Bush attacks critics of his strategy in IRAQ

I read the headline, “Bush Forcefully Attacks Critics of His Strategy in Iraq", in the New York Times today.

“President Bush lashed out today at critics of his Iraq policy, accusing them of trying to rewrite history about the decision to go to war and saying their criticism is undercutting American forces in battle."

The president said in a Veterans Day speech in Pennsylvania.

"The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges,"

What are the American national interests in Iraq? This is difficult for me to understand. We've heard that these interests to be removing Saddam because he was working on Weapons of Mass Destruction, that's been disqualified. There was also supposed to be a link between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Although that’s never been proven. It was also supposed to be a proactive removal of terrorist elements sprouting up around the world.

Why hasn't the American media delved deeper into this investigation? Why are they so intimidated by the White House? Why haven't they looked into the involvement of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice or Vice President Dick Cheney? Why haven't they looked into the directing of foreign policy by Wolfowitz and Pearl and their neo-conservative Washington-based organization known as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)?

There is now enough evidence to show the Bush administration did fabricate the war on IRAQ. How will this go down in history? Will the truth ever make it into the mainstream?

Just one more thing? Here is a alternative theory about 9-11 that Jay Kerr (Bombippy.com) sent me.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194&q=loose+change