(2007-07-12) — As details of a new top-secret threat assessment begin leaking to the media through the usual intelligence community channels, President George Bush stands poised to ask Congress for more funding to boost the CIA’s ability to watch al-Qaeda grow.
The unreleased National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) will show a resurgent al Qaeda — with training facilities, money and communication abilities not seen since 2001 — enjoying safe haven in the western tribal regions of Pakistan, a U.S. ally.
While the president reportedly continues to respect the territorial integrity of Pakistan’s terrorist havens, and has no plans to violate Pakistan’s sovereignty with massive air strikes on al Qaeda training camps there, he will urge Congress to “help me reduce the surprise factor of the inevitable attacks on our soil by increasing our ability to observe the growth of our sworn enemies.”
Meanwhile, an internal White House memorandum, leaked to The Washington Post, suggests that the Bush administration abandon aggressive statements about the so-called “war on terror” and instead borrow jargon from the National Weather Service, referring to “terror watches” and “terror warnings”.
A “terror watch” would indicate a high probability of attack on U.S. soil, while a “terror warning” means an attack has already happened and more might come.
“Of course,” the White House memo says, “as with the violent weather watches and warnings, citizens will simply have to hunker down and hope they don’t get hurt. After all, like the weather, you can talk about terrorism and you can see it coming from a distance, but ultimately, you can’t really do anything about it.”
74 responses so far ↓
1 camojack // Jul 12, 2007 at 7:43 am
“As details of a new top-secret threat assessment begin leaking to the media through the usual intelligence community channels…
Hmmm…yes. What is up with that, anyway?!
2 camojack // Jul 12, 2007 at 7:44 am
Oh, and here’s a pre-emptive God Bless America for J. Jonah Jameson, while I’m here…
3 Roguet55 // Jul 12, 2007 at 8:02 am
Finally, the Congress is tooling up with new physical activities like yelling at each other that “calling out the sky is falling” is irresponsible! Well… at least they are doing something to earn their lifetime stipens!
Please remind me why we leave these tribal allies alone to do as they please to further the islamization of the world?!
Missed you Scott!
4 gafisher // Jul 12, 2007 at 8:03 am
The weather service analogy holds up well. Everybody talks about al Quada but nobody does anything about it.
Today’s forecast: partly terror, becoming mostly terror tomorrow.
5 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 12, 2007 at 8:15 am
It occurred to me today that, at best, al Qaeda and their Islamofascist ilk are actually, really and truly, barbarians still living in the dark ages.
It’s like somebody “beamed†them here from afar.
While the “SG-1 Approach†should have been adopted at a much earlier point in time, it could still be implemented: If an alien acts friendly, then, become pals; else, if they are hostile, vaporize them; else, isolate them from the entire Universe. This is a tried and true method, considered by consensus to be far superior to the “Star Trek Approach†of yesteryear.
6 Rock Slatestone // Jul 12, 2007 at 8:30 am
unfortunately, nobody was just “beamed in”. They have always been here. With the lack of building security and not having a swift successful war, we get to watch this dragon rear its ugly head.
7 conserve-a-tips // Jul 12, 2007 at 8:37 am
Ouch, Scott. Really good, but man, did you have to make your knife so sharp? It cut right through to the truth!!!
Coming from the land of twisters and ‘fraidy holes’ I am thinking that Gary England ain’t gonna be much use on this forecast. “Aunty Em! Aunty Em! I’m not in Kansas anymore!”
8 Fred Sinclair // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:07 am
These days, when I’m out and about in my wheelchair, I meet friends who ask, “Fred, what’s up? What are you doing, lately?”
I ALWAYS answer, “I’m real busy playing Government.”
“Playing Government? How do you do that?”
“Just sit around, running my mouth and doing absolutely nothing.”
Heirborn Ranger
9 Darthmeister // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:17 am
I’ll never understand partisan leftist crowing over this “fact” of al Qaeda trying to reconstitute itself by rallying their fellow nutbags. The fact remains, there have been, there are and there will be al Qaeda death merchants to deal with and one can don’t deal with evil like that by negotiating “peace” terms or letting them metastasize in the swamps of Islamofascism unmolested. Since 9/11, the existence of emboldened jihadists is ALL Americans’ continuing problem whether we had attacked the Taliban/al Qaeda/Saddam axis of evil or not. These loonie tunes are not going to simply disappear by half of us putting their heads
up their… in the sand.And jihadists like Abu al-Zawahiri and Yussuf al-Ayyeri have made it abundantly clear to those with ears to hear, al Qaeda sees Iraq and Afghanistan and the whole planet as their battlefields! All of America and the rest of the free world would too if America blamers weren’t so steeped in their counter-productive and despicable Bush hatred.
