The executive summary for intelligence document #1, covering the global terror threat as a whole, is now online. The PDF that I found (via Aravosis) does not copy/paste very well, so from the love in my heart I have transcribed it into extended copy.
For now I will just offer the document without comment. There is plenty for everybody to digest, although being a summary it lacks any specifics or relevant context. *Edit* I decided to scotch speculation about whether this is or is not the document from this weekend. We will find out soon enough.
**Transcription begins***
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 the 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 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 condemnation 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 beyong operations to capture of 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, patricularly Usama Bin Ladin, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and al-Zarqawi, in rapid succession, probably would cause the group to fracture into smaller groups. Although the like-minded individuals would endeavor to carry on the mission, the loss of these key leaders would exacerbate key 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 that he could broaden his 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 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-Aa’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 these 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 ideologues. This could prompt some leftist, nationalist or separatist 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 communicatie, propagandize, recruit, train, and obtain logistical and financial support.
Zifnab
Shorter: The Republican Administration has been doing a heckava job, but if something gets blown up in the next six to eight weeks, know it was because Al Qaida is festy not because we’re incompentant.
Zifnab
…. …. ….
Punchy
Let’s not forget a bunch of crucial things, too:
They only released 3.5 pages of a 30-something page doc. There’s a ton more “redacted”. I’m assuming it’s not favorable to the Admin…otherwise…well, it wouldn’t stay classified. So 27-odd pages of “truth” have been hidden.
And yes, Tim, this is NOT the doc that the NYT was basing its statements on. The Admin purposefully chose it as a NIE in everything but name only (hence, the confusion), so that, lacking OFFICIAL NIE status, Congress is NOT required to see it.
If they actually released it–and there’s not a chance in hell of that–from what I’ve heard, it’s beyond damming.
F. Authoratah
Time to start rounding up whoever wrote this report. I’d call it material aid.
When will the intel agencies and military help George win this war?
ThymeZone
The wheels are coming off the Potemkinmobile now.
Their plan of managed news cycles for the next eight weeks has thrown a rod and there is oil all over the road.
Watch them try to spin their way out of this collossal clusterfuck.
F. Authoratah
GWoT – Objectively Pro-Terrorist
F. Authoratah
So this is how it works:
1) Someone leaks NIE info
2) Republican blogs cry treason! and disparage intelligence agencies work products as being worthless anyway (Kagan, NRO, etc)
3) Bush releases selective portions, saying “it’s not so bad”
4) Republican bloggers laugh at how stupid lefties are for quoting selectively.
5) Selections of disparaged/worthless intel reports are now held up as refutation to lefties
Cake! Have it and eat it too!
Sojourner
Not anymore. The Bushies have more than met their match. Someone who is a hell of a lot smarter, more politically savvy, and has as big a voice, presence, and access to the media as they do – Bill Clinton. They have awakened the sleeping bear.
Let the games(and rejoicing) continue.
Filthy McNasty
No, this is how it works:
1) Someone with political motives illegally leaks NIE info
2) NYT, and its fellow travelers in the print media, trump this as evidence of presidential failure
3) Appropriate focus is brought to the fact that the information that was leaked was done so selectively, and was reported by a major media organ that purports to be objective
4) The administration, acting in reasonable self-defense, releases additional information in order to provide context that the media did not provide
5) That same media, after being duped yet again, screams that it has been trapped and/or that the administration is selectively telling its story, which interestingly is how the whole situation began
The circle of life continues, and you are the bottom-dwellers.
jg
I’m waiting for them to say that the fact that the jihadis see Iraq as a ’cause celebre’ is proof that Iraq is central to the war on terror.
Filthy McNasty
And his tirade at Chris Wallace was smart and savvy? That was the behavior of a stable man, whom you are looking toward for guidance? Okay.
Sojourner
Absolutely. Being polite has given us eight years of the trashing of our Constitution. It’s long past time to take our country back. Polite speech ain’t gonna hack it.
