Digby leads us to this Powerline post, in which one of them (are they still claiming to be lawyers?) theorizes that we should get rid of birthright citizenship because seriously, fuck those guys, that’s why.

The facts are not entirely clear, but it appears that Dogan was born in the United States to Turkish parents who returned to Turkey not long thereafter. (The ABC story says he was two years old.) Apparently Dogan had lived in Turkey with his family since that time. He apparently was, in other words, a “birthright citizen,” solely by virtue of the fact that his parents were residing in the U.S. when he was born.

If that is the case—and, again, the facts are not yet entirely clear—it is silly to call him an “American of Turkish descent.” He, like the other members of his family, was a Turk. The idea that his presence among the dead raises a special diplomatic problem is absurd; if it does, it shouldn’t.

Coincidentally, Scott Rasmussen published a poll this morning that found 58 percent of voters favor the abolition of birthright citizenship. I think the majority is right on this issue. Birthright citizenship is an anachronism, and in some respects a dangerous one, in an era when millions of people travel internationally and millions more enter the U.S. illegally, some for the specific purpose of having a baby here.

One of the basic presumptions in international law is against the statelessness of persons.  It’s very bad thing when someone is born without a national affiliation, because it essentially means they’re wandering around with no national legal protection.  When bad things happen (like, say, the soldiers of a given nation shooting you in the head four times), you’re left with no national protection and no place to call home.

The main reason we have birthright citizenship in the United States?  Slavery.  We had a rather large class of people who were all of a sudden on American soil with no identifiable national identity and no attachment to any country except the one they were born in.  Without birthright citizenship, every slave in the United States would have just been a wandering, stateless soul with no home country and no real way to leave America and find a home.  Of course, for many modern conservatives, that would have just been former slaves’ wake up call that they needed to start taking the initiative for themselves and stop relying on Constitutional handouts and the willing teat of the federal government, those lazy bastards.

So, is birthright citizenship an anachronism?  Only if you’re a giant xenophobic dickhead.  Imagine that a Turkish grad student meets a Ukranian grad student.  They meet, fall in love, and have a little highly educated international baby.  If we abolish birthright citizenship, what country is the baby a citizen of?  It might be a dual citizen of Turkey and the Ukraine.  It might fall into a contradictory set of citizenship laws in which each country says that the baby is its own citizen exclusively, or where one or both states consider it an American citizen.  The Powerline Proposal also assumes that you can determine citizenship by subsequent actions of the parents, which is just awesomely presumptuous - you have more of a claim to American citizenship if you travel back and forth between the US and Turkey, but less if your parents decide to settle down in one non-American place.  You have more of a claim if you’re doing something pro-American, and less of a claim if GOP donors don’t particularly approve of your political stances. 

If we give a damn about the meaning of citizenship (and about the history of this country), birthright citizenship is hugely important.  The presumption that American citizenship can be rendered invalid because of where your parents decided to move you when you were two is simply absurd; it’ll be patently more so when nativists take this position to its logical end and start arguing that a businessperson who’s spent too long in France has become too froglike to vote for the Muslim impostor in the White House. 

UPDATE: The above referenced Rasmussen poll doesn’t show that 58% of voters favor the abolition of birthright citizenship.  It shows that 58% of those polled favor the abolition of birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens.  Which Furkan Dogan was not.

So much dumb.

When the “kill gays” bill in Uganda was denounced today by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton at the National Prayer Breakfast, everyone knew it would fire up the bigots— and Cliff Kincaid (usasurvival.org) was quick to hit the send button on this hate-filled press release. You won’t believe the defense—the execution and “cleansing” by Uganda of its gays is all about ensuring national health.* I sh*t you not.

Kincaid, president of America’s Survival, Inc., and editor of Accuracy in Media, says the legislation is designed to save lives by discouraging homosexual practices which spread disease and death.

“The purpose is completely at variance with what the U.S. media have reported,” he said. “It is not a ‘Kill the Gays’ bill. Rather, it is designed to kill the disease that some homosexuals spread through their reckless and irresponsible conduct and lifestyle.”

Kincaid said that the much-publicized death penalty provision in the bill is for deliberately spreading AIDS and engaging in homosexual behavior that threatens children and society.

