Already the press is interpreting the National Intelligence Estimate released today, let's look at what's in it. I'll jump straight to the “Key Judgments” section.
We judge the US Homeland will face a persistent and evolving terrorist threat over the next three years. The main threat comes from Islamic terrorist groups and cells, especially al-Qa’ida, driven by their undiminished intent to attack the Homeland and a continued effort by these terrorist groups to adapt and improve their capabilities.
No surprise here. The terrorist threat has not gone away.
We assess that greatly increased worldwide counterterrorism efforts over the past five years have constrained the ability of al-Qa’ida to attack the US Homeland again and have led terrorist groups to perceive the Homeland as a harder target to strike than on 9/11. These measures have helped disrupt known plots against the United States since 9/11.
- We are concerned, however, that this level of international cooperation may wane as 9/11 becomes a more distant memory and perceptions of the threat diverge.
This item is not likely to get a lot of press. We have been successful in stopping attacks against the homeland and there is a danger of complacency.
Al-Qa’ida is and will remain the most serious terrorist threat to the Homeland, as its central leadership continues to plan high-impact plots, while pushing others in extremist Sunni communities to mimic its efforts and to supplement its capabilities. We assess the group has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability, including: a safehaven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), operational lieutenants, and its top leadership. Although we have discovered only a handful of individuals in the United States with ties to al-Qa’ida senior leadership since 9/11, we judge that al-Qa’ida will intensify its efforts to put operatives here.
- As a result, we judge that the United States currently is in a heightened threat environment.
As expected, al-Qa’ida remains our biggest threat and continues to find safe havens in the Middle East. Interesting to see Pakistan called out directly, but not bases in Iran and Saudi Arabian funding.
We assess that al-Qa’ida will continue to enhance its capabilities to attack the Homeland through greater cooperation with regional terrorist groups. Of note, we assess that al-Qa’ida will probably seek to leverage the contacts and capabilities of al-Qa’ida in Iraq (AQI), its most visible and capable affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the Homeland. In addition, we assess that its association with AQI helps al-Qa’ida to energize the broader Sunni extremist community, raise resources, and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for Homeland attacks.
We assess that al-Qa’ida’s Homeland plotting is likely to continue to focus on prominent political, economic, and infrastructure targets with the goal of producing mass casualties, visually dramatic destruction, significant economic aftershocks, and/or fear among the US population. The group is proficient with conventional small arms and improvised explosive devices, and is innovative in creating new capabilities and overcoming security obstacles.
- We assess that al-Qa’ida will continue to try to acquire and employ chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear material in attacks and would not hesitate to use them if it develops what it deems is sufficient capability.
AQI has become a significant subsidiary unit of AQ. Any presence in the Middle East is always going to be a lightning rod for fanatic elements. Better that we fight them with prepared units than face attacks on unprepared people here, in my opinion. While NBC (nuclear, chemical, biological) threats are listed here, the likelihood of small arms and improvised explosives is greater (far less operational security issues).
We assess Lebanese Hizballah, which has conducted anti-US attacks outside the United States in the past, may be more likely to consider attacking the Homeland over the next three years if it perceives the United States as posing a direct threat to the group or Iran.
Hizballah is an emerging threat probably due to the pressure we've been exerting on Iran.
We assess that the spread of radical—especially Salafi—Internet sites, increasingly aggressive anti-US rhetoric and actions, and the growing number of radical, self-generating cells in Western countries indicate that the radical and violent segment of the West’s Muslim population is expanding, including in the United States. The arrest and prosecution by US law enforcement of a small number of violent Islamic extremists inside the United States—who are becoming more connected ideologically, virtually, and/or in a physical sense to the global extremist movement—points to the possibility that others may become sufficiently radicalized that they will view the use of violence here as legitimate. We assess that this internal Muslim terrorist threat is not likely to be as severe as it is in Europe, however.
Our first hint of Information Age problems, more below.