Sojourner
Um, where is that additional information? Don’t you think it would have been released by now?
No. The only people who believe that are the far right sheeple.
Hey, Filthy… baaaaa.
LMAO.
Proud Liberal
a troll’s comment if ever I read one, but I”ll bite anyway. No it was not the behavior of a stable man but rather of a brilliant man.
Look at what he has done. He has changed the whole debate around. Now the Dems feel like they can ask what the Bush administration did in the nine months they were in office. Before they felt that was a little bit off limits – hey no one wants to “blame” bush for 911, but the attacks on Clinton (Path to 911 etc) and Clinton’s “At least I tried” has opend up the gates. Brilliant.
Just today Bush was asked (and refused to answer) if it were true that then never had ONE meeting on terrorism before 911. Condi had to defend their inaction and made the bold faced lie that they weren’t presented with a “comprehensive terrorsim plan” but they were. She absurdly said that they did just as much as the clinton administration to ‘get” bin Laden. Really? what did they do?
The whole conversation has shifted. Hillary even got into the act today by saying that had her husband gotten a PDB that said “Bin Laden determined to strike inside the USA” they sure would have done more.
Brilliant. The man knew EXACTLY what he was doing. For anyone that think he just flew off the handle, I have a nice bridge I am willing to sell you in Brooklyn.
Eural
Have you even listened to Bush once in the past two years?
No, really. Listen.
Clinton at his most “crazed” never comes close to GW’s meandering imitation of incoherence and insanity. And that’s being generous and polite.
Andrew
Am I the only one who remembers how Clinton destroyed the country for 8 long years?
The Republic survived only by the grace of God and Gingrich.
ThymeZone
Not exactly.
jaime
How’s this for smart and savvy, GO FUCK YOURSELF MAJOR LEAGUE ASSHOLE…BIG TIME.
Zifnab
Stable like a fox.
Ironically, only 3 pages of the 30 page document were released ~ see: Punchy
Perhaps the White House would be so bold as to release the other 27 pages if the NYT has taken everything so far out of context. I still don’t see how the media has been ‘duped’.
And lets be fair, what would Republicans have said (hell, what would security have to say) if the whistleblower had leaked the full, unedited document? They’d be screaming bloody murder (not like they aren’t already) about how treason has been committed over the revealing of state secrets.
Sojourner
Yes.
Pb
Yeah… not only was it originally a 30 page doc, but there were originally 9 pages of just key judgements, and they’re only showing us 3.5 pages of just key judgements, which means that we’re likely seeing the lamest and most non-controversial 40% of *those*. And it’s also easy to verify that what The New York Times did quote doesn’t appear in what they declassified.
p.lukasiak
its indicative of how much damage this is doing to Bush that they immediately try to change the focus to Clinton.
nice try….
******************
Two things disturb me about the NIE release — the CIA has been politicized by Goss and Negroponte as is evident by the fact that there was an effort to “sugarcoat” the bad news by presenting what are obviously unrealistic scenarios as actual alternatives. The jihadis are already well ahead of the game — and every day the US remains in Iraq, they gain more ground. Even if the eventually “lose” in Iraq — they will have gained so much elsewhere that the War in Iraq remains a “win” for them.
The other problem that I have with the NIE is that the document seems to conflate “jihadis” in general with al Qaeda, and its particular brand of extreme religious fundamentalism. The Iraq war, however, has made it possible for “jihad” against the United States to be seen as something far less that the completely “radical” position it was five years ago….
The Other Steve
Huh? You support Bush. One of the most un-Presidential Presidents we’ve ever had.
Hell the guy doesn’t even have the moral compass or maturity to be a dog catcher.
The Other Steve
This doesn’t appear to be the Democratic defeating position paper the right was claiming it is. None of this is particularly startling. Rather it seems even more damning than the Times report.
So what am I missing?
That Al Qaeda hates IHOP, and it is our love of pancakes which fuels them?
