NY GOP AG Candidate Pirro (yes her) under fed. investigation for getting Kerik (yes him) to spy on her husband

You have to read the post over at TPMmuckraker. You can't make this stuff up:

Now she's under federal investigation for plotting -- with onetime NYPD chief, former Iraq security head, would-be DHS secretary and crook Bernard Kerik -- to illegally spy on her own husband.

Yes, this is the guy who George Bush wanted to be in charge of all Homeland Security.

Had enough? Read the rest of this post...

6 in 10 Iraqis back attacks on US troops

But can we save them from themselves? Read the rest of this post...

UN Security Council terrorism experts study says Iraq has caused more terror

Reuters

In a second blow to the president, a new U.N. report said the Iraq war was providing al Qaeda with a training center and fresh recruits, and was inspiring a Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan hundreds of miles away.

Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Read the rest of this post...

MSNBC host Keith Olbermann received Anthrax death threat - NY Post thinks it's funny

So the New York Post's official policy is that it's funny when people send alleged Anthrax, along with implied death threats, to reporters at their private home addresses? I wouldn't want to be a New York Post reporter checking my mail if this is the kind of thing the boss finds funny. Read the rest of this post...

National Intelligence Estimate on terrorism

(NOTE FROM JOHN: AJ is a recent former Defense Intelligence officer who spent two years working on Iraq policy.)

The recently-declassified NIE titled "Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States", which was finalized nearly six months ago, is a devastating repudiation of virtually everything leading Executive and Defense Department leaders have told Americans about the war on terror.

As I've written before, the most important thing to look for in this kind of analysis is trends. Events are different than how things are going in general, and here's an example: the report states that U.S. efforts have damaged the leadership of al-Qa'ida and "disrupted" is operations, which is almost certainly true. There have been plenty of operations disrupted. But that's a summary of events, not a trend. More important is the follow-up that "the global jihadist movement . . . is spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts." Event: we've done some good. Trend: things are getting worse, not better.

Much of the initial assessment is uncontroversial. Jihadism is decentralized, it's expanding, self-radicalized cells (especially in Europe) are a growing threat, etc. The real meat, both analytically and politically, involves Iraq. Bear in mind that the report focuses on Terrorism, not Iraq per se, so it's instructive that a great deal of the summary addresses Iraq.

The Iraq portion begins somewhat dubiously, with the statement that "perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere." That's disingenuous to the extent that jihadists already perceive success and fighters have already moved beyond Iraq (claiming responsibility for attacks in Jordan and other Gulf states). The assessment that Iraq "is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives" is also not surprising, though I think more people should realize that a similar situation in Afghanistan caused the rise of al-Qa'ida in the first place. No matter how or when we leave, there will be trained and angry operatives who will lash out in the future.

But to me, the most important, the scariest, and the most damning part of the entire summary is this single sentence:

We assess that the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement outweigh its vulnerabilities are are likely to do so for the duration of the timefram of this Estimate.

Ladies and gentlemen, that's the ballgame right there. What this intelspeak means in English is, "The causes fueling terrorism outweigh the vulnerabilities of terrorists and their networks, and that fact is likely to be true indefinitely." The assessment is saying that the main motivations for terrorism -- and the report puts Iraq at the top of that long list -- outweigh our ability to prevent it, meaning, essentially, that Iraq is more harmful than helpful in our counterterror strategy. I already knew that, and so did most readers here, but I don't think that's the conventional wisdom. Until now, at least. Anyone who defends the Iraq war now has to answer this question: The collective judgment of the entire U.S. intelligence community is that under the watch of the Bush administration terrorism is becoming more of a threat, not less of one, primarily due to Iraq. Do you support continuing that failure, or changing the course to solve it?

The Bush administration is trying to spin the findings, saying that they reflect previous statements, but this response is pathetic. The spin conflates fact with trend, basically saying that President Bush has stated some of the facts contained in the report (shorter version: "The report says al-Qa'ida is bad. President Bush has said al-Qa'ida is bad!") while failing to address the assessment that things are getting worse, not better.