We assess that other, non-Muslim terrorist groups—often referred to as “single-issue” groups by the FBI—probably will conduct attacks over the next three years given their violent histories, but we assess this violence is likely to be on a small scale.
A little bit of a catch-all indicating that other threats of terrorism are out there, but from smaller groups.
We assess that globalization trends and recent technological advances will continue to enable even small numbers of alienated people to find and connect with one another, justify and intensify their anger, and mobilize resources to attack—all without requiring a centralized terrorist organization, training camp, or leader.
- The ability to detect broader and more diverse terrorist plotting in this environment will challenge current US defensive efforts and the tools we use to detect and disrupt plots. It will also require greater understanding of how suspect activities at the local level relate to strategic threat information and how best to identify indicators of terrorist activity in the midst of legitimate interactions.
We are having problems dealing with the free flow of information on the Internet facilitating the coordination of terrorist activities. This is hardly new. The technology race has always led to problems. Continuous solutions to the asymmetrical warfare problem produce a stream of new of technologies (increased rate of fire, convenient improvised explosives, etc.) beyond simple communications improvements.
The goal should always be to make choosing the tactic of terrorism so abhorrent that no one would select it. It's clear there are some elements that believe that terrorist is attractive and we must continue to suppress it. My fear is that there are those who believe appeasement is a tactic of anti-terrorism.
We'll see what the uproar over this intelligent estimate will produce.
According to information dug up by Intellectual Conservative, it looks like the spotted owl was not endangered by the timber industry (“big timber?”) but instead by a more adaptable owl in the same habitat.
As a result of the hysteria to save the “endangered” owls, U.S. timber sales were reduced by 80-90%, forcing saw mills to close, loggers to go broke and whole towns which depended on the industry to literally disappear. The federal crackdown on the industry caused a shift in U.S. domestic lumber supplies to foreign soils.
We killed an industry, and then it turns out that we were wrong.
According to a new government draft plan to save the species, scientists are no longer saying the greatest threat to the Spotted Owl is logging activity. “The draft recovery plan recognizes the primary threat to northern spotted owls as competition with barred owls.” According to the report, barred owls are less selective about the habitat they use and the prey they feed upon and are out-competing northern spotted owls for habitat and food, causing its decline.
I recently read State of Fear by Michael Crichton, a novel with a central theme of environmental terrorism and long debates between various characters on environmental issues. While what he wrote is controversial one important theme was that scientists disagree on the impact of changes and proposed actions to change things because we don't really understand things well enough. Another important theme was the resilience and adaptability of nature leading to constant change in dominant species. That some species might die out is a natural consequence of evolution towards more adaptable species.
The spotted owl is losing to another more adaptable owl. I don't think we should try to preserve every species losing out in the natural process of evolution. Why are we pouring money into saving this owl? Why are we destroying industries of poorly-supported science?
(Hat tip to Free Market News.)
Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr., notorious attention-seeker, plans to protest a gun shop in the Chicago, Illinois suburbs for being the most popular in the nation. I guess someone has to be number one.
While he makes wondrous noises and platitudes, for example, “We have the right to live safe and secure, no matter where we live in America.” he seeks to shut down the very stores that offer (for many) a safe and effective solution to threats of personal violence.
“Our marching does not kill people; people who buy guns from gun shops kill people,” he says, forgetting the intended consequence that marching shuts down gun shops, threatening the lives of innocent people no longer able to even the odds against larger, more aggressive criminal assailants. I suppose known misogynist Jackson prefers rape victims to dead attackers in the national equation.
Jesse must believe that after the Virginia Tech incident that gun control is again a hot button in America, but he's wrong. The reaction of the public has been mixed, ranging from his bitter invective of disarm everyone so only muscles and gangs rule the streets, to the opposite side of arming students and teachers against possible future wackos.
Go ahead and have your protest, Jesse, only your fellow travelers in the Brady Coalition even noticed you are up to something, or care.
Misty didn't believe you could cook a hot with with a battery and a couple forks but I set her straight. What I didn't know is that you could stick some LEDs in it while it was cooking, but these folks did: