Intelligence Estimate on Terrorism Released

[SWJED]

17 July - The Director of National Intelligence just released the National Intelligence Estimate on Terrorism.

[Jedburgh]

Even for a public release, it is remarkable in how little it says, and in how much less it commits to. Hell, it even uses an entire page to clarify how non-committal the estimate really is. In a 7 page pdf file, the actual NIE is only two pages.

These assessments, which are based on incomplete or at times fragmentary information are not a fact, proof, or knowledge.

That is certainly something which we always struggle with in the intel world, but given the nature and scope of the issue, they could have done a helluva lot better than this pablum. In any case, the media is already siezing on and spinning parts of it.....

[SWJED]

Even for a public release, it is remarkable in how little it says, and in how much less it commits to. Hell, it even uses an entire page to clarify how non-committal the estimate really is. In a 7 page pdf file, the actual NIE is only two pages.

That is certainly something which we always struggle with in the intel world, but given the nature and scope of the issue, they could have done a helluva lot better than this pablum. In any case, the media is already siezing on and spinning parts of it.....

You said a mouthful...

[SteveMetz]

Even for a public release, it is remarkable in how little it says, and in how much less it commits to. Hell, it even uses an entire page to clarify how non-committal the estimate really is. In a 7 page pdf file, the actual NIE is only two pages.

That is certainly something which we always struggle with in the intel world, but given the nature and scope of the issue, they could have done a helluva lot better than this pablum. In any case, the media is already siezing on and spinning parts of it.....

The most interesting part was the contention that AQI might attempt to attack the American homeland. That, of course, is what Bush has been arguing. Many people, including me, find the idea unbelievable.

[skiguy]

The most interesting part was the contention that AQI might attempt to attack the American homeland. That, of course, is what Bush has been arguing. Many people, including me, find the idea unbelievable.

Why do you say that? (if the answer's too complex, please direct or point out to me something I can read)

I don't know if this question goes along with the thread: Is Al Q one entity? (I know there's different factions, but do they all share the same goal?) Is AQI just part of Al Q ?

[Jedburgh]

Why do you say that? (if the answer's too complex, please direct or point out to me something I can read)

I don't know if this question goes along with the thread: Is Al Q one entity? (I know there's different factions, but do they all share the same goal?) Is AQI just part of Al Q ?

I'll point you to two other threads in this forum:

The first links to an outstanding two-part RAND study, Beyond Al-Qa'ida

The second has a variety of links and some discussion on the subject of Al-Qa'ida Chief Urges Iraqis to Export Jihad

[Van]

Are we making an erroneous assumption of homogeneity for AQ?

Al Qaeda is "The Base", and is following what appears to be a viral model, feeding "cells" that are moving roughly in their direction.

It is entirely possible for the senior leadership of AQ to be between a rock and a hard place, and simultaneously have a couple of cells and several copy-cats using the AQ labeling planning direct action within the borders of the U.S.

One of our strategic problems is that this does not fit neatly in a sound bite.

AQI could conceivably exfiltrate a team out of Iraq through Syria, then across the Mediterreanian to a less suspicious country, then on to the U.S. I would, however, be concerned about reasonably low-tech attacks (fertilizer explosives or box-cutter hijackings) or attacks involving small amounts of high end materials (a kilo or two of plastique and a couple of detonators to initiate LNG, for example), rather than with the Hollywood, movie plot scenarios that get the most air-time in the media. Still, I'm more concerned about home grown or Eurpoean grown terrorist "fellow travellers" using the AQI brand name.

What concerns me most is that, like with any small war, the underlying issues need to be addressed, if only to remove public support for the terrorists. It is not clear to me that we have a rational, coherent strategy for doing this.

[Tom Odom]

Even for a public release, it is remarkable in how little it says, and in how much less it commits to. Hell, it even uses an entire page to clarify how non-committal the estimate really is. In a 7 page pdf file, the actual NIE is only two pages.

That is certainly something which we always struggle with in the intel world, but given the nature and scope of the issue, they could have done a helluva lot better than this pablum. In any case, the media is already siezing on and spinning parts of it.....

Essentially it says there are still bad people out there who want to attack the US and they might actually do it.

Steve, the snippet bit on AQI seems like an additive that was thrown in after the fact, to reinforce the idea of an AQI threat. This is purely supposition on my part after having particpated in writing these things.

