[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Bush reelected :-(
Author Thread
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
9/23/2006  9:54 PM
I dunno man. I just don't dig torture.
https:// It's not so hard.
AUTOADVERT
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
9/23/2006  9:56 PM
Posted by BasketballJones:

I dunno man. I just don't dig torture.

that's just plain unamerican of you.
martin
Posts: 75269
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
9/23/2006  10:19 PM


Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat
By MARK MAZZETTI

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html

WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document.

The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,’’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.

An opening section of the report, “Indicators of the Spread of the Global Jihadist Movement,” cites the Iraq war as a reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology.

The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official.

More than a dozen United States government officials and outside experts were interviewed for this article, and all spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were discussing a classified intelligence document. The officials included employees of several government agencies, and both supporters and critics of the Bush administration. All of those interviewed had either seen the final version of the document or participated in the creation of earlier drafts. These officials discussed some of the document’s general conclusions but not details, which remain highly classified.

Officials with knowledge of the intelligence estimate said it avoided specific judgments about the likelihood that terrorists would once again strike on United States soil. The relationship between the Iraq war and terrorism, and the question of whether the United States is safer, have been subjects of persistent debate since the war began in 2003.

National Intelligence Estimates are the most authoritative documents that the intelligence community produces on a specific national security issue, and are approved by John D. Negroponte, director of national intelligence. Their conclusions are based on analysis of raw intelligence collected by all of the spy agencies.

Analysts began working on the estimate in 2004, but it was not finalized until this year. Part of the reason was that some government officials were unhappy with the structure and focus of earlier versions of the document, according to officials involved in the discussion.

Previous drafts described actions by the United States government that were determined to have stoked the jihad movement, like the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay and the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, and some policy makers argued that the intelligence estimate should be more focused on specific steps to mitigate the terror threat. It is unclear whether the final draft of the intelligence estimate criticizes individual policies of the United States, but intelligence officials involved in preparing the document said its conclusions were not softened or massaged for political purposes.

Frederick Jones, a White House spokesman, said the White House “played no role in drafting or reviewing the judgments expressed in the National Intelligence Estimate on terrorism.” The estimate’s judgments confirm some predictions of a National Intelligence Council report completed in January 2003, two months before the Iraq invasion. That report stated that the approaching war had the potential to increase support for political Islam worldwide and could increase support for some terrorist objectives.

Documents released by the White House timed to coincide with the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks emphasized the successes that the United States had made in dismantling the top tier of Al Qaeda.

“Since the Sept. 11 attacks, America and its allies are safer, but we are not yet safe,” concludes one, a report titled “9/11 Five Years Later: Success and Challenges.” “We have done much to degrade Al Qaeda and its affiliates and to undercut the perceived legitimacy of terrorism.”

That document makes only passing mention of the impact the Iraq war has had on the global jihad movement. “The ongoing fight for freedom in Iraq has been twisted by terrorist propaganda as a rallying cry,” it states.

The report mentions the possibility that Islamic militants who fought in Iraq could return to their home countries, “exacerbating domestic conflicts or fomenting radical ideologies.”

On Wednesday, the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee released a more ominous report about the terrorist threat. That assessment, based entirely on unclassified documents, details a growing jihad movement and says, “Al Qaeda leaders wait patiently for the right opportunity to attack.”

The new National Intelligence Estimate was overseen by David B. Low, the national intelligence officer for transnational threats, who commissioned it in 2004 after he took up his post at the National Intelligence Council. Mr. Low declined to be interviewed for this article.

The estimate concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to include a new class of “self-generating” cells inspired by Al Qaeda’s leadership but without any direct connection to Osama bin Laden or his top lieutenants.

It also examines how the Internet has helped spread jihadist ideology, and how cyberspace has become a haven for terrorist operatives who no longer have geographical refuges in countries like Afghanistan.

In early 2005, the National Intelligence Council released a study concluding that Iraq had become the primary training ground for the next generation of terrorists, and that veterans of the Iraq war might ultimately overtake Al Qaeda’s current leadership in the constellation of the global jihad leadership.

But the new intelligence estimate is the first report since the war began to present a comprehensive picture about the trends in global terrorism.

In recent months, some senior American intelligence officials have offered glimpses into the estimate’s conclusions in public speeches.