I mean, how many more Germans rallied to the Nazi cause when we began bombing them in 1942? And how many Japanese rallied to Tojo’s cause when Dolittle bombed Tokyo? Did this “rallying effect” mean if we had not “stirred up the hornet’s nest” and simply left them alone in 1941 we would have had “peace in our time”? Sheesh! The anti-war left is stuck on stupid and the Islamofascist have a ready reserve of useful idiots to exploit in the years to come.
10 boberinyetagain // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:21 am
What do you know? Perhaps it would have been best if we had concentrated on finding the bad guy in Afghanistan rather than looking in Iraq. You remember, they guy that caused/rejoiced in the attack on us. Yeah that’s right, the guy we were actually mad at, the one that had done us harm. I know he got lost in the shuffle but if you think real hard you’ll remeber him.
Granted, perhaps the effort in Iraq made some terrorists relocate from A to I but if we had stayed in A to begin with we could have saved them the effort and killed them where they were.
Them and the Osama guy. Might have slowed (not stopped) the rise of Al but, even if it didn’t we would have gotten the guy that actually harmed us, not just a random mean man.
11 boberinyetagain // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:25 am
Hank, you and I agree again! It was by far and away the damned dumbest idea ever to abandon the effort to find the leader of the opposition which is exactly what we did.
Why was that again? To take down a mean man? Stupid, stupid, stupid. History will judge that decision to be one of a fool. (or bunch of fools, take your pick)
Talk about a head up where the moon don’t shine!
12 Laughing@You // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:38 am
What’s up with all the Repug perverts?
http://www.wftv.com/news/13665369/detail.html?taf=orlc
Do you think maybe it’s something in the Neo-Con Kool-Aid?
13 Ms RightWing, Ink // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:39 am
Good morning from Davenport, er Davenport Military Victory Outpost. I too, feel I need to do something to fight terrorism. Where can I send my dimes and nickels. Shoot, I will even throw in my laundry money for next week. Where do I send it.
No place for a victory garden here at the Bunker
14 Harry Daschle // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:51 am
Remember that song, “Watching Scotty Grow” by Mac Davis? Santini ought to be able to do something with that!
WOW, Bush just messed up big time, he called on Helen Thomas for the first question. 10:46 am
15 Maggie // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:59 am
Scott …….Great post as usual.
After watching the news this morning, I feel confident that we can breath easier now that Chertof’s “gut feeling” statement has been brought to public debate.
It was comforting and reassuring to watch the two leaders of the House Intelligence (?)Committee battling it out on television…..esp. while our soldiers are risking life and limb in Iraq and Afganistan to serve in situations
approved and appropiated by these same (uh) men.
I am with Camo and James……God bless and help America!
16 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 12, 2007 at 10:03 am
In my opinion, the three (3) videos released by al Qaeda this month indicate a real need for recruits; I think it shows depleting resources; I think it gives a certain desperate tone to their mindless blathering; I think this is a dangerous condition.
I think these observations are giving Chertoff the queasiness, the anxiety and the embarrassing gastric distress.
17 University Update - George W Bush - Bush: CIA Needs More Money to Watch Qaeda Grow // Jul 12, 2007 at 10:08 am
[...] Wesley Clark Link to Article george w bush Bush: CIA Needs More Money to Watch Qaeda Grow » Posted at ScrappleFace on Thursday, July 12, 2007 (2007-07-12) — As details of a new top-secret threat assessment begin leaking to the media through the usual intelligence community channels, President George Bush stands poised to ask Congress for more funding to boost the CIA’s ability … memorandum, leaked to The Washington Post, suggests that the Bush administration abandon aggressive View Entire Article » [...]
18 Fred Sinclair // Jul 12, 2007 at 10:35 am
A lot of American military died in No. Korea back in ‘50 - ‘53 because the libs of the day were still in shock from Heroshima and Nagasaki and Truman lost his nerve.
