My first thought was to pass over the whole thing in silence.
But we all know what silence=
And a lie right off the bat. He wasn’t at all pleased. Every painfully emitted word from his mouth quivered with fear and apprehension. Not of Saddam Hussein, of course — but of us.
And it wasn’t Saddam Hussein.
Says Dubbya and company, not being able — or perhaps willing — to produce Osama Bin Ladin.
“We hope you’ll believe” is more like it.
In New York tomorrow, the United Nations Security Council will receive an update from the chief weapons inspector. The world needs him to answer a single question: Has the Iraqi regime fully and unconditionally disarmed as required by Resolution 1441 or has it not?
Iraq’s dictator has made a public show of producing and destroying a few missiles, missiles that violate the restrictions set out more than 10 years ago.
Yet our intelligence shows that even as he is destroying these few missiles, he has ordered the continued production of the very same type of missiles.”
In other words the U.N. doesn’t matter.
In some cases, these materials have been moved to different locations every 12 to 24 hours or placed in vehicles that are in residential neighborhoods.
We know from multiple intelligence sources that Iraqi weapons scientists continue to be threatened with harm should they cooperate with U.N. inspectors.
Scientists are required by Iraqi intelligence to wear concealed recording devices during interviews, and hotels where interviews take place are bugged by the regime.”
No reason has been offered to justify why anyone should believe one word of this paranoid scenario. It’s simply “Shut up and listen to us because we said so.”
As described by the “leader” of a country that has systematically and deliberately defied the world for as long as any of us who care can remember.
“Hey Rocky — watch me pull Hans Blix out of a hat!”
What the world has demanded is peace. And that something the Bush regime has no intention of supplying.
Token gestures are not acceptable. The only acceptable outcome is the one already defined by a unanimous vote of the Security Council: total disarmament.”
As we arm more and more and more. The total dsiarmament of the United States would be a dream come true.
“And it cannot be denied because I said so !”
Saddam Hussein and his weapons are a direct threat to this country, to our people and to all free people.”
The United States has a long history of reckless aggression and terrible crimes. It possesses weapons of terror. It provides funding and training and safe haven to terrorists, terrorists who would willingly use weapons of mass destruction against America and other peace-loving countries.
The United States and its weapons are a direct threat to this country, to our people and to all free people.
of being attacked by us — either economically or militarily.
We’ve already seen that at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
because we should be at the Dubbya regime’s mercy alone.
This is where the press whores get their marching orders — cover up the casualties. Decline to so at your own risk.
And nuking them.
The Iraqi people have had about as much choice as the American people on that score — and will continue to do so regardless of the outcome.
Peace Through War.
And pretense is one of the few things Dubbya really knows about.
You mean we’re going to stop supporting all the puppet governments we’ve put in place?
I know their deployment so far from home is causing hardship for many military families. Our nation is deeply grateful to all who serve in uniform.
We appreciate your commitment, your idealism and your sacrifice. We support you. And we know that if peace must be defended, you are ready.”
Cue Kate Smith.
And give Helen Thomas the hook.
The switch form “I can” to “you could” is hilarious. Good boy — here’s a doggie treat!
1441, the Security Council resolution passed unanimously last fall, said clearly that Saddam Hussein has one last chance to disarm.
He hasn’t disarmed. So we’re working with Security Council members to resolve this issue at the Security Council.
This is not only an important moment for the security of our nation, I believe it’s an important moment for the Security Council itself. And the reason I say that is because this issue has been before the Security Council, the issue of disarmament of Iraq, for 12 long years.
And the fundamental question facing the Security Council is will its words mean anything; when the Security Council speaks, will the words have merit and weight? I think it’s important for those words to have merit and weight, because I understand that in order to win the war against terror, there must be a united effort to do so. And we must work together to defeat terror.”
In other words it’s not that Saddam Hussein must disarm. It’s that the United Nations must disarm — role over and play dead for the United States. Or else.
Note: “Has got” to “with wealth’ to “trans terrorists” to “could arm terrorists” to “al-Queda terorists” to “weapons of mass destruction.”
Couldn’t be clearer.
