It's no longer "news" when President Bush links Iraq and 9/11, but his latest email (PDF) to the RNC list contains a particularly egregious example of the ways in which he seamlessly blends the two:
After the enemy attacked us, I vowed I would rally this nation and use our resources to protect you. And that is exactly what we have done. We have reformed our intelligence services to make sure we can find the enemy before they strike. We have fought to deny them safe haven in Afghanistan and Iraq so they cannot plan and plot again.
The fight for freedom in Iraq is the fight for the security of the United States of America and we must prevail. If we leave before the job is done, the enemy that attacked us would be emboldened.
For much more on the administration's use of this tactic, see All the President's Spin.
Now you're being a little silly. Where did President Bush say the people/organization that attacked us were in Iraq, or even if Afghanistan?
What is incontrovertible, is (1) that Al Qaida is responsible for the attacks and (2) that Al Qaida is in Iraq NOW. Why would we NOT want to fight Al Qaida wherever they are?
Posted by: David B. | September 27, 2007 at 05:00 PM
Brendan,
In your "particularly egregious example" could you point out exactly where Bush erred?
Are you saying Bush is claiming that the very individuals who planned and/or carried out 9-11 are those we are now fighting in Iraq? If so, where does he say this?
Or are you saying that, beyond the similarity in names, there is no connection among al Qaeda in Iraq, al Qaeda in Afghanistan, al Qaeda in Pakistan, al Qaeda in Saudi, al Qaeda in Egypt, and so on?
Posted by: ERF | October 01, 2007 at 05:35 AM