“New jihadist networks and cells, sometimes united by little more than their anti-Western agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge,” said Gen. Michael V. Hayden, during a speech in San Antonio in April, the month that the new estimate was completed. “If this trend continues, threats to the U.S. at home and abroad will become more diverse and that could lead to increasing attacks worldwide,” said the general, who was then Mr. Negroponte’s top deputy and is now director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

For more than two years, there has been tension between the Bush administration and American spy agencies over the violence in Iraq and the prospects for a stable democracy in the country. Some intelligence officials have said the White House has consistently presented a more optimistic picture of the situation in Iraq than justified by intelligence reports from the field.

Spy agencies usually produce several national intelligence estimates each year on a variety of subjects. The most controversial of these in recent years was an October 2002 document assessing Iraq’s illicit weapons programs. Several government investigations have discredited that report, and the intelligence community is overhauling how it analyzes data, largely as a result of those investigations.

The broad judgments of the new intelligence estimate are consistent with assessments of global terrorist threats by American allies and independent terrorism experts.

The panel investigating the London terrorist bombings of July 2005 reported in May that the leaders of Britain’s domestic and international intelligence services, MI5 and MI6, “emphasized to the committee the growing scale of the Islamist terrorist threat.”

More recently, the Council on Global Terrorism, an independent research group of respected terrorism experts, assigned a grade of “D+” to United States efforts over the past five years to combat Islamic extremism. The council concluded that “there is every sign that radicalization in the Muslim world is spreading rather than shrinking.”
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
MaTT4281
Posts: 34588
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
9/23/2006  11:54 PM
771
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
9/24/2006  1:52 PM
https:// It's not so hard.
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
9/24/2006  10:00 PM
Why Retired Military Brass Don't Want Torture
Firsthand combat experiences compel old guard to attack Bush's 'alternative interrogation.'
By Charles Kaiser
September 24, 2006

FOR ONE 83-year-old veteran of World War II, it was the searing memory of a Japanese prisoner who helped turn the tide on Iwo Jima. For a 40-year veteran of Army intelligence, it was a trip to the battlefield at Gettysburg. For all 43 retired generals and admirals, it was a combination of moral outrage and deep disgust over President Bush's proposed legislation on interrogating terrorist suspects that propelled them into unfamiliar territory.

"None of us feels comfortable speaking out publicly," said retired Rear Adm. John D. Hutson, who served as the Navy's judge advocate general from 1997 to 2000 and presided over the JAG corps' 1,600 members. "That's not the nature of what military officers do…. [But we] care very, very much about the country and the military — and that's why [we] are speaking out."

The group of retired flag officers first came together in 2005, when a dozen of them signed a letter opposing the nomination of Alberto Gonzales as attorney general for his role in developing Bush's policies on torture in the war on terror. Late last year, they supported Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) ban on cruel and inhumane treatment of detainees in U.S. custody anywhere in the world.

And last week, the Republican senators with whom the retired officers are allied in a fight against Bush's proposed legislation to weaken the spirit and the letter of the Geneva Convention won a compromise with the administration. According to the agreement, all forms of torture would be banned, including waterboarding, which White House officials had insisted wasn't real torture, although it was one of the Gestapo's favorite techniques.

The retired officers believe that the negative consequences of the president's anti-terror policies could have been avoided if the administration had followed traditional military practices. Retired Marine Maj. Gen. Fred E. Haynes, 83, is a veteran of World War II and the Korean and Vietnam wars. In 1945, he was a captain in the regiment that seized Mt. Suribachi on Iwo Jima and raised the U.S. flag there. In March of that year, his unit found two U.S. soldiers dead, apparently victims of torture. On March 17, about 10 days before the battle ended, a Japanese soldier, wearing nothing but his boots and a cotton jock strap, stepped out of a cave with his hands up. He had read one of the leaflets Americans were distributing in artillery shells that promised that anyone who gave up would get his wounds treated and his stomach filled.

The soldier surrendered to a lieutenant who spoke no Japanese. The lieutenant called his company commander to ask what to do with the prisoner.

"As he was talking," Haynes recalled hearing from soldiers in his unit, "a Japanese sniper apparently got a good aim on him and the bullet penetrated his helmet at an angle, scooted around inside the helmet and dropped out the back." Miraculously, the lieutenant was uninjured.

