Random Politics & Religion #00

Mostly because they are A) talking more about religion and B) making fun of Arnold's speech.

same, but for different reasons.

A top U.S. intelligence official confirmed that the Pentagon's inspector general is investigating complaints that senior officials manipulated intelligence reports to create a more optimistic narrative on the fight against ISIS.

Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), said Thursday that "the investigation will play itself out" and help "figure out if we did something wrong."

"We will be better as a result of a very open investigation," Stewart said in Washington while sitting on a conference panel with the directors of the CIA, NSA and FBI.

The Daily Beast reported earlier in the day that 50 intelligence analysts at U.S. Central Command, some of them officially employed by the DIA, are supporting a complaint lodged by two senior intelligence analysts.

The analysts allege that senior officials are manipulating their intelligence reports to better fit the public frame that the U.S. is making steady progress in the fight against ISIS and other terrorist groups in the region -- resulting in inaccurate information reaching the highest levels of government, including President Barack Obama.

Stewart did not comment on the merits of the complaint or the details of the inspector general's ongoing investigation, but he stressed that intelligence analysis is neither "clean" nor a "science," but rather more of an "art."

"When you go through the analytic process, it is a pretty rough-and-tumble debate," Stewart said. "You have this clash, this tension among the analysts, about what it really means, and at some point at the end of the day someone has to say this is the best judgment of what the data says and present that to our decision-makers."

Stewart also appeared to dismiss any suggestion that intelligence reports would be altered to fit a certain political frame, insisting that military intelligence officials "take great pride in the idea of speaking truth to power."

"We don't serve a president, we serve the president, whoever that is," Stewart said.

White House and other administration officials in recent months have heartily touted U.S. gains in the fight against ISIS. Retired Gen. John Allen, the top official charged with coordinating the ISIS campaign, claimed in one such characterization in July that the group "is losing."

But the tone and substance of assessments by intelligence agencies of the fight against ISIS, including from the CIA and the military, haven't all been rosy.

"The issue against ISIL has reached a phase of what I would describe as tactically stalemated a bit. You know, there haven't been any dramatic gains on either side," Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey said Thursday while traveling in Europe, using another acronym for ISIS.

When it came to the long-term future of Syria and Iraq, where ISIS has seized swaths of territory, the intelligence officials at Thursday's conference -- the 2015 Intelligence and National Security Summit -- were downright pessimistic.

When asked whether they could imagine a future in which Syria and Iraq could be reconstituted along the lines of their current official borders, the panelists stayed mum.

Stewart, the DIA chief, said he had a "tough time seeing it (Iraq) come back together" and that while the U.S. would "like to see Iraq as an intact state," he said it would be hard to imagine the Kurds not wanting to preserve the autonomy they've gained as the Iraqi central government has faltered in the face of ISIS's offensive.

"I think the Middle East is going to be seeing change over the next decade or two that is going to make it look unlike it did a generation ago," CIA Director John Brennan said.

Several conference participants also echoed the comments on the importance of transparency made by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who spoke about NSA leaker Edward Snowden in addressing the forum the day before.

Snowden's leaks "forced some needed transparency," Clapper said Wednesday, though he also strongly criticized the "huge damage to our collection capabilities" that Snowden inflicted.

On Thursday, Robert Cardillo, director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, said the investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence reports was "healthy."

"Frankly, I'm more worried about the people who aren't coming forward," he said. "We've got to create the atmosphere that not only we accept it, but we expect it."

FBI Director James Comey stressed the importance of government accountability, opening the forum by saying "the American people should be skeptical of government power," but he also said he is "very concerned that that skepticism has bled over into cynicism."

But not all topics were on the table for discussion. Brennan flatly refused to discuss the controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server while secretary of state and whether classified information was sent over the unsecured system.

"I am not going to address that here ... I am not going to address any aspect of this," Brennan said, adding that it would be "inappropriate."

Comey would not comment on the ongoing federal investigation in connection with Clinton's server but said the FBI would be thoroughly independent in its investigation, calling the FBI "competent, independent" and "honest."

"We do all of our work that way, and we don't give a rip about politics," he said.

Well who the hell wants to import more refugees from the "religion of peace"?

Let them sort out their own problems.

I'm just trying not to care or let it bother me any more since I live, work, and bank/invest in countries that don't have these problems and take steps to curb any future problems and sometimes even come up with solutions that are usually rejected since it forces people to *gasp* work for a living.

