NY Daily News Misleads About Bush Linking Iraq and 9/11

Photo of Warner Todd Huston.
By Warner Todd Huston | July 25, 2007 - 09:31 ET

The New York Daily News perpetrated an interesting, yet subtly misleading headline about president Bush's Charleston, South Carolina speech on Al Qaeda in Iraq today in theirs titled "W still ties Iraq, 9/11." Following the left's playbook of claiming Bush has illicitly linked Saddam's Iraq to 9/11 their headline made it seem as if Bush, indeed, "still ties" 9/11 to Iraq.

It is, of course, a false claim that Bush linked Iraq to 9/11 either then OR now, but the New York Daily News doesn't seem too interested in the truth. And for the headline to say "still ties" they are certainly saying that Bush is using past tense verbiage. But, for the most part, Bush is clearly talking present tense in his speech and he still never linked "Iraq" to "9/11" in the way the Daily News headline seems to claim.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

The defeatist's of the left have always claimed that Bush said Saddam Huessein was responsible for 9/11 and that he used that claim to invade and pursue regime change in that oppressed nation. But, there is no speech in which Bush claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11... he just never said it. This is a lie that the left has promulgated since Bush announced we were going into Iraq. As the saying goes, "A lie will go round the world while truth is still pulling its boots on", and this "Bush lied" lie has practically won the footrace with the truth.

Contrary to what the Daily News is trying to mislead everyone into thinking, if one actually reads Bush's July 24th speech he still did not really link "9/11" to "Iraq." What Bush really did was link al Qaeda, the al Qaeda that is in Iraq today, to the same network controlled by Osamma bin Ladden, the very same bin Ladden that did take credit for perpetrating 9/11. Bush's entire focus in his speech was on al Qaeda in Iraq today, not the Iraq of 9/11/2001.

In the Daily News' phrasing, though, Bush is talking about the Iraq of 9/11, not the Iraq of today.

Trying again to wrest control of the Iraq war debate from the Democrats, President Bush used a friendly military audience yesterday to repeat claims of a link between the 9/11 attacks and insurgents in Iraq.

The Daily News purposefully focuses on the wrong thing here. They focus on 9/11 as if it was Bush's main point. But it was not as a reading of his actual speech easily reveals. That the al Qaeda we face in Iraq today is the same al Qaeda that Osamm bin Ladden controls and controlled then was the point and 9/11 was far more tangential to his main point.

As it happens, it is the Daily News that makes the "ties" and not Bush!

Here is what Bush actually said about al Qaeda, Iraq and 9/11:

Nearly six years after the 9/11 attacks, America remains a nation at war. The terrorist network that attacked us that day is determined to strike our country again, and we must do everything in our power to stop them.

...The key theater in this global war is Iraq. Our troops are serving bravely in that country. They're opposing ruthless enemies, and no enemy is more ruthless in Iraq than al Qaeda.

...There's also a debate about al Qaeda's role in Iraq. Some say that Iraq is not part of the broader war on terror. They complain when I say that the al Qaeda terrorists we face in Iraq are part of the same enemy that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001. They claim that the organization called al Qaeda in Iraq is an Iraqi phenomenon, that it's independent of Osama bin Laden and that it's not interested in attacking America.

That would be news to Osama bin Laden. He's proclaimed that the "third world war is raging in Iraq." Osama bin Laden says, "The war is for you or for us to win. If we win it, it means your defeat and disgrace forever." I say that there will be a big defeat in Iraq and it will be the defeat of al Qaeda.

Notice that Bush's emphasis was all present tense. Notice he said that the al Qaeda in Iraq is but "part of" the same terror network. But, even as it is "part of" he did not say that the al Qaeda branch in Iraq CAUSED 9/11.

As you can see, Bush does not link 9/11 and Iraq with al Qaeda as if the 9/11 were planned and controlled from Iraq as the Daily News would have you believe. What he did was say that the al Qaeda that planned 9/11 has a branch in Iraq and always has had one in Iraq. You see, Bush didn't just link the al Qaeda branch in Iraq to 9/11 directly at all other than to say they are part of the same general movement.

