<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Politicized Intelligence</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:10:31 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jen</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14274</link>
		<dc:creator>jen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14274</guid>
		<description>I caught a bit of Ijaz&#039;s interview on Fox News yesterday and I&#039;ve never seen him that angry. He&#039;s really incensed over Clarke&#039;s assertions. I&#039;ve never seen him like that - he&#039;s usually very mild mannered.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I caught a bit of Ijaz's interview on Fox News yesterday and I've never seen him that angry. He's really incensed over Clarke's assertions. I've never seen him like that - he's usually very mild mannered.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brett</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14275</link>
		<dc:creator>Brett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14275</guid>
		<description>So, it&#039;s all Clarke&#039;s fault, really -- because he wanted a more &quot;militaristic&quot; solution?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, it's all Clarke's fault, really -- because he wanted a more "militaristic" solution?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14276</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14276</guid>
		<description>No, Brett, the issue is Clarke&#039;s credibility, and, more importantly, how much he represents a clear asssessment of the Bush administration&#039;s view on al Qaeda and terrorism in general.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, Brett, the issue is Clarke's credibility, and, more importantly, how much he represents a clear asssessment of the Bush administration's view on al Qaeda and terrorism in general.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14277</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14277</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s review Brett. Clarke was the head counter-terrorism under Clinton but not a whole lot of counter-terrorism occurred.

There are dozens of factual inaccuracies in his charges and he was well known to be loopy long before his book came out. He was loopy under Reagan. (spend some google time)

The only people that believe he is telling the truth also believe that Bush was AWOL, Al gore invented the internet and that the Tooth Fairy really exists. 

And there is just no reasoning with those people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let's review Brett. Clarke was the head counter-terrorism under Clinton but not a whole lot of counter-terrorism occurred.</p>
<p>There are dozens of factual inaccuracies in his charges and he was well known to be loopy long before his book came out. He was loopy under Reagan. (spend some google time)</p>
<p>The only people that believe he is telling the truth also believe that Bush was AWOL, Al gore invented the internet and that the Tooth Fairy really exists. </p>
<p>And there is just no reasoning with those people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brett</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14278</link>
		<dc:creator>Brett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14278</guid>
		<description>I was responding to the specific claims made in the excerpt, not the (predictable) broad-brush character assassination coming out of the White House.  Look again at the second bullet point above.  Ijaz seems to indicate that he believes that Clarke&#039;s fault was in promoting the use of military force rather than diplomacy, unless I&#039;m reading the argument wrong.  No?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was responding to the specific claims made in the excerpt, not the (predictable) broad-brush character assassination coming out of the White House.  Look again at the second bullet point above.  Ijaz seems to indicate that he believes that Clarke's fault was in promoting the use of military force rather than diplomacy, unless I'm reading the argument wrong.  No?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14279</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14279</guid>
		<description>Brett,

Yes, I think that&#039;s right.  He was looking for a chance to blow OBL up rather than work a deal to facilitate his capture.  The advantage of criticizing a failed policy of the past is that we know what happened didn&#039;t work and it&#039;s possible that a rejected option would have.  

See my update.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brett,</p>
<p>Yes, I think that's right.  He was looking for a chance to blow OBL up rather than work a deal to facilitate his capture.  The advantage of criticizing a failed policy of the past is that we know what happened didn't work and it's possible that a rejected option would have.  </p>
<p>See my update.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dodd</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14280</link>
		<dc:creator>Dodd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14280</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s always amusing to me how, when the WH responds to detractors, it&#039;s always a &quot;broad-brush character assassination coming out of the White House&quot; or some such thing. Clarke can accuse Bush &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt; of whatever vile crimes he wishes and they accept that as mere policy disagreement. But as soon as anyone points out that maybe, just maybe, Clarke has an axe to grind and perhaps his credibility in making the charges is less than exemplary, &lt;i&gt;that&#039;s&lt;/i&gt; &quot;character assassination.&quot;

