|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
A Busy Person's Guide to the Bush Press Conference |
Current rating: 0 |
by ben grosser
Email: feedback (nospam) criticalviewer.com (unverified!) |
13 Apr 2004
|
|
Since most people don't like to watch an hour of Bush on television (and for some reason I don't mind even though it drives me nuts), I decided to boil down the questions and answers from tonight's press conference in the East Room of the White House to their bare essentials. The questioners (Q:) are not identified. All answers (A:) are (paraphrases) from George W. Bush. |
( crossposted from http://www.criticalviewer.com )
Since most people don't like to watch an hour of Bush on television (and for some reason I don't mind even though it drives me nuts), I decided to boil down the questions and answers from tonight's press conference in the East Room of the White House to their bare essentials. The questioners (Q:) are not identified. All answers (A:) are (paraphrases) from George W. Bush.
----
Q: April is the deadliest month in Iraq, people are comparing it to Vietnam and support for the war is declining to less than 50%. What say you?
A: Its not Vietnam. This is hard. A free Iraq will be great. This is hard. We've been there a long time, but its not that long. Things have been hard for me. I don't listen to polls.
Q: How long will US troops be in Iraq?
A: I don't know--ask someone else. We'll be there as long as we need to.
Q: You have said we'd be greeted as liberators, that Iraqi oil would pay for the war and that we'd find WMD in Iraq. Why were you so wrong on all of these counts?
A: September 11th. Threat. Saddam, threat. Intelligence told me so. I told UN to act but they didn't so I did. Saddam could have made WMD. Danger. Oil? It wasn't destroyed and its flowing. Iraqi's are happy...the silent majority supports us...Iraqi's are happy.
Q: You told Bob Woodward that Osama wasn't a priority before 9/11. Do you feel any personal responsibility for 9/11?
A: I was angry and sad on 9/11. Before 9/11 I was not.
Q: And do you feel personal responsibility for 9/11?
A: No. The patriot act is good. We were stovepiped. No war footing. 9/11 was gathering threat...thats why I dealt with Iraq. We must preempt all who hate us.
Q: You never admit mistakes (WMD, postwar planning, 9/11). Should people be unhappy about that? Did you screw up?
A: No war footing. Osama hated us. We didn't know what was coming. I wonder where the WMD are. Saddam, threat. World, better. Iraqi's are happy.
Q: You said the Aug. 6th PDB didn't warn of hijacking airplanes into buildings, but just some things really close to that. Did you do anything in response?
A: I asked for the briefing and then went on vacation. The report was historical. I was concerned. If I didn't know something its George Tenet's fault. Nothing new in PDB. FBI was doing good. I would have acted. If only they had told me: "9/11, NYC, WTC, 8:30am" I would have been there.
Q: The PDB says there were 70 FBI investigations. Today the 9/11 hearings found that as wrong. Did you get bad info?
A: I expect to get valid information.
Q: Has the FBI talked to you since?
A: No.
Q: Richard Clarke apologized to the nation. Do Americans deserve an apology from you?
A: If only they had told me "9/11, NYC, WTC, 8:30am" I would have been there. Its Osama's fault, not mine.
Q: The "coalition" forces constitute hardly any of the troops. Isn't it window dressing? What happens when you turn Iraq over to them?
A: Don't say mean things about other people. We must remain strong. The Iraq war is a blow against terrorism. Iraq will be free someday.
Q: Why won't you testify before the 9/11 commission without Cheney at your side?
A: Because they want to ask us questions.
Q: I asked why you're appearing together, instead of separately as they requested?
A: Because we can both answer this way.
Q: Some say you let 9/11 mature too far--Iraq not far enough. What do you think? What's next?
A: They say we should have taken out Afghanistan and they say I shouldn't have attacked Iraq. See? War footing. I thought about Al Qaeda. Our oceans don't protect us. We let people in. Its a tough decision for me to use the military. We'll use it whenever we need to. They found 50 tons of mustard gas in Libya. I worry about WMD. We're at war against terror.
Q: People are unhappy about Iraq--will you lose your job over it?
A: I don't plan on losing my job. I don't like seeing dead people on television. Its hard to console family members. I will make my case. Lets talk about the war against terror. Our soldiers are great.
Q: After 9/11, whats your biggest mistake?
A: I wish you could have given me the questions beforehand. I went to war in Afghanistan. Even though there were no WMD I still would have taken Iraq. They found 50 tons of mustard gas. Saddam is dangerous. He had WMD. I can't come up with a mistake I've made.
Q: Several thousand FBI agents wrote you today begging you to not split up law enforcement and counterterrorism but you said today you might. Will you?
A: Lets talk. The war will be long. Our enemy is ruthless. It will be long. We should learn from mistakes. A free middle east will be hopeful. Free. Freedom. Freedom. Freedom. Freedom. We are a great power. We feed North Korea, we fight AIDS in Africa. I am leading and making the world a better place. We'll stay the course. Stay the course. Soldiers are dying in Iraq for freedom.
Q: Why are you such a bad communicator?
A: "When I say something, I mean it."
[end] |
See also:
http://www.criticalviewer.com
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-13-bush-text_x.htm
|
Comments
|
Heads Up |
by Michael Moore
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
April 14, 2004
Friends,
I have never seen a head so far up a Presidential ass (pardon my Falluja) than the one I saw last night at the "news conference" given by George W. Bush. He's still talking about finding "weapons of mass destruction" -- this time on Saddam's "turkey farm." Turkey indeed. Clearly the White House believes there are enough idiots in the 17 swing states who will buy this. I think they are in for a rude awakening.
I've been holed up for weeks in the editing room finishing my film ("Fahrenheit 911"). That's why you haven't heard from me lately. But after last night's Lyndon Johnson impersonation from the East Room -- essentially promising to send even more troops into the Iraq sinkhole -- I had to write you all a note.
First, can we stop the Orwellian language and start using the proper names for things? Those are not “contractors” in Iraq. They are not there to fix a roof or to pour concrete in a driveway. They are MERCENARIES and SOLDIERS OF FORTUNE. They are there for the money, and the money is very good if you live long enough to spend it.
Halliburton is not a "company" doing business in Iraq. It is a WAR PROFITEER, bilking millions from the pockets of average Americans. In past wars they would have been arrested -- or worse.
The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win. Get it, Mr. Bush? You closed down a friggin' weekly newspaper, you great giver of freedom and democracy! Then all hell broke loose. The paper only had 10,000 readers! Why are you smirking?
One year after we wiped the face of the Saddam statue with our American flag before yanking him down, it is now too dangerous for a single media person to go to that square in Baghdad and file a report on the wonderful one-year anniversary celebration. Of course, there is no celebration, and those brave blow-dried "embeds" can't even leave the safety of the fort in downtown Baghdad. They never actually SEE what is taking place across Iraq (most of the pictures we see on TV are shot by Arab media and some Europeans). When you watch a report "from Iraq" what you are getting is the press release handed out by the U.S. occupation force and repeated to you as "news."
I currently have two cameramen/reporters doing work for me in Iraq for my movie (unbeknownst to the Army). They are talking to soldiers and gathering the true sentiment about what is really going on. They Fed Ex the footage back to me each week. That's right, Fed Ex. Who said we haven't brought freedom to Iraq! The funniest story my guys tell me is how when they fly into Baghdad, they don't have to show a passport or go through immigration. Why not? Because they have not traveled from a foreign country -- they're coming from America TO America, a place that is ours, a new American territory called Iraq.
There is a lot of talk amongst Bush's opponents that we should turn this war over to the United Nations. Why should the other countries of this world, countries who tried to talk us out of this folly, now have to clean up our mess? I oppose the U.N. or anyone else risking the lives of their citizens to extract us from our debacle. I'm sorry, but the majority of Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been let that maybe -- just maybe -- God and the Iraqi people will forgive us in the end.