Bruce Moomaw
If this is the LEAST anti-Bush portion of the whole NIE, I shudder to think what the rest is like:
“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…
“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.”
Note also the extreme fuzziness of the recommendations on how to prevent this — all of which are both so obvious and so hopelessly general that they fall into the Let’s Wish For A Pony category:
(1) Encourage democracy in the Moslem world — although the appraisal adds that “attendant reforms and potentially destabilizing transitions will create new opportunities for jihadists to exploit.” No kidding. Since this thing was published in April, the short-term consequences of allowing elections in an essentially anti-democratic culture have only become more excruciatingly clear.
(2) Catch bin Laden and al-Zawahiri.
(3) Win the war in Iraq — and do so in a way that makes the country at least semi-democratic, instead of turning it into a Shiite-run or Sunni-run religious tyranny. Again, no kidding. As Kevin Drum says: how? “Of course, reading the entire NIE would hardly be an unalloyed blessing for either liberals or conservatives, since the report almost certainly contains analysis that supports both sides. How could it not? But it might sharpen the debate. At yesterday’s Democratic hearings on the war, retired military officers testified angrily about Don Rumsfeld’s conduct of the war, but as Dana Milbank put it [in the New Republic], they also recommended that the answer was ‘more troops, more money and more time in Iraq.’
“This is not what most Democrats want to hear, but let’s face it: it’s not what most Republicans want to hear either. Nonetheless, this is the dilemma in its starkest form. Nearly every serious military analyst believes that even minimal success in Iraq would require a very substantial increase in troop strength for a period of at least several years. Unfortunately, no one has offered up a practical way of FINDING more troops, President Bush shows no inclination to support a larger troop commitment, and the American public is pretty clearly skeptical about doubling down in Iraq anyway. In other words, even those who still believe Iraq can be salvaged also believe that the Bush administration is not doing anywhere near enough to accomplish that. Under these circumstances, with failure staring at us from both directions, what justification can there be for continuing our present course?”
Particularly (I will add for the millionth time) if, while we’re working frantically to try to make A Tree Grow In Iraq (and to catch bin Laden), we let the danger of nuclear proliferation among dictatorships — and thus the danger of nuclear terrorism, which utterly dwarfs all other conceivable terrorist threats to Western civilization — grow. (And there is not a word in this NIE summary about THAT problem.)
rachel
I can’t get it to work for me. :-(
Is there anything in it about North Korea’s program to develop nukes? ( I live in Seoul, so this is kind of a big issue for me.)
Bruce Moomaw
Not a peep — on nukes (or bioweapons) anywhere. This strikes me as a rather large omission…
Kimmitt
Never underestimate the blindness of those whose job depends on not seeing.
Proud Liberal
no… perhaps not the only one that might believe such nonsense but a distinct minority:
hmmmm… whats the Great Decider in the latest CBS/NY Times poll? Oh yeah, 37%
Proud Liberal
Sorry… link for above poll data.
Vlad
Nobody has done more for Clinton’s legacy than Dubya, simply by virtue of being his incompetent self.
Tim F.
Rachel, I transcribed the whole thing.
Paddy O'Shea
A new Gallup Poll shows that the American public blames Bush (53%) over Clinton (36%) for the failure to capture Osama bin laden.
Looks like the recent lie offensive from Kenny Bunkport and his enablers hasn’t worked.
galluppoll.com/content/?ci=24733
rachel
Tim,
Thanks. That’s it then?
Hmm… The good news only seems to be that Al Qaeda’s shrunk, but that looks to be more than offset by the other jihadist group’s growing. The other “good news” part isn’t really news, but wishful thinking–something that hasn’t seemed to have worked very well so far.
Punchy
Not omission…a redaction. What you don’t see isn’t necessarily what they didn’t consider, only what the WH decided they don’t want you to consider.
As for this:
Tim then followed up that quick comment with a gigantic scowl, some choice cuss words, and a new bag of ice for his wrists.
