BUSH'S AMERICA: 100 PERCENT AL-QAIDA FREE SINCE 2001
by Ann Coulter
June 11, 2008

In a conversation recently, I mentioned as an aside what a great president George Bush has been and my friend was surprised. I was surprised that he was surprised.

I generally don't write columns about the manifestly obvious, but, yes, the man responsible for keeping Americans safe from another terrorist attack on American soil for nearly seven years now will go down in history as one of America's greatest presidents.

Produce one person who believed, on Sept. 12, 2001, that there would not be another attack for seven years, and I'll consider downgrading Bush from "Great" to "Really Good."

Merely taking out Saddam Hussein and his winsome sons Uday and Qusay (Hussein family slogan: "We're the Rape Room People!") constitutes a greater humanitarian accomplishment than anything Bill Clinton ever did -- and I'm including remembering Monica's name on the sixth sexual encounter.

But unlike liberals, who are so anxious to send American troops to Rwanda or Darfur, Republicans oppose deploying U.S. troops for purely humanitarian purposes. We invaded Iraq to protect America.

It is unquestionable that Bush has made this country safe by keeping Islamic lunatics pinned down fighting our troops in Iraq. In the past few years, our brave troops have killed more than 20,000 al-Qaida and other Islamic militants in Iraq alone. That's 20,000 terrorists who will never board a plane headed for JFK -- or a landmark building, for that matter.

We are, in fact, fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them at, say, the corner of 72nd and Columbus in Manhattan -- the mere mention of which never fails to enrage liberals, which is why you should say it as often as possible.

The Iraq war has been a stunning success. The Iraqi army is "standing up" (as they say), fat Muqtada al-Sadr --the Dr. Phil of Islamofascist radicalism -- has waddled off in retreat to Iran, and Sadr City and Basra are no longer war zones. Our servicemen must be baffled by the constant nay-saying coming from their own country.

The Iraqis have a democracy -- a miracle on the order of flush toilets in that godforsaken region of the world. Despite its newness, Iraq's democracy appears to be no more dysfunctional than one that would condemn a man who has kept the nation safe for seven years while deifying a man who has accomplished absolutely nothing in his entire life except to give speeches about "change."

(Guess what Bill Clinton's campaign theme was in 1992? You are wrong if you guessed: "bringing dignity back to the White House." It was "change." In January 1992, James Carville told Steve Daley of The Chicago Tribune that it had gotten to the point that the press was complaining about Clinton's "constant talk of change.")

Monthly casualties in Iraq now come in slightly lower than a weekend with Anna Nicole Smith. According to a CNN report last week, for the entire month of May, there were only 19 troop deaths in Iraq. (Last year, five people on average were shot every day in Chicago.) With Iraqi deaths at an all-time low, Iraq is safer than Detroit -- although the Middle Eastern food is still better in Detroit.

Al-Qaida is virtually destroyed, surprising even the CIA. Two weeks ago, The Washington Post reported: "Less than a year after his agency warned of new threats from a resurgent al-Qaida, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden now portrays the terrorist movement as essentially defeated in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and on the defensive throughout much of the rest of the world, including in its presumed haven along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border."

It's almost as if there's been some sort of "surge" going on, as strange as that sounds.

Just this week, The New York Times reported that al-Qaida and other terrorist groups in Southeast Asia have all but disappeared, starved of money and support. The U.S. and Australia have been working closely with the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, sending them counterterrorism equipment and personnel.

But no one notices when 9/11 doesn't happen. Indeed, if we had somehow stopped the 9/11 attack, we'd all be watching Mohammed Atta being interviewed on MSNBC, explaining his lawsuit against the Bush administration. Maureen Dowd would be writing columns describing Khalid Sheik Mohammed as a "wannabe" terrorist being treated like Genghis Khan by an excitable Bush administration.

We begin to forget what it was like to turn on the TV, see a tornado, a car chase or another Pamela Anderson marriage and think: Good -- another day without a terrorist attack.

But liberals have only blind hatred for Bush -- and for those brute American interrogators who do not supply extra helpings of béarnaise sauce to the little darlings at Guantanamo with sufficient alacrity.