One more time, because it's really a remarkable assessment, despite being in bureaucrat-speak:

We assess that the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement outweight its vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this Estimate.

Those underlying factors are listed as, basically, entrenched grievances and humiliation; Iraq; lack of political reform in Muslim nations; and pervasive anti-U.S. sentiment among most muslims. These are all interconnected, of course, and Bush administration policies, especially its intransigence on Iraq, are hurting more than they are helping. Analysts are generally discouraged from offering policy suggestions (that's for policymakers, not interpreters of information), but this transcends that usual prohibition a little, and the strongest statement is this:

Countering the spread of the jihadist movement will require coordinated multilateral efforts that go well beyond operations to capture or kill terrorist leaders.

That is a concept this administration, and its rubber-stamp Congress, simply doesn't seem able to grasp.

The report is definitive, provocative, and damning, and every day between now and the elections Democrats -- and sane Republicans -- should demand accountability for these unconscionable failures of Presidential and Congressional leadership. Read the rest of this post...

Second source alleges George Allen involvement in racist hate crime

From Salon

A former college football teammate of Sen. George Allen's has confirmed details of a controversial hunting trip in the early 1970s, during which Allen is alleged to have placed a severed deer head in a mailbox that he believed to be owned by a black family....

"We were sitting around drinking beer," Beam said in an interview Wednesday morning, recalling the conversation with Lanahan. "Billy said, 'George and Kenny and I went hunting, and we decided at some time to cut off this deer head and stick it in a mailbox.'"

Read the rest of this post...

Open Thread

Okay, let's catch our breath for a second.

What's the latest? Read the rest of this post...

Angry, failed Bush and rubber-stamp GOP refuse to discuss their failed Iraq policy

Yesterday, House Republicans voted against a Democratic request for that body to enter secret session to discuss the findings of the NIE, the intelligence report that says Iraq has fueled more terrorism and made us less safe.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., sought a rare secret session of the House to discuss the report's classified findings. Her request was rejected - 217-171 - on a nearly straight party-line vote.

Such a session hasn't occurred in the House since July 1983, when the chamber went into a closed session to discuss U.S. support for paramilitary operations in Nicaragua.

In an interview, Pelosi said the secret session was needed to allow members to better understand the intelligence community's most recent assessment on global terrorism. Judging by media reports, she said, the intelligence estimate "is the administration's worst nightmare. It is not a corroboration of what the president is saying. It is a contradiction of what the president is saying."

The GOP wants to avoid any discussion about Iraq. The Bush/GOP Iraq policy has made the world a much more dangerous place. They've made Americans less safe. Read the rest of this post...

At least this used to be true before the Republicans took over

Read the rest of this post...

Democrats lead on Iraq

Since the media’s "Operation Ignore Democrats" continues, and because I think it’s important to recognize Democratic leadership on national security issues, this intrepid blogger went down to the US Capitol Building to check out a hearing on Iraq yesterday.

"The Mounting Costs of the U.S. Military Occupation of Iraq" was organized by Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, who heads the Progressive Caucus. It covered a variety of Iraq issues, and was a poignant reminder that Democrats are tackling the problems as Republicans continue to stuff their heads in the sand. It’s crucial to recognize that Democrats are the only party seriously addressing – and exploring solutions for – Bush administration disasters.

The event was headlined by General William Odom, retired Army and former head of the NSA, and it’s hard to imagine a more credible voice on these issues than General Odom, a Reagan appointee and career intelligence and military professional. The costs of the Iraq war are myriad, and he chose to specifically address the strategic expense.

By way of introduction, he explained, "It is difficult to appreciate [the costs] outside the context of critically important facts that are either ignored or grossly distorted in most discussions of the war." He elucidated, in a measured and persuasive way, how our invasion and continued presence in Iraq harms American interests and serves those of our adversaries.

