<?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: Intelligence at Work</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence_at_work/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence_at_work/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 06:16:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Bradley</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence_at_work/#comment-475</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 21:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence-at-work/#comment-475</guid>
		<description>What is your comment on the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, which does not assign a major role in the widespread sectarian violence and insurgency there to Iran?

ML:

That&#039;s exactly what Steve Schippers was talking about, in fact.  Note that there is a division within the Intel Community, not everyone bought into the alternate universe.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is your comment on the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, which does not assign a major role in the widespread sectarian violence and insurgency there to Iran?</p>
<p>ML:</p>
<p>That&#8217;s exactly what Steve Schippers was talking about, in fact.  Note that there is a division within the Intel Community, not everyone bought into the alternate universe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Azad Andish</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence_at_work/#comment-474</link>
		<dc:creator>Azad Andish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 10:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence-at-work/#comment-474</guid>
		<description>Yesterday, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.iranews.org,&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.iranews.org,&lt;/a&gt; one of the many mullahs&#039; news agencies had an interview with &quot;MohammadNabi  Roodaki&quot; , the vice chairman of the &quot; Security and Foreign Policy Committee&quot; of Iran&#039;s Parliament.
He openly says : &quot; US should release our diplomats as soon as possible because otherwise it is possible that US diplomats are abducted in Iraq.&quot;
He further adds: &quot; Youngsters and people of Iraq have so far controlled their wrath for the killings and daily explosions but the US should not do anything to make young sunni and shiites to confront the US and should be afraid of the day the Iraqi young people take guns because then the US should take back the corps of its soldiers to America.&quot;

I think this clear warning / confession will also be ignored by the US administration. To tell you the truth I hope it does not make them trembling out of fear and decide that let&#039;s be friendly with mullahs and beg their mercy.
God bless Neocons!

By the way, what happened to Mr Khalilzad who had promised to disclose the important info on Iran&#039;s meddling in Iraq last Wednesday?

ML:

Good question.  I suppose he&#039;s furious, don&#039;t you?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yesterday, <a href="http://www.iranews.org," rel="nofollow">http://www.iranews.org,</a> one of the many mullahs&#8217; news agencies had an interview with &#8220;MohammadNabi  Roodaki&#8221; , the vice chairman of the &#8221; Security and Foreign Policy Committee&#8221; of Iran&#8217;s Parliament.<br />
He openly says : &#8221; US should release our diplomats as soon as possible because otherwise it is possible that US diplomats are abducted in Iraq.&#8221;<br />
He further adds: &#8221; Youngsters and people of Iraq have so far controlled their wrath for the killings and daily explosions but the US should not do anything to make young sunni and shiites to confront the US and should be afraid of the day the Iraqi young people take guns because then the US should take back the corps of its soldiers to America.&#8221;</p>
<p>I think this clear warning / confession will also be ignored by the US administration. To tell you the truth I hope it does not make them trembling out of fear and decide that let&#8217;s be friendly with mullahs and beg their mercy.<br />
God bless Neocons!</p>
<p>By the way, what happened to Mr Khalilzad who had promised to disclose the important info on Iran&#8217;s meddling in Iraq last Wednesday?</p>
<p>ML:</p>
<p>Good question.  I suppose he&#8217;s furious, don&#8217;t you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexis</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence_at_work/#comment-473</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 09:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence-at-work/#comment-473</guid>
		<description>You may wish to consider approaching a Senator with your ideas.  There is an off-chance a legislator may agree with you and put Iran&#039;s behavior on the national agenda.

Although the executive branch of government conducts America&#039;s foreign policy, Congress (and especially the Senate) sets the general parameters of our foreign policy.  And it is a rare President who can set the national agenda during the last two years of his tenure.

ML:

There used to be a legislator who &quot;got it&quot; on these matters, a very great legislator named Rick Santorum from Pennsylvania.  He was defeated in a landslide by an empty suit named Casey.

The other one who gets it is Senator Coburn from Oklahoma, who has been kind enough to have me testify in the past.  And I do talk to him.  But I don&#039;t believe there is enough critical mass in the Congress to initiate effective policy toward Iran.  Quite the contrary, in fact;  look at the Democratic candidates who warned Bush about attacking Iran...


