A Reporter Finally Stands Up To Bush... No, sorry, not an American; So he files a complaint with her embassy and cancels another, already scheduled interview with Laura Bush... What a surprise!
By Anthony Wade
I hope everyone takes notice of the quiet story today, trying to fly under the radar on a relaxing Sunday afternoon. The White House filed a complaint with the Irish Embassy in Washington over RTE journalist Carole Coleman's interview with US President George Bush. As if this was not enough, they then canceled an already agreed upon interview with Ms. Coleman and Laura Bush as an "I'm taking my ball and going home" gesture. Chutzpah in the dictionary now officially has a picture of this administration.
What was Carole Coleman's great sin you ask? Well she asked the President honest questions that are on the minds of everyone around the world. She asked them respectfully, quietly and candidly. We just cant have that in a day and age where the media has written Bush a blank check and he is used to contrived questions and pat answers. The President, not used to being asked difficult questions, tried his level best to intimidate Ms. Coleman, repeatedly extending the length of his answers just so he could tell her stop cutting him off. She was not being abrasive, he on the other hand came off as defensive, controlling, and bullying.
Substantively, lets take a look at the interview. For starters, Bush answers the first question, by again stating that Abu Ghraib is the result of actions of some bad apples. This point has been proven wrong. Then to answer a question about how people are angry at the US over Iraq, Bush again goes into lie mode saying that people should focus on Saddam and the "mass graves". No mention of the fact that the Iraqi citizens have had to bury thousands of their own because of this invasion. He then continued, by saying that Saddam used WMD on his own people, which is certainly not a confirmed fact. At this point, Bush is rambling on about how the UN had told Saddam to disarm, and Ms. Coleman tries to correctly point out that no WMD have been found. Bush, not used to having a reporter actually ask him a tough question, or point out a misdirection, actually interrupts her and tells her "can I finish". He finished by saying, "the UN told him to disarm or face serious consequences, and guess what, he didn't disarm and therefore he faced serious consequences". What??? He didn't disarm? Really Mr. Bush, then where are the WMD? He actually breezed right by this lie and went directly into another by stating that we "have found that he had the capacity to make weapons". What??? When was this found Mr. President? Is this the weather balloons you are talking about? The truth is that we have found no such capacity. He then finishes this stream of unconsciousness by using his favorite tag line; "no one can say that the world is not a better place without Saddam in power".
Ms. Coleman, undeterred by the level of bovine excrement, presses on by correctly pointing out that most people find life today more dangerous than they did before Bush came to power. She points out that every day there is some terrorist news, while four years ago, it was always isolated incidents. Mr. Bush, then asks her what was it like on 9-11, and when she has the audacity to start to answer, he again cuts her off by saying "you ask the questions and I'll answer them if you don't mind." What??? Hm, Mr. President, you JUST ASKED HER A QUESTION! Nevertheless, he continued and wouldn't let her answer. The President rattled off a litany of bombings, all of which had one thing in common, they all had nothing to do with Iraq. Ms. Coleman correctly points this out and says that we feel less safe because Bush has taken the focus off al Qaeda and placed it on Iraq, a very astute point. When she follows it up by talking about a picture she saw the other day, of four dead US soldiers, Bush interrupts her, by saying "nobody cares more about death than me", which ironically may have been the first true statement he has made in this interview. When she tries to go back to her point, because she was in mid-sentence, he again cuts her off rudely with the "can I finish" nonsense.
Then Bush starts going off the deep end, waxing philosophical about how people join terrorist organizations because of a lack of hope, and by bringing democracy and freedom to Iraq, we are bringing hope, and thus, we defeat terrorism. WOW.
After some brief exchanges, Bush finds himself trying to prop up his image again, by saying that the US has done more than any country to help stop the spread of AIDS. He trumpets his "initiative" to send 15 billion dollars to Africa to fight this "pandemic". While the President has always talked a tough game on this subject, the money has not actually been provided. Similar to the first responder monies promised to NYC.
Next up, Coleman asks Mr. Bush about the opinion of the US in the eyes of the Europeans. He opines a bit about how France is really the only dissenting European nation and that Europe actually supports the war effort. The fact of the matter is that besides England, you would be hard pressed to find a European ally among the "Coalition of the Bribed", that has provided any more material support than the juggernaut that is Palau.
In responding to a question about whether democracy can really flourish where there is still so much fighting and death, Bush essentially accuses her of focusing too much on the death. Of course we know that Bush does everything in his power to not focus on the thousands of lives he has taken through this invasion. He then talks about the terrorists, as willing to "slaughter innocent people". We have taken out a wedding with an air strike, and bombed residential neighborhoods. Women and children have died because of the actions ordered by this President and he has the nerve to talk about the slaughter of the innocents. He wraps this bit up by stating he will not cower in the face of terror; he chooses to lead in the face of terror. Never mind that there is now proof that there never was any relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, Bush keeps on playing that ole tired line. This is at the heart of Bush policy, misdirection. By talking in sound bites he is able to float out the misdirection. "I will lead in the face of terror," sounds nice, but what it does is it tries to legitimize the invasion of Iraq, as having something to do with fighting terrorism. We all now know that to be patently false.
So, in response to this interview, the White House files a complaint and then cancels an interview Laura Bush was supposed to do, as punishment for Ms. Coleman having the temerity to give an honest interview and ask the relevant questions we all wished our media would start asking. That sums up this administration. If it is not completely under their control, they simply change the rules until it is. In this interview Bush lied about Abu Ghraib being a result of the actions of a few soldiers, that Saddam had WMD, that Saddam didn't disarm, that he had the capacity to make weapons, that by blowing up Iraq and bringing democracy to it; terrorism will stop, that he has provided 15 billion to Africa for AIDS, that outside of France, Europe supports the Iraq war, and that he is leading in the face of terror by invading Iraq. That is a lot if lies and misdirection for a 12 minute interview.
On the truth side of the ledger, we see that Mr. Bush does not play fair with open inquiries, that he then is punitive when someone has dared to question him honestly, and that "no one cares more about death", than Bush. Well Mr. Bush, on that point, I truly believe you.
Anthony Wade is an independent writer from New York. Email to takebacktheus@gmail.com
