[vaj3k]

Bush: Insurgents in Iraq same as 9/11 attackers Nick Juliano
Published: Thursday July 12, 2007 reddit_url=window.location.href reddit_title='Bush: Insurgents in Iraq same as 9/11 attackers'
Print This Email This
President Bush, defending his troop surge in Iraq, insisted Thursday that the insurgents attacking US troops in Iraq "are the same ones who attacked us on Sept. 11."
Bush was speaking at a White House press conference on the same day an interim progress report on his troop surge in Iraq was released. Asked for proof of the connection between insurgents in Iraq and the 9/11 hijackers, Bush said both had pledged their allegiance to Osama bin Laden.
"The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq are the ones who attacked us on Sept. 11," Bush said.
The president was responding to a question from NBC correspondent David Gregory, who asked why Americans shouldn't believe he is "stubborn or in denial." Gregory was referencing a report in Thursday's Washington Post that indicated CIA Director Michael Hayden saw as "irreversible" the lack of progress in Iraq.
Facing a new report out today on the progress of his troop surge, Bush downplayed the fact that the report shows Iraqi lawmakers are making "satisfactory" progress on less than half of the 18 benchmarks that are required related to the troop buildup. The president reminded reporters that the buildup was just completed within the last month, and he tried to urge more patience in the war's fifth year.
Bush said the report shows the Iraqi government has made satisfactory progress on eight benchmarks, unsatisfactory progress on eight more and mixed results on two.
Democrats used the occasion of the progress report's release to criticize Bush's war policy.
"Does this White House think that we don't know how to turn on our televisions?" asked Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, a Democratic presidential candidate, in a prepared statement. "Don't tell us we're making progress in Iraq when the last three months have been some of the deadliest since this war began for our brave troops who have sacrificed so much. And don't tell us it's progress when the Iraqi leadership has done nothing – nothing – to take the political steps necessary to end their civil war."
During the press conference, Bush acknowledged that public opinion is turning agains the war in Iraq, but he continued to insist that he believed the fight was winnable.
"There's war fatigue in America," Bush said. "It's affecting our psychology ... it's an ugly war."
Bush insisted progress was being made in Iraq, several times invoking Anbar Provence, before continuing to try to tie the Iraq war to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
"Al Qaeda in Iraq has pledged allegiance to Osama bin Laden," Bush said. "We need to take al Qaeda in Iraq seriously just like we need to take al Qaeda anywhere in the world seriously."
Bush also refused to rule out committing more troops to Iraq in the future, saying he would not publicly speculate about what he will do when Gen. David Petraeus delivers a final report on the surge's progress in September.
"I'm not going to answer your question," Bush told a reporter who asked about the possibilty of sending more troops to Iraq.
As Bush tried to leave the press conference, a reporter called out a question about a new intelligence report that shows al Qaeda is gaining strength and is stronger now than at any time since 2001.
Bush said it "is simply not the case" that al Qaeda is stronger now than it was before the Sept. 11 attacks, although he asserted the terror group to defend some of his more controvercial programs.
"No question al Qaeda is dangerous ... that's why we need terrorist surveillance programs," Bush said, in an apparent reference to his warrantless wiretapping program.
Bush's double-take was a one-time deal, though. As he left a second time, a reporter tried to get in one last question.
"Is bin Laden alive?" the reporter asked, as Bush continued to leave the room without offering an answer.
The following video is from MSNBC's News Live broadcast on July 12, and contains clips from press conference edited by David Edwards:

[MrPositive]

If you want people to read this stuff you need to break it up and format it.

Simply cut and pasting from the web makes it hard on the eyes.

And you put up a lot of threads.

A lot of stuff that isn't really worth its own thread.

You should post shit like this on someone elses thread to point out how Bush is a douche, like we didn't already know anyway, but to prove your points in already ongoing discussions.

This constant spamming of the board just annoys people and your threads die quickly.

Just suggesting a different way to express your enthusiastic distaste for our Executive branch, which I share with you btw.

[clmetal]

he's right about your threads - despite the colors, pictures and formats, they are hard to read. I also find it strange you put the titles in glossy black when the background is matte black

I saw the news say yesterday that the military said 90% of the suicide bombers in Iraq are foreign-born, and that 70% of the foreign-born insurgents crossed the Syrian border (latter is not that relevant). So his comments are reasonable. Our ability/inability to win is a different matter.

[MrPositive]

Good article from the CS Monitor about who is leading the insurgent fight in Iraq according to the new security assesment.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0712/p99s04-duts.html

The authors of the report.... also point out that most Iraqi insurgents are fighting for nationalist or local reasons, not ideological ones close to Al Qaeda's. They also point out the differences between Al Qaeda in Iraq and major insurgent groups like the IAI.

Foreign jihadists have flocked to Iraq, but it should be recalled that Iraq has never had a robust Islamist, let alone jihadist, movement. Moreover there is no evidence that jihadist ideas hold any great appeal for Iraq's Sunni population, which provides the bulk of the insurgency's rank-and-file fighters.

An April 5 statement by the IAI illustrates both the intermingling of insurgent and jihadist media, and a sharp polemic between two leading insurgent groups.

The IAI statement…. Criticized ISI/Al Qaeda for inflexible extremism, outright banditry, against civilians and attacks on insurgent groups that refuse to swear allegiance to the putative state.

The Washington Post reports that Central Intelligence Agency director Michael Hayden put Al Qaeda low on his list of concerns over Iraq in a meeting with members of the Iraq Study Group last November.

Hayden catalogued what he saw as the main sources of violence in this order: the insurgency, sectarian strife, criminality, general anarchy and, lastly, al-Qaeda. Though Hayden had listed al-Qaeda as the fifth most pressing threat in Iraq, Bush regularly lists al-Qaeda first.

[vaj3k]

Originally Posted by MrPositive

If you want people to read this stuff you need to break it up and format it.

Simply cut and pasting from the web makes it hard on the eyes.

And you put up a lot of threads.

A lot of stuff that isn't really worth its own thread.

You should post shit like this on someone elses thread to point out how Bush is a douche, like we didn't already know anyway, but to prove your points in already ongoing discussions.

This constant spamming of the board just annoys people and your threads die quickly.

Just suggesting a different way to express your enthusiastic distaste for our Executive branch, which I share with you btw.

Im sorry! I will take it on board and selectively post threads

[constitution]

i thought we were done with this................................ it was so peaceful for a while..

would someone care to do the honors of daying _ _ _ _/ _ _ ??

[kingstu]

Originally Posted by MrPositive

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0712/p99s04-duts.html

They put out a darn good publication.

[AZ BJJ]

Despite his constant outright assertions that in the run up to the war, they didn't claim that Iraq was linked to 9/11, Bush just can't get pass up the temptation to equate the war in Iraq with the "War on Terror." It's a pathetic, yet still somewhat effective (in some circles) means to drum up support for un extremely unpopular occupation. The simple facts are these:

1. No AQ elements in Iraq before March 2003
2. Some AQ elements in Iraq now
3. The majority of the violence in Iraq has nothing to do with AQ

But such facts don't help the President's cause, so he'll continue to skew information and put spin on news stories and political reports.

[Diomedes]

Originally Posted by constitution

i thought we were done with this................................ it was so peaceful for a while..

would someone care to do the honors of daying _ _ _ _/ _ _ ??

vaj3k/dr!

[Stoic1]

Revisionist history has already begun. The citizens of the United States are letting it happen. Nobody seems to have called bullshit on this obvious lie. In 100 years our great grandchildren may believe that we fought in Iraq to kill the people who perpetrated the 9/11 attack. It may even be in the textbooks they read at school.