</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You may wish to consider approaching a Senator with your ideas.  There is an off-chance a legislator may agree with you and put Iran&#8217;s behavior on the national agenda.</p>
<p>Although the executive branch of government conducts America&#8217;s foreign policy, Congress (and especially the Senate) sets the general parameters of our foreign policy.  And it is a rare President who can set the national agenda during the last two years of his tenure.</p>
<p>ML:</p>
<p>There used to be a legislator who &#8220;got it&#8221; on these matters, a very great legislator named Rick Santorum from Pennsylvania.  He was defeated in a landslide by an empty suit named Casey.</p>
<p>The other one who gets it is Senator Coburn from Oklahoma, who has been kind enough to have me testify in the past.  And I do talk to him.  But I don&#8217;t believe there is enough critical mass in the Congress to initiate effective policy toward Iran.  Quite the contrary, in fact;  look at the Democratic candidates who warned Bush about attacking Iran&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence_at_work/#comment-472</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 09:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence-at-work/#comment-472</guid>
		<description>The question is not whether &quot;we are going to fight back.&quot;

The question is whether we are going to destroy them.

We&#039;re in a war with Iran.

We should be seizing upon the slightest predicate or excuse to close with them with everything we have.  We should be looking for excuses to pound them thoroughly.

This encompasses far more than an absence of policy.

This involves FUNDAMENTAL, NON-NEGOTIABLE American honour.

This is a thing of honour now.

Every hour of every day that we do NOT unload upon them, disgraces us the more, dishonours us the more, validates the contempt, the PROPER contempt our enemies throughout islam have for us.

George W. Bush&#039;s message of American strength is warping into one of American weakness.  The very point of the tutorial that we supposedly inflicted by going to Baghdad is being completely undone.

I enjoyed that line about it &quot;requiring an act of faith&quot; to continue to profess that Iran has nothing to do with the mayhem racking Iraq presently.

THAT was a beautiful line.  You need to hammer that one home.  Use it often, use it well.  For the people in the White House who are scrambling about avoiding mentioning Tehran can be mortified by your use of that phrase.  It places their policy in such a squalid light as to shame them.  And such men can be shamed.

Persuasion has failed.  So try shame.

That&#039;s why I relentlessly focus on American honour.

Democrats are impervious to claims of honour, but not so the Grand Old Party.

So use that.

The White House policy isn&#039;t simply one of dither.  For they&#039;ve made up their mind.  They haven&#039;t any intention of tangling with Tehran, REGARDLESS of how many Americans get blown up, get maimed, get disfigured.

There&#039;s very little time left for this President to remain in office.  If he hasn&#039;t seized upon the evidence to take on Iran heretofore, he won&#039;t hereinafter.

Whatever appetite he ever had to kill our enemies, and let&#039;s be blunt, he didn&#039;t have much to begin with, is gone now.

But perhaps the recollection of fundamental American honour can revive his lost awareness of himself, his lost awareness of the dignity and power of the office he holds.

Perhaps recollections of honour can restore his lost manhood.  For we&#039;ve got an emasculated man as Commander-in-Chief right now.

Oh, by the way, I loved that article you wrote about Bobby Knight.  That was great.