Bush went on to give a comprehensive history of al Qaeda in Iraq as well as a detailed description of how we have repeatedly cut the head off that snake. He clearly demonstrates that al Qaeda is in Iraq and that they wish to make Iraq a major battlefield of the war on terror.

But, the New York Daily News isn't done getting their digs in at Bush just yet. After improperly claiming that Bush linked 9/11 to Iraq, they next go on to attack where Bush gave the speech, as if the locale of the speech itself made Bush's facts somehow wrong or suspect. The Daily News tries to create an air that the military audience itself somehow makes the speech illegitimate.

Observers have noted that Bush seeks out military audiences the way President Richard Nixon traveled abroad to escape fallout from the Vietnam War and Watergate scandal.

"He spends almost all his time speaking in front of friendly audiences, and there is no more friendly an audience for George Bush than the military," said Hunter College political scientist Andrew Polski.

Shows what they think of our military folks, doesn't it?

Naturally, they attribute this evil plan to that darn Karl Rove!

"It's part of the Rove-ian strategy of trying to control the message," Polski added, referring to Bush political guru Karl Rove.

So, to sum up the Daily News' lies, they want readers to think Bush linked Saddam's Iraq to 9/11 when he didn't and they want people to believe that just speaking before a military crowd makes a speech somehow wrong or a lie.

No, the New York Daily News has no agenda, eh? So much for "reporting" the news. Here we have another MSM outlet inventing it, instead.

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"But, there is no speech in

"But, there is no speech in which Bush claimed that Saddam was
responsible for 9/11... he just never said it. This is a lie that the
left has promulgated since Bush announced we were going into Iraq."

Oh? And who on the left ever alleged that Bush said Saddam was "responsible for" 9/11? Certainly many on the left have reminded us that Bush and his administration worked overtime in falsely suggesting that Saddam was CONNECTED to 9/11. But that is very different from "responsible for."

 

da left

NO the lefties have said that Bush brought down the towers

I agree, the main thrust of

I agree, the main thrust of the left's argument is not so much that Bush said Iraq was responsible for 9/11, but rather that a major connection existed.  I will admit that this connection probably was not as strong as Bush was trying for here, but he certainly did not intentionally lie us into a war.  Saddam= WMD, Iraq= Saddam, Iraq= Terrorists.... ergo Terrorists=WMD, seems rational and in the wake of 9/11, something needed to be done.  What has happened here is the media along with fringe left and even many mainstream left elements have spun and spun and spun lie after lie after lie until their version is heard which includes things such as "Bush destroyed the towers, Bush lied, Bush fired everyone who was against him, Bush hates blacks, Bush is listening to your phone calls, Bush is watching your home...etc."  Can you imagine on September 12, 2001 someone saying, "Stop the presses, it was our President who killed all those people!!!"  No, they all pointed to the government as "not doing enough" to prevent this.  So now nearly six years later and no USS Missouri moment, we have a press who, like the terrorists, sees the opportunity to press ahead with their own sick agenda.

Actually, PLENTY of people

Actually, PLENTY of people on the left have claimed that Bush tied the two together. You obviously didn't do your homework.

http://thinkprogress...

http://www.airameric...

http://digg.com/poli...

liberals that lie

The REAL lie is getting so dangerous that a serviceman is shot by a peacenik. The time has come for the administration to call out the press before American borm terrorism builds momentum. The press is at war with Bush but civilians are going to suffer. The hate can be stopped by the truth. George should start with the Al Gore speech berating Bush 41 as a back drop for a speech laying out ALL facts on ALL attacks on America since the gulf war

Look madpole, nobody likes

Look madpole, nobody likes a grammar nerd but redundency like "liberals that lie" is just too good to pass up goofing on.

As for the actual point of your post there, I couldn't agree more. I wish Bush would defend himself. I don't kow if he believes that he shouldn't sink to that level but HELLO... they are dragging it to a level far below what you could ever.

You can't save the Earth unless You're willing to make other people sacrifice. Dogbert the Green Consultant summing up the elite left.

Family ties

I have family members who are not liars but ARE stupid enough to believe the CIA brought the towers down and quote Michael Moore. I love them and never considered them stupid until we talk about the war. I womder what they are feeding them in Detroit and they wonder why I live in Florida.