Until then, enjoy the "pacification" of Falluja, the "containment" of Sadr City, and the next Tet Offensive – oops, I mean, "terrorist attack by a small group of Baathist loyalists" (Hahaha! I love writing those words, Baathist loyalists, it makes me sound so Peter Jennings!) -- followed by a "news conference" where we will be told that we must "stay the course" because we are "winning the hearts and minds of the people."
I'll write again soon. Don't despair. Remember, the American people are not that stupid. Sure, we can be frightened into a war, but we always come around sooner or later -- and the one way this is NOT like Vietnam is that it hasn't taken the public four long years to figure out they were lied to.
Now if Bush would just quit speaking in public and giving me more free material for my movie, I can get back to work and get it done. I've got four weeks left 'til completion.
Yours,
Michael Moore
mmflint (at) aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com |
|
Kucinich Says that Bush Failed to Answer the Number One Question |
by Kucinich.US
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
WASHINGTON - April 14 - On APRIL 13TH 2004 President Bush failed again to answer the one most crucial question that is on the minds of most Americans: "When will our troops come home from Iraq?" Ohio Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich says Bush promised more of the same no-end-in-sight vision that has marked this unjustified and illegitimate war from the beginning.
"The President's answers to questions about how long our forces will remain were as vague as ever and wholly predictable," Kucinich emphasized. The President's statements that, "We'll stay the course. We'll complete the job. We must not waiver. The United States will continue to occupy - his word - Iraq as long as necessary," makes it clear that this election is about world leadership and who is telling the truth to the American people. "It is not George W. Bush," says the Democratic Presidential challenger.
"Bush is prepared to escalate American involvement in the region," says Kucinich. "This administration is going to sacrifice the lives of our soldiers." The statements made by this President are alarming. "If more troops are needed," Bush said. "He will send them. Any concession or retreat," he went on, "will embolden the enemy."
Kucinich has some questions for the President. "When will Bush realize that our very presence in Iraq has become a lightning rod for increased hostility and increased violence?" The economic impact is profound. "We can't afford to stay the course. We need a new course - a reasoned and responsible way out, not a political rationalization for keeping our troops at risk indefinitely, and sending even more troops into harm's way."
"Given the President's unhesitating willingness to send more and more of our young men and women to a war that was launched on lies and exaggerations, how long will it be before he resorts to a reinstatement of the draft to feed the demands of a thoroughly flawed and totally failed foreign policy?" The Ohio Congressman who lead the vote against the invasion is emphatic, "We went to war for the wrong reasons. We continue to be at war for the wrong reasons. And it's time to ask the United Nations to assume responsibility so our troops can come home! This can only come about when the US takes an entirely new direction, reconnecting with the world community through the United Nations, letting go of ambitions to control the oil and the contracts, trying to privatize Iraq, and run the government by remote control."
http://www.kucinich.us |
|
A Scary Performance, and a Signal for Slaughter |
by Matthew Rothschild
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
15 Apr 2004
|
George Bush's press conference on April 13 was a scary performance.
Not because his second sentence was ungrammatical: "This has been tough weeks in that country."
Not because he pronounced "instigated" as "instikated" in his fourth sentence.
Not because he said Donald Rumsfeld was Secretary of State.
Not because of his foolish comment that before 9/11 "we assumed oceans would protect us." (Ever since the Russians built their first ICBMs fifty years ago, the oceans haven't protected us.)
Not because he said of the August 6 briefing, "Frankly, I didn't think it was anything new"!
Not because he said that even if he had known beforehand that Iraq did not have WMD stockpiles, he still would have gone to war against Saddam Hussein.
Not because he had no coherent answer as to why Dick Cheney must hold his hand when he testifies to the 9/11 commission.
Not because he said that no one in his Administration had "any indication that bin Laden might hijack an airplane and run it into a building," when in fact, at the Genoa G-8 summit, there were precautions taken against incoming airplanes as missiles.
And not because he repeatedly refused to take a shred of personal responsibility for allowing the 9/11 attacks to happen on his watch.
No, his performance was scary because he plunged the United States deeper into a no-win war in Iraq.
"We will finish the job of the fallen," he said.
