We fight them over there so they won't come over here

[George Gervin's Afro]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3336148


A secret U.S. law enforcement report, prepared for the Department of Homeland Security, warns that al Qaeda is planning a terror "spectacular" this summer, according to a senior official with access to the document.

"This is reminiscent of the warnings and intelligence we were getting in the summer of 2001," the official told ABCNews.com.


U.S. officials have kept the information secret, and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said today on ABC News' "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" that the United States did not have "have any specific credible evidence that there's an attack focused on the United States at this point."


As ABCNews.com reported, U.S. law enforcement officials received intelligence reports two weeks ago warning of terror attacks in Glasgow and Prague, the Czech Republic, against "airport infrastructure and aircraft."


The warnings apparently never reached officials in Scotland, who said this weekend they had received "no advance intelligence" that Glasgow might be a target.


Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff declined to comment specifically on on the report today, but said "everything that we get is shared virtually instantaneously with our counterparts in Britain and vice versa."


Unlike the United States, officials in Germany have publicly warned that the country could face a major attack this summer, also comparing the situation to the pre-9/11 summer of 2001.


Luckily we are fighting them in Iraq..Or according to Yoni they are sending their 2nd string bomb makers...

[Yonivore]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3336148

Luckily we are fighting them in Iraq..Or according to Yoni they are sending their 2nd string bomb makers...
So far, it looks that way.

Hopefully, people like you haven't so damaged our ability to surveil these pieces of trash that we can't discover their plot -- even if by incompetents -- before it's too late.

[George Gervin's Afro]

So far, it looks that way.

Hopefully, people like you haven't so damaged our ability to surveil these pieces of trash that we can't discover their plot -- even if by incompetents -- before it's too late.


Well if we get hit again the Iraqi liberation was a complete failure..

[PixelPusher]

So far, it looks that way.

Hopefully, people like you haven't so damaged our ability to surveil these pieces of trash that we can't discover their plot -- even if by incompetents -- before it's too late.
How have "we" damaged our ability to surveil? It certainly hasn't stop the FBI from running roughshod with their new Patriot Act powers.

[Yonivore]

Well if we get hit again the Iraqi liberation was a complete failure..
Again with the absolutist characterizations.

I think that would depend on the severity of the attack, don't you?

But, by the same token, I could make the claim that if we get hit again, it is because of all the ways the left has frustrated efforts to detect and prevent domestic terrorism.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Again with the absolutist characterizations.

I think that would depend on the severity of the attack, don't you?

But, by the same token, I could make the claim that if we get hit again, it is because of all the ways the left has frustrated efforts to detect and prevent domestic terrorism.


So the ridiculous slogan "we fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" is just bumper sticker talk!

[PixelPusher]

Again with the absolutist characterizations.

I think that would depend on the severity of the attack, don't you?

But, by the same token, I could make the claim that if we get hit again, it is because of all the ways the left has frustrated efforts to detect and prevent domestic terrorism.
How, exactly, have "the left" frustrated efforts to detect and prevent domestic terrorism?

[DarkReign]

Again with the absolutist characterizations.

I think that would depend on the severity of the attack, don't you?

But, by the same token, I could make the claim that if we get hit again, it is because of all the ways the left has frustrated efforts to detect and prevent domestic terrorism.

Right, because we should avail all our rights so that we can be "safe" by our governments defintion?

The phrase "slippery slope" wasnt coined because it sounds funny. It was declared in the inevitability of those granted power to abuse said power.

Why are you so confident that the government will protect YOU, Yoni? Because youre white and Republican?

Youre not even going to be a majority in this country in 20 years. YOU'LL be the minority. YOU will be gazed upon with prying eyes. All someone has to do is name you, and your dance with freedom will be over.

[gtownspur]

This is a question for GGA and Pixel Pusher....


What would you rather have happen?

A) John Stewart nut on your face

B) Blow your entire load after a terrorist attack because you will have ample reason to politicize the attack against The WOT.

C) Have barrack obama dogfart your mom...

[PixelPusher]

This is a question for GGA and Pixel Pusher....


What would you rather have happen?

A) John Stewart nut on your face

Ask yourself, you're the one obsessed with him.

B) Blow your entire load after a terrorist attack because you will have ample reason to politicize the attack against The WOT.
This question belongs to Yoni, who would no doubt fill endless threads on how it's all the left's fault for not being patriotic enough.

