Good thing the Islamic Jihadis do not use the Internet or anything, eh? NY Times – Amid Policy Disputes, Qaeda Grows in Pakistan
Late last year, top Bush administration officials decided to take a step they had long resisted. They drafted a secret plan to make it easer for the Pentagon’s Special Operations forces to launch missions into the snow-capped mountains of Pakistan to capture or kill top leaders of Al Qaeda.
Intelligence reports for more than a year had been streaming in about Osama bin Laden’s terrorism network rebuilding in the Pakistani tribal areas, a problem that had been exacerbated by years of missteps in Washington and the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, sharp policy disagreements, and turf battles between American counterterrorism agencies.
The new plan, outlined in a highly classified Pentagon order, was intended to eliminate some of those battles. And it was meant to pave a smoother path into the tribal areas for American commandos, who for years have bristled at what they see as Washington’s risk-averse attitude toward Special Operations missions inside Pakistan. They also argue that catching Mr. bin Laden will come only by capturing some of his senior lieutenants alive.Â
All in all, it is a very interesting report (including the typical BDS), but, did they really need to write it for all the enemy to read? Did they need to release classified information yet again?
More: Tigerhawk
…one might also wonder what a corresponding article written from al Qaeda’s point of view would look like. If the United States was “distracted” by Iraq, what about bin Laden? He declared it the central front in the war and vowed to drive the United States out, but he has not achieved that or been able to pull off a mass casualty attack outside the Arab Middle East since Madrid and London. Has al Qaeda also been “distracted” by Iraq? Almost certainly, even if the allegations in the Times article are also true.
Pam Gellar makes a good point
Bush may be angry at the latest NY Times act of treason but he has only himself to blame. Bush and his Justice department never pursued the obvious leaker (s)at the Pentagon and/or CIA. They dropped the ball on Sandy Berger.On the FISA leak and the wiretapping leak. This is but the latest outrageous leak in a long list of classified info dumped in the lap of the willing whore of our enemies, The Times. Bush never went after the lawbreakers Why? We are at war. These leaks jeopardize American lives. They should have been persecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Oliver Willis and Brilliant at Breakfast (who seem to be playing the “I’ll take Hussein as my middle name game”) do not seem to have a problem with exposing secret operations to the enemy. Jill at BaB even asks “It makes you wonder just whose side they’re on.” Of course, she wasn’t meaning people on the Left and at the NY Times who are doing all they can to lost the war against radical Islam.
Double More: I feel like Glenn Greenwald with all the updates! The Canadian Free Press makes a few salient points
The story, some 8 pages long, quotes some 18 times unnamed officials as sources.
Naming sources is Journalism 101.
In fact, one of the few mentioned is Dick Armitage, who knows something about leaking himself.
In closing paragraphs of the story, the NYTimes quotes Seth Jones, a Pentagon consultant and a terrorism expert at the Rand Corporation: “The United States faces a threat from Al Qaeda today that is comparable to what it faced on Sept. 11, 2001.â€
And with the tell-all NYTimes “exposing highly classified Pentagon ordersâ€, it’s small wonder.
From TV reports, the Pentagon is saying that the Times article is overblown and a bit hysterical. Waiting for an internet report at the moment.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