In his book “Boring a Hole in the Sky” General Robert Lee Scott, Jr. detailed how Generals White, Twining and LeMay went to the President and said they were willing to guarentee a 3 day war, with zero American casualities, if Truman wouuld authorize the use of “The Atom Bomb”
They gave him their most accurate figures on projected loss of life (both military and civilian) and maximum property damage. Truman refused, resulting in our fighting the length of Korea twice. Later figures showed loss of life in excess of a factor of three - and property damage by a factor of five. Plus multiple thousands of American lives, needlessly wasted.
Probably a good thing from the lib’s point of view that I wasn’t President on 9/11/01 because I would have done what Truman wouldn’t and obviously Bush (either one) wouldn’t either.
The “world” was outraged by an Israli “pre-emptiive strike” a few years ago but in time the “world” mostly got over it. Just as they’re going to eventually get over Israeli’s next “pre-emptive” strike - this time (and very soon, I believe) in Iran.
Heirborn Ranger
19 RedPepper // Jul 12, 2007 at 11:08 am
gafisher #4: “Today’s forecast: partly terror, becoming mostly terror tomorrow.”
Our problem is more like the Hippy-Dippy Weatherman’s forecast:
Tomorrow’s high … whenever I get up!
20 Hawkeye // Jul 12, 2007 at 11:26 am
War on Terror? What War on Terror? That’s just a bumper sticker… a slogan. I got it from a reputable source.
21 Darthmeister // Jul 12, 2007 at 11:30 am
CONGRESS HASN’T MET BENCHMARKS
AP - Baghdad
While the U.S. Congress sits in judgment of the Iraqi Parliament for “having not done enough” during wartime, it was discovered that the U.S. Congress is stuck in a quagmire of its own and has only met one of seven benchmarks it set for itself six months ago.
When asked for comment, House Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Moon) and Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-Moon) both blame President Bush for their own inaction on the important business it needed to address. “We’re just here to throw money at problems, that is if we can ever get a majority to pass legislation. Everything else is the executive branch’s problem. That’s our story and we’re sticking to it.”
Democrats
and the mediaacross the country applauded the boldness of the Congressional leadership in blaming the Bush Administration for its gridlock.22 Hawkeye // Jul 12, 2007 at 11:31 am
Today’s forecast… Partly sunny, gradually fading into mostly darkness this evening. The darkness may be heavier in some localized areas.
23 Hawkeye // Jul 12, 2007 at 11:35 am
Darth #21,
“Democrats
and the media…”Yes, that would be redundant now, wouldn’t it?
24 Darthmeister // Jul 12, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Bober, stop with the canards already. You really don’t care if we get Osama or not and here’s why. First, he could already be dead for all we know. There are leftists on your side of the aisle that claim precisely that and accuse the Bush Administration and elements within the CIA of propping up Osama as a boogey man to justify a continued bumpersticker war on terror. So whether Osama is alive or happens to be dead … IT’S BUSH’S FAULT!
And you also know in your heart of hearts that taking out Osama (don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see UBL hang just like Saddam) won’t change the terror war one whit. In fact, it looks like Ayman al-Zawahiri is the one running what’s left of the al Qaeda A-team. So, once again we see your side of the aisle on both sides of the issue. If we kill Osama it will only make him a martyr, if we don’t kill Osama, Bush has failed … blah, blah, blah.
And what positive thing has your side of the aisle actually done to support the troops in their missions in Afghanistan, Iraq and in advancing the overall GWOT … zilch, nada, goose egg. Your side has done nothing, nothing but complain, second-guess, generate hare-brained conspiracy theories and fingerpoint. Your side has proven to be clueless whiners and your post provides more evidence of which I speak.
25 Ms RightWing, Ink // Jul 12, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Global warming affecting al Qaeda?
26 Shelly // Jul 12, 2007 at 12:42 pm
boberin, all I can say is that I’m SO glad someone with your way of seeing things did not occupy the White House on December 8, 1941 because Hilter really needed to go.
27 Laughing@You // Jul 12, 2007 at 12:55 pm
“First, he could already be dead for all we know.”
Sad to say, that may be true!
But, doesn’t it seem like we should at least try know, since this IS the leader of the 911 Attack. NOT Saddam!
“So I don’t know where he is (Osama). You know, I just don’t spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you.â€
President George W. Bush, March 13, 2002 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
28 tomg // Jul 12, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Wonder if the CIA uses any of these for watching http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1274983,00.html
29 Laughing@You // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:01 pm
You’re going to need a long string, and lots of help to spin this one, knowitall!
30 Shelly // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:05 pm
tomg, who knew Iran was hiding their secrets in bird feeders?
31 EXT // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Let’s see….
Disney/ABC (Al Jazzera North)…..
Disney: Annimation carried to perfection….
Might we imagine that Bin Laden actually died but has been animated with long-life lithium batteries inserted so the beat can go on and on and on and on and on……
32 Ted // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:27 pm
More money means we may watch Qaeda “glow.”
Ted
33 Beerme // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:33 pm
OK, so Sadaam didn’t attack us on 9-11-2001 and perhaps it was a mistake going after toppling his regime. What if we all admit that is absolutely true (which it pretty much is). Will you Democrats stop harping on this issue and answer me one question?
What does it matter, now?
Are we not there? Is it not the epicenter of the GWOT (sorry, I know it’s a bumper sticker but I just don’t know what else to call it)?
Don’t we need to win it now, rather than whine about why we went in the first place and who is at fault for going?
WE’RE THERE! WE MUST WIN!
Anything else is disastrous and any attempt to do anything else is un-American.
Now, go whine somewhere else, grownups are talking.
34 da Bunny // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:42 pm
May as well give the CIA the money to watch al Qaeda grow…wouldn’t want to use the funds to seal off our borders or begin mass deportations of illegal aliens or “students” who never attend classes because they’re too busy planning evil deeds. I heard something chilling yesterday. A “student” can come here on a visa, register for classes in person, and get taxpayer funded financial aid, never attend a single class, and the college doesn’t have to report to the government that the “student” never showed up for classes until after the semester ends. Simply infuriating…
35 Darthmeister // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:47 pm
And to show how disingenuous and duplicitous those on your side of the aisle are, Lying@You, if President Bush had admitted he spent all his time thinking about UBL, you moonbats would whine that Bush is obsessed with UBL and is not spending enough time looking at the broader war and thus making America less secure, what about our children … blah, blah, blah.
How do I know this, because one of your local moonbat comrades made this point back in late 2001 in our local newspaper regarding Bush’s alleged “obsession” with UBL during the initial Afghan operations that was supposedly putting America more at risk because not enough time or thought was being spent in securing American from future 9/11s (which haven’t happened in six years despite Bush’s alleged “obsession”) or the actions of other terrorist organizations. You people are constantly on both sides of the issue as contrarian armchair generals. Pathetic demagogues all. Your self-righteous posturing hasn’t contributed one positive thing to the GWOT - not one.
Even if you and your anti-war pals are able to political force American troops out of Iraq, that perceived loss and the subsequent bloodbath in Iraq will be hung around your worthless necks for the rest of your lives. And you can bank on the fact conservatives will be reminding you anti-war demagogues of how your policy of cut-and-run literally made the world a far more dangerous place with lunatic jihadists around the world being further emboldened by their “victory” over Great Satan America. If you think things are bad now, wait until your policies of defeat are acted upon by a Democratically-controlled Congress. You can either wake up now or wake up later.
36 boberinyetagain // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:51 pm
Beerme, because we could stay and die there for the next 3000 years much like folks have been staying and dying there for the last 3000. Or, we could leave and leave them to do what they have always done, will always do, hate and kill each other. What is that to us, exactly? There are other areas of the planet where the same things have gone on/will continue but we do nothing (some lip service like “stop that!” is offered in some instances)
Hank/Shelly/Beerme,
I don’t have a “side of the asile” even though you have accused me of this approx 3,500 times over the years but, no matter, your arguments are just as nonsensicle as those accusations. “We should remain there and keep dying because we are there” that’s just perfect “logic”, the “logic” that got us there, the “logic” that will keep us there.
Hey, if you don’t want to chase Osama, fine, bring ALL the troops home and let them do what we hired them to do, protect America. Heck, use em to round up and deport illegal aliens for all I care….oh, I forgot, your man George doesn’t want to do that, he wants to build a wall (which will serve to keep them in, that’s certain)
Y’all talk circles around nonexistent problems and accuse those of us that won’t play along of being unAmerican/uncooperative but you gleefully ignore the real, verifiable threats (like 216 Philadelphians killed by “terrorists” so far thie year and the “busy” season is just beginning).
Just amazing!
37 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:54 pm
For some reason, I find it comical that the Leftists relentlessly equate 9/11 with Saddam Hussein and Saddam Hussein with 9/11.