To understand the costs of being in Iraq, we must look back at whose interests were served. The interests of Iran and al Qaeda have been hugely advanced. Toppling Saddam avenged Iran’s grievances for his invasion of that country [and] the inevitable Shiite dominance in any successor Iraqi regime greatly enhances Tehran’s influence there. […] Al Qaeda is no less grateful to the United States than Iran. Our toppling of Saddam opened Iraq to al Qaeda cadres and placed Americans there where they would be vulnerable.

One of the lessons in Political Science 101 is that policy decisions always have secondary and unintended consequences. Sometimes they’re unpredictable, but in the case of Iraq, all the evidence was there, and nobody who understands the Middle East should be surprised by these results. Further, in addition to the dubious underlying strategy, the mission was obviously engaged in a way that virtually guaranteed a variety of appalling results. What we should do next is a question that Democrats are rightfully trying to address, while Republican leaders ignore the issue. General Odom put it succinctly:

Once these two facts are recognized – that we are fighting in the interests of our enemies in Iraq and that we cannot improve things in the larger region until we withdraw – we can begin to talk sense about what to do next. In the meanwhile, the costs go up every day. We squander American lives and money, and lose allies and the moral authority we need and used to effectively during the long course of the Cold War . . . The longer we remain bogged down in Iraq, the closer we come to the destruction of these institutions that have served us so well, financially, militarily, politically, and morally.

Congresswoman Woolsey deserves great credit for bringing this kind of information and expertise into the debate. There is occasionally a tendency among some Democrats to call for some kind action without actually doing what they’re demanding, but Rep. Woolsey is stepping up to the plate. She doesn’t have a big megaphone, and you won’t read about it on the front page of the Times or the Post, but she’s doing, not just talking. She summarized the facts, in closing:

We’ve mortgaged our future on a failed policy. And in this case, failure is measured in lives lost, security diminished, a world endangered. And that’s the read tragedy of Iraq. We’ve sent Americans to die, we’ve ripped Iraq apart at the seams, we’ve spent all this taxpayer money; and the problem we set out to solve is worse than it was before . . . worse, in fact, than it’s ever been.

If you support Democrats not only speaking and voting the right way, but calling hearings, seeking out the opinions of experts, and leading on issues of national security the way many of us want them to, let Congresswoman Woolsey know it. Give her office a call, at 202-225-5161. We always tell reps when they screw up; let’s also reward good behavior. And I hope there’s more of this kind of leadership over the next 40 days and beyond.

(P.S. I'll have the intelspeak-to-English translation and analysis of the Iraq/terror NIE this afternoon. Stay tuned . . .) Read the rest of this post...

Thank you, President Bush

Sometimes you just have to let an idiot hang himself.

As you all now know, George Bush made public the executive summary of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq late yesterday. Bush claimed that the NIE was going to exonerate him and show how peachy everything was in Iraq and in the war on terror. In fact, the document was horrifically pessimistic, and said just what the NYT said it said - namely, that Bush's quagmire in Iraq is fueling more terror and making us less safe.

The thing I can't fathom is what possessed Bush to make this document public AND to claim that it was going to be a really happy and peppy assessment. Granted, he may not have read the thing - it was, after all, a full three pages (and there were no pictures). But seriously, he must have read the thing - how did he get off thinking he could just lie about it, and then release it three hours later, like nobody would notice?

Now for a summary of the media reaction to the story. It ain't pretty. Meaning, it's absolutely hysterical.

First, ABC News. I watched their broadcast last night, top story, talking about the NIE. "It says the jihadist movement is spreading," Charlie Gibson said. "These three-plus pages are very sobering," said Martha Radditz. It got worse from there.

And now the rest of the media weighs in.

Here is AP's headline: "Iraq is 'cause celebre' for extremists." And here is what AP had to say:

The war in Iraq has become a "cause celebre" for Islamic extremists, breeding deep resentment of the U.S. that probably will get worse before it gets better, federal intelligence analysts conclude in a report at odds with President Bush's portrayal of a world growing safer....

Bush and his top advisers have said the formerly classified assessment of global terrorism supported their arguments that the world is safer because of the war. But more than three pages of stark judgments warning about the spread of terrorism contrasted with the administration's glass-half-full declarations.