"In good conscience, he could have shot the Japanese [prisoner] dead," said the general, because the soldier could reasonably have concluded that he had been set up. "But he didn't."

Instead, the lieutenant waited for the company commander to join them. He subsequently discovered that French was a language he shared with the prisoner. Speaking French, the Japanese man offered to help clear out caves nearby.

When the prisoner was interrogated by two Marine interpreters fluent in Japanese, they quickly determined that he was the chief code clerk for the Japanese commander on Iwo Jima, an extraordinarily valuable catch.

"He not only knew the situation on Iwo, but he had good insight into the situation on Okinawa, which we were to invade on April 1 and did. He even knew a fair amount about the [Japanese army's] situation with respect to China," Haynes recalled.

The prisoner was immediately sent to the headquarters of Adm. Chester W. Nimitz, and from there to Washington.

"The moral of the story," said the general, "is we Americans have been so thoroughly imbued with the idea that you have to treat prisoners humanely — and this [story] is an example of why. It is an illustration of how by treating an individual decently you are much more likely to get any information you might want — and it's more likely to be correct."

Retired Army Brig. Gen. David R. Irvine spent 40 years in the Reserve as an intelligence officer, spending much of that time teaching the rules of interrogation to soldiers, Marines and airmen. He remembers a visit to Gettysburg, where he lined up with 125 other officers in front of a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, from which they retraced Pickett's Charge.

"Everything there is completely flat," Irvine said. "By the time you get 50 yards out … [you're] right in artillery range of the Union line. And you've got a mile and half to go on foot [to reach the Union soldiers]. As stragglers who survived found their way back to Seminary Ridge, Lee was riding his horse on that line and apologizing: 'It's all my fault.' He sent a letter of resignation to [Confederate President] Jefferson Davis, who refused to accept it. And the point of that whole exercise was command responsibility. That's a powerful lesson."

It's a lesson these retired officers think the administration doesn't get because no higher-ups were prosecuted for the abuses uncovered at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere. "Tailhook was a very painful time for the Navy," Hutson said, referring to the 1991 sexual misconduct scandal. "The Navy was not treating women with the respect and dignity that they deserved and had earned. But speaking of accountability, we had a chief of naval operations who resigned; we had a secretary of the Navy who resigned."

Retired Brig. Gen. James P. Cullen was chief judge of the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals. "I grew up in an Army where the rules were very clear and where serviceman and women had no question about what their obligations and responsibilities were under both the Geneva Convention and our domestic law," he said. "When you have a winking-and-nodding policy [as was the case at Abu Ghraib], that just brings about the consequences that we came to view at [the prison]."

What further fuels the officers' outrage is that the policies they believe have undermined the military were mostly formulated by men, like Bush, who have not seen combat.

"[Vice President Dick] Cheney made mention in the days after 9/11 that he wanted to operate sort of on the dark side," Cullen said. "Here was a guy who never served, and now something terrible had happened, and he wanted to show that he was a tough guy…. So he's going to operate outside the rules of law. Bad message."
https:// It's not so hard.
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
9/24/2006  10:27 PM
https:// It's not so hard.
MaTT4281
Posts: 34588
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
9/25/2006  1:08 AM
770
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
9/25/2006  5:55 AM
Wallce (Fox News) tries to ambush Clinton on his interview. Watch what happens!!
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/24/clinton-video/
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
9/25/2006  6:35 AM
"you got that little smirk on your face, you think you're so clever."

oowee billy aren't you feeling it.

guess that ticker's pretty mended up.

here's my thing with clinton though - here's a guy who squandered so much political capital that he coudn't launch any effective military or covert campaigns because everyone thought he was just trying to divert attention from monicagate. plus he ushered in bush by fanning the "family values" flame. talk about screwing the pooch - she truly WAS a dog.

hell i understand human nature and everyone's gotta have some, etc, but that was one of the all-time worst clusterf**ks and we've all paid for it many many times over.

still it's good to see him spitting fire at the weasel wallace. he's like tom cruise only without the insanity!

nice clip silver, thanks for posting it.
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
9/25/2006  10:29 AM
Posted by Marv:

"you got that little smirk on your face, you think you're so clever."

oowee billy aren't you feeling it.

guess that ticker's pretty mended up.

here's my thing with clinton though - here's a guy who squandered so much political capital that he coudn't launch any effective military or covert campaigns because everyone thought he was just trying to divert attention from monicagate. plus he ushered in bush by fanning the "family values" flame. talk about screwing the pooch - she truly WAS a dog.

hell i understand human nature and everyone's gotta have some, etc, but that was one of the all-time worst clusterf**ks and we've all paid for it many many times over.

still it's good to see him spitting fire at the weasel wallace. he's like tom cruise only without the insanity!

nice clip silver, thanks for posting it.

