This is an 'old' story from late December of last year when French journalists Georges Malbrunot and Christian Chesnot were released after being held captive by a merry band of 'insurgents' in Iraq. BBC NEWSFrench hostage recalls his ordeal:
Malbrunot: 'We were very aware of the fact that it wasn't the Iraqi agenda that motivated our kidnappers, but the internationalist jihadist agenda. I think this is the real challenge for the next 10 years - the clash of cultures that these people are advocating, are seeking.'
So does he get it? Could it be there exists a Frenchman that understands that Iraq is part of the GWOT ? Someone that has empirical knowledge that it might no be such an odd thing that combatants move their assests from one theatre of operation to another? Could it be Bush has got it right in the view of this Frenchman?
Not if CNN has anything to do with it.
Here is their interview with Malbrunot where we find them singing in perfect Bush-Hate harmony as Malbrunot recounts insurgent political analysis of the 04 American election.
"'We vote for Bush because Bush help us a lot by intervening in Afghanistan. So, from that point we could spread all over the world and we are now in 60 countries,' Malbrunot cited one of the militants as saying on October 15, two weeks before Bush defeated Democrat John Kerry.
Malbrunot, 41, quoted the same militant as saying: 'Our main targets are Saudi Arabia and Egypt. And because of Bush, if he is re-elected, we are sure that American soldiers will remain in Iraq for years.'"
Sound familiar? This is how liberals think... because Bush attacked Afghanistan there is now more terrorism. that's the argument they are making in industrial media isn't it ? Bush attacking Afghanistan and Iraq is the CAUSE and the growth of international terrorism is the EFFECT.
How about this perspective... The growth of international terrorism is the CAUSE and Bush attacking Afghanistan and Iraq ( nations supporting terrorism ) is the EFFECT ?