And there's more:

Iraq Is Fueling Muslim Radicalism Globally, US Report Says
Bloomberg - 1 hour ago
By Brendan Murray and Jeff Bliss. Sept. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Anger over the war in Iraq is fueling Muslim radicalism, and the dispersal ...

No longer a secret: Iraq war breeds terror threat
USA Today - 1 hour ago
In Washington today, politicians too often just stand their ground. Liberal strategist Bob Beckel and conservative columnist Cal Thomas provide a better model. ...

Waging the War on Terror: Report Belies Optimistic View
New York Times, United States - 1 hour ago
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 — Three years ago, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld wrote a memo to his colleagues in the Pentagon ...

Iraq war fuels terror - US report
BBC News, UK - 2 hours ago
The Iraq conflict has become a "cause celebre" for Islamic militants worldwide, declassified parts of a US intelligence report say. ...

Iraq Is 'Cause Celebre' for Extremists
Forbes - 6 hours ago
By KATHERINE SHRADER , 09.26.2006, 07:02 PM. The war in Iraq has become a "cause celebre" for Islamic extremists, breeding deep resentment ...

Iraq Is 'Cause Celebre' for Extremists
ABC News - 6 hours ago
President Bush gestures as he speaks during a news conference with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC ...

Iraq is 'cause celebre' for extremists
Houston Chronicle, United States - 8 hours ago
By KATHERINE SHRADER Associated Press Writer. WASHINGTON — A declassified government intelligence report says the war in Iraq has ...

NIE says Iraq is 'cause celebre' for jihadists
U.S. News & World Report, DC - 6 hours ago
... National Intelligence Estimate on terrorism done by the US intelligence community last April say the Iraq conflict has become "the 'cause celebre' for jihadists ...

Iraq war has become a 'cause celebre' for extremists, US report ...
Arizona Republic, AZ - 8 hours ago
WASHINGTON - A declassified government intelligence report says the war in Iraq has become a "cause celebre" for Islamic extremists, breeding deep resentment ...

And my personal favorite, Pravda on the Hudson weighs in:

Iraq a 'Cause Celebre' for Extremists, Intel Report Says
FOX News - 7 hours ago
WASHINGTON — A newly declassified and controversial intelligence report says that the Iraq conflict has become a "cause celebre" for Islamic extremists, but ...

Read the rest of this post...

Wednesday Morning Open Thread

Okay, let's review. Bush and the GOP are claiming that they've made the world safer. Now the U.S. Intelligence entities -- all 16 of them -- have shown that they're lying.

Iraq has been a double whammy. Not only did that war distract the U.S. from the real war on terror, Iraq has mobilized the jihadists. We're further behind than we were in 2003.

We have a President who thinks violence in Iraq is a comma. For the jihadists, it's a "cause celebre."

And you gotta love the feigned outrage from the GOP that people are politicizing the terror issue.

Okay, that's what I woke up thinking this morning...what about everyone else? Read the rest of this post...

GE loses 50,000 employee records

Another stolen laptop with personal information. The GE spin-machine sees no problem and claims not to be worried, but I'm guessing that is only because the spin-master wasn't part of the 50,000. Read the rest of this post...

Musharraf also agrees Iraq makes the world more dangerous

When it rains, it pours.

The war in Iraq has not made the world safer from terror, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has told CNN, saying he stands by statements on the subject he makes in his new book, "In the Line of Fire."

In the book, Musharraf -- a key ally who is often portrayed as being in complete agreement with U.S. President George W. Bush on the war on terror and other issues -- writes he never supported the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.

"I stand by it, absolutely," Musharraf told CNN's "The Situation Room." Asked whether he disagreed with Bush, he said, "I've stated whatever I had to ... it [the war] has made the world a more dangerous place."

Read the rest of this post...

To be fair, this is probably the first time the Boston Herald has seen a black person

From the Boston Herald, via TeamBio. Read the rest of this post...