Read it here. Allahpundit makes a good point that you may want to save the document on your hard drive because once Drudge links to it, it will be very difficult to access.
Update: If you have a hard time accessing the document at the DNI’s site, you can get it here.
Lorie adds: I read the report, then read this AP report which mischaracterizes the NIE in an almost laughable way. The AP report picks the same section of the report that was leaked to help Democrats, the part which was reported and discussed for days, and ignores the rest of the report. Predictable. Sad, but predictable. Read the report. I say that to Democrats and Republicans alike, liberals and conservatives. Read if for yourself if you want to be informed. The AP is certainly not going to do it for you.
As for the “cause celebre” point they pick up on, if some of those currently helping the terrorists with their PR effort by equating them with the U.S. military would quit, much of that problem would be solved.
Musing Minds picks out a few portions of the report the Democrats won’t be mentioning.
I see Lee and company are still misusing their education. Teading every other line must be all they are capable of. The truth would send them back to floating on top of the sewer (you know what floats on the top at the sewer plant i’m sure) where they belong so they have to keep up the lies, oh, that’s a lesson the learned from their fallen impeached hero Slick Willie. Pay attention, the post gave you a link to read, go read it so you don’t have to read the entire 3 1/4 pages. Wouldn’t want your heads to explode from truth overload and spread sh** all over the room.
No I don’t condemn the NYT because I support a free press.
What about Fox News?
Personally, I think people are on the wrong argument here. Of course, both sides will try to leak whatever they can and, you know, no one’s above the fray.
The real discussion is WHY the jihadists are getting strong and, if they are, wouldn’t it suggest that SOME change in tactics is needed? Digging in when the tactic is flawed is not a strength.
The problem is that military alone will never defeat or sideline these guys. There has to be a non-military component SIDE BY SIDE with a military one. That component has to be one that makes becoming an Al Qaeda member shameful. How do we accomplish this? I don’t have the answer. But if you parallel this to the defeat of the KKK there are some similarities while also having some drastic differences.
Public opinion turned around on the KKK, partly due to the civil rights movement and how that gained acceptance in this country, partly due to law enforcement.
Al Qaeda has a political beef and our inability to think beyond a military option fuels them – and it’s certainly tough to defeat an enemy that turns your show of force back on you. And a minority of people, a large minority, support them.
There are complexities here in trying to defeat this enemy – and they all need to die as well. But anger and revenge, as much as they push us forward, can’t do it alone.
The democrats finally have a plan on terrorism. Tell the terrorist how we collect intel and identify our sources in the middle east. That way the terroist can kill all of the sources and plug the holes in their intel world. Can we use the same process against the leakers of secret national security data (democrats every time) and line all of the democratic members of congress against the fence outside and shoot them? If we use the terrorists method no trial will be required. Seems fair to me.
It seems a democratic employee of the CIA may be the leaker. The FBI and others have his name and position so will wait for their action, if any.
I think the worst appointment made by President Bush in six years is the current head of the Justice department. Under his leadership they have continued to be a do nothing department, maybe they are a CYA department only.
Funny what crops up when the rabid democrats use terrorists tactics to try and win elections. They get carried away and give away the farm while trying to save the cow. How many of you know that the attack on the WTC in 1993 was really a WMD attack designed to kill (poison) every person in the tower that was bombed. The bomb failed to operate as designed is the only reason several thousand people are alive today. Know someone that was in the building in 1993, do they know they were lied to like worthless dogs by the Slick Willie administration? Normal operation for the democrats, to them American lives are worthless when balanced against their political aims. Also information came out that the planner of the attack immediately went to Iraq where he was protected. No terrorists in Iraq, huh. Planned in Iraq and excaped to Iraq.
Stephie
Personally, I think people are on the wrong argument here. Of course, both sides will try to leak whatever they can and, you know, no one’s above the fray.
So at least we can agree that the Dems have been dishonest about asking for a special prosecutor wrt “Plame/Wilson”. Surprised that you don’t find it outrageous wrt the dishonesty and betrayal of the NYT wrt ILLEGAL LEAKS of classified info
The real discussion is WHY the jihadists are getting strong and, if they are, wouldn’t it suggest that SOME change in tactics is needed? Digging in when the tactic is flawed is not a strength.