“Uganda’s people and government deserve support, not criticism, from the United States,” said Kincaid. “They are up against the international homosexual lobby, the money of George Soros, and the Obama Administration. They are trying to create a Christian culture that is protective of families and children.”

Would Kincaid support the execution of heterosexuals who engage in unsafe sex or who engage in pedophilia as well, since AIDS on that continent is mostly spread through heterosexual sex? I didn’t see him proposing that anywhere. As Joe Jervis said, Kincaid is

defending the bill as necessary to prevent “homosexual imperialists” from continuing their campaign to fuck as much AIDS into the children of Uganda as possible.

Kincaid and the rest of these defenders of this execution and “queer cleansing” bill are completely morally bankrupt, repugnant—and proud of it.

—
* Note that in this universe of eliminationism, lesbians and the demographically lower rate of STD transmission than heterosexuals conveniently never comes up.

Please help people in these dire circumstances. The U.S. State Department Operations Center set up the following number for Americans seeking information about relatives in Haiti: (888) 407-4747. The department cautioned that because of heavy volume, some callers may hear a recording. The State Department said those interested in helping immediately may text ‘HAITI’ to ‘90999’ and a donation of $10 will be made automatically to the Red Cross for relief efforts. The donation will be charged to your cellphone bill. The department also suggested contacting agencies such as the Red Cross or Mercy Corps to help with relief efforts.

I’ve been covering the federal Prop 8 case almost round the clock, but a disaster like this makes you think about the larger scheme of things, particularly for those who live in earthquake-prone zones. When your lives are reduced to a lack of even bare necessities, and you don’t even know if loved ones are alive, the level of human tragedy is almost unbearable to contemplate. Those who live in Haiti, already the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere, are going through that pain. (CNN ireport):

A powerful earthquake hit the impoverished country of Haiti on Tuesday, collapsing the presidential palace and raising fears of substantial casualties in what the country’s U.S. ambassador called “a major disaster.”

President René Garcia Préval was reported to be safe, but Radio Metropole of Port-au-Prince, the capital, quoted a government official as saying there were “certainly dozens of deaths.”

Dozens of dead and injured people in the street and the streets are blocked in so many parts.

President Barack Obama said the United States stood “ready to assist” Haiti after a powerful 7.0 quake rocked the impoverished Caribbean nation.

MSNBC:

The earthquake had a magnitude of 7.0 and was centered about 10 miles west of the capital, Port-au-Prince, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. It was followed by at least eight powerful aftershocks of magnitude 5.0 or greater, the USGS reported. “People are out in the streets, crying, screaming, shouting,” Karel Zelenka, director of the Catholic Relief Services office in Haiti told The Washington Post. “They see the extent of the damage,” he said, but can do little to rescue people. “This will be a major, major disaster,” Zelenka told the Post.

Numerous public buildings were destroyed along with the palace, including the parliament building, the Finance Ministry, the Public Works Ministry, the Palace of Justice and Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Port-au-Prince, the national cathedral, Haiti TV reported.

The State Department has a phone number for Americans seeking info about family in Haiti: 1-888-407-4747.

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release January 13, 2010

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON RESCUE EFFORTS IN HAITI

Diplomatic Reception Room 10:20 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. This morning I want to extend to the people of Haiti the deep condolences and unwavering support of the American people following yesterday’s terrible earthquake.

We are just now beginning to learn the extent of the devastation, but the reports and images that we’ve seen of collapsed hospitals, crumbled homes, and men and women carrying their injured neighbors through the streets are truly heart-wrenching. Indeed, for a country and a people who are no strangers to hardship and suffering, this tragedy seems especially cruel and incomprehensible. Our thoughts and prayers are also with the many Haitian Americans around our country who do not yet know the fate of their families and loved ones back home.

I have directed my administration to respond with a swift, coordinated, and aggressive effort to save lives. The people of Haiti will have the full support of the United States in the urgent effort to rescue those trapped beneath the rubble, and to deliver the humanitarian relief—the food, water and medicine—that Haitians will need in the coming days. In that effort, our government, especially USAID and the Departments of State and Defense are working closely together and with our partners in Haiti, the region, and around the world.

More after the jump.

Read All...

I went over to Instapundit today to see how the 101st Fighting Keyboarders are taking the fight to the Iranitards.  That led to this interview, in which he begins the process of proving himself a savant for predicting that technology would play a role in events to come, which nobody had ever done before.  Ever.

Now, Insty has painted his blog green and fairly frequently mentions Iran, mainly to either make stupid points or to join in the same masturbatory orgy of “look at what I’m noticing” that seems to have consumed about 75% of the Iranblogging thus far (and 98% of the right’s). But something keeps nagging at me, and I realized what that something is.

Two years ago, Reynolds was advocating systematic American assassination of the Iranian government and scientists.  Not in order to overthrow the government and provide a safe democracy for Iranians (as ill-advised and unlikely as that outcome would be), but instead to punish the government and people of Iran for participation in the insurgent movement against occupying U.S. forces in Iraq.

This is the major reason I’ve been going on about the emptiness of the “green solidarity” movement.  There are simply too many people “going green” who could not care less about the Iranian people, their goals, their sacrifices.  No heavens opened up, joining neoconservatives with devout Muslims on the streets of Tehran.  There’s no concern for whether tens of millions of Iranians live in freedom or in oppression, what their government will look like or even what the protesters’ hopes are as they put their own lives on the line.  It’s about various elements of conservatism validating their preexisting notions while, once again, someone else puts their asses on the line.  It’s why the bravest act Obama has taken during his presidency is not bowing to people who wouldn’t mind a few hundred thousand Iranians’ blood shed in order to prove a point, and instead maintaining silence rather than subverting autonomous Iranian demands for freedom and democracy to make John McCain’s little soldier tingle. 

There’s a reason that we’re all so aware of what’s happening in Iran.  There are thousands of people sending out as many messages as they possibly can whenever they can using whatever means are available.  This means two things.  The first is that Twitter is now the most important thing that happened to democracy since the invention of the ballot, and the second is that if there is an urgent need for the President of the United States to weigh in with support for the protesters, they will find a way to let him know. 

So, when Representative Mike Pence decides that he’s going to say what Obama won’t, or Jonah Goldberg writes some incomprehensible mess masquerading as satirical commentary, what they’re essentially saying is that while the Iranian people putting their lives on the line is a nice start, the people who actually know what needs to be done are the same American conservatives who invaded Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein after propping him up against Iran a couple of decades prior because that was a fucking great idea.  Sure, those nice Iranians can put pressure on their local tinpot theocrat, but it’s not really going to mean anything until the United States validates it as, you know, a thing.

The most important thing in the world right now to these steely-eyed warriors of high-speed internet (28 MB upstream, and you can suck on that) is not that citizens in a faraway land they’ve dreamed about bombing for years are standing up to the Evilest Men Imaginable, it’s that these citizens are trailing the path that these conservatives blazed - and, as such, the most important facet of this amazing story is getting the goddamn black Muslim Kobama Bryant to say what they want.  That, incidentally, is the undertone of all of this: Iranians are the citizen journalists that conservatives always dreamed of being, sidestepping the dreaded Reuters and New York Times and bringing exciting news with bravery and danger and hopefully some titties to a world who will stand up, take notice, and then eventually worship them as the blogger-kings they are. 

Pete Hoekstra was just stupid enough to say out loud what’s driving a lot of Republican/conservative commentary and concern with Iran.  They are the brave ones, and since they can’t fight the actual relevant fight, they must find their own.  They are facing the Obamatollah and his hand-picked denier of Liberal Fascism, Pelosidinejad.  As nice a job as those amateurs are doing in Persia or whatever, it must always come back to the real fight - modern conservatism versus whatever enemy is threatening to snicker at its last Twitter update.

Representative Pete Hoekstra (R-MI):

Iranian twitter activity similar to what we did in House last year when Republicans were shut down in the House.

By way of comparison, Republicans showed up after a weekend off to talk to an empty, dark room about drilling for oil or how Michelle Obama was Mao Tse Kong or whatever stupid thing they thought would win Sarah Palin the presidency.  Iranians, on the other hand, have it easy, merely facing arrest, beatings or even death because they dare to criticize their government’s handling of a sham election in the public square. 

I’m pretty sure the reason that Obama hasn’t spoken on Iran using the many, many scripts that conservatives have given him is because they’re all covered with doodles of Ronald Reagan teabagging the Ayatollah.

I’m in total agreement with John Cole here - I’m fascinated with the ongoings in Iran, but when you’re talking about a sovereign nation experiencing a popular uprising against a clearly rigged election, changing your link color to to #00CC00 does not make you an active participant and/or expert in the fight against the country’s totalitarian regime.

It’s why Obama’s silence is not “cowardly”, any more than me refusing to walk barefoot across broken glass in a tuberculosis ward makes me a sniveling little pansy.  John McCain proving what a terrible President he would have been may have that end-of-movie “facing down the asteroid” feel to it, but it would also be, to put it charitably, goddamn stupid.

It’s actually kind of awesome that Iran’s government blatantly rigged an election and cemented its dictatorial grip on its people because then it’s a lot more likely that Israel will bomb the Allah out of those fuckers. 

Now, from the perspective of Guy Who’s Paid Attention This Decade, I thought that the entire point of our involvement in the Middle East to make steps towards functioning democracies, not destabilizing the hell out of Mideastistan in order to further raise Israel’s position as the preeminent country that bombs the places we want to bomb anyway. But, you know, the liberal fascism, it gets in your head and makes you all crazy sometimes!

Chicago radio host Mancow had himself waterboarded in order to prove that the procedure wasn’t torture.  He lasted six to seven seconds before he bowed under “not torture”. 

Fox News famously declared that the 183 times that Khalid Sheik Mohammed was waterboarded was a highly misleading number because, and I quote:

The “183 times” was widely circulated by news outlets throughout the world.

It was shocking. And it was highly misleading. The number is a vast inflation, according to information from a U.S. official and the testimony of the terrorists themselves.

A U.S. official with knowledge of the interrogation program told FOX News that the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto Mohammed’s face—not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-drowning technique on the terror suspect.

[...]

“The water was poured 183 times—there were 183 pours,” the official explained, adding that “each pour was a matter of seconds.”

So one pour, only a matter of seconds, is considered torture by someone who a.) didn’t want to believe it was torture and b.) could, at any point, say stop and never have to face another instance of ill treatment from the people involved again.  That same thing happening 183 times is “highly misleading”, and should not be taken as some terrible, inhumane thing constituting a gross violation of human rights. 

Also keep in mind that “until the pliers and blowtorches come out, “torture” seems to be very much in the eye of the beholder”.  Particularly, you know, the person being maybe-tortured.

UPDATE: It’s not torture because Mancow is a scrawny wimp.  I’m sure that conservatives are on their way to kick sand in his face as we speak.

Were you aware that not-so-secret Kenyan Muslim Barack Hussein Obama is also the evilest man alive?

I will bet you were not, because you were too busy tracking down a good source for organic tofu and gangbang pornography for your alternative Fourth of July, which will be held on the graves of American soldiers.  Naked.  Being a liberal is so awesome.

Anyway, Obama is headed to Normandy for the 65th anniversary of D-Day.  And because 95% of what he does is meant to be an affront to a.) white people, b.) all of America, c.) everyone else in the world except for Arab Islam terrorists, he’s going to ban tour guides (and therefore regular people) from Normandy on what would be perhaps its biggest tour day ever.

The 65th Anniversary of D-Day is fast approaching.  Barack Obama will attend the events on June 6th as George Bush did in 2004 for the sixtieth memorial service.  Here is the rub, as of now Obama’s State Department has asked (read demanded) the French government not allow tour guide services to operate that day. It is a big day for Normandy tourism. Yet, the king will not allow those not connected with government to enjoy the day.  Obama is very important you know.  This is an unprecedented request.  I hope the French come to their senses and deny it.

Note that there’s no link in that excerpt, no source for the story.  My initial assumption was that this was just so well-known in the land of patriotism and Quarter Pounders that the source didn’t need to be linked.  So, I did what any burgeoning statist would do - I Googled the story in a transparent attempt to destroy the author’s life.

Every single blog or source talking about this links back to Big Hollywood.  Now, far be it from me to impugn the journalistic integrity of a man whose major talent seems to be looking like a constipated Kiefer Sutherland, but, uh, really?  Can I just write that John Boehner has instituted “Swimsuit Thursdays” for all of his young staffers?

Wait, John Boehner is misappropriating campaign funds to force his staffers to go-go dance on his newly installed office poles?  Man, I’m glad I told myself this thing on the Internet that I will now treat as gospel truth.  Thanks, me!

With North Korea’s Kim Jong-Il acting up again (he seems to erupt like Old Faithful), puffing himself up to impress/scare the rest of the world and test whoever happens to be president. Barack Obama discussed his plan to help move the globe toward nuclear disarmament and said this about the North Korea missile firing in an address to a huge crowd in Hradcany Square, Prague, Czech Republic.

Just this morning, we were reminded again of why we need a new and more rigorous approach to address this threat. North Korea broke the rules once again by testing a rocket that could be used for long range missiles. This provocation underscores the need for action –- not just this afternoon at the U.N. Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons.

Rules must be binding. Violations must be punished. Words must mean something. The world must stand together to prevent the spread of these weapons. Now is the time for a strong international response—(applause)—now is the time for a strong international response, and North Korea must know that the path to security and respect will never come through threats and illegal weapons. All nations must come together to build a stronger, global regime. And that’s why we must stand shoulder to shoulder to pressure the North Koreans to change course.

...So, finally, we must ensure that terrorists never acquire a nuclear weapon. This is the most immediate and extreme threat to global security. One terrorist with one nuclear weapon could unleash massive destruction. Al Qaeda has said it seeks a bomb and that it would have no problem with using it. And we know that there is unsecured nuclear material across the globe. To protect our people, we must act with a sense of purpose without delay.

So today I am announcing a new international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within four years. We will set new standards, expand our cooperation with Russia, pursue new partnerships to lock down these sensitive materials.

I haven’t been following all of the stops of the first big trip abroad by the President and First Lady, but there’s one thing I do know—I sleep better at night knowing our country is no longer represented by a president who makes an ass out of himself in front of world leaders in times of crisis or utters insane, ignorant, amoral BS like:

Left: letting his lips flap over an open mic—he said that quote to Tony Blair while chewing on a buttered roll, adding that special touch of American class.

“This foreign policy stuff is a little frustrating.” — as quoted by the New York Daily News, April 23, 2002

“I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe — I believe what I believe is right.” — Rome, Italy, July 22, 2001

“Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.” — speaking underneath a “Mission Accomplished” banner aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, May 1, 2003

“Can we win? I don’t think you can win it.” — after being asked whether the war on terror was winnable, “Today” show interview, Aug. 30, 2004

“If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator.” — Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000

“My answer is bring them on.” — on Iraqi insurgents attacking U.S. forces, Washington, D.C., July 3, 2003

It’s refreshing not to hear cheap, inflammatory phrases like “Dead Or Alive,” “Mission Accomplished,” or “I’m the Decider.” We all know Barack Obama has an actual functioning brain. Watching Bush was like a form of PTSD - you’d watch him on one of those trips and replay all the horrible embarrassing incidents, afraid he was going to top himself.

With a record in Iraq of uncontrolled violence as a U.S. security contractor, NC-based Blackwater Worldwide decided it needed a facelift, as if a name-change would wash away its record. Bzzzzzt.

Blackwater Worldwide, the contractor that emerged over the last few years as Exhibit A for ugly Americans in Iraq, has decided that the best response is to ... change its name.

And check out the name they picked: “Xe.” (Apparently it’s pronounced like the letter ‘Z.’ Raising the question: Why not just call it “Z”?)

They’ve also renamed Blackwater Lodge & Training Center, the subsidiary that does much of their controversial overseas operations. It’s now the “U.S. Training Center Inc.” (Which doesn’t exactly mesh with “Xe,” but whatever.)

...It’s not hard to guess why Blackwater (or wait, Xe) wants to get out of the private security business. In 2007, Blackwater guards opened fire in a Baghdad square, killing 17 Iraqis. Five ex-Blackwater guards were charged with voluntary manslaughter and are awaiting trial.

I don’t think it would be a surprise to you that the Iraqi government has decided not to renew its contract with the firm.

Can’t say Israel didn’t warn you:

Meanwhile, Israel pounded rocket sites and tunnels Saturday while its planes dropped leaflets warning of an escalation…“The IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) will escalate the operation in the Gaza Strip,” said the leaflets in Arabic dropped from planes. “The IDF is not working against the people of Gaza but against Hamas and the terrorists only. Stay safe by following our orders.”

Emphasis mine, because of this:

Israeli forces shelled a house where they had ordered about 100 Palestinian civilians to take shelter, killing about 30 people and wounding many more, witnesses told the U.N.

Accidents happen in war. I’m not saying that the IDF was deliberately targeting this so-called safe house. But it does put the lie to the claim that there’s anything people in Gaza can do right now to “stay safe.” And if I’m reading the story right, it’s the same safe house to which the IDF later refused access by the Red Cross for several days.

You’ll notice, by the way, that I linked to a Fox News story, above, which buries the discussion of the IDF escalation amongst a bunch of admittedly inflammatory rhetoric from Hamas leaders. I would have preferred to link to a more impartial news source, but weirdly, the only major-outlet discussion of the leaflet I could find which included the phrase “Stay safe by following our orders” came from Fox News, and the Jerusalem Post (which buried it amongst discussions of Hamas body counts.) I’m trying to decide whether that’s because the libruhl medya refuses to recognize how terribly concerned Israel is about Palestinian safety, or whether only those sources were willing to dignify that ludicrous sentiment by reporting it.

Update: I didn’t want to focus massive attention on the Fox News/Jerusalem Post aspect; it was really just a quick anecdote about the frustration of trying not to link to Fox News. I did finally find a story by the AP (in the WaPo) which also included the phrase in question.

“The Palestine issue” is in most Americans’ hands the epitome of either-or thinking. As Thersites notes, in the case of our politicians, it’s not even “either-or” thinking - it’s “is” thinking.

On Israel, there’s no particular difference in substance between the statements of Nancy Pelosi and, say, Pamela Oshry. As Glennzilla goes on to glumly observe, wingnuts—the very people who have been so colossally and disastrously wrong about Iraq—are completely in charge of the way Israel/Palestine is discussed in America. They have a monopoly on the definition of “legitimate” opinions about the conflict, the ones you can express officially. Hence they are able to get away with the most preposterous and insulting declarations—that disagreeing with Israeli actions makes one an “anti-Semite”; that Israeli and American interests are identical; that criticizing Israel equals support for terrorists.

In the comments, the Gaza rocket attacks on Ashkelon and Ashdod is compared to the Confederacy’s firing on Fort Sumter, which might hold up if the Union had immediately closed off the Mason-Dixon line (but eventually allowing foreigners to leave, which is certainly magnanimous) or if early battles resulted in death rates of 1:100.

But this is, after all, a both-and blog (see? it says so, right there in the post title) and so I find myself modeling my position on the issue on the same folks I always do: The Egyptians.

———————

...and then, while I was still struggling to finish this post, Israel invaded.

Read All...

OMG. This is outlandish, a real cap to the Bush presidency. An Iraqi journalist gives a kiss off to Bush by throwing his shoes at him during a farewell press conference. Bush’s comments afterward are asinine.

CNN’s Michael Ware said the shoe assault is the height of insults for Iraqis, reserved for the likes of Saddam Hussein. A translation of what the journalist said to Bush when he threw the shoes:

First Shoe:
“This is the gift from the Iraqis— this is the farewell kiss you dog.”

Second Shoe:
“This is from the widows, the orphans and those killed in Iraq.”

Just to show you that Bush is completely delusional and disgusting about the last 8 years as Destructor in Chief, after the shoe-throwing, he gave this incredible assessment to ABC of his “hard work” on the War on Terror^TM and his obliteration of a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Bush: There have been no attacks since I have been president, since 9/11. One of the major theaters against al Qaeda turns out to have been Iraq. This is where al Qaeda said they were going to take their stand. This is where al Qaeda was hoping to take ...

Raddatz: But not until after the U.S. invaded.

Bush: Yeah, that’s right.

So what?

The point is that al Qaeda said they’re going to take a stand. Well, first of all in the post-9/11 environment Saddam Hussein posed a threat. And then upon removal, al Qaeda decides to take a stand. And they’re becoming defeated and I think history will say, one, the world was better off without Saddam, two, along with the Iraqi troops we have denied al Qaeda a safe haven because a young democracy is beginning to grow, which will be an important sign for people in the Middle East.

No comment.