C) Have barrack obama dogfart your mom...
Nice to see Barakophobia is still in full effect.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

So far, it looks that way.

Hopefully, people like you haven't so damaged our ability to surveil these pieces of trash that we can't discover their plot -- even if by incompetents -- before it's too late.

Do you really think that Osama is going to divulge his plans to some second stringers?

Besides, it's pretty fucking obvious (and has been stated by OBL before) that his goal is multiple nukes going off in the U.S. at once.

[Yonivore]

Do you really think that Osama is going to divulge his plans to some second stringers?
Well, what'cha gonna do when your A-string Zarqawis are rotting in Hell?


Besides, it's pretty fucking obvious (and has been stated by OBL before) that his goal is multiple nukes going off in the U.S. at once.
Well, then you should be behind the federal government's efforts to detect and prevent such an event.

[Yonivore]

Right, because we should avail all our rights so that we can be "safe" by our governments defintion?
Okay, the improper use of the word "avail" aside, (I think I get your drift), name one right of which you've "availed" yourself. Just one.


The phrase "slippery slope" wasnt coined because it sounds funny. It was declared in the inevitability of those granted power to abuse said power.
Every wartime abuse of presidential power -- save the Roosevelt New Deal -- has been corrected by subsequent legislation and judicial intervention. What slippery slope are you suggesting the other branches can't fix?


Why are you so confident that the government will protect YOU, Yoni? Because youre white and Republican?
Who says I'm confident? And, what's race or party affiliation got to do with preventing a terrorist attack?

I'm not confident. Particularly after witnessing the depths to which Democrats and idiots will go to undermine this President's efforts.


Youre not even going to be a majority in this country in 20 years. YOU'LL be the minority. YOU will be gazed upon with prying eyes. All someone has to do is name you, and your dance with freedom will be over.
Okay, now you're blithering.

[boutons_]

yoni has yet offer any evidence of how anybody has shackled dubya and dickhead from doing the nastiness dubya, and above all dickhead, want to do, like starting a bogus war for oil.

Quite the opposite, dubya and dickhead have fucked up Aghanistan, Iraq, the war on terror, Katrina, etc, completely on their own, getting a pass from an intimiated press before Iraq and full rubber stamping support from Congress until Nov06.

[Jamtas#2]

yoni has yet offer any evidence of how anybody has shackled dubya and dickhead from doing the nastiness dubya, and above all dickhead, want to do, like starting a bogus war for oil.

Quite the opposite, dubya and dickhead have fucked up Aghanistan, Iraq, the war on terror, Katrina, etc, completely on their own, getting a pass from an intimiated press before Iraq and full rubber stamping support from Congress until Nov06.


Yeah, those Nov 6 elections really showed him. That's when the American people voted for a change of course and to bring our troops home, and the newly elected Democratic officials went right to work on that...until Bush told them no and they agreed to give him his money for the war anyways. But let's not forget they made a great stand on calling for a vote of no confidence against the Attorney General.
Lets have more rhetoric about change and how bad this president is, but no action.

[George Gervin's Afro]

This is a question for GGA and Pixel Pusher....


What would you rather have happen?

A) John Stewart nut on your face

B) Blow your entire load after a terrorist attack because you will have ample reason to politicize the attack against The WOT.

C) Have barrack obama dogfart your mom...



I guess that you are quite satisfied that Dick has bent you over for over 6 yrs now without as much as a kiss. I guess we could classify you as a taker..

[Yonivore]

Former Spook (http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2007/07/next-spectacular.html) comments on information emerging from coverage of the London terror attacks that al-Qaeda is planning a 9/11 style series of attacks on the US. But out of weakness, not out of strength. I tend to agree with his assessment.


The idea that Al Qaida wants to stage another 9-11-style "spectacular" is hardly new. A number of analysts who focus on the terrorist organization have long held that Al Qaida needs another, large-scale success, for a variety of reasons. As Strategy Page recently observed [edit: I posted here or in another thread. -Y], the organization is hardly on a roll; the number of operations tied to the group has declined, and the U.S. troop surge in Iraq is forcing Al Qaida to devote even more resources to that battle--resources that might otherwise be allocated to attacks in western Europe and the United States.

But the bad news doesn't end there. The loss of Al-Anbar Province as a logistical and operations base was a devastating set-back for Al Qaida. Recent clearing operations in Dialya are having a similar effect, and American troops are now moving into terrorist safe-havens in the Baghdad security belts. While the battle for Iraq is far from won, Al Qaida finds itself increasingly on the defensive, in areas that were once terrorist sanctuaries.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban's spring offensive never materialized, despite the availability of training and support facilities across the border in Pakistan. ... Earlier this year, Al Qaida also suffered a major setback in eastern Africa, when Ethiopian troops, backed by U.S. airpower and special operations forces, routed the Islamic Courts in Somalia. ... Successful tracking and prosecution of Al Qaida's financial networks has made it more difficult for sympathizers to give money to the cause, and with the lack of apparent progress in Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa and elsewhere, some donors may be re-thinking their contributions. In short, Al Qaida is in something of a squeeze, and needs to prove that it's still capable of large-scale, "spectacular" attacks on the enemy's home soil.
Some people are going to call Former Spook's analysis a kind of wishful thinking. But there is one aspect of his analysis which understates, rather than overstates, his conclusion. By bringing to the forces of radical Islam to battle, the US has achieved two things. First, as American critics have pointed out, it has allowed al-Qaeda to generate recruits to fight America. But secondly -- and this is the neglected half of the equation -- al-Qaeda's operations have allowed America to get recruits to fight them. The Anbar tribes are a good example. al-Qaeda's activities have generated a backlash of their own and they're feeling the pinch.

Any reasonable person will probably concede -- without necessarily buying into Former Spook's analysis -- that this worldwide engagement certainly imposes a load on al-Qaeda. Even assuming it gained more recruits from its war with America, those recruits would still have to be trained, armed and fed. The critical question is whether al-Qaeda has lost more than it has gained by this process. Former Spook appears to be arguing that al-Qaeda is stalled and needs a win to convince its own backers, (their own version of the U.S. Congress, and maybe the U.S. Congress itself) that some sort of victory is possible and the thing won't drag on forever.

One possible item in Former Spook's favor is the recent attack in London and Glasgow. Al-Qaeda's attack cell in Britain consists of 3 or more medical doctors. Using doctors as suicide bombers, as one of the Glasgow attackers appeared to be, especially when they are "cleanskins" is an incredibly wasteful given their potential as sleeper agents or leaders. There cannot be so many al-Qaeda agents that they can afford to use neurologists as hit men. This suggests a certain level of eagerness to make a big publicity splash that is inconsistent with confident strength. It also suggests their rank of available jihadis in the west may be depleted to the point they're having to expend more valuable resources.

We fight them over there so we don't have to here. Here, in former spook's analysis, you see that principle at work.

[Yonivore]

CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/03/terror/main3010835.shtml) reported this morning that the attacks in Britain started with a proposal by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to infiltrate the West. At least one of the attackers got their training in Zarqawi's organization, and the use of doctors was a deliberate part of the deception:


British intelligence services increasingly believe that the failed car bombings in London and Glasgow bare the fingerprints of al Qaeda in Iraq, CBS News has learned.

Intelligence sources tell CBS News that the people behind the attempts were directly recruited by Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, the present leader of the terror group's Iraq franchise. ...

Sources tell CBS News that al-Muhajir recruited the men between 2004 and 2005, while they were living in the Middle East, upon orders from then-al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Al-Muhajir was told to recruit young men who could easily move into Western countries, assimilate and lay low until the time came to attack. Britain has a fast-track visa program for medical students which makes it easier for them to enter the country.
It's still early in the investigation, and more information may change some of the conclusions drawn from this attack. However, the failures of all three attacks have allowed the British to get a much clearer picture of the conspiracy sooner than with the 7/7 attacks two years ago, chiefly because they caught everyone alive. They have been able to roll up an international network comprised mainly of physicians, and have learned that that is no coincidence.

Why physicians? The British had a fast-track entry program to get doctors into the country from abroad. Does that sound familiar? The US had a similar system for students before 9/11.

This tells us that the jihad in Iraq presents a direct threat to the West, and that it didn't begin with the invasion -- and the invasion didn't entirely stop it, either. Zarqawi had set up shop in Iraq before the Americans arrived with the complicity of the Iraqi government and ramped up his organization in the aftermath of the invasion. He had always threatened to reach outside of Iraq with AQ-Iraq, and almost a year after reaching room temperature, he almost succeeded.

