NIE: Who to Believe, Who to Believe?

The New York Times reported today reported, yet again, classified information. They published part of the National Intelligence Estimate, the part that they say says that the Iraq War has resulted in more terrorists, made terrorism worse.

Do most Americans still believe what's printed in the New York Times?

Instead, maybe it's smarter to listen to bloggers who have a world of experience compared to the Times reporters who only attended journalism school.

For starters, from an email sent to Hugh Hewitt:

Hugh, The allegation that the war in Iraq has increased terrorist attacks and stimulated the U.S. conflicts with the Islamic Nazi's is an unreality in the minds of the Democrats.

 

After Pearl Harbor our involvement in the Pacific War and the European Theater also increased dramatically. That is why they call it a war. It is clear that once they attacked us, we have no choice but to go after tem wherever they are. Just as President Bush has said. The problem is the Democrats have no idea how to fight a war or to win one.

Professor Hewitt doesn't think there's any reason to believe the Times anymore.

Mac Ranger, who's actually worked in the IC, reports that this Times hit on the President is to stem his rising poll numbers.

Yep, sure enough, turns out that the NIE was published in April, so to publish now=political hit job.

Plus, seems that Reuters is way out of step.

Since when did the NIE become known for accuracy anyway?

Would Saddam in power mean less terrorism?

vadkins
QT Monster Blog Home