Posted on 05/30/2008 7:15:01 PM PDT by mdittmar
CIA director Michael Hayden came under stiff challenge for portraying Al-Qaeda as on the defensive after global setbacks, even in its safe havens along the Afghan-Pakistani border.
Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, Jay Rockefeller, said Hayden's upbeat appraisal was not consistent with intelligence assessments provided his committee over the past year.
"In fact, I have seen nothing, including classified intelligence reporting, that would lead me to this conclusion," Rockefeller said in a scathing letter to the Central Intelligence Agency director.
Hayden's assessment -- one of the most positive since the September 11, 2001 attacks -- comes less than a year after US intelligence warnings that Al-Qaeda had regrouped in the border area and was plotting attacks against the west.
"On balance, we are doing pretty well," Hayden told the Washington Post in an interview published Friday, while warning that Al-Qaeda remains a serious threat.
The list of accomplishments, he said, includes: "Near strategic defeat of Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Near strategic defeat for Al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. Significant setbacks for Al-Qaeda globally -- and here I'm going to use the word 'ideologically' -- as a lot of the Islamic world pushes back on their form of Islam."
But Rockefeller cited a litany of public statements by top intelligence officials over the past year that emphasized Al-Qaeda's regeneration in the Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).
Earlier this month, the acting director the National Counter-Terrorism Center, Michael Leiter, told lawmakers that US efforts had not succeeded in stopping "core Al-Qaeda plotting."
"We're better at disrupting it, but we have not disrupted the senior leadership that exists in the FATA, and we have also not stopped the organization from promulgating a message which has successfully gained them more recruits," Rockefeller quoted him as saying.
Bruce Riedel, a longtime former CIA analyst now with Brookings Institution, called Hayden's remarks "a pretty large dish of wishful thinking."
"I think that the administration very much wants to paint a picture of success, particularly as it gets close to the end of eight years," he said.
"So I'm not surprised we're seeing an effort to portray it in the most optimistic possible way," he said.
Al-Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri remain at large, and the US intelligence estimate in July 2007 said Al-Qaeda had regenerated a new cadre of leadership in Pakistan.
Tom Sanderson, a terrorism expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Hayden appeared to be drawing on undisclosed evidence that shows Al-Qaeda's leadership is reeling.
"Nonetheless, it does take people by surprise, even people who are monitoring this, that there is such a stark difference between the assessment last year, with significant though not overwhelming tactical successes in the interim," he said.
Hayden said Al-Qaeda has lost three senior officers this year, including two who succumbed "to violence." The Post said that was an apparent references to strikes by unmanned Predator aircraft that killed Abu Laith al-Libi and Abu Sulayman al-Jazairi.
"The ability to kill and capture key members of Al-Qaeda continues, and keeps them off balance -- even in their best safe haven along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border," he said.
Hayden said bin Laden is also losing the battle for hearts and minds in the Islamic world and has largely lost his ability to exploit the Iraq war to recruit new members.
Riedel said that while al-Qaeda has suffered serious setbacks in Iraq and Saudi Arabia, there was a danger in "glossing over some of Al-Qaeda's remarkable strengths."
"The safe haven that they have developed in Pakistan over the last two or three years is getting bigger, not smaller, and that safe haven is the most important thing for Al-Qaeda," he said.
It was from Pakistan that Al-Qaeda launched attacks in western Europe, including the 2005 attacks on the London underground and a 2006 attempt to bring down 10 jumbo jets over the Atlantic.
A posting on jihadist website al-Hesbah threatened an attack bigger than September 11 before President George W. Bush leaves office, according to the SITE intel group.
Great stuff, reiterated here. Check it out.
Rockefeller is a ‘RAT. He’s obligated to say stupid things like this. The fact that he’s also a moron doesn’t really come in to play. He’s doing it for the party.
"In fact, I have seen nothing, including classified intelligence reporting, that would lead me to this conclusion," Rockefeller said in a scathing letter to the Central Intelligence Agency director.
Is there a dumber guy than Jay Rockefeller in the Senate? He is the moron who makes an oxymoron of "Senate Intelligence" Committee.
Ole Jay likes to use his Intelligence Reports according to his agenda..at the moment.
He is not real worried about treason, otherwise he would have been prosecuted year ago.
Teddy’s out, Ole jay is feelin’ his oats again.
yesterday the chicom news agency xinhua
had a more upbeat analysis of iraq than
our media!
what’s that tell you?
“Senate Intelligence Committee”—the ULTIMATE oxymoron!
THIS crap from the MSM/DNC is why, everytime the Pres or his people say ANYTHING they are called liars.
For sure. I am scratching my head and trying to figure out what state can possibly compete with West Virginia for the worst pair of Senators: Kleegle Byrd and Buy the State Rockefeller. Do any other states come to mind? I guess Massachusetts with their two fraudsters, but West Virginians as a whole seem pretty normal.