We know one thing that the jihadists get the encouragement to continue their fight from the propaganda they received from the left like BBC, AP, NYT, and the Dem party itself. That ‘s why people like Chavez, Adm thought that they could come here and simply spout Dem talking points and got big applause.
The problem is that military alone will never defeat or sideline these guys. There has to be a non-military component SIDE BY SIDE with a military one. That component has to be one that makes becoming an Al Qaeda member shameful. How do we accomplish this? I don’t have the answer. But if you parallel this to the defeat of the KKK there are some similarities while also having some drastic differences.
Looks like you didn’t bother to read the report itself. That ‘s Iraq and Afghanistan is all about: building democratic society. The left is against that also! Here is the relevant portion from the NIE report
If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years,
political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and
groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives.
The healdine of this post reads: “National Intelligence Estimate Key Judgements Released”
“Key” in who’s estimation? The lying Republican adminstration – that’s who!
The same lying Republican administration which first declared the contents “classified”, then declared portions of the contents “unclassified” when it served their political purposes!
Release the entire document, and let’s see just how bad the situation really is!!!!
Wait, let me check the weather report for hell and see if there is any chance of snow… nope. Guess we won’t learn the truth after all. The liars in the White House will play the contents of this report against the American People to better the chances of Republicans holding Congress.
With the Republicans in power – America loses again.
So LoveAmerica Immigrant:
Your response to my inquisitive post is, essentially, this:
Democrats are responsible for everything.
Now, I’m not taking sides on this. I’m just stating that if things aren’t working 100% it’s time to start assessing some new options.
But really, you can’t believe that democrats, who have had no power in congress and senate for the last, well, 10 years, do not have any viable mouthpiece to compare with the media power the republicans can wield, and who have voted more or less lockstep with their republican counterparts on most things regarding these wars – can be the REASON the jihadists are increasing.
That’s just plain ignorant and myopic – and very self-serving because it completely removes any form of blame from your side of the isle. If you told me there’s a little blame on both sides, I’d go along with you a bit. But c’mon. You’re wasting my time with that kind of narrowmindedness.
And if you really believe that – you’re just deluding yourself.
And it doesn’t advance a needed conversation.
Stephie,
I gave you a MAJOR non-military solution in the NIE and what Bush has been trying to do in the last 5 years. Building democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq is the long term non-military solution that you are asking for. The militarty is there to take care of the bad guys so that these poor oppressed people have a chance to build a functional democracy. I guess the truth hurts. Don’t you wonder why the Demas haven’t done much to help this non-military solution?
Key” in who’s estimation?
——————————-
Lee,
IN the estimation of the NIE authors. You are beyond parody. You are happily propagating the falsehoods from the NYT and Dem. And then when more details are released, you complained. So why did you take the spin from the NYT without any question given their despicable record of lies and illegal leaks?
It seems there is another report just dealing with Iraq.
Odds on seeing it before the elections?
Building democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq is the long term non-military solution that you are asking for.
LoveAmerica,
I beg to differ. A “non-military” strategy to compliment the current military one is not a vague “building a democracy” in Iraq schpiel.
That’s a goal. Not a strategy. A strategy would be to find ways to outwardly support non-jihadist muslims in ways that break through all media and show this country as what it should be: a force for the betterment of mankind.
All anyone sees in the news (overseas) is more bloodshed in Iraq, U.S. building a Taj Mahal type embassy in Baghdad, and the President inserting himself into the decision-making process with Israel regarding lebanon.
And the fact that Iraq was a war of choice rather than an urgent necessity only clouds this.
Argue all you want about who’s at fault, the fact is that U.S. is vilified more now than they were 5 years ago – and it’s not because “all the muslims hate us” as some might claim. (To think so is a useless point of view. It will solve nothing).
It’d be nice to see people accepting certain truths and moving on from them. Or giving up opinions, right and left, and moving toward solutions.
The simple fact is this: The Iraq war is not successful. If it were, the outcomes would be better. So, given that, where do we go from here? All I know is that some “non-military” component that helps build positive PR for us in the arab world is a given. As I mentioned earlier, the KKK lost support not because our government beat them down, but because the mindset of the people advanced so as to discard them from the mainstream.
