| Page 3 of 5 < > |
Failing to Reassure
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
"Bush has disclosed intelligence secrets before. In 2005, he referred to 10 foiled terrorist plots in defense of his foreign policy. A year later, he divulged portions of a high-level intelligence report to rebut leaks in news reports about the effect of the Iraq war on Islamic radicalism worldwide. And earlier this year, an intelligence report with mixed findings about Iraq was released to back up Bush's new strategy of building up troop levels."
In fact, few if any of the threats Bush has described in the past have ever been convincingly documented. See, for instance, the "Where's the Evidence?" section of my recent article on NiemanWatchdog.org (where I am deputy editor).
Mark Silva writes in the Chicago Tribune: "President Bush, who repeatedly has declassified select snippets of U.S. intelligence to justify the war in Iraq, revealed new details Wednesday of an Al Qaeda attempt two years ago to coordinate attacks against the U.S. with operatives based in Iraq. . . .
"[T]he president's critics say that he is selectively using the disclosures.
"'We certainly don't need new declassified documents to understand the ongoing threats of Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden,' said Tim Roemer, a member of the Sept. 11 Commission. At the same time, he said, 'The president's focus on Iraq as a front line misstates the situation in terms of where the only threat is, and misdiagnoses what we need to do about it.'"
Deb Riechmann writes for the Associated Press: "President Bush portrayed the Iraq war as a battle between the U.S. and al-Qaida on Wednesday and shared nuggets of intelligence to contend Osama bin Laden was setting up a terrorist cell in Iraq to strike targets in America. . . .
"Critics of the war insist that U.S. troops are in the middle of fights among Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. . . .
"Rand Beers, national security adviser to John Kerry's 2004 Democratic presidential campaign, contended Wednesday that the Bush administration was releasing intelligence to buttress the argument that Iraq is the central front in the war on terrorism while a number of intelligence sources say the most recent attacks or planned attacks against the U.S. and its allies have originated in Pakistan instead.
"'Bin Laden is using Iraq to kill and demonize the United States while remaining secure and planning further operations in Pakistan,' Beers said."
Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes in the New York Times: "President Bush, addressing head-on the criticism that Iraq has turned into another Vietnam, argued Wednesday that withdrawing from Iraq would be dangerous because, unlike the enemy in Vietnam, terrorists in Iraq had the ability and desire to strike Americans at home. . . .
"The comments brought immediate criticism from Democrats and some counterterrorism experts, who assailed Mr. Bush for not acknowledging that the war itself helped open the door for terrorists to set up shop in Iraq. 'One day Bush tells us we are fighting in Iraq so that terrorists won't come here, then he releases intelligence that says terrorists trained in Iraq are coming here. Which is it?' said Richard A. Clarke, a former counterterrorism adviser to Mr. Bush and President Clinton, in a statement released by the National Security Network advocacy group. . . .
"Some argued that the speech, rather than building up Mr. Bush's case for the war, undermined it by confirming that Iraq is already a haven for terrorists.



