Call my cynical, but...

Did you see this story about Pakistan's Prime Minister claiming that he was coerced to go along with Bush's War on Terror back in 2001?

It sounds to me like a clever rhetorical strategy designed to take the heat off of both Bush and Musharraf in the press.

How so?

Understood in the context of Pakistan essentially ceding control over certain lands to the Taliban, it makes more sense.

It gives the Western news cycle something else to talk about in advance of Musharraf's visit, instead of only speaking of his decision to cut a deal with extremist successionist. It makes Musharraf also look as though he's looking out for his people, by preventing them being bombed back "into the stone age."

And it makes Bush look like less of a hypocrite for making noises about his opponents being "weak on terror" while cozying up to a strongman who is coddling violent extremists.

Sounds like a win/win PR strategy for both of them, doesn't it?