Uh, no it hasn’t.
As far as ultimatums and all of the speculation about what may or may not happen after next week, we’ll just wait and see.”
Tune in tomorrow for another ennervating episode!
BUSH: Well, we’re days away from resolving this issue at the Security Council.
Q: Thank you. Another hot spot is North Korea. If North Korea restarts their plutonium plant, will that change your thinking about how to handle this crisis? Or are you resigned to North Korea becoming a nuclear power?
BUSH: This is a regional issue. I say regional issue because there’s a lot of countries that have got a direct stake into whether or not North Korea has nuclear weapons. We’ve got a stake as to whether North Korea has a nuclear weapon. China clearly has a stake as to whether or not North Korea has a nuclear weapon. South Korea, of course, has a stake. Japan has got a significant stake as to whether or not North Korea has a nuclear weapon. Russia has a stake.”
And in the Dracula movies Dr.Van Helsing has a stake. The repetitiveness nudges towards Gertrude Stein at times.
And this administration has broken nearly every international treaty the U.S. ever signed.
Really? How? Go on “Dr. Phil” with them?
So should Saddam come to Crawford?
Maybe “Dr. Phil” should come to Crawford.
Q: Mr. President, you and your top advisers, notably Secretary of State Powell, have repeatedly said that we have shared with our allies all of the current, up-to-date intelligence information that proves the imminence of the threat we face from Saddam Hussein and that they have been sharing their intelligence as well. If all of these nations, all of them our normal allies, have access to the same intelligence information, why is it that they are reluctant to think that the threat is so real, so imminent that we need to move to the brink of war now?
And in relation to that, today, the British foreign minister, Jack Straw, suggested at the U.N. that it might be time to look at amending the resolution perhaps with an eye toward a timetable, like that proposed by the Canadians some two weeks ago, that would set a firm deadline to give Saddam Hussein a little bit of time to come clean. And also, obviously, that would give you a little bit of a chance to build more support with any members of the Security Council.
Is that something that the governments should be pursuing at the U.N. right now?”
Dave thinks he’s really playing hardball here.
But I meant what I said. This is the last phase of diplomacy. A little bit more time: Saddam Hussein has had 12 years to disarm. He is deceiving people. This is important for our fellow citizens to realize that if he really intended to disarm like the world has asked him to do, we would know whether he was disarming. He’s trying to buy time.
I can understand why: He’s been successful with these tactics for 12 years.”
12 years, again!
And how does Saddam Hussein figure in Sepetember the 11th?
September the 11th should say to the American people that we are now a battlefield, that weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a terrorist organization could be deployed here at home.
So therefore I think the threat is real. And so do a lot of other people in my government. And since I believe the threat is real and since my most important job is to protect the security of the American people, that’s precisely what we will do.”
I am reminded of the fact that Liberace’s favorite self-help book was entitled “The Magic of Believing.”
Almost a neo-dadaist poem, that one.
The “I appreciate that” is the killer.
We must communicate. We must share intelligence. We must share — we must cut off money together. We must smoke these al-Qaida types out one at a time.”
Now “communicate” becomes the word to be repeated mindlessly.
But America is not alone in this sentiment. There are a lot of countries who fully understand the threat of Saddam Hussein. A lot of countries realize that the credibility of the Security Council is at stake; a lot of countries, like America, who hope that he would have disarmed, and a lot of countries which realize that it may require force, may require force to disarm him.”
Q: Thank you, Mr. President.
Sir, if you haven’t already made the choice to go to war, can you tell us what you are waiting to hear or see before you do make that decision?
And if I may, during a recent demonstration many of the protesters suggested that the U.S. was a threat to peace, which prompted you to wonder out loud why they didn’t see Saddam Hussein as a threat to peace.
I wonder why you think so many people around the world take a different view of the threat that Saddam Hussein poses than you and your allies.”
My what GUTS it took to pretend to ask something vaguely resembling a serious question!
Been to a mall lately?
I remember the protests against trade. A lot of people didn’t feel like free trade was good for the world. I completely disagree. I think free trade is good for both wealthy and impoverished nations. But that didn’t change my opinion about trade. As a matter of fact, I went to the Congress to get trade promotion authority.”