The sheer repetition of lies about Bush is wearing people down. There is not a liberal in this country worthy of kissing Bush's rear end, but the weakest members of the herd run from Bush. Compared to the lickspittles denying and attacking him, Bush is a moral giant -- if that's not damning with faint praise. John McCain should be so lucky as to be running for Bush's third term. Then he might have a chance.

__________________
Liberals are people that will believe anything twice.

Thanks, this article was quite interesting and excellent! I'm sick of how knee-jerk anti-American so many can be here in Aus.,
One question, do you know what Anne meant when she wrote about:
72nd and Columbus in Manhattan
Is this where the Trade Towers were?
cheers ,

Yeah the trade off for flushable toilets and a U.S freindly Iraqi government was worth the hundreds of thousands of lives that it cost Iraqis and U.S. combined, not to mention the trillion plus dollars it cost us.

I wonder which country we will make to our liking next, maybe austrailia.

__________________
The Bill of Rights.....Void where prohibited by Law.

i'm a vet so, i'm a give you some facts. there was no doubt in a lot of our minds that bush was going back to iraq to finish his daddy's business before he even came into office. we all knew it was about the oil. what happened to $20 a barrel oil? what happened to iraq's repaying us for liberating them with their oil? the shit, is crazy when you think about your brothers in arms being killed for monetary gain. also, we were attacked on bush's watch, he better make sure it doesn't happen again. i'm not affiliated with any political party but, i understand warfare. yes, it was right to wage war on terrorism but, not in iraq. the type of warfare that the u.s. should have initiated is a modern cold war with intensive espionage efforts. by giving an organization such as al-qaida a front line it stretches out are intelligence capabilities and allows our enemy to adapt to our tactics. the art of war is knowing your enemy, in this case enemies. leaving saddam in power would of kept iran in check, all the while the u.n. sanctions kept iraq in check. we monitored the no fly zones regularly and we were more than strategically capable of handling any problem that iraq may have caused militarily. the fact of the matter is our government over reacted to 9/11 and now our economy is seeing the of ramifications of such i.e., oil prices, weak dollar, highest deficit ever. now, here's some news to everyone 9/11 happened on Bush's watch and we now know that he was given intelligence of such of a planned attack.

Interesting, could you provide us evidence that we are there for oil and that the U.S. has taken any? Thanks.


Iraq is safer than Detroit
That is a damn good quote.

__________________
Am I supposed to have some sort of disclaimer here?

"here's some news to everyone 9/11 happened on Bush's watch and we now know that he was given intelligence of such of a planned attack."

How long was Bush in office prior to the attack? Does Bill Clinton have any responsibility for this in your mind?

Vi

__________________
Liberals are people that will believe anything twice.

let's not kid ourselves here. during the build up to the war there was an enormous amount of debate as to how to finance the removal of saddam. estimates of the finances for such of a war were staggering at the time but, advocates for the war in congress suggested that the iraqi government would have to repay our military for our efforts, oil being iraq's number one export how else would they repay our government. furthermore, the first military operations in iraq were mission to secure the oil reserves, in other words securing our investments. let's not be naive here. after 9/11 the game definitely changed, fuck yeah we were supposed to go to war, but like i stated in my previous post it was the wrong type of war to initiate. thirdly, it was the wrong call because, of false intelligence and we now know that president bush also had intelligence conflicting that of the wmd reports by that lying iraqi defector who said he was a scientist at one of these chemical plants where weapons were being made. when in actuality he was just a janitor or something like that. it's cool to blow up shit and flex are military muscle but, to whom much is given much is expected. our commander in chief lacked poise in a pivotal point in the history of the u.s. let alone improper planning for a war. i must stress the fact that proper planning prevents poor performance. i don't think that anyone can argue that this war has been improperly planned i.e. exit strategy, lack of troops, underestimation of our enemy, oil smuggling, civilian casualties. 80% of america now believes, bush is a fuck up. in this technological day and age it would be impossible for bush to be remembered as a good president, with the internet and historical fact keeping technology it's a shame that americans in a future far away from now will know the truth of our current predicament. it's funny to say that america is now safer when the organization that has attacked our country has been strengthened in every aspect since the war in iraq. just yesterday, it was reported that a tip lead to a safe house in baghdad being raided which lead to the normal cache of weapons but, the most interesting items that were found were documents of top secret information regarding bunker specifications and detailed blueprints of u.s. bases in iraq. these bases are u.s. only personnel. the fact of the matter is this war has not made us safer and it has compromised our depth, which has made us vulnerable to infiltration. if you have studied how al-qaida operates you would understand that they're extremely calculated and have no set time table for attacking a proposed target, i'd also like to add that there might not have been a specific attack on u.s. soil but, if you remember there have been attacks on our embassy's, and allies(spain, london). i want to make sure that my point isn't misconstrued, war was necessary just not a on the ground war against iraq. the war that should of been waged, should have been a direct engagement of al-qaida. i believe that things started in this manner during the search for osama but, our government became distracted because, of bush's ties to oil and the potential of $20 a barrel oil. iraq is safer than detroit, absolutely hilarious. i bet you wouldn't go live in iraq. plus, detroit is in the u.s. where no attacks have occurred since 9/11 but, you already knew that.

I never heard of such an agreement that Iraq has to repay the U.S. in oil. The only thing that vaguely relates to that claim is we want Iraq to help pay for the reconstruction of their infrastructure, however there is no mention of them "paying" us back for the war.

We secured the oil reserves first cause you know why? Last time Saddam set fire to them all which is devastating to both Iraq's economy and ecology.

I honestly don't believe that Bush received false intelligence, what I do believe however is that Saddam buried his shit and moved whatever he couldn't do Syria. Hell we gave him 6 months warning.

The war in Iraq had nothing to do with Afganistan, it was an entire different conditions that advocated our armed response, oil not one of them. I beg for anyone to show me that we have been taking oil from Iraq and that is the only reason we are there, I have yet to see any evidence other than speculation.

__________________
Am I supposed to have some sort of disclaimer here?

9 months, would you live in a dirty house for 9 months or would you try and clean it up. clinton's responsibility is irrelevant. as commander in chief i expect you to make sure our security is a top priority. politics is a dirty game and fueled by tons of propaganda. the question i pose to you is do believe everything you see on fox news or do make an honest unbiased decision about what you see and hear? it's easy to through the blame but, it takes a man to stand up and say yes, i failed but, i will correct the problems. furthermore, we live in america the land of the free and the home of the brave with justice and equality for all, at least for the most part. in my opinion being far to the right is the same as being far to the left, of course not when it comes to the issues, but in being divisive and accomplishing little when it comes to the welfare of our society. shit, is really fucked up right now and it started when the invasion began and has gone down hill since. let's be realistic.

agreement no, what i said is that congressmen who advocated for the war made a case on how the war is going to be funded with assertions that oil would become $20 a barrel, also there were congressman who suggested that a new iraq without saddam would repay us for our efforts and liberation "monetarily," the main source of iraq's wealth coming from oil exports. bush did receive false intelligence this is fact and has been reported on extensively. all intelligence agency even the white house have acknowledged this. it's cool that you seem to have missed some of these reports but, i will find these articles and try and post the links if not i'll cut and paste them. yes, you are correct that we haven't strong armed their oil but, that's not what i said, either. the situation, is still very, very, unstable in iraq but, that's not how the u.s. operates either. we just don't invade a country and commandeer what we want, that's not how we operate. make no mistake about it, this current administration went into iraq with a plan of crushing the opposition in a small amount of time and i'd bet my life that those who advocated for the oil war in the administration thought that iraq would be a stable enough of a country were we could back door the saudi's and have our own leverage in the worldwide oil trade. what bush did makes since to me he just fucked up more and more as things went along. shit, mission accomplished was almost 2,000 days ago. the is no doubt we all have been misled by this administration look at how many have resigned it's clear to see a lot of funny business has been going own for a while. i believe the term is whenever you see smoke the is fire.