This should make it official -- Iraq is a center in the war against radical Islamist terrorism. People can debate whether it would have been so absent an American invasion honestly and with evidence to support either position, but none can escape the fact that al-Qaeda operates in Iraq and that they have used that base to attack the West at home. They failed, which gives us optimism that we can beat them both at home and in Iraq, but it doesn't negate the threat.

Congress will debate the Iraq war policy in the next two months. They need to recognize that we cannot simply disengage and allow Iraq to serve as a base of operations for al-Qaeda. In the event of a successful attack from this group, we would have to re-invade all over again. Better that we stomp out AQI now and ensure a stable Iraq that can keep terrorists out in the long term than to pretend that the biggest problem in Iraq is the American forces fighting the terrorists.

We fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here. Can I get a show of hands? Who is opposed to interrogating every physician, here on a Visa, from any Islamic country? Not me. I say start the questioning and surveilling.

Besides, I thought they were attacking us because they disaffected and poverty-stricken Muslims lured into Jihad by promises of glory in martyrdom. Whatever happened to that, anyway?

Still not convinced?

There are now five jihadi doctors (http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2730423.ece) implicated in the London/Glasgow car bomb attempts. The latest is a doctor in Australia (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070703/ap_on_re_eu/britain_terrorism;_ylt=AjGsVy.B7ASRR1zEA8kQFbys0NU E). Some are expressing shock that highly educated medical professionals are accused of participating in attacks with al Qaeda’s fingerprints all over them. Those shocked experts are either profoundly blind or suffering from toddler-age attention spans. al Qaeda honcho Ayman Zawahiri is a doctor. So is former Hamas biggie Abdel Rantissi. And the woman pictured on the below?

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/f/fd/Siddiqui2.PNG
She’s Affia Siddiqui–a Pakistani who studied microbiology at MIT and did graduate work in neurology at Brandeis. The FBI (http://www.fbi.gov/terrorinfo/siddiqui.htm) has been seeking information about her whereabouts since 9/11.

Back in 2004, Newsweek reported (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4687305/) on her al Qaeda-linked activities and that of her estranged husband–also a doctor:


[D]ocuments show that while trying to trace a tangled money trail beginning with the Saudi Embassy, [terrorism] investigators soon drew startling connections between a group of Saudi nationals receiving financial support from the embassy and a 34-year-old microbiologist and MIT graduate who officials have since concluded was a U.S. operative for 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

The microbiologist, Aafia Siddiqui, a mother of three young children, has since fled the country–most likely to her native Pakistan-and is now wanted for questioning by the FBI. But “suspicious-activity reports” (SARS) filed by Fleet Bank with the U.S. Treasury Department, suggest that Siddiqui and her estranged husband, Dr. Mohammed Amjad Khan, an anesthesiologist, may have been active terror plotters inside the country until as late as the summer of 2002.

The reports show that Fleet Bank investigators discovered that one account used by the Boston-area couple showed repeated debit-card purchases from stores that “specialize in high-tech military equipment and apparel,” including Black Hawk Industries in Chesapeake, Va., and Brigade Quartermasters in Georgia. (Black Hawk’s Web site, advertises grips, mounts and parts for AK-47s and other military-assault rifles as well as highly specialized combat clothing, including vests designed for bomb disposal.)

Fleet accounts associated with the couple also showed “major purchases” from U.S. airlines and hotels in Pittsburgh and North Carolina as well as an $8,000 international wire transfer on Dec. 21, 2001, to Habib Bank Ltd., a big Pakistani financial institution that has long been scrutinized by U.S. intelligence officials monitoring terrorist money flows.

NEWSWEEK first reported, in a June 23, 2003, cover story, that the FBI had identified Siddiqui and Khan as suspected Al Qaeda agents. Internal FBI documents showed that, after his capture in March 2003, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed told U.S. interrogators that Siddiqui was supposed to support “other AQ operatives as they entered the United States.” Agents also found evidence that she had rented a post-office box to help another Baltimore-based Al Qaeda contact who had been assigned by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed to blow up underground gasoline-storage tanks. Bureau documents also stated that Khan, Siddiqui’s husband, had purchased body armor, night-vision goggles and a variety of military manuals that were supposed to be sent to Pakistan.
Our Hot Air report tracing the Baltimore plot and Siddiqui’s role as the suspected fixer for al Qaeda is here.

