A couple of weeks ago, Bush delivered what was billed as a “major speech” on the war on terror, which included one new claim: “Overall, the United States and our partners have disrupted at least ten serious al Qaeda terrorist plots since September the 11th, including three al Qaeda plots to attack inside the United States.” (emphasis added)
Reporters asked for a list of the 10 in order to substantiate Bush’s claim. Scott McClellan said most of the disrupted plots were classified, but we should all just take the president’s word for it.
It’s hard to say for sure, but it seems that if that had happened in 2003, this tack probably would have worked. But a funny thing happened this month: reporters weren’t satisfied with the White House response, they followed up, and are now highlighting just how dubious Bush’s claim was.
A White House list of 10 terrorist plots disrupted by the United States has confused counterterrorism experts and officials, who say they cannot distinguish between the importance of some incidents on the list and others that were left off.
Intelligence officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity said the White House overstated the gravity of the plots by saying that they had been foiled, when most were far from ready to be executed. Others noted that the nation’s color-coded threat index was not raised from yellow, or “elevated” risk of attack, to orange, or “high” risk, for most of the time covered by the incidents on the list. […]
“We don’t know how they came to the conclusions they came to,” said one counterterrorism official, who spoke anonymously for fear of angering the White House. “It’s safe to say that most of the [intelligence] community doesn’t think it’s worth very much.”
There is, of course, surface level problem. Bush boasted of the disruption of “at least ten serious al Qaeda terrorist plots” — which is true so long as you discount the words “ten,” “serious,” “al Queda,” and “plots.”
And then there’s the context of the reporting. Put simply, Bush just isn’t in a position to get away with these stunts anymore. When he makes bogus claims, reporters actually seem to notice, and for a change, care.
Yes, the WaPo story ran on page A6, but progress is progress.