Getting into the psychology of these people is the only way to truly eliminate this threat. And we’re not doing enough toward that. That’s why we’re failing.
All anyone sees in the news (overseas) is more bloodshed in Iraq, U.S. building a Taj Mahal type embassy in Baghdad, and the President inserting himself into the decision-making process with Israel regarding lebanon.
You mean the anti-American leftist outlets like the BBC and French national media. These same outlets were silent about the UN oil-for-food corruption and the complicity of these Europeans gov as well. These same oversea news outlest advocate appeasement of the communist dictators and against the US during the cold war. They even covered up for the communist atrocities. So I wouldn’t count on them too much. I don’t know what you mean wrt Is. If it is up to these news outlets oversea, they would cover up the second Holocaust advocated by Adm
And the fact that Iraq was a war of choice rather than an urgent necessity only clouds this.
Yup it was a war of choice that Clinton signed an executive order for Iraq Regime Change. In other words, the strategy you have is to wait until another nuclear attack against the US before you would do anything
Argue all you want about who’s at fault, the fact is that U.S. is vilified more now than they were 5 years ago – and it’s not because “all the muslims hate us” as some might claim. (To think so is a useless point of view. It will solve nothing).
Don’t you find it outrageous that the US is vilified by people like Carter and Clinton on foreign soil. And in the service of whom? Thuggish dictators like Chavez and Adm and Castro. If you truly care about this, then start at home. No former presidents have gone oversea to criticize their gov and their country, esp during a time of war. That ‘s why you need to start condemning the terrorist-enabling outlets like the NYT, AP and folks like Carter, Clinton, Moore, Sheehan etc…
The simple fact is this: The Iraq war is not successful. If it were, the outcomes would be better. So, given that, where do we go from here? All I know is that some “non-military” component that helps build positive PR for us in the arab world is a given. As I mentioned earlier, the KKK lost support not because our government beat them down, but because the mindset of the people advanced so as to discard them from the mainstream.
If Iraq war is not successful, the terrorists wouldn’t have to blow up innocent women/children in Iraq to thwart the building of democracy. People are doing real work and making real progress there, not the kind of fancy talk you are involved in right now. Even the terrorists know that Iraq democracy is the huge blow to their ideology. That ‘s why it is uncontionable and stupid to advocate a cut-and-run from Iraq policy (check the NIE).
That ‘s right. The people of this country condemned the KKK and not provide the excuse and fodder for them. That ‘s why it is so despicable that the Dems wouldn’t even stand up and condemning the jihadists as they did towards the KKK. Clinton was willing to send the military to squash the Branch Davidians at Waco and Elian Gonzalez to return him to Castro. So it is time to discard these radical leftists from the mainstream of America
Getting into the psychology of these people is the only way to truly eliminate this threat. And we’re not doing enough toward that. That’s why we’re failing.
By taking the fight to them and force them to show how bankrupt they are. They are now blowing women/children indiscriminately just to get the leftist media in the West to do the propaganda job for them. That ‘s why it is incredible that the Dems won’t join in the effort to marginalize these brutal terrorists. Instead they are trying to marginalize their real enemy, Bush. You only need to watch their actions.
BTW, Stephanie, what is your strategy (short term and long term for fighting the terrorists)?
Mantis, if a portion of it can be construed as anti Bush by you idiots who suffer from BDS, I would say the chances are quite good that some cowardly lowlife will violate his pledge taken upon his getting what ever job he or she holds to try to undermine the efforts of this Administration. You democrats learn a lot from Nazi propagada didn’t you?
Zelsdorf,
One of my point is that Mantis is here to spin for the Dems/liberals but he is not honest enough to admit it. This thread is simply another proof.
Wrt the link pointed to by Mantis, it is just another example of the despicable behavior of the Dems. First the Dems on the intelligence committees (in both house and Senate) knew about the NIE since April and said nothing about it. Then one sentence was leaked to the NYT. Instead of condemning this illeagal leak, they joined in and planned a dishonest campaign on this leak. Now the context surrounding that one sentence has been released, they simply have to move to the next dishonest tactic: calling for the release of all the classified information. The regard these people have for national security is zero. That ‘s why their behaviors are so dangerous and despicable.
BTW, do you remember the memo from the Dems on the Senate intelligence committee in which they plan to use intelligence information for political purposes?
Mantis, if a portion of it can be construed as anti Bush by you idiots who suffer from BDS,
But the Iraq war is eliminating terrorism, right? Shouldn’t the report be good news?
I would say the chances are quite good that some cowardly lowlife will violate his pledge taken upon his getting what ever job he or she holds to try to undermine the efforts of this Administration.
Well, I was talking about it being officially released, but if the administration decides to keep it under wraps and some courageous official decides that maintaining a well-informed populace is more important than his/her career, far be it from me to criticize.
You democrats learn a lot from Nazi propagada didn’t you?
So the assessments from our intelligence agencies are Nazi propaganda now, eh? Interesting.
Well, I was talking about it being officially released, but if the administration decides to keep it under wraps and some courageous official decides that maintaining a well-informed populace is more important than his/her career, far be it from me to criticize.
—————————————————
Now dishonestly leaking one sentence from the NIE or even leaking the info about NSA to benefit the terrorists is a courageous act for the liberals.
One of my point is that Mantis is here to spin for the Dems/liberals but he is not honest enough to admit it. This thread is simply another proof.
Man you are boring. I am liberal (on many issues), but I’m not a Democrat. Therefore yes, I do often bring a liberal viewpoint when I comment. This, however, is not spin. Spin is something politicians and political operatives do; I’m expressing my opinion. Is that wrong?
First the Dems on the intelligence committees (in both house and Senate) knew about the NIE since April and said nothing about it.
Criticizing the Democrats for not revealing classified information. Interesting.
Then one sentence was leaked to the NYT. Instead of condemning this illeagal leak, they joined in and planned a dishonest campaign on this leak.
Care to point out an example of this “dishonest campaign”? Is it dishonest to discuss the contents of the report and what they mean regarding our strategy in the war on terror?
Now the context surrounding that one sentence has been released, they simply have to move to the next dishonest tactic
You mean discussing it? Pointing out what a dismal estimate it is?
calling for the release of all the classified information. The regard these people have for national security is zero.
The President declassified the report. If the info would have damaged security, he wouldn’t have done so, right? Or does the President have no regard for national security either?
Now dishonestly leaking one sentence from the NIE or even leaking the info about NSA to benefit the terrorists is a courageous act for the liberals.
How does informing the public about the effect our efforts are having in fighting terrorists help the terrorists, exactly? Why are you against the American public being informed?
Here’s a question, were you upset when we found out that Libby leaked classified info from the NIE to Judith Miller about Saddam’s WMDs? I wasn’t. Couldn’t that have harmed national security? What if Saddam found out we were on to him and was emboldened or some other nonsense?
Care to point out an example of this “dishonest campaign”? Is it dishonest to discuss the contents of the report and what they mean regarding our strategy in the war on terror?
————————————————–
You are either ignorant or willfully dishonest. Let me explain slowly to you again.
The dishonest campaign is to use the leaked NIE leaked report to call for a cut-and-run policy from Iraq. The NIE actually said the opposite
Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves,
and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry
on the fight.
If the dems want to advocate a cut-and-run policy, then make the case. Using the leaked NIE as a basis for that conclusion is dishonest.
The President declassified the report. If the info would have damaged security, he wouldn’t have done so, right? Or does the President have no regard for national security either?
Again, willfully ignorant. The liberals/Dems dishonestly leaked the NIE report to thwart the US policy. The president declassified the relevant portions of the report to counter this lies. The Dems then called for the release of all the classifed information, which noone in their right mind would do. Again, this is an example of your dishonesty when you claim to talk about strategy. A person with a slightest understanding of intelligence would not ask for the release of classified information in this manner.
mantis
How does informing the public about the effect our efforts are having in fighting terrorists help the terrorists, exactly? Why are you against the American public being informed?
