Comparing Bubble-Boy's First Year vs Obama's First Year on Terror Attacks

Okay, so let's get this straight: During Bubble-Boy's first year of being President, his administration ignored a warning regarding al-Qaeda's plans to attack America and approximately 3000 Americans died. In Obama's first year of being President, according to the right-wing pundits, his administration ignored warnings about the Nigerian who attempted to destroy an American airliner and no Americans died. Yet, amazingly, according to the right-wing pundits, it is the Obama administration and not the Bubble-boy administration that failed the national security test in its first year.

Here's what Democrats need to start saying: In Bush's first year of being president we lost 3,000 Americans to organized terrorism. In Obama's first year of being President, we lost zero Americans to organized terrorism. That simple fact, repeated over and over, says everything that needs to be said about which administration did a better job of protecting the American people.

While U.S. Is Bogged Down in Iraq, Al-Qaida Rebuilds in Pakistan

This is really great. During the time that the United States has been increasingly bogged down in a civil war in Iraq, Al-Qaida has rebuilt inside Pakistan, in the apparently ungovernable area between Pakistan and Afghanistan. (You can read an article about this by clicking on the link in this entry's title.) This is a quote from the article:

Al-Qaida is "considerably operationally stronger than a year ago" and has "regrouped to an extent not seen since 2001," the counter terrorism official said, paraphrasing the report's conclusions. "They are showing greater and greater ability to plan attacks in Europe and the United States."

The group also has created "the most robust training program since 2001, with an interest in using European operatives," the official quoted the report as saying.

At the same time, this official said, the report speaks of "significant gaps in intelligence" so U.S. authorities may be ignorant of potential or planned attacks.

John Kringen, who heads the CIA's analysis directorate, echoed the concerns about al-Qaida's resurgence during testimony and conversations with reporters at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Wednesday.

"They seem to be fairly well settled into the safe haven and the ungoverned spaces of Pakistan," Kringen testified. "We see more training. We see more money. We see more communications. We see that activity rising."

The article then goes on to state that this could strengthen Bush's hand in his confrontation with Congress over Iraq. Democrats need to start asking the following question: "What in the hell does Iraq have to do with Al-Qaida's operations in Pakistan?"

In fact, this report actually strengthens the argument for getting out of Iraq's civil war. We need to use our military to go after Al-Qaida in this border area between Iraq and Pakistan.

This article also points out that Al Qaida has more money to use to conduct operations. Where are they getting the money? Is it coming from Saudi Arabia sources? Is it coming from sources in Iraq which are using the Iraqi breakdown in law to carry out criminal activities which make money to fund Al-Qaida?

This article also explains why Bush and other administration officials are starting to use Al-Qaida as a justification for staying in Iraq. They know that this leaked report will generate news stories like the one linked to in this entry and they want the public to confuse staying in Iraq with actually doing something about Al-Qaida. Meanwhile Al-Qaida grows stronger in Pakistan while we are mixed up in a civil war in Iraq. Lovely.

L.A. Times Story: CIA Reports Iraq Money Going to Bin Laden's Followers in Pakistan

Just in case you needed more evidence to convince any Bush Kool-Aid drinkers you know that the Iraq disaster is hurting our security, try this out. The L.A. Times is reporting that the CIA has been conducting an extensive search for Osama bin Laden. While it hasn't found bin Laden, it has found that money from Iraq is going into Pakistan to help support bin Laden's followers there and in Afghanistan. This money is coming from the kidnapping and ransoming of Iraqis and from donations to groups in Iraq who are fighting the United States. So our staying in Iraq is not only killing American soldiers, it is helping to finance al-Qaeda. Way to go, George. Click on the link in this entry's title to read the whole article.

What Happens When You Start a Second War Without Finishing the First One

The New York Times has a story in its February 19th edition, which you can read by clicking on the link in this title's entry, about how Al Qaeda chiefs are re-establishing control over their world-wide network. They are doing this by basing themselves in the mountainous region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. They are getting away with this because Bubble-Boy Bush started one war without finishing the first one against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. He was so eager to attack Iraq that he didn't stop and make sure that he had completely destroyed Al Qaeda before embarking on that adventure.

Bush likes to say that the Iraqi War is part of the War on Terror. Well, it seems to us that the first thing he should have done with his War on Terror is make sure that the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11-2001 were destroyed. He didn't and now all Americans are at risk from further attacks by these evil people. Just another screw-up from this administration.