0

SAME OLD SONG AND DANCE

BORROWED OPINIONS

It had to happen. President Bush’s bungling of the war in Iraq has been the talk of the summer. On Capitol Hill, some of the more reliable Republicans are writing proposals to force Mr. Bush to change course. A showdown vote is looming in the Senate.

Enter, stage right, the fear of terrorism.

Yesterday, the director of national intelligence released a report with the politically helpful title of “The Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland,” and Fran Townsend, the president’s homeland security adviser, held a news conference to trumpet its findings. The message, as always: Be very afraid. And don’t question the president.

Certainly, the report’s conclusions are disturbing. Nearly six years after 9/11, terrorism remains a huge threat. Al Qaeda has replaced leaders killed or captured by the United States, regrouped in its former home base in the tribal lands on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and is trying to use affiliated terrorists in Iraq “to raise resources and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives.”

If the report is given an honest reading, it is a powerful rebuke to Mr. Bush’s approach to the war on terror. It vindicates those who say that the Iraq war is a distraction from the real fight against terrorism — a fight that is not going at all well.

The administration, however, seized on the report and, through bald political timing, tried to use it to dampen calls for an end to Mr. Bush’s catastrophic war. That required some particularly twisted logic. Ms. Townsend, for example, dismissed a reporter who asked whether the fact that Al Qaeda has regrouped in the area from which it planned the 9/11 attacks suggested that it was a mistake to divert American forces to Iraq. She said Al Qaeda headed by Osama bin Laden and the terrorists in Iraq that use the name Al Qaeda are the same.

In fact, we’ve seen no evidence of that, and none was in the intelligence report, at least the page and a half of conclusions released to the public.

Was there a link before the war between Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist leader in Iraq? Ms. Townsend refused to answer. “This is ground long covered,” she snapped.

Indeed it is. The answer is, “No.” In fact, Mr. Bush’s bungled invasion spawned a new terrorist army and gave it a home base. Now, the report said, those terrorists are the only ones affiliated with Al Qaeda that are “known to have expressed a desire to attack the” United States.

The White House denied that the report was timed to the Senate debate. But the administration controls the timing of such releases and the truth is that fear of terrorism is the only shard remaining of Mr. Bush’s justification for invading Iraq.

This administration has never hesitated to play on fear for political gain, starting with the first homeland security secretary, Tom Ridge, and his Popsicle-coded threat charts. It is a breathtakingly cynical ploy, but in the past it has worked to cow Democrats into silence, if not always submission, and herd Republicans back onto the party line.

That must not happen this time. By now, Congress surely can see through the president’s fear-mongering and show Mr. Bush the exit from Iraq that he refuses to find for himself.

 
Morning folks, yeah I went back and made a few posts.
I didn't even bother to see what the trolls and graffiti people are up too.
I really have developed the art of scroll-over.
The sad part is that it is like we (the normal folks) never even left. You could take the posts from six months ago and repaste them into today's threads and nobody would even notice....
Pitiful, just pitiful.
VT, don't worry too much about Pmom.
In short, she's the one who outed G. Sheridan as Tippy, them blamed me for posting it!
She did not tell me it was off limits or secret.
I tried to kiss and make up, and invited her here several times. She won't respond. Nuff said.

This is Home now. Good enough.
 
posted 857 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
 
I miss ol' WSC a bit.
 
posted 857 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Tracy, I miss WSC a bit, too, although he seems to be holding his own "over there".

On to the thread topic. While the unclassified NIE didn't say this, it is my understanding from other readings, etc., that AQI (al Qaeda in Iraq) was formed in 2004 - 2005. In other words, post-invasion. The relationship to al Qaeda central (the OBL group currently in Pakistan) is somewhat formalized, but AQI appears to me to be operating more as a "franchise", that is using the name, but operating somewhat independently.

Interesting to note that while GWB et al. conclude that AQI is the largest threat in Iraq, the military itself (can't find link) has concluded that in terms of numbers, it represents some 3 to 5% of the "insurgency". Its main impact is the suicide bombings, on which it holds exclusivity. The IEDs, isolated sniper attacks, etc., are carried out by the other 95 to 97% of the insurgency.

