Posted on 09/27/2006 8:45:45 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1708787/posts
Declassified Key Judgements from the April 2006 NIE Director of National Intellegence ^ | 09-26-06 | DNI
NOTE: The link is receiving many hits and is only available intermittently. This conversion from PDF to HTML is courtesy of PRND21 in #11. AM
Declassified Key Judgments of the National Intelligence Estimate .Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States. dated April 2006
Key Judgments
United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa’ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qa’ida will continue to pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist organization. We also assess that the global jihadist movement—which includes al- Qa’ida, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks and cells—is spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts.
• Although we cannot measure the extent of the spread with precision, a large body of all-source reporting indicates that activists identifying themselves as jihadists, although a small percentage of Muslims, are increasing in both number and geographic dispersion.
• If this trend continues, threats to US interests at home and abroad will become more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide.
• Greater pluralism and more responsive political systems in Muslim majority nations would alleviate some of the grievances jihadists exploit. Over time, such progress, together with sustained, multifaceted programs targeting the vulnerabilities of the jihadist movement and continued pressure on al-Qa’ida, could erode support for the jihadists. We assess that the global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent global strategy, and is becoming more diffuse. New jihadist networks and cells, with anti- American agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge. The confluence of shared purpose and dispersed actors will make it harder to find and undermine jihadist groups.
• We assess that the operational threat from self-radicalized cells will grow in importance to US counterterrorism efforts, particularly abroad but also in the Homeland.
• The jihadists regard Europe as an important venue for attacking Western interests. Extremist networks inside the extensive Muslim diasporas in Europe facilitate recruitment and staging for urban attacks, as illustrated by the 2004 Madrid and 2005 London bombings.
We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.
• The Iraq conflict has become the .cause celebre. for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight. We assess that the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement outweigh its vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this Estimate.
• Four underlying factors are fueling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1) Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the Iraq .jihad;. (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US sentiment among most Muslims.all of which jihadists exploit. Concomitant vulnerabilities in the jihadist movement have emerged that, if fully exposed and exploited, could begin to slow the spread of the movement. They include dependence on the continuation of Muslim-related conflicts, the limited appeal of the jihadists. radical ideology, the emergence of respected voices of moderation, and criticism of the violent tactics employed against mostly Muslim citizens. •
The jihadists. greatest vulnerability is that their ultimate political solution.an ultra-conservative interpretation of shari.a-based governance spanning the Muslim world.is unpopular with the vast majority of Muslims. Exposing the religious and political straitjacket that is implied by the jihadists. propaganda would help to divide them from the audiences they seek to persuade.
• Recent condemnations of violence and extremist religious interpretations by a few notable Muslim clerics signal a trend that could facilitate the growth of a constructive alternative to jihadist ideology: peaceful political activism. This also could lead to the consistent and dynamic participation of broader Muslim communities in rejecting violence, reducing the ability of radicals to capitalize on passive community support. In this way, the Muslim mainstream emerges as the most powerful weapon in the war on terror.
• Countering the spread of the jihadist movement will require coordinated multilateral efforts that go well beyond operations to capture or kill terrorist leaders. If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years, political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives. Nonetheless, attendant reforms and potentially destabilizing transitions will create new opportunities for jihadists to exploit.
Al-Qa’ida, now merged with Abu Mus’ab al-Zarqawi’s network, is exploiting the situation in Iraq to attract new recruits and donors and to maintain its leadership role.
• The loss of key leaders, particularly Usama Bin Ladin, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and al-Zarqawi, in rapid succession, probably would cause the group to fracture into smaller groups. Although like-minded individuals would endeavor to carry on the mission, the loss of these key leaders would exacerbate strains and disagreements. We assess that the resulting splinter groups would, at least for a time, pose a less serious threat to US interests than does al-Qa.ida.
• Should al-Zarqawi continue to evade capture and scale back attacks against Muslims, we assess he could broaden his popular appeal and present a global threat.
• The increased role of Iraqis in managing the operations of al-Qa.ida in Iraq might lead veteran foreign jihadists to focus their efforts on external operations. Other affiliated Sunni extremist organizations, such as Jemaah Islamiya, Ansar al- Sunnah, and several North African groups, unless countered, are likely to expand their reach and become more capable of multiple and/or mass-casualty attacks outside their traditional areas of operation.
• We assess that such groups pose less of a danger to the Homeland than does al- Qa.ida but will pose varying degrees of threat to our allies and to US interests abroad. The focus of their attacks is likely to ebb and flow between local regime targets and regional or global ones. We judge that most jihadist groups.both well-known and newly formed.will use improvised explosive devices and suicide attacks focused primarily on soft targets to implement their asymmetric warfare strategy, and that they will attempt to conduct sustained terrorist attacks in urban environments. Fighters with experience in Iraq are a potential source of leadership for jihadists pursuing these tactics.
