The selective declassifier strikes again

May 23, 2007

The White House seems to be pushing this story pretty hard. I’m not sure why.

Seeking to rally support for the war, President Bush released intelligence asserting that Osama bin Laden in 2005 ordered creation of a terrorist unit to hit targets outside Iraq, including the United States.

The information, which Bush was to cite Wednesday in a commencement address at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, was declassified by the White House on Tuesday. It expands on a classified bulletin the Homeland Security Department issued in March 2005.

The bulletin, which warned that bin Laden had enlisted Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, his senior operative in Iraq, to plan potential strikes in the United States, was described at the time as credible but not specific. It did not prompt the administration to raise its national terror alert level.

Apparently, this newly declassified intelligence highlights bin Laden instructing Zarqawi to create terrorist cells, and shows bin Laden instructing Hamza Rabia, a senior al Qaeda operative, to brief Zarqawi on launching attacks.

In other words, unless the AP and the Washington Post are leaving out some extremely pertinent details, the intelligence shows that al Qaeda, in 2005, planned to commit acts of terrorism. I think we, um, knew that.

Frances Fragos Townsend, the White House homeland security adviser, told the AP that Bush will “use the intelligence to argue that terrorists remain a threat to Americans.”

So, the president is declassifying intelligence to tell us something we already know? There has to be more to this.

CNN’s report is a little more helpful, but not much.

President Bush is expected to use declassified intelligence about Osama bin Laden to defend his Iraq war policy during a commencement address Wednesday.

The intelligence says that in 2005 bin Laden planned to use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks in the United States, according to White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

I feel like we’re banging our heads against a brick wall here. It’s already clear that bin Laden is reveling in the war in Iraq — the conflict is filling his coffers and making recruiting easier. If the goal is to undermine al Qaeda, then the solution is to withdraw and let Iraqis drive al Qaeda out.

I obviously haven’t heard Bush’s speech yet, but this leak — and associated argument — seems pointless. Is it to remind us that bin Laden is still out there plotting? If so, maybe Bush can explain why he’s “truly…not all that concerned about him.”

And let’s also not lose sight of the selective declassification here. A few days ago, the White House couldn’t even acknowledge a meeting that took place in John Ashcroft’s hospital room, but now they can leak the details of sensitive communiques between bin Laden and Zarqawi. Got it.

Bush will probably tout this as the kind of information they were able to obtain through their warrentless wiretapping program.

  • “In other words, unless the AP and the Washington Post are leaving out some extremely pertinent details, the intelligence shows that al Qaeda, in 2005, planned to commit acts of terrorism. I think we, um, knew that.”

    But you aren’t SCARED enough, so he had to remind you that SCARY people are out there doing SCARY things, and because of that, for some reason I’ve never quite understood, you’re supposed to vote Republican.

    Sad to see that, despite all his denials, Bush is still trying to associate Iraq with Al Qaeda.

  • And Bush will try to raise the fear level another notch. Too bad some of us remember that Bush didn’t try as hard as expected to get bin Laden in the first place.

  • …Osama bin Laden in 2005 ordered creation of a terrorist unit to hit targets outside Iraq, including the United States…

    …then he realized that George W. Bush was already doing a fine job of terrorizing the planet and recruiting al Qaeda members, so bin Laden went back in his cave and laughed his ass off for several hours.

    IMHO we won’t see bin Laden attacking us again until it looks like we might stop doing his work for him.

  • I think the (misguided) point is that if we leave Iraq, al Queda will take it over to use as a base to attack the West. The subtle undertone for the low IQ crowd is that W used “bin Laden” and “Iraq” in the same sentence (never mind the 2005 part), therefore they must have been working together and we were justified in attacking Iraq.

    Everyone left of Atilla should be ready to pounce on this with a “all this proves is that bin Laden wasn’t interested in Iraq until after we screwed it up” or a “too bad Bush’s incompetence let him get away at Tora Bora” or even a “what was that macho bullshit 4-5 years ago about getting him dead or alive? has Bush backed up his big talk yet?”