38 RedPepper // Jul 12, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Ms RW #13: “No place for a victory garden here at the Bunker.”
There’s always hydroponics, Ms. RW - you could check out the Weeds series on Showtime for a few ideas ! I believe some of the others who post here have already been exploring this very option !
39 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 12, 2007 at 2:06 pm
My hovel is a veritable indoor jungle water garden (think General Sternwood).
[cough]
40 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 12, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Dang! There’s a SWAT Team out front pounding on my front door! Whoa, just kidding! I take it back! I didn’t mean i
41 RedPepper // Jul 12, 2007 at 2:16 pm
boberinyetagain #36: “Y’all talk circles around nonexistent problems … but you gleefully ignore the real, verifiable threats (like 216 Philadelphians killed by “terrorists†so far this year and the “busy†season is just beginning).”
Afternoon, boberin ! I’ll see your 216 and raise you an extra 201, plus 345 critically injured … no, wait, that’s just this past week … let me grab my calculator & I’ll get back to you …
42 boberinyetagain // Jul 12, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Oddly enough I find the threat in Phila to be of greater personal interest that the one you refer to Red and, nothing is being done about ours. No “surge”
43 Beerme // Jul 12, 2007 at 2:28 pm
Boberinyetagain,
Don’t you see the danger in the US leaving Iraq before victory is achieved? Don’t you see that the threat that an Al Qaeda-run Afghanistan posed is as nothing compared to an emboldened, Al Qaeda-run Iraq? Don’t you see the incredible danger for the innocent population of Iraq when we leave and the terrorists take over?
I really can’t believe you don’t see these events on the horizon.
Don’t you see the dangers to this country an Al Qaeda victory in Iraq would pose? 9-11 is just a jumping off point to these nutjobs. This is a danger to us here, in this country. Iraq is not just any other country where we just pay lip service with “stop that”. It is the front line of the GWOT and it is a line that we must hold!
We must win in Iraq-even if it proves the neocons and Bush right-we still must win in Iraq.
44 Laughing@You // Jul 12, 2007 at 2:36 pm
“OK, so Sadaam didn’t attack us on 9-11-2001″.
“Now, go whine somewhere else, grownups are talking.”
But, Osama did attack us on 9-11-2001, and we have done NOTHING!
Don’t worry about any future message to the terrorists! That message has already been sent, and received, and it is a much bigger message than withdrawal from Iraq WILL BE!
45 Laughing@You // Jul 12, 2007 at 2:40 pm
When you say; “we must hold!”, do you have rat in your pocket? We! Dawg gone!!
46 Beerme // Jul 12, 2007 at 3:05 pm
No, but there’s a rat on my monitor. Why do you want to know what I have in my pocket, chickenhawk(and I use the term correctly)?
47 RedPepper // Jul 12, 2007 at 3:06 pm
boberin #42: “I find the threat in Phila to be of greater personal interest that the one you refer to Red and, nothing is being done about ours … ”
What a shame, boberin. You should really complain to the mayor of Philadelphia about that problem, don’t you think ? And the City Council, or whatever they call the local governing body. To quote one of my favorite movies, Who are those guys ?
48 Laughing@You // Jul 12, 2007 at 3:31 pm
No, you don’t use it correctly! I understand both military service, and since my son served in twice in combat, something of the hardship it causes.
Now, if you mean “chicken”, I guess that might make more sense. My position on Iraq is in line with many General Officers, and statesmen.
There is no good answer, but there is a better answer. And that would be to redirect our efforts toward eliminating Osama and Al-Quaida at the their command post, not in Iraq where less than 5% of the insurgents are Al-Quaida.
If there is GWOT the United States isn’t fighting it very well (I’m not speaking of the troops)! We have most of our forces where the least Al-Quaida is located.
About you pocket, you disagree with 70% of Americans, you have never served, you personally risk nothing, and you say “we”.
Do you plan on going, or you preening just again?
49 Darthmeister // Jul 12, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Lying@You, how do you know Iraq is “where the least amount” of al Qaeda are and how do you know there are more where their “command posts” are? And if you happen to know where their “command posts” are and how many are there, then why don’t you tell the CIA, eh?
Look, you guys can blame Bush, 72% of the American people and the Congresscritters for putting American troops into Iraq, but if your side of the aisle gets what it wants, you will most certainly be culpable for how America disengages from Iraq.