• CBRN capabilities will continue to be sought by jihadist groups. While Iran, and to a lesser extent Syria, remain the most active state sponsors of terrorism, many other states will be unable to prevent territory or resources from being exploited by terrorists.
Anti-US and anti-globalization sentiment is on the rise and fueling other radical ideologies. This could prompt some leftist, nationalist, or separatist groups to adopt terrorist methods to attack US interests. The radicalization process is occurring more quickly, more widely, and more anonymously in the Internet age, raising the likelihood of surprise attacks by unknown groups whose members and supporters may be difficult to pinpoint.
• We judge that groups of all stripes will increasingly use the Internet to communicate, propagandize, recruit, train, and obtain logistical and financial support.
It was Calhoun's stance (and those who supported it) on slavery that cost lives. DUmocrats would like to break up the country over race again if they could.
oh please give me a break thats bunch of GOP Yankke bull that was put up there so they could cover Linoln's sorry Leftest ass
Raster, I disagree. Lincoln's stance is what cost the horrible loss of life in the nation.
There were plenty of abolitionists in the south, as technology grew, slavery would have ended. Ending slavery by war cost the south, white and black, a hundred years of abject poverty.
Calhoun knew the consequences, Lincoln did not.
And I forgot to say that even as important as November is to us, we have to understand the liberals plans for '08, because to me, that makes this November of 2006 all the more important knowing what they'll do IF they win in November. The GOP MUST win in November to save us from defeat in the war, open border illegals access, tax hikes across the board, and the destruction of all founding principal in the country if the Liberals control both Houses of Congress and then the White House. That cannot be allowed to happen and will not happen, If all conservatives walk the talk and vote Republican in November. The time for big talk is over, it's time for big action. That's why I think we'll win. Because Liberals do the talking. Conservatives do the walking. That's how it's always been, and nothing has ever been accomplished with lip service. Things get done with action and heavy lifting and that's the conservative mindset. Liberal do to much talking about what they think because they don't have the guts to do what they say, unless it's back door shadow liberal socialist policies they put in place. Conservatives walk the walk, and that's what's needed to preserve the liberty we were handed by our fathers and mothers.
Me neither. My food intake habits harm NO ONE but ME.
Trashing Lincoln to make a point? Be careful how you pick your heroes, Mr. Duke.
Jefferson was a slave owner. Lincoln wasn't.
Right Give me CalHoun over Rudy any day of week
takeing shoots at Thomas Jefferson?
Nope, pointing out the obvious.
My ancestors fought this battle 140 years ago....they were right. No matter how much the revisionists would like to frame it, southern stubborn support of slavery is why the country have been fighting the battle over and over.
States rights for slavery is same as a woman's right to "choose".
So what GW owned Slaves too
Never said I supported a big tent....nor would I support Rudy as President. That's still too far ahead to worry about at this point.
If the Jackass party gets in power, there very well could be CW II. We are already fighting it, just no shots have been fired.
So did mine Raster, and what the North did to the South was shameful.
Lincoln and the Republicans trashed the Constitution to do it. Remember, if the Constitution had banned slavery, there would never have been a Southern state in the Union to start with.
The Republicans shoved the 3/5's rule down our throat to limit the number of Reps we had in the house, then tried using that to make States slave or non slave to dilute the Electoral college and the Senate.
Ending slavery was a noble end, how they did it sucked.
This isn't a hard issue to pick apart. The Confederate slave states knew they were going to lose the blance of power in the Senate in the comming years with new States being admitted, so they preempted the Senate vote making slavery illegal, and attacked the United States Fort Sumpter, forcing Lincoln and the legitimate United States government to respond militarilly. It's just that simple. It was a fight picked by the slavers, and finished by the legitimate United States Government. Lincoln did just what Bush and Reagan did. Took the fight to those who started it, and do what it takes to win. Lincoln didn't start the Civil War. Reagan didn't start the Cold War. Bush didn't start the War on Terror. But by God Lincoln and Reagan finished the wars thrust on the, just like Bush will finish the war thrust on him.
If The Gop loses both houeses its there own fault they threw out strong ConErvative Leadership such as Newt and Delay you can't throw out good leadership and be able to win elections its that simple
your 100% Wrong its not even funny
You need to check your history Texas. Lincoln was resupplying Ft. Sumter with munitions, breaking his agreement with Jefferson Davis. He was warned that was an act of war and did it anyway.
The flotilla of ships were spotted in New York when they were loaded. Lincoln started the war.
By the way, the Supreme Court upheld the South's position in the Dred Scott case. Lincoln and the North ignored it.
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.