The NAFTA protests were only a fraction of the size of the world-wide protests of the last few weeks, but in Dubbya’s view they’re the same “focus group.”
Well we know you don’t like to go to war yourself. But sending others is a different story.
The “demands of the world” part wasn’t your hope — it was your fantasy.
Note the use of the 12th. Clever, Karl.
I’m hopeful that he does disarm.
But in the name of peace and the security of our people, if he won’t do so voluntarily, we will disarm him, and other nations will join him — join us in disarming him.”
The “join him – join us” is hilarious.
Really? Black Hawk Down was a big hit.
by nuking it.
says the gentle Dubbya.
BUSH: This is unscripted.”
Ever so remindful of that moment in Sextette when Mae West started getting traffic reports off the reciever that was put in her ear to read her her lines — and she read the traffic reports as if they were dialogue.
And as you prepare the American people for the possibility of military conflict, could you share with us any of the scenarios your advisers have shared with you about worst-case scenarios, in terms of the potential cost of American lives, the potential cost to the American economy and the potential risks of retaliatory terrorist strikes here at home?”
Very Late Afternoon News. It’s all “personal” and “worst-case scenarios” confected to keep us all quivering in antici-
People can describe all kinds of intentions. I swore to protect and defend the Constitution, that’s what I swore to do. I put my hand on the Bible and took that oath. And that’s exactly what I am going to do.
I believe Saddam Hussein is a threat to the American people. I believe he’s a threat to the neighborhood in which he lives.
And I’ve got good evidence to believe that. He has weapons of mass destruction, and he has used weapons of mass destruction in his neighborhood and on his own people. He’s invaded countries in his neighborhood. He tortures his own people. He’s a murderer. He has trained and financed al-Qaida-type organizations before — al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations.
I take the threat seriously, and I’ll deal with the threat. I hope it can be done peacefully.
The rest of your six-point question?”
to which you’ll get a one-point answer.
BUSH: No, thanks.
Q: … for the economy, terrorism.
BUSH: The price of doing nothing exceeds the price of taking action if we have to. We will do everything we can to minimize the loss of life.
The price of the attacks on America, the cost of the attacks on America on September 11th were enormous. They were significant. And I’m not willing to take that chance again, John.”
In short — no thanks.
Q: Thank you, sir.
May I follow up on Jim Angle’s question? In the past several weeks your policy on Iraq has generated opposition from the governments of France, Russia, China, Germany, Turkey, the Arab League and many other countries, opened a rift at NATO and at the U.N. and drawn millions of ordinary citizens around the world into the streets into anti-war protests.
May I ask what went wrong that so many governments and peoples around the world now not only disagree with you very strongly, but see the U.S. under your leadership as an arrogant power?”
Well the simple answer is they don’t buy the crap you shovel out by the cartload, Terry.
And the vote came out 15 to nothing, Terry. And I think you will see when it’s all said and done, if we have to use force, a lot of nations will be with us.”
ie. Might makes Right
Having said that, they’re still our friends, and we’ll deal with them as friends. We’ve got a lot of common interests. Our trans-Atlantic relationships are very important.
And while they may disagree with how we deal with Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction, there was no disagreement when it came time to vote on 1441, as least as far as France was concerned. They joined us. They said Saddam Hussein has one last chance of disarming.
If they think more time will cause him to disarm, I disagree with that. He’s a master of deception. He has no intention of disarming. Otherwise, we would have known.
There’s a lot of talk about inspectors. It would have taken a handful of inspectors to determine whether he was disarming. They could’ve showed up at a parking lot and he could’ve brought his weapons and destroyed them.
That’s not what he chose to do.”
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION IN A PARKING LOT?!?!?!!!!!
One of the things we love in America is freedom. If I may, I’d like to remind you what I said at the State of the Union: Liberty is not America’s gift to the world, it is God’s gift to each and every person. And that’s what I believe.”
I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant’s faithful 100%.
But this is a unique circumstance because of 12 years of denial and defiance, because of terrorist connections, because of past history.
