Helen Vs. Scotty
Press Secretary Scott McClellan has been having a rough week. Twice he has been asked tough questions by White House Reporter Helen Thomas. The first incident occurred on Oct. 13th.
Here is the transcript of the incident:
Notice how quickly Scotty accused Thomas of being “soft” on terror simply because she had the audacity to point out the reality that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 (a reality some what different from the Bush version). This is pure Bush style of addressing the issues, when faced with tough questions you either a) accuse the questioner of being sympathetic to the enemy or b) leave the question unanswered and take the opportunity to regurgitate the same rhetoric you have been peddling for the last 2 ½ years. But what else do you expect from a White House that hasn’t been held accountable for its actions?
Something else that was lost in the exchange was the question: If they ask us to leave, then we’ll leave? That is a good question, and one that hasn’t really been addressed by the mainstream media. According a Zogby poll taken right before the January elections, 69% of Shiites and 82% of Sunni’s favored a “near-term” withdrawal of US troops and an end to the occupation. Surveys done for the Coalition Provisional Authority in June 2004 showed that a 55 % majority "would feel safer if US troops left immediately."
Why hasn’t this gotten any attention in the mainstream media? Mainly due to the fact that because the corporate media had a hand in “hyping” the case for war, to report now that a majority of Iraqis favor our withdrawal would likely cause the remaining support to crumble. Incidentally, ratings would probably suffer as well.
Round Two
Helen went toe-to-toe with Scotty again in an Oct 18th press briefing:
Yet another attempt to evade the tough questions. Even after repeated tries, Scotty couldn’t defer the question of this incident onto the military. So finally he decided to use the opportunity to praise the military and their efforts to spread freedom and peace. Yet again he mentioned we are on the offense in a war of last resort, fighting the enemies of democracy (I see a pattern here, is Scotty reading from the same script?) He talked about how we are better than them because we don’t intentionally target civilians. Note to Scotty: all because we don’t intentionally target civilians doesn’t make them any less dead. He talked about the distinction between us and them. Unfortunately, with incidents such as these, that distinction becomes somewhat blurred.
Mahatma Gandhi once said: "What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the name of liberty and democracy?"
(Originally posted on Yahoo360)
Here is the transcript of the incident:
Thomas: What does the President mean by "total victory" -- that we will never leave Iraq until we have "total victory"? What does that mean?
McClellan: Free and democratic Iraq in the heart of the Middle East, because a free and democratic Iraq in the heart of the Middle East will be a major blow to the ambitions --
Thomas: If they ask us to leave, then we'll leave?
McClellan: I'm trying to respond. A free and democratic Iraq in the heart of the broader Middle East will be a major blow to the ambitions of al Qaeda and their terrorist associates. They want to establish or impose their rule over the broader Middle East -- we saw that in the Zawahiri letter that was released earlier this week by the intelligence community.
Thomas: They also know we invaded Iraq.
McClellan: Well, Helen, the President recognizes that we are engaged in a global war on terrorism. And when you're engaged in a war, it's not always pleasant, and it's certainly a last resort. But when you engage in a war, you take the fight to the enemy, you go on the offense. And that's exactly what we are doing. We are fighting them there so that we don't have to fight them here. September 11th taught us --
Thomas: It has nothing to do with -- Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
McClellan: Well, you have a very different view of the war on terrorism, and I'm sure you're opposed to the broader war on terrorism. The President recognizes this requires a comprehensive strategy, and that this is a broad war, that it is not a law enforcement matter.
Notice how quickly Scotty accused Thomas of being “soft” on terror simply because she had the audacity to point out the reality that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 (a reality some what different from the Bush version). This is pure Bush style of addressing the issues, when faced with tough questions you either a) accuse the questioner of being sympathetic to the enemy or b) leave the question unanswered and take the opportunity to regurgitate the same rhetoric you have been peddling for the last 2 ½ years. But what else do you expect from a White House that hasn’t been held accountable for its actions?
Something else that was lost in the exchange was the question: If they ask us to leave, then we’ll leave? That is a good question, and one that hasn’t really been addressed by the mainstream media. According a Zogby poll taken right before the January elections, 69% of Shiites and 82% of Sunni’s favored a “near-term” withdrawal of US troops and an end to the occupation. Surveys done for the Coalition Provisional Authority in June 2004 showed that a 55 % majority "would feel safer if US troops left immediately."
Why hasn’t this gotten any attention in the mainstream media? Mainly due to the fact that because the corporate media had a hand in “hyping” the case for war, to report now that a majority of Iraqis favor our withdrawal would likely cause the remaining support to crumble. Incidentally, ratings would probably suffer as well.
Round Two
Helen went toe-to-toe with Scotty again in an Oct 18th press briefing:
Thomas: Dispatches from Iraq said that yesterday we killed 70 people in Iraq, near Ramadi, including 18 children. I want to know what the President thinks of that.
McClellan: Well, first of all, I think you need to talk to the military, because the military --
Thomas: No, I'm talking here.
McClellan: Yes, and as I'm responding to you, the military has said otherwise at this point. Now, the military has review mechanisms in place and when there are questions raised, they look into those matters, and so that's something that, obviously, they will look into. But, beyond that, you'd have to talk to the military about where that stands. Now --
Thomas: Eighteen children --
McClellan: -- in terms of our United States military, our military goes out of the way not to target --
Thomas: Why were 18 children killed?
McClellan: Our military goes out of the way not to target innocent civilians.
Thomas: I'm not saying they were targeted --
McClellan: Our military goes out of the way to target the enemy, and to --
Thomas: Why did they say 18 children?
McClellan: -- bring to justice the terrorists and those who are seeking to prevent democracy from taking hold, through violent means, to justice. And that's what our military does. And they do --
Thomas: Seventy people were killed by an air strike.
McClellan: Helen, please let me respond, because I think it's important to point this out when you're bringing up a question like this. We fully support our men and women in uniform. They're doing an outstanding job to defend our freedoms and to help the Iraqi people move forward on a free --
Thomas: I'm not saying -- I'm saying why did they kill 70 people?
McClellan: -- to move forward on a free and peaceful future. I think everybody in this room would like me to have the opportunity to be able to talk to you about this question. And you're assuming things that people have different recollections about right now, or have characterized very differently. And that's why I said the military has review mechanisms in place, when situations like this arise, and they look into those matters. That's why you need to talk to the military, to see where that stands.
Thomas: Are the figures wrong in all the newspapers?
McClellan: The military is looking into the matter, Helen. I don't have any more information at this point.
Reporter: If I could follow on Helen's question, though. Whatever the facts of this particular situation are, war is an inexact business, and children do get killed. And what I think she's asking is for a response from the President about children who may have been killed as a result of American action.
McClellan: Look, I don't want to assume, because this is an incident that's being looked into.
Reporter: I'm not assuming. I'm not assuming.
McClellan: And I want to also make the point -- and I think you can go back and look at this -- yes, war is always the last resort. It's not something that's pleasant. But it is a decision that sometimes the Commander-in-Chief has to make in order to protect the American people. And he made the decision that we were going to go on the offensive in this global war on terrorism that we're engaged in, and that's exactly what we're doing, and that we're going to work to spread freedom and democracy in a part of the world that is in need of hope. And you have to recognize the struggle that we're engaged in.
And there are people in Iraq, terrorists, who recognized how high the stakes are, and they're seeking to do everything they can to stop the democratic process from advancing. And there are attacks carried out on some of our troops. And when those attacks are carried out on our troops, you have others that respond to that. And we appreciate all that our men and women in uniform are doing when it comes to defending our freedoms abroad.
Now, in terms of any innocent people being killed, we mourn the loss of any innocent life that is lost. We have seen that the terrorists have no regard for innocent human life. That's the difference between the enemy and between those in the civilized world who are committed to spreading freedom and peace. We target the enemy; they target innocent civilians. And there's a stark contrast in how we go about waging this war on terrorism. They carry out cowardly acts against innocent civilians. We go after those who seek to do harm to those innocent civilians.
Yet another attempt to evade the tough questions. Even after repeated tries, Scotty couldn’t defer the question of this incident onto the military. So finally he decided to use the opportunity to praise the military and their efforts to spread freedom and peace. Yet again he mentioned we are on the offense in a war of last resort, fighting the enemies of democracy (I see a pattern here, is Scotty reading from the same script?) He talked about how we are better than them because we don’t intentionally target civilians. Note to Scotty: all because we don’t intentionally target civilians doesn’t make them any less dead. He talked about the distinction between us and them. Unfortunately, with incidents such as these, that distinction becomes somewhat blurred.
Mahatma Gandhi once said: "What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the name of liberty and democracy?"
(Originally posted on Yahoo360)
Post a Comment