In April 2006, the annual "Patterns of Global Terrorism" National Intelligence Estimate report was released to Congressional leaders. Both Democrats and Republicans had access to its findings, although -- because it contains classified information like operatives' names and methods -- the report was not made available to the public.

Yet while the Right wages war on terrorists and their supporters, the Left continues to wage war on President Bush. Instead of admitting that our own intelligence services disagree with their chosen position, the Democrats have continued to do everything possible to undermine public support for the Iraq war as well as every method used to stop terrorism. Their success in the 2006 election depends upon failure for America.

About five months after it was released, someone leaked a few choice -- but hardly representative -- sentences of the classified NIE to the NY Times and the Washington Post. "Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat," screamed the New York Times, quoting anonymous officials. The Washington Post chimed in with, "Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Hurting U.S. Terror Fight." Meanwhile, the main story on CNN's web site was, "Dems: Leaked Iraq report shows need for new direction." As usual, none of the major news agencies or Democratic politicians seemed concerned about the fact that classified information was leaked, as long as the information could be used against the Bush administration.

"The intelligence community -- all 16 agencies -- believes the war in Iraq has fueled terrorism," said Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV). Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) called the report a "devastating and authoritative analysis of the Bush administration's failures in Iraq," and accused the President of following "a failed stay-the-course strategy that America's intelligence community has concluded makes America less safe." Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) said that the "the April classified national intelligence estimate assessing the impact of Iraq on the global war on terror only adds more urgency to the importance of changing course in Iraq." Clinton also attacked "a rubber-stamp Congress that continually supports a failed policy in Iraq, and now, as we can tell from what's been leaked about the NIE, a failing policy in terms of containing, deterring and defeating the terrorist leaders and operatives in the global war on terror."

But that's not what the NIE says at all. In fact, it barely mentions Iraq.

The Democrats have apparently hung their collective hat on the following lines: "We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere. ... The Iraq conflict has become the 'cause celebre' for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement." They deliberately ignored the very next line: "Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

In essence, the latest NIE concluded that the aggressive global campaign against terrorism has weakened al-Qaeda, that terrorist movements -- while still dangerous -- lack cohesive leadership and strategy, and that the fight in Iraq has become a do-or-die situation for the terrorists. If we complete our mission there, the terrorists will suffer a crushing defeat. If, on the other hand, the terrorists can be perceived as having driven us out, radical Islam will flourish.

In other words, it says pretty much what members of the Bush administration, as well as most Republicans and Conservatives, have been saying all along.

Another line the Democrats declined to quote: "United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa'ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qa'ida will continue to pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist organization."  Of course, why would they want to let the public know that a) al-Qaeda has been seriously damaged and that b) the threat of terrorism is real?

National security and the lives of innocent Americans are merely pieces in a political game. Democratic politicians, knowing that the report actually said something quite different, shamelessly lied about the report's conclusions just to attack President Bush, erode support for the fight in Iraq, and convince voters to put them in power in November. 

Even after the report's key judgments were declassified, they continue to lie about its conclusions. "[A]s the (National Intelligence Estimate) indicates, his failed policies have made America less safe and spawned terrorism, not decreased it," said Karen Finney, spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee, on 28 September 2006 -- two days after President Bush declassified the report. That's a bit like blaming the 1942 Allied invasion of North Africa (countries that never attacked us!), which doubtless resulted in increased German recruitment, for "spawning" more Nazis. Finney also said, "Democrats will be tough and smart, and will actually fight the terrorists, not leave them to plan future attacks."

Of course, Democrats won't fight them by tapping phone calls to and from known terrorists without asking a judge's permission, they won't fight them by allowing law enforcement agencies to share information, they won't fight them by interrogating them to find out what they know, and they won't fight them by preventing them from taking over Iraq to use as a base from which to control the Middle East. How they will fight terrorism, the Democrats have yet to say.

But at least we know they'll be "tough and smart," which will no doubt impress the terrorists.