Finally I would say the obvious here. This is the sanitized version of the Key Judgements (or at least I hope it is) with no sourcing and no caveats taken by any agency. The net result is that it adds nothing to the "gut feeling" remarks of the DHS Director.

Best

Tom

[Jedburgh]

Tom, I clearly understand its a sanitized version - that is what I meant by public release. However, my point is that this is so "sanitized" as to be meaningless. (unless the classified version is just as banal). Better analysis of the current situation vis-a-vis the terrorist threat is readily available to anyone with an internet connection. The public deserves better.

.....The net result is that it adds nothing to the "gut feeling" remarks of the DHS Director.

The "gut feeling" remarks were truly unplanned, and were followed by creation and distro of "talking points" on those remarks to DHS personnel as a knee-jerk CYA after the public reaction. None of which inspires any confidence in DHS. This administration has lost much of its credibility even among its previously strong supporters, and it continues to stubbornly eat away at its own standing by hewing to positions that lack substance and treating the public as booger-eating morons.

[skiguy]

The public deserves better.

Thank you.

[SWJED]

18 July NY Times - Bush Aides See Failure in Fight With Al Qaeda in Pakistan by Mark Mazzetti and David Sanger.

President Bush’s top counterterrorism advisers acknowledged Tuesday that the strategy for fighting Osama bin Laden’s leadership of Al Qaeda in Pakistan had failed, as the White House released a grim new intelligence assessment that has forced the administration to consider more aggressive measures inside Pakistan.

The intelligence report, the most formal assessment since the Sept. 11 attacks about the terrorist threat facing the United States, concludes that the United States is losing ground on a number of fronts in the fight against Al Qaeda, and describes the terrorist organization as having significantly strengthened over the past two years.

In identifying the main reasons for Al Qaeda’s resurgence, intelligence officials and White House aides pointed the finger squarely at a hands-off approach toward the tribal areas by Pakistan’s president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who last year brokered a cease-fire with tribal leaders in an effort to drain support for Islamic extremism in the region...

18 July Washington Post - Al-Qaeda's Gains Keep U.S. at Risk, Report Says by Karen DeYoung and Walter Pincus.

Al-Qaeda has reestablished its central organization, training infrastructure and lines of global communication over the past two years, putting the United States in a "heightened threat environment" despite expanded worldwide counterterrorism efforts, according to a new intelligence estimate.

Intelligence officials attributed the al-Qaeda gains primarily to its establishment of a safe haven in ungoverned areas of northwestern Pakistan. Its affiliation with the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq, the report said, has helped it to "energize" extremists elsewhere and has aided Osama bin Laden's recruitment and funding.

The estimate concluded that "the U.S. Homeland will face a persistent and evolving terrorist threat over the next three years." Al-Qaeda, it said, "is and will remain" the most serious element of that threat...

[Tom Odom]

Tom, I clearly understand its a sanitized version - that is what I meant by public release. However, my point is that this is so "sanitized" as to be meaningless. (unless the classified version is just as banal). Better analysis of the current situation vis-a-vis the terrorist threat is readily available to anyone with an internet connection. The public deserves better.

The "gut feeling" remarks were truly unplanned, and were followed by creation and distro of "talking points" on those remarks to DHS personnel as a knee-jerk CYA after the public reaction. None of which inspires any confidence in DHS. This administration has lost much of its credibility even among its previously strong supporters, and it continues to stubbornly eat away at its own standing by hewing to positions that lack substance and treating the public as booger-eating morons.

Jedburgh,

No disagreement whatsoever. I was getting at what you put in parentheses--that hopefuly the classified version is better because this version is bird cage material.

On gut feelings, Pepto-Bismal would have been a better fix. The public does indeed deserve better.

Best

Tom

PS Cartoonist Jim Morin said it best

[Ski]

I'll tell you what really bothers me about all of this.

The leadership speaketh with forked tongue.

One day, it's "AQ is on the defensive." The next day, it's "AQ is ready to strike at Des Moines Iowa with a dirty bomb made of depleted plutonium."

It muddles the water, and more importantly, it damages the publics trust of the leadership, and there for, the government as a whole.

Not only does the public deserve better, it should demand better. The doublespeak coming out of these various offices is confusing, ill timed, and damaging to the credibility of these people making the statements.