But the damage is done as the sheeple have been conditioned to we shouldn't be there,after their daily dosage of propaganda.
As usual, good news for America is bad news for the dims.
I’m going to get eggs and tomatoes for this but here goes: Remember the assessment a month or so ago from the same CIA that we no longer have to worry about Iran’s centrifuge development? A slap in the face to Israel. Now in this election year the same folks from Langley are again telling us al-qaeda is no longer a threat. I’m sorry I’m not buying. As far as I’m concerned since James J Angleton ran that show it has become an entrenched nest of vipers which have grown to include globalists and internationalists and leftwingers of every stripe. The attempt to reform this wayward agency most recently by the Bush administration through the short-lived and failed efforts of Porter Goss, an ex-agent himself, speaks volumes to the real danger we have in our midst, i.e., entrenched hence invisible enemies of state purportedly acting in our best interests at the CIA who are impervious to removal.
Ole Jay and his family got bitch slapped in their attempt to sway Exxon stockholders to Green the company. He needs to get slapped again and again in this forum.
I’ll put Lautenberg and Menendez up there with any of them.
In fact New Jersey has had terrible representation in Washington for years. We have tax and spenders who have been horrible in bringing the bacon home. Let’s face it, if your representatives in DC are gonna vote yes to every spending bill, you would think they might manage to have soem of the funds spent here. I haven’t checked the figures lately (and am too tired to look it up now) but NJ has had a ridiculous ratio of dollars sent to washington vs dollars brought back. At least Byrd is an expert in benefiting his constituents.
"In fact, I have seen nothing, including classified intelligence reporting, that would lead me to this conclusion," Rockefeller said in a scathing letter to the Central Intelligence Agency director. Well you've seen it now you panty-waist and from the head spook himself.
...Dingy Harry, for starters. Both the WA senators on the distaff side...
but if any report came out which said that Al Qaeda was MORE powerful, the dems would immediately accept it without even reading it and proclaim the Iraq War a disaster and Bush a total failure and call for his impeachment.
Gosh, it’s nice to live in a country where responsible people are elected to office to join in efforts to protect the safety of America and it’s Constitution. sarc\
This analysis is consistent with what I’ve been hearing from the “private CIA” folks over at Strategic Forcasting (stratfor.com). They are no Bush or war fans, but it would be downright suspicious if they concluded that AQ was still going great. They’ve been shattered in every way.
In any case, if they said AQ was still a huge problem, then the dem. committee would have made hay with that. And, many knowledgable people would have widely written and commented that CIA was either being too cautious or was exaggerating the threat to keep budgets up, as they were accused of (perhaps with some justification) post-cold war.
Well the Torch was among the worst. Lautenberg has never annoyed me as much as the pair from WVA, maybe because he wasn’t as good at pork-barreling as Byrd and actually was a successful businessman, unlike Jay Rockefeller.
I think Dingy Harry is mean-spirited and dishonest but far from dumb.
True, I’m ashamed to admit how passionately I hated Torreceli. But for me, it drives me crazy that Lautenberg votes for every bit of spending he can, but delivers almost nothing in pork to NJ. At least if you are going to play the game, play it to benefit your constituency.
Torricelli was a disgrace. Personally, as a non-New Jerseyan, I am happy that Lautenberg hasn’t figured out how to deliver federal pork to NJ. I wish more politicians were like that.
Our state gets back 55 cents on each dollar sent to Washington, making us proportionately the largest net donors to the federal government. In fact, since 1981 NJ has ranked 49th or 50th in percentage of our tax dollars that come back to our state every year but one. That year we ranked 48th. In contrast, Robert Byrd's West Virginia has raked in the top ten for twenty years. Most of those years in the top 5.
For a guy who believes so strongly in government solutions, you would think that Lautenberg would try to get some federal money to come up with some solutions to the blight in Trenton (our states capital) Camden, Newark, Elizabeth and Plainfield. The first three are usually in the top 25 most dangerous cities in the US. The other two are no picnic either.
The federal highways in NJ are a disgrace. You would think they would rate a bit higher in priority as they are amongst the most traveled roads in the nation and are a vital conduit to New York and New England. Do our tax and spend liberals from NJ do anything about it? No. Other states have beautiful four lane highways that go from Noplace to Nowhereseville. Don't get me wrong. I don't really want Washington to build our roads. I just want them to stop having us build theirs while ours fall apart.
I would rather the waste in Washington were trimmed, but since it isn't gonna be, our representatives should be advocating for our state. They don't. They consistently screw the NJ taxpayer by voting for every ill-conceived project in every other state.
OK, I think I've ranted enough.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.