I’m convinced that a liberated Iraq will be important for that troubled part of the world. The Iraqi people are plenty capable of governing themselves. Iraq’s a sophisticated society. Iraq’s got money. Iraq will provide a place where people can see that the Shia and the Sunni and the Kurds can get along in a federation. Iraq will serve as a catalyst for change — positive change.
So there’s a lot more at stake than just American security and the security of people close by Saddam Hussein. Freedom is at stake, as well. And I take that very seriously.”
Yadda, yadda, yadda.
Q: Mr. President, good evening.
If you order war, can any military operation be considered a success if the United States does not capture Saddam Hussein, as you once said, “dead or alive”?
BUSH: Well, I hope we don’t have to go to war. But if we go to war we will disarm Iraq. And if we go to war there will be a regime change. And replacing this cancer inside of Iraq will be a government that represents the rights of all the people, a government which represents the voices of the Shia and the Sunni and the Kurds.
We care about the suffering of the Iraqi people. I mentioned in my opening comments that there’s a lot of food ready to go in. There’s something like 55,000 oil-for-food distribution points in Iraq.
We know where they are. We fully intend to make sure that they’ve got ample food. We know where their hospitals are. We want to make sure they’ve got ample medical supplies.
The life of the Iraqi citizen’s going to dramatically improve.”
Cancer, food, and “quality of life issues.”
BUSH: We will be changing the regime of Iraq for the good of the Iraqi people.
Q: Mr. President, to a lot of people it seems that war is probably inevitable, because many people doubt — most people I would guess — that Saddam Hussein will ever do what we are demanding that he do, which is disarm.
And if war is inevitable, there are a lot of people in this country — as much as half by polling standards — who agree that he should be disarmed, who listen to you say that you have the evidence, but who feel they haven’t seen it, and who still wonder why blood has to be shed if he hasn’t attacked us.
BUSH: Well, Bill, if they believe he should be disarmed and he’s not going to disarm, there’s only way to disarm him. And that is going to be my last choice: the use of force.
Secondly, the American people know that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction.
By the way, he declared he didn’t have any. 1441 insisted that he have a complete declaration of his weapons. He said he didn’t have any weapons.
And secondly, he’s used these weapons before. I mean, we’re not speculating about the nature of the man. We know the nature of the man.
Colin Powell, in an eloquent address to the United Nations, described some of the information we were at liberty of talking about. He mentioned a man named al-Zarqawi who is in charge of the poison network. It’s a man who was wounded in Afghanistan, received aid in Baghdad, ordered the killing of a U.S. citizen — USAID employee, was harbored in Iraq.”
Fugue state once again!
Built by the British.
So in the name of security and peace, if we have to — if we have to, we’ll disarm him. I hope he disarms, or perhaps I hope he leaves the country. I hear a lot of talk from different nations around where Saddam Hussein might be exiled. That would be fine with me, just so long as Iraq disarms after he’s exiled.”
We hope. He might. Exile.
Q: Thank you, Mr. President.
As you said, the Security Council faces a vote next week on a resolution implicitly authorizing an attack on Iraq. Will you call for a vote on that resolution, even if you aren’t sure you have the votes?
BUSH: Well, first, I don’t think — it basically says that he is in defiance of 1441. That’s what the resolution says.
And it’s hard to believe anybody saying he isn’t in defiance of 1441 because 1441 said he must disarm.
And yes, we’ll call for a vote.
Q: No matter what?
BUSH: No matter what the whip count is, we’re calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council.”
Whip? He thinks it’s the Senate!
Q: Mr. President, are you worried that the United States might be viewed as defiant of the United Nations if you went ahead with military action without specific and explicit authorization from the U.N.?
BUSH: No, I’m not worried about that.
As a matter of fact, it’s hard to say the United States is defiant about the United Nations when I was the person who took the issue to the United Nations September the 12th, 2002.
We’ve been working with the United Nations. We’ve been working through the United Nations.
Secondly, I’m confident the American people understand that when it comes to our security, if we need to act, we will act. And we really don’t need United Nations approval to do so.”
Yep — fuck the U.N.!
Q: Thank you, Mr. President.
Even though our military can certainly prevail without a northern front, isn’t Turkey making it at least slightly more challenging for us, and therefore at least slightly more likely that American lives will be lost? And if they don’t reverse course, would you stop backing their entry into the European Union?
BUSH: The answer to your second question is I support Turkey going into the EU.
Turkey’s a friend.”
Not according to Tosspot Fascist Hitchens.
April, did you have a question, or did I call upon you cold?
Q: No, I have a question.
BUSH: OK, I’m sure you do have a question.
Q: Mr. President, as the nation is at odds over war, with many organizations like the Congressional Black Caucus pushing for continued diplomacy through the U.N., how is your faith guiding you? And what should you tell America? Well, what should America do collectively as you instructed before 9/11? Should it be prayer? Because you are saying, “Let’s continue the war on terror.”
BUSH: I appreciate that question a lot.”
And we live in a dangerous world. We live in new circumstances in our country, and I hope people remember the — I know they remember the tragedy of September the 11th, but I hope they understand the lesson of September the 11th.”
And the lesson is September the 11th will be used as an excuse for everything.
Jesus H. Christ on the Cross!!!! It’s the God Card!
I pray for peace, April. I pray for peace.”
Q: As you know, not everyone shares your optimistic vision of how this might play out. Do you ever worry, maybe in the wee, small hours, that you might be wrong and they might be right in thinking that this could lead to more terrorism, more anti-American sentiment, more instability in the Middle East?
BUSH: I think, first of all, it’s hard to envision more terror on America than September the 11th, 2001.”
Hunh? I thought that was just what you were doing?
Sounds almost like the finale to Chicago doesn’t it?
I believe we’ll prevail. I know we’ll prevail.
And out of that disarmament of Saddam will come a better world, particularly for the people who live in Iraq.
This is a society, Ron, who — which has been decimated by his murderous ways, his torture. He doesn’t allow dissent. He doesn’t believe in the values we believe in.
I believe this society — the Iraqi society can develop in a much better way. I think of the risks, calculated the costs of inaction versus the cost of action. And I’m firmly convinced, if we have to, we will act in the name of peace and in the name of freedom.
Q: Mr. President, if you decide to go ahead with military action, there are inspectors on the ground in Baghdad. Will you give them time to leave the country, or the humanitarian workers on the ground, or the journalists? Will you be able to do that and still mount an effective attack on Iraq?
BUSH: Of course, we will give people a chance to leave. And we don’t want anybody in harm’s way who shouldn’t be in harm’s way.
The journalists who are there should leave. If you’re going and we start action, leave.
The inspectors — we don’t want people in harm’s way.”
In other words if we kill the inspectors don’t blame us.
And we will do everything we can, as I mentioned — and I mean this — to protect innocent life. I’ve not made up our mind about military action. Hopefully, this can be done peacefully. I believe that, as a result of the pressure that we have placed, and others have placed, that Saddam will disarm and or leave the country.
Q: Mr. President, good evening.
Sir, you’ve talked a lot about trusting the American people when it comes to making decisions about their own lives, about how to spend their own money.
When it comes to the financial costs of the war, sir, it would seem that the administration surely has costed out various scenarios. If that’s the case, why not present some of them to the American people so they know what to expect, sir?
BUSH: Ed, we will. We’ll present it in the form of a supplemental to the spenders. We don’t get to spend the money; as you know, we have to request the expenditure of money from the Congress, and at the appropriate time we’ll request a supplemental.
We’re obviously analyzing all aspects. We hope we don’t go to war, but if we should, we will present a supplemental.”
There is a huge cost when we get attacked. There’s a significant cost to our society.
First of all, there’s the cost of lives. It’s an immeasurable cost. Three thousand people died. Significant cost to our economy. Opportunity loss is an immeasurable cost. Besides the cost of repairing buildings and cost to our airlines. And so, the cost of an attack is significant.
If I thought we were safe from attack, I would be thinking differently. But I see a gathering threat. I mean, it’s a true, real threat to America. And therefore, we will deal with it.
And at the appropriate time, Ed, we will ask for a supplemental. And that’ll be the moment where you and others will be able to recognize what we think the dollar cost of a conflict will be.
You know, the benefits of such an effort, if, in fact, we go forward and are successful, are also immeasurable. How do you measure the benefit of freedom in Iraq? I guess if you’re an Iraqi citizen you can measure it by being able to express your mind, though. How do you measure the consequence of taking a dictator out of power who has tried to invade Kuwait, somebody who may someday decide to lob a weapon of mass destruction on Israel? How would you weigh the cost of that?
Those are immeasurable costs. And I weigh those very seriously.
In terms of the dollar amount, we’ll let you know here pretty soon.”
Q: If I can follow on Steve’s question on North Korea, do you believe it is essential for the security of the United States and its allies that North Korea be prevented from developing nuclear weapons? And are you in any way growing frustrated with the pace of the diplomacy there?
BUSH: Yes, I think it’s an issue. Obviously I’m concerned about North Korea developing nuclear weapons, not only for their own use, but for — perhaps they might choose to proliferate them, sell them. They may end up in the hands of dictators, people who are not afraid of using weapons of using weapons of mass destruction, people who try to impose their will on the world or blackmail free nations — concerned about it.
We are working hard to bring a diplomatic solution.
And we’ve made some progress. After all, the IAEA asked that the Security Council take up the North Korean issue. It’s now in the Security Council.
Constantly talking with the Chinese and the Russians and the Japanese and the South Koreans. Colin Powell just went overseas and spent some time in China, went to the inauguration of President Roh in South Korea and spent time in China. And we’re working the issue hard, and optimistic that we’ll come up with a diplomatic solution.
I certainly hope so.
He wishes it were all inaudible.
Mr. President, millions of Americans can recall a time when leaders from both parties set this country on a mission of regime change in Vietnam. Fifty-thousand Americans died. The regime is still there in Hanoi and it hasn’t harmed or threatened a single American in 30 years since the war ended.
What can you say tonight, sir, to the sons and the daughters of the Americans who served in Vietnam to assure them that you will not lead this country down a similar path in Iraq?”
Our mission is clear in Iraq. Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament.
In order to disarm, it will mean regime change. I’m confident that we’ll be able to achieve that objective in a way that minimizes the loss of life.
No doubt there’s risks with any military operation. I know that. But it’s very clear what we intend to do. And our mission won’t change. The mission is precisely what I just stated. We’ve got a plan that will achieve that mission should we need to send forces in.
Last question. Let’s see, who needs one? Jean?
Q: Thank you, Mr. President.
In the coming days, the American people are going to hear a lot of debate about this British proposal of a possible deadline being added to the resolution or not. And I know you don’t want to tip your hand; this is a great diplomatic moment.
But from the administration’s perspective and your own perspective, can you share for the American public what you view as the pros and cons associated with that proposal?
BUSH: You’re right, I’m not going to tip my hand.
Q: But could you help them sort out the debate …
BUSH: Thank you.
Anything that’s debated must have resolution to this issue. We’re not going to — it makes no sense to allow this issue to continue on and on in the hopes that Saddam Hussein disarms. The whole purpose of the debate is for Saddam to disarm.
We gave him a chance. As a matter of fact, we gave him 12 years of chances. But recently, we gave him a chance starting last fall, and it said, “last chance to disarm.” The resolution said that. And had he chosen to do so, it would be evident that he disarmed. And so more time, more inspectors, more process, in our judgment is not going to affect the peace of the world.
So whatever is resolved is going to have some finality to it, so that Saddam Hussein will take us seriously.
I want to remind you that it is his choice to make as to whether or not we go to war. It’s Saddam’s choice. He’s the person that can make the choice of war and peace. Thus far, he’s made the wrong choice. If we have to, for the sake and the security of the American people, for the sake of peace in the world and for freedom to the Iraqi people, we will disarm Saddam Hussein. And by we, it’s more than America. A lot of nations will join us.
Thank you for your questions.
Good night “
Don’t it always seem to go
You don’t know what you’ve got til it’s gone
You take your Weapons of Mass Destruction
and drag them to a Parking Lot!