You refuse to see the obvious. With every decision one resets the table of alternatives. Every choice opens new doors to new possibilities - both good and bad. Initially deciding to go to war in Iraq (forget the controversy about the war being either a just or unjust cause for the moment) doesn’t make defeat inexorable for us. Cutting-and-run just might be the most immoral choice to make at this point.
You guys are way too locked-in with the we-must-skedaddle policy. We and our leaders must carefully examine the various alternatives now facing this great nation at this very moment. Great strides are being made in Iraq even as we type. I believe there are still more tenable options than to get the heck out of Dodge. But I will say this, if a vocal faction does succeed in imposing its political will which leads to a premature retreat from Iraq before reasonable stability is achieved, that decision alone could and most certainly would secure defeat - particularly in the eyes of a ruthless, calculating enemy. It’s axiomatic when you quit in the middle of any conflict you’re going to flat out lose, period.
At some point those rushing hellbent into a cut-and-run scenario have to put aside that defeatist insanity and make at least some reasonable effort to actually help maximize the chances for a stable Iraq. It doesn’t matter who gets the credit for winning, all Americans win.
Look guys, we’re facing a truly implacable, ruthless foe and as Americans we’re in this together whether you like it or not. I don’t have to like your or vice versa, we’re Americans and Americans simply don’t lose … unless we quit like we did in Vietnam. The only acceptable outcome for our respective sides is for America to prevail by creating stability in Iraq and weaning that fledgling democracy from what was once an Islamic hellhole. The enemies of liberty have chosen to make Iraq their battlefield. This means Iraq must be viewed as another front on the war on terror because that’s how the Islamic terrorists see it, too.
50 Beerme // Jul 12, 2007 at 5:55 pm
That fact is, if it weren’t Bush’s war, it wouldn’t be nearly so odious to these Dems. He didn’t pander to them and they are going to make him pay for that, by God. The problem is that in making him pay, they will make all of us pay (that’s the US, so often spoken of by our resident war hero and arbiter of all that is military). That’s right, we the people of this country will pay for the retreatist/defeatist attitudes of these wretches who want to lose this war because in so doing we shame Bush and Cheney.
Now the dolt who sees the US as fighting in the wrong place and hunting down the wrong guy would have us believe that if Bush were to invade Pakistan (where, presumably, Bin Laden is hiding and Al Qaeda is thriving), he would be absolutely in favor of it. He also believes that there is no US military presence in Afghanistan, apparently.
Perhaps those who served or sired someone who served are the only ones who should be able to vote, hold opinions or debate any military-related issues…
51 Bush: CIA Needs More Money to Watch Qaeda Grow - Speedzilla Motorcycle Message Forums // Jul 12, 2007 at 6:13 pm
[...] Bush: CIA Needs More Money to Watch Qaeda Grow Bush: CIA Needs More Money to Watch Qaeda Grow by Scott Ott (2007-07-12) — As details of a new top-secret threat assessment begin leaking to the media through the usual intelligence community channels, President George Bush stands poised to ask Congress for more funding to boost the CIA’s ability to watch al-Qaeda grow. The unreleased National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) will show a resurgent al Qaeda — with training facilities, money and communication abilities not seen since 2001 — enjoying safe haven in the western tribal regions of Pakistan, a U.S. ally. While the president reportedly continues to respect the territorial integrity of Pakistan’s terrorist havens, and has no plans to violate Pakistan’s sovereignty with massive air strikes on al Qaeda training camps there, he will urge Congress to “help me reduce the surprise factor of the inevitable attacks on our soil by increasing our ability to observe the growth of our sworn enemies.” Meanwhile, an internal White House memorandum, leaked to The Washington Post, suggests that the Bush administration abandon aggressive statements about the so-called “war on terror” and instead borrow jargon from the National Weather Service, referring to “terror watches” and “terror warnings”. A “terror watch” would indicate a high probability of attack on U.S. soil, while a “terror warning” means an attack has already happened and more might come. “Of course,” the White House memo says, “as with the violent weather watches and warnings, citizens will simply have to hunker down and hope they don’t get hurt. After all, like the weather, you can talk about terrorism and you can see it coming from a distance, but ultimately, you can’t really do anything about it.” [...]