Why doctors? Well, they had been able to evade national security scrutiny by immigration officials who didn’t realize the threat they posed and their education and expertise have helped advance the jihadi plots.

Those who are expressing shock, shock at the presence of medical professionals in the al Qaeda world haven’t been paying enough attention.

[Yonivore]

From a letter to the editor (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2115832,00.html) by a confessed jihadist:


When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network, a series of semi-autonomous British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology, I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy.

By blaming the government for our actions, those who pushed the 'Blair's bombs' line did our propaganda work for us. More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.
Read the entire letter. I posted it in another thread but, thought it relevant to the "we fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" argument.

[Yonivore]

newsflash: terraists planning acts of terra!

be terra-fied america, be very terra-fied
I'd settle for vigilant.

[George W Bush]

newsflash: terraists planning acts of terra!

be terra-fied america, be very terra-fied

[George Gervin's Afro]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289028,00.html



AP: Government Report Concludes Al Qaeda Now as Strong as in Summer of 2001
Thursday, July 12, 2007

E-MAIL STORY PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION
WASHINGTON — A new threat assessment from U.S. counterterrorism analysts says that Al Qaeda has used its safe haven along the Afghan-Pakistan border to restore its operating capabilities to a level unseen since the months before Sept. 11, 2001.

A counterterrorism official familiar with a five-page summary of the document — titled "Al Qaeda better positioned to strike the West" — called it a stark appraisal. The analysis will be part of a broader meeting at the White House on Thursday about an upcoming National Intelligence Estimate.

The official and others spoke to The Associated Press on condition they not be identified because the report remains classified.

The findings suggests that the network that launched the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil has been able to regroup despite nearly six years of bombings, war and other tactics aimed at dismantling it.

The threat assessment focuses on the terror group's safe haven in Pakistan and makes a range of observations about the threat posed to the United States and its allies, officials said.

Counterterrorism officials have been increasingly concerned about Al Qaeda's recent operations. This week, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said he had a "gut feeling" that the United States faced a heightened risk of attack this summer.

Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff Warns of Increased Summertime Al Qaeda Threat Report: U.S. Aborted Raid on Al Qaeda Leaders in Pakistan in 2005 Still, numerous government officials say they know of no specific, credible threat of a new attack on U.S. soil.

Al Qaeda is "considerably operationally stronger than a year ago" and has "regrouped to an extent not seen since 2001," the counterterrorism official said, paraphrasing the report's conclusions. "They are showing greater and greater ability to plan attacks in Europe and the United States."

The group also has created "the most robust training program since 2001, with an interest in using European operatives," the official quoted the report as saying.

At the same time, this official said, the report speaks of "significant gaps in intelligence" so U.S. authorities may be ignorant of potential or planned attacks.

John Kringen, who heads the CIA's analysis directorate, echoed the concerns about Al Qaeda's resurgence during testimony and conversations with reporters at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Wednesday.

"They seem to be fairly well settled into the safe haven and the ungoverned spaces of Pakistan," Kringen testified. "We see more training. We see more money. We see more communications. We see that activity rising."

The threat assessment comes as the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies prepare a National Intelligence Estimate focusing on threats to the United States. A senior intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity while the high-level analysis was being completed, said the document has been in the works for roughly two years.

Kringen and aides to National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell would not comment on the details of that analysis.

"Preparation of the estimate is not a response to any specific threat," McConnell's spokesman Ross Feinstein said, adding that it probably will be ready for distribution this summer.

Kringen said he wouldn't attach a summer time frame to the concern. In studying the threat, he said he begins with the premise that Al Qaeda would consider attacking the U.S. a "home run hit" and that the easiest way to get into the United States would be through Europe.

Several European countries — among them Britain, Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands — are highlighted in the threat assessment partly because they have arrangements with the Pakistani government that allow their citizens easier access to Pakistan than others, according to the counterterrorism official.

This is more troubling because all four are part of the U.S. visa waiver program, and their citizens can enter the United States without additional security scrutiny, the official said.

The Bush administration has repeatedly cited Al Qaeda as a key justification for continuing the fight in Iraq.

"The No. 1 enemy in Iraq is Al Qaeda," White House press secretary Tony Snow said Wednesday. "Al Qaeda continues to be the chief organizer of mayhem within Iraq."