Well who the hell wants to import more refugees from the "religion of peace"?

Let them sort out their own problems.

because who doesn't want their children growing up in a war zone? Builds character.

Yes, people shouldn't flee from a war they don't care about, and they should certainly stick around if they've got children, because who doesn't want their children growing up in a war zone? Builds character.

You're telling me you'd stay? Call me a skeptic.

There's about 20,000 or so people that have passed here through Serbia each day that could have told you that the campaign against ISIS hasn't done anything. The only thing it has done is increase the bombings of the civilian population and forcing more people to run towards Europe. Although the refugees aren't happy with just escaping a war zone, hence their goal of heading to Germany and Sweden.

I love watching the arguments over migration/refugees/illegal immigration. Particular the stance that implies if are against letting tens of thousands (and now in the hundreds of thousands) of people in a place that either can barely support its own population, doesn't have the resources to support such a huge mass migration of people, or simply doesn't have the type of economy that can handle it - you are automatically labeled as xenophobic.

The only country that comes even close to such a label is Slovakia. And even there it's more about being to assimilate people culturally.

Oh well, not my problem. Glad I don't live in places that are ruled by the false feels of liberalism. In America, it's purely used a political move. Democrats don't actually care about them. They just like to use them as political leverage, and it's working quite well. Anyone who speaks up against letting illegal immigrants in, boom! Xenophobic, isolationist, racist, or whatever label makes you feel self righteous when talking about 'the other side.'

Forget the current day (it's not the early 1900s when immigrants were a staple of the US economy, that time has long passed) implications of not giving a damn about your current population and the economy wobbling on a one leg that's about to collapse. Nope, it's a feels economy now. Well have fun with that. How long do you think it will be sustainable to have less and less people working while the majority of people live off the government?

Thankfully I live in place where there is no welfare state. You're expected to work and make your own way through life. Hell, even some Serbian officials proposed a solution for some refugees where they would have gotten their own land down south to revitalize some of the abandoned villages down there. The only catch was they had to work for their money and live off the land, meaning farming, livestock, etc. Nope, they declined the offer and wanted the free stuff promised by Germany and Sweden. That's why I feel sorry for the people in those countries. A noble idea to temporary help people out is about to come back to bite them in a huge way. Unfettered welfare...

Oh well, good luck with all that everyone. Keep on demonizing anyone who dares speak up about the problems of mass migration to any place that can't support them.

The U.S. needs immigrants like it needs another reality show.

I didn't even get into the other major problem of assimilation, but let the French tell you about that.

Ok rant over... just had to be said. Have fun!

That's besides the point.

It's no ones obligation to open the flood gates to refuges that cannot be properly vetted.

I wouldn't stay I'd do everything I could to flee. That's besides the point. It's no ones obligation to open the flood gates to refuges that cannot be properly vetted. We did that in Boston, and still do. One time it ultimately led to a boy and his older brother bombing the Boston marathon.

Don't assume that the biggest advocates of illegal immigration have any desire to preserve the culture through assimilation. many want the culture destroyed and see no value in it.

So two kids - who were by all accounts pretty Americanized - get violent and that's an excuse to condemn thousands of unrelated, innocent people, including a large number of children, to a pointless war they're not invested in?

Usually people dress their fear and xenophobia up a little better than that, so kudos to you for honesty, if not basic human compassion.

Calling for vetted people coming into this country or any country for that matter is not xenophobic. How many homeless people do you bring home for a hot meal? How come? Would it be because you might think it to be risky? Gosh that's mighty ill compassionate and xenophobic of you.

Nausi doesn't strike me as someone who is advocating for thousands and thousands of homeless people and giving them free stuff paid for by people who can barely support themselves.

Very valuable lesson in there somewhere.

Too bad you've probably utterly failed to learn it and, likely, you've taken entirely the wrong thing away from the situation and transferred the bitterness of one situation's unfortunate outcome to color your entire view of life and society.

Too bad you've probably utterly failed to learn it and, likely, you've taken entirely the wrong thing away from the situation and transferred the bitterness of one situation's unfortunate outcome to color your entire view of life and society.

There are so many ways to get out of homelessness, it's unreal. People just have to have the want to get away from all the free stuff they get for not working.....

Are we talking about clochards? Cause if so this doesn't make any sense to me.