Well, sorry, Brett. As much as you might prefer that they just lie there and try to enjoy it, when one is attacked, one has the right to fight back. Clarke put his own credibility squarely at issue when he claimed that he warned them what to do and they ignored him. If, in fact, that isn&#039;t quite true, then it is in no way &quot;character assassination&quot; to point that out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It's always amusing to me how, when the WH responds to detractors, it's always a "broad-brush character assassination coming out of the White House" or some such thing. Clarke can accuse Bush <i>et al</i> of whatever vile crimes he wishes and they accept that as mere policy disagreement. But as soon as anyone points out that maybe, just maybe, Clarke has an axe to grind and perhaps his credibility in making the charges is less than exemplary, <i>that's</i> "character assassination."</p>
<p>Well, sorry, Brett. As much as you might prefer that they just lie there and try to enjoy it, when one is attacked, one has the right to fight back. Clarke put his own credibility squarely at issue when he claimed that he warned them what to do and they ignored him. If, in fact, that isn't quite true, then it is in no way "character assassination" to point that out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brett</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14281</link>
		<dc:creator>Brett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14281</guid>
		<description>James:

I&#039;m really not sure that the charge is &quot;if only they&#039;d listened to me, we&#039;d have avoided 9/11.&quot;  I just read the bulk of the book, and it&#039;s the final two chapters that are really worth focusing on, it seems to me (of course, I read them last so they&#039;re in my thoughts).  The argument is that in order to avoid another 9/11, we need to get serious about going after al Qaeda, and the war in Iraq does little toward that goal (and is probably counterproductive).  I can understand why the Bush administration has focused on the criticisms of its pre-9/11 policies, but to be honest, it&#039;s the rest of the argument that&#039;s got me worried.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James:</p>
<p>I'm really not sure that the charge is "if only they'd listened to me, we'd have avoided 9/11."  I just read the bulk of the book, and it's the final two chapters that are really worth focusing on, it seems to me (of course, I read them last so they're in my thoughts).  The argument is that in order to avoid another 9/11, we need to get serious about going after al Qaeda, and the war in Iraq does little toward that goal (and is probably counterproductive).  I can understand why the Bush administration has focused on the criticisms of its pre-9/11 policies, but to be honest, it's the rest of the argument that's got me worried.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14282</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14282</guid>
		<description>Brett:

That&#039;s a reasonable enough argument, although certainly not a novel one.  It&#039;s certainly not what 60 Minutes focused on.  Of course, I&#039;ve long quit watching that show, since Hewitt doesn&#039;t even bother to pretend to be an honest journalist anymore.

I&#039;m not sure what else it is we should be doing to fight al Qaeda.  We&#039;re certainly killing a lot of them in Iraq, although I think that&#039;s a happy accident rather than the plan behind the war.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brett:</p>
<p>That's a reasonable enough argument, although certainly not a novel one.  It's certainly not what 60 Minutes focused on.  Of course, I've long quit watching that show, since Hewitt doesn't even bother to pretend to be an honest journalist anymore.</p>
<p>I'm not sure what else it is we should be doing to fight al Qaeda.  We're certainly killing a lot of them in Iraq, although I think that's a happy accident rather than the plan behind the war.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PoliBlog</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14283</link>
		<dc:creator>PoliBlog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14283</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Ijaz on Clarke&lt;/strong&gt;
James Joyner excerpts a lenghthy response by Mansoor Ijaz to Clarke&#039;s accusations regarding the Bush admininstration&#039;s attention to al Qaeda....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Ijaz on Clarke</strong><br />
James Joyner excerpts a lenghthy response by Mansoor Ijaz to Clarke's accusations regarding the Bush admininstration's attention to al Qaeda....</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ipse Dixit</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/politicized_intelligence/comment-page-1/#comment-14284</link>
		<dc:creator>Ipse Dixit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=5522#comment-14284</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;What&#039;s New?&lt;/strong&gt;
It&#039;s only a matter of time before someone asks me why I haven&#039;t commented on the Richard Clarke &quot;story.&quot; Well,...

---</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>What's New?</strong><br />
It's only a matter of time before someone asks me why I haven't commented on the Richard Clarke "story." Well,...</p>
<p>---</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
