George Bush in his speech today said America had not been attacked since 9/11 implying his war in Iraq was the reason.
He forgot to mention that Russia was attacked in the summer of 2004, London was attacked last summer. Spain was attacked in 2004. Indonesia has suffered terrorist bombings. India has suffered from terrorist attacks.
And the base support for many of these attacks came not from Iraq or Afghanistan, or Iran or North Korea but from the terrorist state that is America's ally; Pakistan.
Sure America has not been attacked, not because of the war in Iraq, or the failed occupation of Afghanistan, or because they have increased Homeland Security and decreased civil liberties.
Nope its because the terrorists hit other targets. And they are not living in America.
Foreign Affairs - Is There Still a Terrorist Threat? - John Mueller
Summary: Despite all the ominous warnings of wily terrorists and imminent attacks, there has been neither a successful strike nor a close call in the United States since 9/11. The reasonable -- but rarely heard -- explanation is that there are no terrorists within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad.
Five years after 9/11: The fear and dread campaign
But this overblown "terror" rhetoric is clearly augmenting and thereby empowering the very terrorist networks Bush and Blair say they are trying to constrain.
The most powerful recruiting tool for suicide bombers certainly isn't Osama bin Laden, says Margolis, but Bush and his administration's attempt to "exploit terrorism" for political gain.
Ironically, while Bush's policy may be encouraging support for terror networks across the Muslim world, it's beginning to backfire at home.
As its fifth anniversary approaches, 9/11 has become dwarfed by the carnage in Iraq, where more civilians are killed every month than died in the attack on America.