The findings could bolster the president's hand at a moment when support on Capitol Hill for the war is eroding and the administration is struggling to defend its decision for a military buildup in Iraq.

The threat assessment says that Al Qaeda stepped up efforts to "improve its core operational capability" in late 2004 but did not succeed until December of 2006 after the Pakistani government signed a peace agreement with tribal leaders that effectively removed government military presence from the northwest frontier with Afghanistan.

The agreement allows Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives to move across the border with impunity and establish and run training centers, the report says, according to the official.

It also says that Al Qaeda is particularly interested in building up the numbers in its middle ranks, or operational positions, so there is not as great a lag in attacks when such people are killed.

"Being No. 3 in Al Qaeda is a bad job. We regularly get to the No. 3 person," Tom Fingar, the top U.S. intelligence analyst, told the House panel.

The report also notes that Al Qaeda has increased its public statements, although analysts stressed that those video and audio messages aren't reliable indicators of the actions the group may take.



I'm just thankful that we started the war in Iraq so we could kill them there...

[clambake]

I'm just thankful that we started the war in Iraq so we could kill them there...
Terrorist want to terrorize us.

So does Chertoff.

[Extra Stout]

So, to summarize...

The surge in Iraq is working becuase al-Qaeda is weaker than ever before, except that they're stronger than they've been since 2001 because of their base in Pakistan.

They are planning summer attacks in the U.S. because they are weak and desperate, and also because they are strong and confident.

I keep getting mixed signals.

[Oh, Gee!!]

al Qaeda is planning a terror "spectacular" this summer

Sounds like an ad for a musical.

[nkdlunch]

A secret U.S. law enforcement report, prepared for the Department of Homeland Security,

:rolleyes

[Yonivore]

So, to summarize...

The surge in Iraq is working becuase al-Qaeda is weaker than ever before,
Yes, in Iraq.


...except that they're stronger than they've been since 2001 because of their base in Pakistan.
Yes, in the Pakistani region under their control they are increasing.


They are planning summer attacks in the U.S. because they are weak and desperate, and also because they are strong and confident.
I don't know from where you draw this conclusion. I think it's been a constant threat since before 9-11 that al Qaeda was trying to attack the U. S. Homeland. Both during times when they were at their strongest and at times when they were at their weakest.


I keep getting mixed signals.
That's because you're either stupid or willfully ignorant of the facts. Take your pick.

[PixelPusher]

That's because you're either stupid or willfully ignorant of the facts. Take your pick.
Once again, a foolish, oversimplistic Republican talking point ("We fight them over there, so we don't have to fight them here") is proven false, and once again Yoni reveals himself to be a disingenuous turd by invoking some mythical nuance to the prior talking point that never existed.

[George Gervin's Afro]

That's because you're either stupid or willfully ignorant of the facts. Take your pick.

That's what we think of you !!

[Yonivore]

Want to know how we're doing with respect to al Qaeda in Iraq?

If you're not familiar with the Pentagon Channel (http://www.pentagonchannel.mil/), you should check it out. Check out yesterday's Multi-National Force briefing, titled "Iraq Briefing 11 July 2007," by Brigadier General Kevin Bergner. It is the most detailed, fact-intensive discussion of our effort to destroy al Qaeda in Iraq, a principal objective of the "surge," that I have seen.

You won't get this information on the evening news or, apparently, from any sources accessed by Extra Stout; the Defense Department has to carry on what amounts to a guerrilla effort to inform the American people about what it is accomplishing in Iraq -- by creating their own internet channel.

[Yonivore]

That's what we think of you !!
So, speaking for all of "we," are you? And, whomever "we" is, I'm alright with that.

[PixelPusher]

Want to know how we're doing with respect to al Qaeda in Iraq?

If you're not familiar with the Pentagon Channel (http://www.pentagonchannel.mil/), you should check it out. Check out yesterday's Multi-National Force briefing, titled "Iraq Briefing 11 July 2007," by Brigadier General Kevin Bergner. It is the most detailed, fact-intensive discussion of our effort to destroy al Qaeda in Iraq, a principal objective of the "surge," that I have seen.

