The
NYTIMES and
WaPo are both reporting that the recent Al Qaeda news is actually old news retrieved recently:
Most of the al Qaeda surveillance of five financial institutions that led to a new terrorism alert Sunday was conducted before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and authorities are not sure whether the casing of the buildings has continued, numerous intelligence and law enforcement officials said yesterday.
More than half a dozen government officials interviewed yesterday, who declined to be identified because classified information is involved, said that most, if not all, of the information about the buildings seized by authorities in a raid in Pakistan last week was about three years old, and possibly older.
This creates more questions than it answers.
Has Al Qaeda been marginalized bigtime since there have been no attacks at these financial centers? Or, since there's been no attacks has our government created more fear than necessary?
But the BIGGEST question is clearly this: Has the Bush war in Iraq diverted resources away from Pakistan and Afghanistan and left us more vulnerable? I mean, simply put, over the last month you've heard reports that US has pressured Pakistan to find Al Qaeda in the northwest provinces of Pakistan, and they have agreed to do so. Also, the attacks against civilians and troops have increased in Afghanistan.
Last time I checked we've discovered no information in Iraq to help us at home, and that's putting aside the issue of increased hatred. So, if we have just found information in Pakistan that is supposedly intel that specifies attacks against the U.S., and the info is ages old, doesn't this mean that Iraq really was a major diversion from the real war on terror which is Pakistan and Afghanistan? I mean, be serious, Pakistan becomes more vigilant in the face of the AQ Khan incident and the Bush Admin pressure to step up efforts, and in no time we find dated information that'll supposedly make us safer.
I think getting this information 1-2 years ago would have been prudent.