52 DrivebyMeteor // Jul 12, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Whaddaya know! Al Qaeda is stepping up its efforts to sneak terror operatives into the United States!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289152,00.html
Gee, I wonder why they didn’t tell us about this back when they were debating the
amnestyimmigration reform bill . . .53 Darthmeister // Jul 12, 2007 at 6:57 pm
Excellent points, Beerme, particularly the part about making Bush pay irrespective of how the troops might pay because of an emboldened enemy. And you were spot on about moonbat reaction to America invading Pakistan just to get to UBL.
Notice how the liberals wring their hands over Darfur, Sudan (a terrible, terrible genocide even during the Clinton Administration) and cry their phony crocodile tears about the need for America “to do something.” Well, there isn’t anything stopping these people from becoming human shields over in Darfur is there?
But you know darn well if the Bush Administration sent the military to INVADE Sudan and kick jangaweed butt from one border to the other, the American left and Euroweenies would have screamed their outrage about American imperialism and condemned this “reich-wing conservative administration” for having the unmitigated gall in bullying such a small, defenseless nation. We would have heard things like, “You’re using a sledgehammer to crack a peanut you stupid cons,” and, “Hey, don’t you chickenhawks know you can’t impose freedom and democracy upon a Muslim nation?”
Playing both sides of an issue just simply comes natural to contrarian liberals.
54 hwy93 // Jul 12, 2007 at 7:42 pm
This is a must have for Christmas
http://hillarynutcracker.com/completelynuts.html
Back on topic, It may be time to revisit the argument for expanding the use of targeted assasinations beyond the borders of Afghanistan and Iraq. Much cheaper and less messy than a ground war in asia. Also I’m pretty sure that if amadinajad, khomeni, assad, nasrallah, sadr, and maybe a dozen or so others (with an option on anyone standing in front of a crowd shouting “death to ________” )assumed room temperature, Afghanistan and Iraq would quiet down fairly quickly. We may have to apologize to and or “retire” their replacements, but eventually people of reason will get the positions.
(I’m aware that proper nouns should be capitalized but I don’t consider this group proper humans.)
55 hwy93 // Jul 12, 2007 at 8:24 pm
hello, paging lost post.
56 Maggie // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Hello hwy93…..great to see you back.I missed you.
Did you tie the knot?
57 Maggie // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:28 pm
Has anyone seen my post?
58 Maggie // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:30 pm
My two posts are lost……Has anyone seen them?
59 Maggie // Jul 12, 2007 at 9:34 pm
OH!There they are! They must hav stopped off at the bunker for some of Ms Righty’s WFCCC
60 Darthmeister // Jul 12, 2007 at 10:12 pm
The latest Congressional surrender bill is nothing but empty political posturing. The bill is deconstructed over at CaptainsQuarters. It will certainly be vetoed when it passes the Senate and Congress will fail to override the veto.
But the dirty little secret is that as it the bill is worded, phrases like “minimum force level required to protect U.S. national security interests” are vague and ill-defined, thus even with passage of the bill it would still allow President Bush to maintain present troop levels almost indefinitely!
It seems the House Demoncrats are in CYA and really don’t have the stomach to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory but rather want the bill as a fig leaf while throwing chum to their left-wing whacko base.
More good news from the milblog Badgers Forward.
61 Laughing@You // Jul 12, 2007 at 11:33 pm
Ollie: I guess I told him!
Stan: You certainly did Ollie, So there!
62 Ms RightWing, Ink // Jul 13, 2007 at 12:20 am
Hmm, cookies were being served at that very time. So there Ollie, just like two peas in the pod.
63 RedPepper // Jul 13, 2007 at 1:10 am
I’m not sure why I only recently came across this piece, since I’ve been reading Mark Steyn’s columns for a long while now.
Nevertheless, this one is important ; it may, at long last, be the answer to the question, “Why do they hate us?”
Muslim Paranoia: Enemies Made Us Impotent!
If you think it’s about our foreign policy, think again …
64 Darthmeister // Jul 13, 2007 at 6:33 am
U.S. forces kill 6 Iraqi police … scream the headlines. But wait, when you bother to read the story and then read between the lines you find out U.S. forces were apprehending an Iraqi police Lt. who was heading up a Shia cell of militiamen working in concert with their Iranian masters. Not only were 6 Iraqi “police” killed trying to stop the capture of the Lt. but also 7 other Shia gunmen (read: militiamen). That’s 13 more dead “insurgents”.
