White House To Review Terror Policies Amid A New, "Amorphous" Al-Quaeda (moved from ATSNN), page 1

posted on May, 29 2005 @ 12:29 PM

link

White House policy on the War on Terror is now being subjected to review. The review has been made necassary due to the resiliency of the Al-Quaeda leadership. A new policy is set to be drawn up to address these concerns.

www.washingtonpost.com
President Bush's top adviser on terrorism, Frances Fragos Townsend, said in an interview that the review is needed to take into account the "ripple effect" from years of operations targeting al Qaeda leaders such as Khalid Sheik Mohammed, arrested for planning the Sept. 11 attacks, and his recently detained deputy. "Naturally, the enemy has adapted," she said. "As you capture a Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an Abu Faraj al-Libbi raises up. Nature abhors a vacuum."

The review marks the first ambitious effort since the immediate aftermath of the 2001 attacks to take stock of what the administration has called the "global war on terrorism" -- or GWOT -- but is now considering changing to recognize the evolution of its fight. "What we really want now is a strategic approach to defeat violent extremism," said a senior administration official who described the review on the condition of anonymity because it is not finished. "GWOT is catchy, but there may be a better way to describe it, and those are things that ought to be incumbent on us to look at."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

The entire War On Terror has been the subject of much discussion and speculation. From Bin Laden's oil connections with the Bush family to the CIA and many intelligence discrepancies, our government has been keenly hopping from one explanation to another. An analysis of the headlines in the last few years would show that Al-Quaeda and terrorism were the target, only to make way for Iraq and it's obvious terror affiliations. Amidst failure(in the public eye) and success(of what nature?), the name of the game has been to keep the news rolling with distractions, always waking up to point the finger in a new direction.

And now the White House is changing it's policy, albiet a necassary move, however ill-defined as I'm sure the foremost literature will read, "In the pursuit of freedom...." Granted, I accept that there are people across the globe and even in our own backyard who have it in for us, but in light of the new Patriot Act and the governments insistence that they need access to the private records of citizens, regardless of the criminal nature of the individual, I have to believe in the ulterior motives of a government body that gets paid more than I do to, essentially, tell me why I need to be controlled more and more with each passing year.

White House Policy with regards to the War On Terror should be simple and straight forward........We Don't Like It and We're Going To Fight It. But beyond the intense debate on the hows and whos of the fight, maybe we should reassess who in fact is included in the term, "we."

clearmind

posted on May, 29 2005 @ 01:19 PM

link

'violent extremism'...wow, that's sort of a broad paintbrush...anything to do with the fbi report on domestic terrorist threat? hmmmmmmmmmmmm

MemoryShock

posted on May, 29 2005 @ 01:29 PM

link

A very broad paintbrush........kind of par the course for government communications.....they use a lot of words to say, for all intents and purposes, nothing.