You won't get this information on the evening news or, apparently, from any sources accessed by Extra Stout; the Defense Department has to carry on what amounts to a guerrilla effort to inform the American people about what it is accomplishing in Iraq -- by creating their own internet channel.
...and now he's changing the subject to the effectiveness of the surge (yeah, we know..."It just got started! Give it more time!) and passing on central issue - WTF does the Iraq occupation have to do with quelling global terroism? Even less than you have claimed for the past 4 years.

[clambake]

Wow, the Pentagon Channel!!!!

Finally, we got our own Tokyo Rose and Hanoi Hannah!!!!!!

[boutons_]

Analysts have placed AQ as the 5th threat in Iraq.

Taking out AQ in Iraq will help (but everybody knows more will come), but it won't solve the Sunni/Shiite/Kurd POLITICAL problems that fuel the non-AQ civil war.

[George Gervin's Afro]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/17471.html


By Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Thu, June 28, 2007 email | print tool nameclose
tool goes here
WASHINGTON — Facing eroding support for his Iraq policy, even among Republicans, President Bush on Thursday called al Qaida "the main enemy" in Iraq, an assertion rejected by his administration's senior intelligence analysts.

The reference, in a major speech at the Naval War College that referred to al Qaida at least 27 times, seemed calculated to use lingering outrage over the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to bolster support for the current buildup of U.S. troops in Iraq, despite evidence that sending more troops hasn't reduced the violence or sped Iraqi government action on key issues.

Bush called al Qaida in Iraq the perpetrator of the worst violence racking that country and said it was the same group that had carried out the Sept. 11 attacks in New York and Washington.

"Al Qaida is the main enemy for Shia, Sunni and Kurds alike," Bush asserted. "Al Qaida's responsible for the most sensational killings in Iraq. They're responsible for the sensational killings on U.S. soil."

U.S. military and intelligence officials, however, say that Iraqis with ties to al Qaida are only a small fraction of the threat to American troops. The group known as al Qaida in Iraq didn't exist before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, didn't pledge its loyalty to al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden until October 2004 and isn't controlled by bin Laden or his top aides.

Bush's references to al Qaida came just days after Republican Sens. Richard Lugar of Indiana, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and George Voinovich of Ohio broke with Bush over his Iraq strategy and joined calls to begin an American withdrawal.

"The only way they think they can rally people is by blaming al Qaida," said Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of the CIA's Counter-Terrorism Center who's critical of the administration's strategy.

Next month, the Senate is expected to debate the Iraq issue as it considers a Pentagon spending bill. Democrats are planning to offer at least three amendments that seek to change Iraq strategy, including revoking the 2002 resolution that authorized Bush to use force in Iraq and mandating that a withdrawal of troops begin within 120 days.

Bush's use of al Qaida in his speech had strong echoes of the strategy the administration had used to whip up public support for the Iraq invasion by accusing the late Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein of cooperating with bin Laden and implying that he'd played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks. Administration officials have since acknowledged that Saddam had no ties to bin Laden or 9-11.

A similar pattern has developed in Iraq, where the U.S. military has cited al Qaida 33 times in a barrage of news releases in the last seven days, and some news organizations have echoed the drumbeat. Last month, al Qaida was mentioned only nine times in U.S. military news releases.

In his speech, Bush referred only fleetingly to the sectarian violence that pits Sunni Muslim insurgents against Shiite Muslim militias in bloody tit-for-tat attacks, bombings, atrocities and forced mass evictions from contested areas of Baghdad and other cities and towns.

U.S. intelligence agencies and military commanders say the Sunni-Shiite conflict is the greatest source of violence and insecurity in Iraq.

"Extremists — most notably the Sunni jihadist group al Qaida in Iraq and Shia oppositionist Jaysh al-Mahdi — continue to act as very effective accelerators for what has become a self-sustaining struggle between Shia and Sunnis," the National Intelligence Council wrote in the unclassified key judgments of a National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq published in January. Jaysh al Mahdi is Arabic for the Mahdi Army militia of anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr.

The council comprises the top U.S. intelligence analysts, and a National Intelligence Estimate is the most comprehensive assessment it produces for the president and a small number of his senior aides. It reflects the consensus of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.

In his speech, Bush made other questionable assertions.

He claimed that U.S. troops were fighting "block by block" in Baqouba, a city northeast of Baghdad, as part of an offensive to clear out al Qaida fighters.