The Other Steve
Well jg, it’s official.
Your moment of Zen.
srv
I agree, the selective release of this information is treason.
I look forward to seeing George Bush in the docket.
The Other Steve
Well now will you look at that.
The Republicans have totally lost the Independent vote.
Punchy
TOS–did you just post on dKos? Are you TOS there, too?
As for this:
I’m guessing the 36% who think Clinton’s attempt to hit him with Tomahawks was a bigger failure than Bush’s decision to skip out on Tora Bora are not those holding college degrees and/or a full set of teeth…
Pb
One problem with that survey question is that they need a few control questions to put it into perspective, like…
Do you blame Bush/Clinton for:
Crime
Gas Prices
The Economy
Immorality in America
War Profiteering
The Christian Right
The Theory Of Evolution
Trans Fats
Alcoholism
Natural Phenomena
Vince Foster’s death
Shape-shifting reptiles
Baby Jesus Crying
etc.
RSA
Thanks for the transcription, Tim. Was anyone thrown by this part?
Not the Monty Python numbering, but the idea that jihadists are driven by the slow pace of social and political reforms? I thought that the jihadists had the general goal of halting and reversing the pace of social and political reforms. I wonder if the redaction has screwed something up here. Maybe someone else can make sense of it, though.
Dave
I for one would love to see a list of things Clinton did to destory the country for eight….long….years….
The Other Steve
Yup.
And, I just want to say… I blame Herbert Hoover.
I don’t know why he is at fault. I just never really liked the guy. So he’s to blame. I’ll figure out a way to blame him and write up on that tomorrow.
Tim F.
About nuke/chem/bio capabilities, the summary says this:
They want but don’t have, which we knew already.
Andrew
Look it, if KKKlinton hadn’t dishonored the Office of the President by fornicating with interns and having his wife murder their shady financial partners, President Bush wouldn’t have to try so hard to restore its honor. Bush is doing as best as he can, considering he had to drag the country’s morals out of the gutter and fight the Islamonazis at the same time.
Face
He brought a mixed bag…Good with the dams, sucked with the vacuums…
Rusty Shackleford
Does DougJ know you’re stealing his gig?
Only the biggest idiot in the world would refer to “the first black President” as KKKlinton. It’s like you’re intentionally retarded.
Do you really think an intelligent person will buy your nonsense?
Andrew
Only those foolish enough to believe what they read in the liberal media’s most left wing propaganda outlet, Salon “magazine.”
Rusty Shackleford
Are you saying Nobel Prize winner Toni Morrison didn’t refer to Bill Clinton as “the first black President”?
“Morrison caused a stir when she called Bill Clinton “the first Black president;” saying “Clinton displays almost every trope of blackness: single-parent household, born poor, working-class, saxophone-playing, McDonald’s-and-junk-food-loving boy from Arkansas.”
Do you really believe your own bullshit?
Pb
FYI: No. Duh.
Dave
Being relatively new around here (to the comments secion at least). Is Andrew for real, being sarcastic or a troll.
Whatever he is I’m getting a good laugh out of it.
Krista
Spooflalicious! A little heavy-handed, but still enjoyable.
Sojourner
My suspicion is that poverty and lack of education feed the jihad machine. Get rid of these issues and you reduce (not end) the number of recruits.
Getting rid of the madrassas (sp?) is certainly an important step but can only occur if public schools exist as an alternative for those without a whole lot of resources.
Skip
The Summary came out too early to mention other little niggles the jihadist might want to add, such as:
5. Elected members of the Palestinian parliament being kidnapped and held in jail by our Special Ally.
6. The minor matter of an invasion of Lebanon by the same party, and the million cluster bomblets they left behind.
The Arabs have al Jazeera, and thus they often see what we do not.
The Other Steve
It’s pure sarcasm.
Now, Melodrama Buckets, Darrell, Sherard and Par R are serious when they say pretty much the exact same thing. It’s kind of funny. :-)