This is the kind of “fair and balanced” reporting we can expect in misleading headlines. Sometimes the facts can be 100% correct yet the way they are presented as well as other facts which aren’t brought to bear to give a fair and balanced view can bias a story. News editors know this and use it to their advantage to spin a story.
It’s only when one reads half-way down the page they find out:
The captured lieutenant was a “high-ranking” leader of a cell suspected of helping coordinate Iranian support for Shiite extremists in Iraq as well as carrying out roadside bombings against mortar attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces, the military said.
The average American just cruising the headlines would come away with the impression that idiot American stormtroopers just accidentally murdered 6 Iraqi policeman in a hail of friendly fire. Stupid Bush.
So what would have been a better headline?
U.S. Forces Kill 6 “Police” Defending Shia Militia Lt.
65 Darthmeister // Jul 13, 2007 at 6:53 am
Here’s the audioclip of the Nobel Prize winning moonbat thug who laughingly talked of “killing Bush” … oh, in a “non-violent” way of course.
What is even more disturbing are the nutbags in the audience who laughed. Maybe the Administration ought to come up with a “non-violent” way of ridding our society of scum like this and let’s see how funny that think that is.
Veiled threats like this ought to be seriously followed up. This is just more left-wing moonbat insanity. In a different time when men were men they would have been rounded up for their conspiracy of hate, tried and shot. Then let’s see if there is more careless BS like this. Somehow I doubt it since by definition leftists are cowards.
66 Shelly // Jul 13, 2007 at 9:41 am
Darth, that “peace lover” also mentioned that no one in the Muslim world will ever forgive Bush. I guess the women in Afghanistan are peeved that they can now shed their burkas, attend school, get a job if they’d like, and not get beaten in the streets or have their fingers cut off for wearing nail polish. Dang Bush! They used to live in eutopia! And this “peace lover” obviously thinks they should return to it.
Beerme, I too was shocked to learn that the U.S. and NATO forces had left Afghanistan.
67 Ms RightWing, Ink // Jul 13, 2007 at 10:23 am
Good morning from a cool NE Ohio. Ahh, the comfortable days of summer. I sure am glad that bout with global warming is over. Now all we need is rain, rain, rain.
68 Darthmeister // Jul 13, 2007 at 11:26 am
Shelly, you have to remember we’re dealing with people infected with BDS disease. Ya see, Bush equals Hitler … but at least Hitler meant well!
If these nattering ninnies had lived during the Third Reich and said one-tenth of the crap about der Fuhrer that they’ve venomously spewed about President Bush, they would quickly find themselves with a hole in the head lying in a hole full of lime. They’d then know what a real fascist state is like.
Which goes to prove, the only thing worse than a moron is a stupid liberal.
69 EXT // Jul 13, 2007 at 1:45 pm
Hey!
Morons generally are of limited mental capacity from birth and have no control over it.
Liberals have choices and choose stupidly.
You’re giving honest-to-goodness morons a bad name here!
70 Darthmeister // Jul 13, 2007 at 7:35 pm
You’re right EXT. I repent. I hope morons have it in their heart to forgive me for comparing them to stupid liberals.
71 -Dan from Denver // Jul 14, 2007 at 9:44 am
Watch Closely…
Watch closely, but no action…. A technique refined during the Clinton Administration.From Scott Ott:Bush: CIA Needs
More Money to Watch Qaeda Grow
Posted:
12 Jul 2007 07:37 AM CDT
(2007-07-12) — As details of a new top-secret threat……
72 -Dan from Denver // Jul 14, 2007 at 9:44 am
Watch Closely…
Watch closely, but no action…. A technique refined during the Clinton Administration.From Scott Ott:Bush: CIA Needs
More Money to Watch Qaeda Grow
Posted:
12 Jul 2007 07:37 AM CDT
(2007-07-12) — As details of a new top-secret threat……
73 EXT // Jul 14, 2007 at 2:18 pm
#48….
A son?
Implies a live birth!
How can a dedicated Liberal have allowed that to happen?
Oh well, an abortion opportunity lost forever!
74 nomoregore // Jul 19, 2007 at 10:00 pm
Eureka! All we have to do is convince the libnerds that al Qaeda is involved in Global Warming, and they will jump on the WOT bandwagon.
After all, they can believe Bush brought the Twin Towers down, so they can believe anything.
You must log in to post a comment.