He gave only a pro forma nod toward the additional innocent Iraqis the United States may kill in the process.
"We will continue taking the greatest care to prevent harm to innocent civilians; yet we will not permit the spread of chaos and violence," he said. "I have directed our military commanders to make every preparation to use decisive force, if necessary, to maintain order and to protect our troops."
He reiterated this point later, saying, "Our commanders on the ground have got the authority necessary to deal with violence, and will--and will in firm fashion."
Here is the President warning that U.S. troops, who have already killed more than 600 Iraqis in the last week, will have a free hand.
That is a signal for slaughter.
He also continued to underestimate the resistance the United States is facing in Iraq. He called it "a power grab by extremist and ruthless elements." He said, "It is not a civil war. It is not a popular uprising." And, astonishingly, he asserted, "Most of Iraq is relatively stable."
That is not what many reporters have seen with their own eyes, and it is not what the TV screens are portraying.
What's more, Bush's vow to unleash "decisive force" will only make things worse.
He indicated that he will go after Moqtada al-Sadr, saying the cleric "must answer the charges against him and disband his illegal militia." This strongly suggests that Bush will order his troops to, as one senior commander said, "kill or capture" al-Sadr. And if that happens, all hell could break loose.
In his Manichaean worldview, Bush lumped the Iraqi insurgents in with the terrorists of 9/11. They are all "enemies of civilization," he said, and they share "a fanatical political ideology."
But many of those who are fighting against the U.S. occupation are not Al Qaeda members who want to destroy America and are not subscribers to the "ideology of terror." Rather, many are Iraqi nationalists who want to expel America from their own country because they have seen the brutality of the U.S. occupation.
That's a huge difference, and Bush makes a terrible mistake by conflating the two.
He also seems to have a static view of who the enemy is. He sees it as a finite group of innate murderers and evildoers. He thinks that all he needs to do is kill all the bad guys and victory is his.
But he doesn't understand that his policy is creating new enemies by the thousands every single day.
He warned that if the United States does not take "resolute action" and does not "stay the course" in Iraq, it will "recruit a new generation of killers."
What he failed to grasp is that by maintaining the brutal occupation, he himself is recruiting that generation.
And the more "firm" and "decisive" the U.S. military response, the more recruits Bush will be enlisting to fight against the United States.
Interestingly, the first question Bush got was on the Vietnam comparison.
But Bush did not want to hear anything about it. "The analogy is false," he said, without explaining why.
He did, however, suggest that it was almost treasonous to raise the specter of Vietnam. "That analogy sends the wrong message to our troops and to the enemy," he said.
(This is an echo of John Ashcroft's infamous statement that "those who scare peace-loving people with the phantoms of lost liberty" are giving "aid" and "ammunition" to America's enemies.)
In previous remarks, Bush has made clear that he believes the lesson of Vietnam is two-fold: first, that the political leaders interfered with the generals, and second, that the United States did not use overwhelming force.
If that is the lesson he applies here, the generals will run the war, and overwhelming force will be the order of the day.
Expect more troops to be sent over soon, or to have their tours extended. Bush said if General Abizaid wants more troops, which he does, he'll get them.
Bush also displayed again the full fervor of his messianic militarism.
Several times he mentioned that the war offered a "historic opportunity to change the world."
In one of his most emphatic moments, he said, "I also have this belief, strong belief, that freedom is not this country's gift to the world; freedom is the Almighty's gift to every man and woman in this world. And as the greatest power on the face of the Earth, we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom."
This is Bush saying that he is doing God's work in Iraq. That is a particularly inappropriate claim to make, leaving aside the obvious leaping of the church/state wall. Given that Bush has chosen to wage war in an Islamic country, it is unlikely that there are many Iraqis who are anxious to hear Bush's theological justifications.
Bush's rhetoric is proof once again that the government of the United States is in the hands of a crude and deluded leader, whose war policy in Iraq promises more disasters to come.
"Our work may become more difficult before it is finished," he said.
With Bush's approach, that is a guarantee.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive.
Copyright 2004 The Progressive
http://www.progressive.org/ |
|
