The Washington Times' Bill Gertz reports today:
Al Qaeda terrorists are rebuilding their capabilities and continuing to plan mass-casualty attacks inside the United States, according to an intelligence assessment made public yesterday.
"We assess [al Qaeda] has protected or regenerated key elements of its homeland attack capability, including a safe haven in ... Pakistan [tribal areas], operational lieutenants and its top leadership," according to the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a consensus analysis of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.
It's the latest in a series of recent stories speculating about a summer attack on the United States. Critics of the administration accuse the Bushies of manipulating news coverage of these potential attacks for political advantage.
Does that charge ring true to you? Are you more skeptical than you were two years ago?
Or are you on the other side of the issue: the plots seem feasible, the dangers seem real, and those who ignore the threats are playing with a lit fuse?
What do you think?
-- David Eldridge, managing editor, WashingtonTimes.com
Comments (1)
Dear Mr. Eldridge:
There is no need to be more skeptical. This is a far different war than we have ever fought in the history of this nation. I don't mind if someone says they have a gut feeling that we might be attacked. The police often use these very same instincts during the course of their work.
The administration has far greater access to information and research than any individual or group that are among the administration's most vocal critics.
As far as the administration using domestic terrorism for political purposes, I am not sure that such is the case, but it appears to me that the administration's critics have fully politicized the war to such an extent that they don't want us to win it.
Even if the reports from Iraq are glowingly positive in September, the administration's critics will latch on to the most negative aspects they can find because they cannot allow Bush to be vindicated by winning in Iraq even though that would be in the country's best interests because it would not be in the democratic party's best interests.
I have maintained my support for the war and the war on terror. The democrats were on the wrong side of history when they supported slavery and even wrote their support for slavery in their political platform and they are on the wrong side of history today. The only issue remaining is how much interference they can run against the president to insure our defeat.
Posted by Wyatt Kopp | July 26, 2007 1:29 PM