I agree, but in spite of that, he is so much a better man than Bush in every way it isn't funny.

Bill gets off on blow jobs.
W gets off on torturing people.

I'll take Bill any day. (But then, I've never been to "Jesus Camp").
https:// It's not so hard.
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
9/25/2006  5:12 PM
Get ready for the repuglicans to run the same campaign for a third time. Will it work again? If not, expect them to get a little help from "Uncle Diebold".


MILWAUKEE (Reuters) - Vice President
Dick Cheney on Monday accused Democrats of being soft in the war on terrorism with a strategy of "resignation and defeatism in the face of determined enemies."

Cheney, in a speech to Wisconsin Republicans, singled out in particular Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, West Virginia Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller and Democratic Party chairman
Howard Dean for criticism.

Democrats would like the November elections to be seen as a referendum on President George W. Bush's handling of the Iraq war. The party got a boost this past weekend with media reports of an intelligence report indicating that the Iraq war had led to a mushrooming of jihadist ideology.

Republicans, on the other hand, want to portray Democrats as soft on terrorism in hopes of hanging on to both houses of the U.S. Congress in November elections.

Cheney cited Reid for suggesting the United States should not have invaded Iraq in 2003 even if it meant leaving Saddam Hussein in power and for opposing the Patriot Act, controversial laws passed with the goal of fighting terrorism. He criticized Dean for saying the capture of Saddam had not made America safer.

"As we make our case to the voters in this election season, it's vital to keep issues of national security at the top of the agenda," Cheney said.

Cheney in particular attacked Democrats for turning their backs on Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, now running as an independent after losing his state's Democratic primary in August to anti-war candidate Ned Lamont.

Lieberman has firmly backed the Iraq war while criticizing the president's handling of it.

"For the sake of our security, this nation must reject any strategy of resignation and defeatism in the face of determined enemies," Cheney said.

At Milwaukee's Pfister Hotel, Cheney helped the state's Republican Party raise $150,000. In the race to become the state's governor, polls show Republican Mark Green down about five percentage points to Democrat Jim Doyle.

The Cheney visit was strong on a "war on terrorism" theme. Upon exiting Air Force Two at Milwaukee's airport, he was greeted by 10 members of Wisconsin's Air Force Reserve unit, some of whom had served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Later he was to address members of the Michigan National Guard in Grand Rapids, Michigan, before attending a closed Republican fund-raiser expected to raise $300,000.

Without much fanfare, Cheney has been an active money-raiser for his party in this campaign cycle, having raised $33 million in 100 events.
https:// It's not so hard.
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
9/25/2006  9:19 PM
wow, good stuff Marv! I blogged ur response. Hope its cool.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
9/25/2006  10:27 PM
hey i'm honored.
MaTT4281
Posts: 34588
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
9/26/2006  12:01 AM
769
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
9/26/2006  6:31 AM
This whole Clinton v. Fox News thing really exploded! I never expected this much coverage but one thing is for sure, Clinton had fox news backpedal all night last night. Every single guest they had on was say something like, 'i'm not blaming bill clinton and that I want to look forward not backward.' Jon Stuard had a pretty good piece on this. His issue was with how the media covered it as Clinton getting angry and disregarding all the information he provided in his defense. This had done more damage for the republicans than they expected.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
9/26/2006  8:08 AM
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
9/26/2006  9:20 AM
whew. check out olberman in response.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/09/25/olbermanns-special-comment-are-yours-the-actions-of-a-true-american/
martin
Posts: 75269
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
9/26/2006  10:06 AM
man, LOVE olberman. Loved him on ESPN and love him even more now. Why can't this guy get better national coverage? Katie who?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
9/26/2006  10:28 AM
yeah he's pretty impressive. but do you think he'd lose his edge if he were on a bigger stage?
Bush reelected :-(

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy