If you know me, you know I don't use the "Breaking" tag lightly. But this really is unbelievable.
On the anniversary of 9/11, Sarah Palin has used a talking point that has been long discarded by the Bush administration, linking Iraq to the terrorist attacks of that day.
The Washington Post has front paged an article describing Palin's comments to troops, including her own son, heading for Iraq:
Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."
How dare she.
The link between Iraq and 9/11 was disproven years and years ago.
Do we really want someone back in the White House who uses the events of that horrible day to justify a war that should have never been authorized or waged?
Check out this article from 2005 where Joe Biden takes the lead in slamming George Bush for continuing to use the devastation of 9/11 to justify the mistake in Iraq:
In a bid to shore up flagging domestic support for the war, Bush said the war against terror had "reached our shores" on September 11 and that sacrifices in Iraq were "vital to the future security of our country."
But Democrats accused the president of reviving a questionable link between Iraq and 9/11.
"I think the American people are a lot smarter than that," Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden said. "They've figured this out."
The American people may have figured it out in 2005, but Sarah Palin is dredging it up again in 2008. I understand that her son was in the unit she was addressing - but shouldn't that provide her with an incentive to be honest with those same troops?
Shame.
Shame.
Crossposted at Strategy 08
Update Some folks, no doubt in shock and awe that someone would nominate a Vice Presidential candidate who is this unaware of the terrorist threat, have suggested that maybe Palin meant Al Qaeda in Iraq, distinct from Al Qaeda. If so, that does not forgive the blunder: AQI did not exist in Iraq before the invasion. The IHT last year:
[Bush's] references to Al Qaeda in Iraq, and his assertions that it is the same group that attacked the United States in 2001, have greatly oversimplified the nature of the insurgency in Iraq and its relationship with the Qaeda leadership. Bush's critics say that he has overstated the Qaeda connection in an attempt to exploit the same kinds of post-Sept. 11 emotions that helped him win support for the invasion in the first place.
Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia did not exist before the Sept. 11 attacks, and it has thrived as a magnet for recruiting and a force for violence largely because of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, which brought an American occupying force of more than 100,000 troops to the heart of the Middle East...
But while American intelligence agencies have pointed to links between Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia leaders and the top Qaeda leadership, the militant group is in many respects an Iraqi phenomenon. They believe the membership of the group is overwhelmingly Iraqi. Its financing is derived indigenously from kidnappings and other criminal activities. And many of its most ardent foes are close at home, namely the Shiite militias and the Iranians who are thought to support them.
One more note: does Sarah Palin know how many of the 9/11 Hijackers were from Iraq? The answer, of course, is zero.
Update II Thanks to NCDem Amy for linking us to the youtube of her remarks: