WP
One year after the transfer of power in Iraq, President Bush found himself in a familiar, if unsettling, position last night, as he sought to reinvigorate public support for his policies in the face of almost daily suicide bombings and continued U.S. casualties that have called into question whether the administration has a workable strategy for success and exit there.
Bush signaled no shifts in policy, as Democrats such as Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) have called for in recent days. Instead his goal was to reeducate Americans on his view of the stakes involved in Iraq and the consequences to the Middle East and U.S. security if the insurgents prevail.
His clearest message was to argue anew that Iraq is the critical battle in a war against terrorists that began with the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. He made repeated references to those attacks to underscore that U.S. security depends on defeating the insurgency in Iraq. “After September the 11th, I made a commitment to the American people,” he said. “This nation will not wait to be attacked again. We will defend our freedom. We will take the fight to the enemy.” He then added, “Iraq is the latest battlefield in this war.”
Sept. 11 remains Bush’s most reliable argument with the public when he faces political headwinds; it gave him the highest-rated moments of his presidency and helped sustain him through a difficult reelection campaign. Surprisingly, given how effectively he has used the collective emotion of that day in the past, Sept. 11 has been largely missing in the administration’s discussions of Iraq this year.
His critics long have accused Bush of falsely drawing a connection between Iraq and Sept. 11 as a way to justify the original decision to launch the war in Iraq. That was not the point Bush made last night. Instead it was that Iraq has now become such a magnet for foreign terrorists that winning the current battle there is every bit as critical as was the fight to depose Saddam Hussein.
some more “peaceful muslims”
Justice Department attorney Paul Nishiie said Ahmed was linked to a terrorist group in Pakistan and had preached about attacking Americans a few months after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Ahmed was one of five men arrested during the FBI’s terrorism investigation. He was brought to Lodi in 2002 by Muhammed Adil Khan, the second imam held on immigration complaints. His son, Mohammad Hassan Adil, also is being held pending an immigration hearing in August.
Two other Lodi residents also are facing charges. Hamid Hayat, 22, is charged with two counts of lying to the FBI earlier this month when he said he did not attend a terrorism camp in Pakistan in 2003 and 2004. His father, Umer Hayat, 47, was indicted on a single count of lying to investigators by denying his son attended the camp.
1-My husband and I discussed the fact that one could bring up examples such as yours, but it falls on deaf ears. People have the memory of fleas, and fail to put the entire story together.
Last night I watched as Charlie Rangle told Alan and Sean that he remembers Rummie telling the American people that the war would take a few days, 2 weeks at the longest:shock: The sad fact is, there are people that believe him.