————————————————–
Against willfully ignorant: you weren’t upset that the NYT reveals our means and methods of tracking the terrorists’ financial information? This info helped the terrorist avoid one key method of tracking them. We all know the US gov is tracking the terrorists. I don’t need to know the exact secrets. I am surprised that you don’t find NYT ‘s action outrageous.
Here’s a question, were you upset when we found out that Libby leaked classified info from the NIE to Judith Miller about Saddam’s WMDs? I wasn’t. Couldn’t that have harmed national security? What if Saddam found out we were on to him and was emboldened or some other nonsense?
—————————————————
I remembered Clinton made a public speed about Saddam ‘s WMD and the threat he posed in 1998. I would be upset if Libby leaked the classified info our tracking of the terrorists.
The dishonest campaign is to use the leaked NIE leaked report to call for a cut-and-run policy from Iraq.
Name one person who said the info from the NIE supports withdrawal.
The liberals/Dems dishonestly leaked the NIE report to thwart the US policy.
How do you know who leaked the report?
The president declassified the relevant portions of the report to counter this lies.
The report countered the report? How did that work?
Again, this is an example of your dishonesty when you claim to talk about strategy. A person with a slightest understanding of intelligence would not ask for the release of classified information in this manner.
I didn’t ask for the release of classified information. Can I talk about strategy now?
Against willfully ignorant: you weren’t upset that the NYT reveals our means and methods of tracking the terrorists’ financial information? This info helped the terrorist avoid one key method of tracking them.
Terrorists stopped using money? What do they do now, barter donkeys for AK-47s?
I remembered Clinton made a public speed about Saddam ‘s WMD and the threat he posed in 1998. I would be upset if Libby leaked the classified info our tracking of the terrorists.
So you were for leaks before you were against them? We knew that the Iraq war creates more terrorists, so the leak was only confirming what we already knew. So I guess it’s ok, at least using your logic.
Name one person who said the info from the NIE supports withdrawal.
HEre it is (BTW, let ‘s not waste my time in verbal gymnastics, we know what Kennedy wanted all along).
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvg/story?section=nation_world&id=4596323Democrats on Sunday seized on an intelligence assessment that said the Iraq war has increased the terrorist threat, saying it was further evidence that Americans should choose new leadership in the November elections…
“It is abundantly clear that we need a new direction in Iraq by strategically redeploying our troops to fight and win the real war on terror and make our country safer,” said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.
The liberals/Dems dishonestly leaked the NIE report to thwart the US policy.
How do you know who leaked the report?
Thanks for the correction: I should have said, the Dems/liberals dishonestly used the leaked NIE report to thwart the US policy.
The report countered the report? How did that work?
Did i say report to counter report? Part of the report has been leaked without the context). So the context was declassified.
Terrorists stopped using money? What do they do now, barter donkeys for AK-47s?
Willfully ignorant again? They will find new means of getting the money. And the global banks will not cooperate with US gov anymore since the cover has been blown. Are you trying to excuse that?
remembered Clinton made a public speed about Saddam ‘s WMD and the threat he posed in 1998. I would be upset if Libby leaked the classified info our tracking of the terrorists.
So you were for leaks before you were against them? We knew that the Iraq war creates more terrorists, so the leak was only confirming what we already knew. So I guess it’s ok, at least using your logic.
Again you didn’t provide all the facts. The Libby simply revealed the same information that Wilson already leaked for another campaign against Bush.
The president has the constitutional authority to release the information. That ‘s his authority. No one else has that authority. So it is illegal to leak that information without explicit approval of the pres. That ‘s a given. Only the pres has that authority. I thought you undeerstand the constitution. That ‘s why it matters who is the pres. If Libby did it without explicit approval of the pres, he violated the law and he should go to jail for it. All set now?
Are you still for illegal leaking of classified information?
It’s you liberal swine, Lee, mantis and the like, who conspire to destroy this country with your wiley liberal ways and communist talky talk. I’m a proud conservative who is willing to start a jihadist movement of my own against the arabic jihadists who claim war against our great country. I will put on my uniform and fight like a man, more than any of you dem nazi sympathizers will. I will dance around in my cha cha heels and put on my beautiful red dress and create an interpretive dance to curse your liberal platform. I love my cha cha heels. Sometimes I yodel at the moon while I try on a push up bra.