And how would that work, exactly?

McCain isn’t the only one confused about al Qaeda - The Carpetbagger Report:

"...“a White House reporter asked Dana Perino a critically important question after Bush’s speech: “I don’t understand how a fragmented, clandestine, non-Iraqi terrorist organization could produce and sell Iraqi oil on the global market, especially when the majority of Iraqis have turned against al Qaeda. Could you describe a plausible scenario?”

Perino had a little trouble with this one.

ERINO: The purpose of what the President said is that al Qaeda should not be allowed to have safe haven in Iraq and take over —

Q: How can they take over Iraq’s oil reserves —

PERINO: Well, if we were to leave we would certainly ensue chaos and not be able to — if we were to leave too soon, it would certainly be chaos and it would be terrible for not only the innocent Iraqis, but the entire region and, in fact, our own national security. That’s what the President —

Q: But the Iraqis would let a foreign terrorist organization take over their oil?

PERINO: You’re missing the point, and I think that you should go back and read —

Q: No, I —

PERINO: Yes, actually, I think you are missing the point. And I call on you because I see what you write about how you come here and you really want to have questions asked. And I’m calling on you and I’m providing it to you, but I suggest that you read the President’s speech and read it in context, because that’s — what you’re suggesting is not what the President said.

This isn’t complicated. The president told the nation, “An emboldened al Qaeda with access to Iraq’s oil resources could pursue its ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction to attack America and other free nations.” The claim is absurd, and asked to defend it, the White House couldn’t. Indeed, if we take Bush’s words at face value, and consider them in context, we’re necessarily “missing the point,” as far as the president’s chief spokesperson is concerned.

It fascinates me that even now, as the war begins its sixth year, the White House is still struggling to come up with arguments that make sense and can withstand even cursory scrutiny."