  • “Dead or alive.” … He’s still alive George. Liar.

    Did George decide to declassify the “covered your ass” memo or something? What’s newsworthy about this?

  • Bu$h tossed this shiny thing into the gutter, what—26 months ago—and now he picks it up, all covered with rust and ooze, and screams, LOOK—A SHINY THING!”

    UM…color me unimpressed, people. It isn’t shiny any more. It’s rusty. It’s got all kinds of “I-do-not-want-to-know” kinds of stuff dripping from it, not because it is a scary thing, but because Bu$h threw it in the gutter 26 months ago. And after all, Mad George says that Osama is irrelevant—so, he must be irrelevant.

    Personally, I find George W. Bu$h to be obscene. I do not allow my children to have contact with the man. He has molested Truth, the Constitution, the Republic, the People, and the entire planet Earth.

    And I never allow my children to go anywhere near a molester….

  • “Bu$h tossed this shiny thing into the gutter, what—26 months ago”

    Next Bush intelligence report to be released: reliable intelligence suggests that in April 1775 the redcoats planned to seize the weapons stores in Concord! Don’t trust the new British prime minister!

  • The other problem is until recently the WH insisted that bin Laden and Hussien were BFF. Now they’ve reached the point where they will spare us the trouble of proving they’re liars by admitting it themselves. Thanks. Unless the pResident is going to reveal during his speech that the US has a time machine and the 2003 invasion was an attempt to stop bin Laden from ordering terrorist activities in Iraq in 2005.

    That would make as much sense as the usual crap we get from the WH.

    In addition I think it will re-ignite all of the speculation that Al-Z was not exactly bin Laden’s favouritest person in the world and may have in fact sold him out so we could (once again) do his job for him.

  • See, if Al Qaeda didn’t have Iraq to use as a base of operations, we wouldn’t be in danger. Of course before we invaded Iraq Al Qaeda couldn’t operate from there because Sadam would not allow it. If they can organize and launch attacks in Iraq where teh vast majority of our army is stationed, patroling, and being killed, imagine what they could do if we didn’t have the whole army there!

    I can’t wait for the report on the press gaggle tomorrow. Tony Snow is going to need some Tums.

  • Thanks for the reminder that you never caught bin Laden, Dubya! Makes the decision to attack Iraq, instead of capturing the guy who actually attacked us, seem smarter and smarter with each passing day.

    I couldn’t have less respect for a child molester than I have for this monkey in a suit we’re expected to call Mister President. Seriously.

    Of course, that’s not to say I have MORE respect for a child molester.

    Yeah, they’re about even in my mind. Both dangerous. Both need to be stopped.

  • Why would bin Laden establish a base of operations where there are 150,000 US troops operating freely?
    Wouldn’t you pick a place that was less likely to be attacked by your enemies?

    Like, oh let’s say, some region in Pakistan where you enjoy support of the local population, and the national government has no authority?

  • Seeking to rally support for the war, President Bush released intelligence asserting that Osama bin Laden in 2005 ordered creation of a terrorist unit to hit targets outside Iraq, including the United States.

    Whoa, whoa, whoa…

    “We’re fighting them there so they won’t come here,” is the party line.

    Yet, to bolster support for that position, Bush says they’re planning on avoiding Iraq and coming here?

    Hell-o?

  • Ya’ think this has anything to do with the recent claim that we’ve been paying Pakistan something like, $1 billion/(year, month) to find this guy?

    When George would not even mention his name before, now he’s dropping it everywhere. Maybe he thinks he’ll hit paydirt soon for reasons not clear to us.

  • Is anyone else disturbed by the fact that the president made this announcement at a commencement speech? For heaven’s sake, this was the graduation of Coast Guard Academy students! I surely would be miffed if my commencement speaker decided to talk about something like this. Although, a friend of mine says this is standard for the academy commencements speeches, that they are an indicator of policy and not so much to wish graduates well. Even so, I still find this disturbing.

    • Comments are closed.