Posted on 09/29/2006 10:44:09 AM PDT by Miami Vice
(Michael Tremoglie is the author of the novel, "A Sense Of Duty",contact him at elfegobaca@comcast.net)
The Grand Inquisitors of the Democratic Party are once again accusing the Bush administration of "misleading" Americans (read "Bush lied"). As was the case with their previous, similarly unsubstantiated claims, this too will be disproved.
The latest McCarthy-like allegation derives from The New York Times publication of, essentially, one sentence of an April 2006 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) with the headline, "Spy agencies say Iraq War worsens terrorism threat."
Following The New York Times great Jayson Blair/ Walter Duranty tradition of bogus journalism, the article stated, "A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks .... The report mentions the possibility that Islamic militants who fought in Iraq could return to their home countries, 'exacerbating domestic conflicts or fomenting radical ideologies.'" Democratic leaders instantly used this information to try to discredit Bush.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Bush should read the intelligence carefully "before giving another misleading speech about progress in the war on terrorism." Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Rahm Emanuel said, "the Bush administration has known since receiving this report more than four months ago that its claims that the war in Iraq was making the American people safer were not true."
The Times' report is also being used by Democratic congressional candidates to discredit their Republican opponents. Joe Sestak, the Democrat candidate for Curt Weldon's office said, "the National Intelligence Estimate report confirms that President Bush's and Curt Weldon's stay-the-course policy in Iraq has undermined our ability to focus on security issues at home and abroad."
Democrat Sens. Schumer and Durbin continue their obsession with VP Cheney and allege Cheney lied to the American people because he made statements contrary to the NIE.
The incredible thing about all this is that Democrats have had this Paul-on-the-Road-to-Damascus-type conversion about national security this election year.
Their reaction to this NIE just confirms it. The Democrats went from the party that cut funding for the military and for intelligence operations to now trying to be the biggest proponents of them. Their current election year strategy included recruiting military veterans as window dressing to show how pro-national security they are. Simply put, the Democrats strategy is to make the voters believe they are something they are not.
However, the NIE flap boomeranged because it illustrates the hypocrisy and deceit of the Democratic Party for three reasons:
First, The Times' report was skewed. Not surprisingly they provided a version of the NIE that justified their antiwar position. What The Times' omitted were some other salient facts contained in the NIE.
President Bush, unfortunately, had to declassify portions of this report to respond to the Democrats criticism, which resulted from this illegally obtained information. The declassified portions refute the Democrats' claims.
For example, while the report does say that the terrorists in Iraq could return home, "exacerbating domestic conflicts or fomenting radical ideologies," it also states that, "Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight." The Times conveniently omitted this.
Second, Democrats, who wanted to spare no effort to find who leaked Valerie Plame's name, are not so anxious to find the source of this NIE leak.
The third reason is their recent conversion to the validity of the NIE. If you listen to Democrats, they make it sound as if the NIE is the gospel and scientific fact all rolled into one.
Yet, it wasn't too long ago that Democrats criticized the NIE.
Howard Dean claimed during his Nov. 13, 2005 Meet the Press appearance that the October 2002 NIE was corrupted, partially because of CIA incompetence.
Now Democrats are swearing the NIE is the gospel. When did they change their minds and why?
Perhaps the Democrats should recall an NIE, famous for its erroneous conclusions, published 40 years before the October 2002 NIE, during the administration of a hallowed Democrat president. It was September 1962 when a Special NIE was published which argued against the idea that the Soviet Union would deploy missiles in Cuba.
Does anyone find it disconcerting that Democrats do not have a plan to combat terrorism; they do not have a plan for Iraq; they did not and do not have a plan for bin Laden?
However, they have devoted a great deal of time and resources to devise a plan to deceive the public into voting for them. Democrats are betting Americans are gullible enough to believe their propaganda.
Remember this on Election Day.
Really?!? Ya' think?
Wow a sarcastic comment. No substance just sarcasm. Related to Paul Begala?
Wow you and gridlock are both such brilliant people you can make comments on an article without reading it.
Well I think you tell me more about yourself than you really want them to know.
Correction you tell people more about yourself than you really want them to know.
Wow you must have a camera in my office to know I didn't read the article. Get over yourself. You posted. We commented. Don't like it? Don't post. And it wasn't directed at you anyway.
Do you ever post a comment which is not an insult to another freeper? Just curious. You seem to be stuck on Attack mode.
You commented I commented Don't like sarcasm? Don't be sarcastic.
Not attack just defending against those who are attacking.
You need to check out the timeline.
There's a difference between sarcasm and what you wrote. Look it up.
Yeah right. You are really secure - insulting people who can't reply.
Earth to Miami Vice... we weren't attacking YOU. We were calling into question the content of the article.
All this kind of goes without saying, IMHO.
Of all the people, though, I give a pass to the President because he was only reacting to malicious actions by others.
Oh wow now you are the arbiter of what constitutes sarcasm.
Guys like you always make me laugh. You can dish it out but yo ucan't take it.
Stop being a cry baby.
Must be a half-day today...
I'll go him one better and say that to Dems, everything is politics.
One of Rush's greatest sayings about the Dems: Their plan is "How can we fool them today?"
Must be an election year. The Democrats are trotting out their Bibles and addle-brained veterans.
LMAO... you're a hoot. Gimme your best shot, cowboy.
You are correct it was political but the author exposes the hypocrisy of the Democrats and gives specific examples.
I for one did not know about the September 1962 NIE.
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.