Listening closely to the Dissembler in Chief's remarks yesterday, I noted he had backed off a bit from the former claim that AQI and al Qaeda are one and the same. He talked about AQI being a group who had sworn allegiance to OBL, or words to that effect, rather than the blanket claim they are one and the same. A distinction with a difference, but one which likely will not be heard nor understood by the 27% or so who continue to blindly follow, not to mention the target audience of the rest of us, the intent being to scare us all. While I have always enjoyed Carole King's song "Where you Lead, I will Follow", the same is singularly inappropriate to the current situation, the wishes of the Administration to the contrary notwithstanding.

 
posted 857 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
Me too! I sent Will a short email telling him just that a few days ago. He responded with a friendly hi, he has been busy... I think he won't lose touch altogether as he values friends. Maybe he needs a break. He has a good brain and does some good thinking! Plus, he is fun. Good combination.

I know the few times I have spent much time at the place we first met I was a poster child for sayings like, "we are the company we keep." It really does rub off on you and isn't healthy to be around so much arguing, negative attitudes and name calling. Hank Price turns my stomach! He was doing his sarcastic put downs -- you all know the ones where he is sugary sweet in the most sickening way while telling everyone who disagrees with him how stupid, ill informed, not worthy of him, obviously wrong they are. I asked him to call me by my name if he felt he needed to address me directly, that his endearment didn't sound endearing, etc. So he posts back with more "endearments" after I asked him to stop. There is no agreeing to disagree with someone so disrespectful.

Kinda like our president, et al. bushco seems to think they can scare people (once again). Fewer will believe it this time. Most of us are able to see where the real danger is and want him and his out of office before they do more harm. Most also know bushco have increased the dangers rather than protecting anyone from anything.

Speaking of Tippy -- is the person who posts as "littlejohn" maybe her?
 
posted 857 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
"Any media-brainwashed automaton can summon the insipid courage to peer into the horrifying abyss. But it takes a freaking genius with a fearless imagination to peer into the maw of happiness."

I like what that says! Can't give credit where credit is due as I don't know who said it; I stole it from an online friends blog who also didn't give credit. Is it really true that everything worth saying has already been said?
 
posted 857 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
The perverse part of me wants to ask the following: since, as Tracy has posted, the Administration controls the release of a variety of things, including the unclassified summary of the NIE, does it also control the language, at least to some extent? I don't think it's a coincidence that the leaked information concerning al Qaeda was stronger than that finally appearing in the released version. I'm almost willing to bet that in the close to final draft the leaked language was as reported, and was leaked purposefully for two reasons: 1) there was a sense that the NIE, as released, would be edited down in tone; and 2) a CYA maneuver, to let those of us know who do not possess the requisite clearances, the intel folks know how strong al Qaeda is at present, notwithstanding what we're told. Of course, I'd like to see the "real" thing, i.e., the classified version, but understand why I can't. Dollars to donuts the language therein is a bit more plain and stronger on the current assessment of the real strength of al Qaeda "central", that is, the group operating from the Pakistan safe haven.
 
posted 857 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Linda, you've hit upon something which strikes those of us in the legal profession when writing a brief, a memorandum, or whatever. It seems that, in fact, everything worth saying in a substantive sense has been said, many times, before. It then becomes almost "form over substance" in crafting the arguments, etc. to present to a court. Really true!
 
posted 857 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Rox said:
 
As I mentioned over at Dubya's place, it's just like this administration to pull out the terror card when things are going poorly and an election is in the not really so far future.

OTOH, I wouldn't be at all surprised to have an attack this summer. Until we close our borders, we have no control over who enters this country.

I wish someone would tell me how GWB and his henchmen are keeping this country safe.
 
posted 857 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Rox, the overplaying of the terror card will result in any attack this Summer as being discounted by the general populace as just another gambit by the Administration. While they (the Administration) can spin the latest NIE however they want, the reading of that bit which was unclassified shows that irrespective of the public statements, the country is not being kept safe.
 
posted 856 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 

Search