But Gen. Raymond Odierno, the U.S. ground commander in Iraq, said earlier this month that 80 percent of the insurgents American troops expected to encounter in Baqouba had fled before the operation began, including much of the insurgent leadership.

There was little heavy fighting. Out of 10,000 U.S. troops involved, only one has been killed.

Bush categorically blamed al Qaida for the Feb. 22, 2006, bombing of the Askariya mosque, a sacred Shiite shrine in Samarra whose destruction accelerated sectarian bloodshed.

But no group has claimed responsibility for the attack, and U.S. officials say there's no proof that al Qaida in Iraq was responsible, only strong suspicions.

Critics of the war are questioning the administration's increasing references to al Qaida.

"We cannot attribute all the violence in Iraq to al Qaida," retired Army Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who commanded the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq before becoming an opponent of Bush's strategy there, told the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday. "Al Qaida is certainly a component, but there's larger components."


Bush just can't stop twisting the truth. yes Yoni I acknowledge that Bush isn't lying but he sure as hell is playing loose with the facts..

[Extra Stout]

That's because you're either stupid or willfully ignorant of the facts. Take your pick.
Well, I thought the media reports were contradictory, but don't let that stop you from jumping on anybody who might even seem to deviate from the talking points, you mindless partisan hack.

[Yonivore]

Bush just can't stop twisting the truth. yes Yoni I acknowledge that Bush isn't lying but he sure as hell is playing loose with the facts..
I think the article you quoted is playing loose with the facts.


U.S. military and intelligence officials, however, say that Iraqis with ties to al Qaida are only a small fraction of the threat to American troops.
That's right. Since the surge began more and more of the Sectarian groups are allying with the U.S. to fight al Qaeda. So, this would be a true statement. The majority of the danger to U. S. troops in Iraq comes from the few Iraqis associated with al Qaeda and al Qaeda itself.


The group known as al Qaida in Iraq didn't exist before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003,
Again, this may be true but that doesn't mean al Qaeda didn't exist in Iraq. Zarqawi arrived there, from Afghanistan, shortly after the U. S. invasion of Afghanistan and started building an organization that was loyal to al Qaeda and bin Laden...as we evidenced by the communication between Zarwahri and Zarqawi early in the conflict.

Saying this is like saying the myriad of "Palestinian" terrorist groups that popped up and faded away, over the years, didn't share an ideology or allegiance with Yasser Arafat's Fatah simply because they didn't exist as a named organization prior to their institution.


...didn't pledge its loyalty to al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden until October 2004 and isn't controlled by bin Laden or his top aides.
So? They identify themselves as al Qaeda and that they aren't centrally controlled only supports the current view that al Qaeda has "franchised" out and decentralized.

As for the rest of the article, particularly the parts you bolded, you (and they) seem to be arguing al Qaeda isn't a major force in Iraq and hasn't been responsible for much of the more spectacular violence over the course of the war there.

We disagree. You seem to be comfortable the Mainstream Media is telling you everything and, just by looking at Michael Yon's blog alone, I can tell you they're not even coming close to giving an accurate picture of al Qaeda's influence in Iraq...or, for that matter, the U.S. progress with formerly violent sectarian groups there.

One example (http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/al-qaeda-on-the-run-feasting-on-the-moveable-beast.htm) of something I've yet to hear in the Mainstream Media.


The last major mission I did while in Baqubah in early 2005 was into Buhriz. That mission had begun with our artillery firing some 155mm shots into a palm grove on the banks of the Diyala River. The enemy in Buhriz, consisting partly of the 1920s Revolution Brigades, was tough and proficient at killing our people.

A current leader in Burhiz and member of the 1920s Revolution Brigades (1920s) goes by the name Abu Ali. On Monday 9 July, I drove in the back of a Stryker and talked on the streets of Buhriz with Abu Ali. Just months ago our forces would have shot Abu Ali on sight, and he surely would have done the same to us. Today we are allies, for now.

***

I was standing there with Abu Ali, with American soldiers and 1920s people milling all around. We had certainly killed a lot of his people, and the 1920s certainly had killed many American soldiers. During severe fighting with al Qaeda in April 2007, the 1920s reached out to American soldiers, and together they have been dismantling al Qaeda here in Baqubah and other places. If we had to fight an allied force of 1920s and al Qaeda, there is no telling how many soldiers we would have lost.
The Iraqis sure seem to believe al Qaeda is a significant presence in Iraq.