  Bush, and the

Bush, and the Republican party as a whole, not defending themselves is the primary reason the Dems are in power right now, and why the libs are so vocal with the MSM proudly waving the bias flag. I personally can't understand it. It's not in the nature of politicians in general to take personal attacks lying down as has been the case for about the last five years.

The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers

Why is this surprising? The

Why is this surprising? The "Bush Lied" mantra is how liberals identify each other.

Joe meets Fred in the street, decides Fred may be "one of us" and greets him with, "Good morning. Bush Lied. Nice weather today".

Fred replies, "Good morning to you. Yes, the weather is nice today, but it might rain later. Bush lied", followed by the secret handshake.

Contact made. Identity verified.

The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers

Contact made. Identity


Contact made. Identity verified...

They then French kiss, and go on their way....

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

I have been waiting for

I have been waiting for someone to post something lending itself to what Giuliana just endorse. The dems obviously are backing away from this but it makes good sense; Protect citizens from being sued for reporting potential terrorism-related activity.

If you see French kissing taking place, pull out your cell phone...

JDW

News media: Scoreboard for terrorists

 

The MSM goes out of it's

The MSM goes out of it's way to explain what Democrats really meant, when their statements are criticized by Republicans. Then, they go out of  their way to mischaracterize Republican comments, doing the Democrats' work for them. Jeez, go figure...

 

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

Even if iron-clad evidence

Even if iron-clad evidence suddenly appeared that directly tied Saddam to 9-11, the Bush haters would never believe it.

Hell, photos could surface showing him shaking hands with Mohammed Atta, and the BDS people would cry "Photoshop!"

After we invaded Iraq in 2003, our soldiers came across one of those pro-Saddam paintings that were on many buildings there. This one showed a smiling Saddam with the Twin Towers burning in the background. Coincidence?

Bush and MSM

Bush needs to come out at least once a week until

the next election and make strong speeches like

this one to pound into their block heads that

AlQueda is the enemy and they want to destroy

us!!!!! 

Bush speaks in front of

Bush speaks in front of "friendly audiences" ha!
friendly? they're SCREENED! can't get in unless you're a supporter! makes for a good photo-op, don't ya know

and give me a break, Bush & Co ALL ran around prior to the invasion of Iraq hinting at links between Iraq and 9/11, over and over again

I hope you don't think this

I hope you don't think this is anything new. The closest I've ever come to being arrested in my life was the US Secret Service in Miami under Bill Clinton, at a similar (but stuffed with Democrats instead of Republicans, as if that makes any difference!) event. The only reason they didn't arrest me and instead only "detained" me (means no handcuffs, but you still get a ride) is that I knew a police officer's name & badge number, and the officer had ordered me to do what I was doing when the SS objected!
JMR

LOL. Hillary's audiences are

LOL. Hillary's audiences are all screened too. What's your point?

As for "Bushco" people all running around prior to 2003 claiming Iraq was tied to 9/11, please quote some of them for us, with credible cites and links. Key word: CREDIBLE.

I bet there won't be any

I bet there won't be any reply here from KittyLee.  Wonder why! 

Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar. 

this is just 2002 - would

this is just 2002 - would you like more? I've got more

2002

"The regime has longstanding and continuing ties to terrorist groups, and there are Al Qaida terrorists inside Iraq." - George W. Bush Delivers Weekly Radio Address, White House (9/28/2002) - BushOnIraq.com

"We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases." - President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat; Remarks by the President on Iraq, White House (10/7/2002) - Whitehouse.gov

"I think they're both equally important, and they're both dangerous. And as I said in my speech in Cincinnati, we will fight if need be the war on terror on two fronts. We've got plenty of capacity to do so. And I also mentioned the fact that there is a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. The war on terror, Iraq is a part on the war on terror. And he must disarm." - President Condems Attack in Bali, White House (10/14/2002) - Whitehouse.gov

"This is a man who has got connections with Al Qaida. Imagine a terrorist network with Iraq as an arsenal and as a training ground, so that a Saddam Hussein could use this shadowy group of people to attack his enemy and leave no fingerprint behind. He's a threat." - Remarks by the President in Texas Welcome, White House (11/4/2002) - Whitehouse.gov