You might consider a similar piece about the recently retired Coach of the Cowboys, Bill Parcells.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The question is not whether &#8220;we are going to fight back.&#8221;</p>
<p>The question is whether we are going to destroy them.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re in a war with Iran.</p>
<p>We should be seizing upon the slightest predicate or excuse to close with them with everything we have.  We should be looking for excuses to pound them thoroughly.</p>
<p>This encompasses far more than an absence of policy.</p>
<p>This involves FUNDAMENTAL, NON-NEGOTIABLE American honour.</p>
<p>This is a thing of honour now.</p>
<p>Every hour of every day that we do NOT unload upon them, disgraces us the more, dishonours us the more, validates the contempt, the PROPER contempt our enemies throughout islam have for us.</p>
<p>George W. Bush&#8217;s message of American strength is warping into one of American weakness.  The very point of the tutorial that we supposedly inflicted by going to Baghdad is being completely undone.</p>
<p>I enjoyed that line about it &#8220;requiring an act of faith&#8221; to continue to profess that Iran has nothing to do with the mayhem racking Iraq presently.</p>
<p>THAT was a beautiful line.  You need to hammer that one home.  Use it often, use it well.  For the people in the White House who are scrambling about avoiding mentioning Tehran can be mortified by your use of that phrase.  It places their policy in such a squalid light as to shame them.  And such men can be shamed.</p>
<p>Persuasion has failed.  So try shame.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s why I relentlessly focus on American honour.</p>
<p>Democrats are impervious to claims of honour, but not so the Grand Old Party.</p>
<p>So use that.</p>
<p>The White House policy isn&#8217;t simply one of dither.  For they&#8217;ve made up their mind.  They haven&#8217;t any intention of tangling with Tehran, REGARDLESS of how many Americans get blown up, get maimed, get disfigured.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s very little time left for this President to remain in office.  If he hasn&#8217;t seized upon the evidence to take on Iran heretofore, he won&#8217;t hereinafter.</p>
<p>Whatever appetite he ever had to kill our enemies, and let&#8217;s be blunt, he didn&#8217;t have much to begin with, is gone now.</p>
<p>But perhaps the recollection of fundamental American honour can revive his lost awareness of himself, his lost awareness of the dignity and power of the office he holds.</p>
<p>Perhaps recollections of honour can restore his lost manhood.  For we&#8217;ve got an emasculated man as Commander-in-Chief right now.</p>
<p>Oh, by the way, I loved that article you wrote about Bobby Knight.  That was great.</p>
<p>You might consider a similar piece about the recently retired Coach of the Cowboys, Bill Parcells.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kourosh</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence_at_work/#comment-471</link>
		<dc:creator>kourosh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 06:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2007/02/06/intelligence-at-work/#comment-471</guid>
		<description>With these many article more or less against US in the media, I wonder how Pentagon can effectively deals with the problems in the Middle East.

Take the situation in regards to Iran.
Ever wonder why Khomeinists and other Islamists are so disrespectful toward US and civilization. They take their clues form the European media who are totally against US, while their whole survival depends on US.  Just notice as demonstrated below, how LeftOver Marxists and SociNazis in Europe and US have ganged together against US.


&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/02/07/do0702.xml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/02/07/do0702.xml&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article1336313.ece&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article1336313.ece&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-weiss5feb05,0,4991100.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-weiss5feb05,0,4991100.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8655676&amp;top_story=1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8655676&amp;top_story=1&lt;/a&gt;

AP Report of junkies in UK:
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359782481&amp;pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359782481&amp;pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/04/wiran04.xml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/04/wiran04.xml&lt;/a&gt;

Sunday Times:
&lt;a href=&quot;http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&amp;y=2007&amp;m=02&amp;d=04&amp;a=3&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&amp;y=2007&amp;m=02&amp;d=04&amp;a=3&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2004169,00.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2004169,00.html&lt;/a&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With these many article more or less against US in the media, I wonder how Pentagon can effectively deals with the problems in the Middle East.</p>
<p>Take the situation in regards to Iran.<br />
Ever wonder why Khomeinists and other Islamists are so disrespectful toward US and civilization. They take their clues form the European media who are totally against US, while their whole survival depends on US.  Just notice as demonstrated below, how LeftOver Marxists and SociNazis in Europe and US have ganged together against US.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/02/07/do0702.xml" rel="nofollow">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/02/07/do0702.xml</a></p>
<p><a href="http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article1336313.ece" rel="nofollow">http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article1336313.ece</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-weiss5feb05,0,4991100.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail" rel="nofollow">http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-weiss5feb05,0,4991100.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8655676&amp;top_story=1" rel="nofollow">http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8655676&#038;top_story=1</a></p>
<p>AP Report of junkies in UK:<br />
<a href="http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359782481&amp;pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull" rel="nofollow">http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359782481&#038;pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/04/wiran04.xml" rel="nofollow">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/04/wiran04.xml</a></p>
<p>Sunday Times:<br />
<a href="http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&amp;y=2007&amp;m=02&amp;d=04&amp;a=3" rel="nofollow">http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&#038;y=2007&#038;m=02&#038;d=04&#038;a=3</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2004169,00.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2004169,00.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