"He's a threat because he is dealing with Al Qaida. In my Cincinnati speech I reminded the American people, a true threat facing our country is that an Al Qaida-type network trained and armed by Saddam could attack America and leave not one fingerprint." - President Outlines Priorities, White House (11/7/2002) - BushOnIraq.gov

"He's had contacts with Al Qaida. Imagine the scenario where an Al Qaida-type organization uses Iraq as an arsenal, a place to get weapons, a place to be trained to use the weapons. Saddam Hussein could use surrogates to come and attack people he hates." - Remarks by the President at Arkansas Welcome, White House (11/4/2002) - BushOnIraq.com

2003

"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help develop their own." - President Delivers "State of the Union", White House (1/28/2003) - Whitehouse.gov

"Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses, and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other planes -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known." - President Delivers "State of the Union", White House (1/28/2003) - Whitehouse.gov

"Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. We also know that Iraq is harboring a terrorist network, headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner." - President Bush: "World Can Rise to This Moment", White House (2/6/2003) - Whitehouse.gov

Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraq intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. And an al Qaeda operative was sent to Iraq several times in the late 1990s for help in aquiring poisons and gases. We also know that Iraq is harboring a terrorist network headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner." - President's Radio Address, White House (2/8/2003) - BushOnIraq.com

"He has trained and financed al Qaeda-type organizations before, al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations." - President George Bush Discusses Iraq in National Press Conference, White House (3/6/2003) - BushOnIraq.com

"The regime . . . has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda. The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other." President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours, White House (3/17/2003) -BushOnIraq.com

"The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more." - President Bush Announces Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended, White House (5/1/2003) - BushOnIraq.com

"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men -- the shock troops of a hateful ideology -- gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the 'beginning of the end of America.' By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed." - President Bush Announces Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended, White House (5/1/2003) - BushOnIraq.com

"this is just 2002 - would


"this is just 2002 - would you like more? I've got more"

None of which shows Bush and company tying Iraq to 9/11.

funny...looks like 2003 also

Seems funny, but it looks like it is more than just 2002, but also 2003.

I want more

Give me more links that demonstrates where President Bush said that Iraq was involved with the 9-11 attacks. Remember, those would be different that saying that Al Qaeda had a presence in Iraq, etc.

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.
Thompson/Rice

A fine example of how the

A fine example of how the "minds" of lib***ls just don't work.

 

Check out my latest YouTube...but only if you support the troops and their mission: Better Men Than Me/The Battle For Fallujah

First of all, you quoted

First of all, you quoted two whole sources! I'm convinced! [sarc]

How about these:

"Ten years after the Gulf War and Saddam is still there and still continues to stockpile weapons of mass destruction. Now there are suggestions he is working with al Qaeda, which means the very terrorists who attacked the United States last September may now have access to chemical and biological weapons." - James Rubin (President Clinton's State Department spokesman) 2002 http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/shows/saddam/   

"Every nation has to either be with us, or against us.  Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price." - Hillary Clinton 2001  http://www.wavsource.com/news/20010911a.htm

I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein.  ...  Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. - Nancy Pelosi 2002 http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=H7777&dbname=2002_record    

"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now -- a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. - Bill Clinton 1998 http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/

"[W]e have evidence of meetings between Iraqi officials and leaders of al Qaeda, and testimony that Iraqi agents helped train al Qaeda operatives to use chemical and biological weapons. We also know that al Qaeda leaders have been, and are now, harbored in Iraq. - Joseph Leiberman 2002 http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002391

The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards. But the path of inaction is far more dangerous. This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker. Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters. We cannot wait for such a terrible event -- or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse -- to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq." John Edwards 2002 http://edwards.senate.gov/statements/20020912_iraq.html   

"I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries.  I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."  - John Edwards 2002 http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0202/24/le.00.html  

"Others argue that if even our allies support us, we should not support this resolution because confronting Iraq now would undermine the long-term fight against terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. Yet, I believe that this is not an either-or choice. Our national security requires us to do both, and we can." - John Edwards 2002 http://edwards.senate.gov/statements/20021010_iraq.html  

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members... Hillary Clinton 2002 http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html  

Want more? 

My links make the same point yours do - that ALL of our elected officials made a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda. None of mine make an Iraq - 9/11 connection, as do none of yours (if anything, several of mine come much closer to said connection than any of yours). All the empty rhetoric and finger pointing from the left is so inane as to be laughable, if it wasn't so serious to the security of this nation. And for the MSM and the devout Dems to so completely ignore the disparity between what their leaders are saying today and what they said back then demonstrates a severe lack of independent thinking and/or blatant bias.

The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers

Okay, here's a litmus test

Okay, here's a litmus test to discern whether or not an individual is capable of analyzing facts and events to a proper conclusion...

Is O.J. guilty?

 If you say "no", you're disqualified from jury duty, voting, rabble-rousing and generally mouthing your hare-brained ideas, opinions and theories anyplace where there are impressionable young minds.

“In the violence and

“In the violence and instability following Saddam's fall, Zarqawi was able to expand dramatically the size, scope, and lethality of his operation. In 2004, Zarqawi and his terrorist group formally joined al Qaida, pledged allegiance to Osama bin Laden, and he promised to "follow his orders in jihad."If only Bush and Franks could have got Bin Laden, there would be no instability in Iraq and we wouldn’t have to be hearing Bush quote Bin Laden. Was Bush telling the truth when he said:

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)

Iraq was a terrorist state

Iraq was a terrorist state who supported and harbored terrorists and conducted state-sponsored terrorism.  They had used lethal weapons of mass destruction before on their own people and against Iranians during their war with them, and was widely believed to be developing and planning on using them again.  Iraq did not comply with any U.N. resolution involving inspections of possible wmd development or storage.   

    Saddam was Hitler, Jr., NOT George Bush and the US.  Keep playing with yourself, and rant about 9/11 crazy, unproven conspiracies though, and repeat the standard gone-off-on-a-tangent stuff that Bush supposedly did or didn't do, as the Left is apt to do, rather than focus on the reality of what we're up against.

   P.S.  bin Laden should have been dead in the 90s if the flaccid B.J. Clinton had done what he should have.  Don't hear you fretting about him, though.

Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar. 

Aaaa, J devin, I dont know

Aaaa, J devin, I dont know if you have heard or not, but, aaaa, Zarqawi is dead. Killing bin laden will not end al qaida. Thats like saying if we had killed little Ho in the RVN, it would have ended the NVA. Dont assume that everyone on here is as naive as you are.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Kinda like Pres

See, to use my southern terminology, y'all thought you got rid of Bush, but another Bush came along!  Heck, ain't there more of them Bushs out there!

I'm Bushed

NO MORE RINO'S PLEASE

Better than being Clint(o)oned!!

Better than being Clinto(o)ned!!

alas

True, I am a slow learner, complained about Jeb and got Charlie Crist! This bum thinks pollution will just hover over our state defiant of sea-breeze, or that we're stupid enough to believe goverment can assure insurance for homes that face hurricanes every decade or so. Will someone send the illegals home so I can work? Jeb tried his best to put me out of work but it was lawbreakers AND lawmakers that did me in. I'm the Madder Pole

This is what he said

To put it in better context

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

 Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.

And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom.

The problem

with this theory is that CAIR remains an UNIDICTED co-conspirator in raising money for terrorists.  Get the indictment already.

Support our Troops   

Isn't it amazing?

I think is is amazing how a person could take one line out of a paragraph and put a spin on it. Thanks for posting that bmovies.

 

Stop global warming. Ball-gag a liberal.

Good Bush quotes,

Good Bush quotes, unfortunately the Libs stop their ears when Bush speaks.  They've gone so far out on a limb claiming ridiculous things like "Bush is more evil than Bib Laden" that they can't afford to compare his words to Bin Laden's or to look at the facts of what's been going on since the 1970's. 

If they did that they might have to backtrack and thereby expose themselves as the irrational paranoics they are.  They can not bring themselves to do this, so they continue further out on that limb...  It's sad, really.

The Bush Administration and

The Bush Administration and Republicans sort of held their own through 2004. After that, the ferocity of the MSM/Dem onslaught was such that they just gave up and curled up in a ball and let the kicking continue, undefende and unanswered. Well actually, many Republican pols just cried "Uncle! You're right."... 

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb