posted on November 18, 2002 12:12:08 AM new
If you watched the segment, it was interesting to note what was NOT said. Some of those things that Bush said could have come from any Dictator; such as, "I feel I don't have to answer to anyone, you see, because I'm the President. It's everyone else who has to answer everything to me!"
Also, about how he (Bush) would go into rages if things were not done immediately (shades of Adolph Hitler!)
Boy! I caught quite a few things like that! Did you?
sp.
[ edited by Borillar on Nov 18, 2002 12:12 AM ]
posted on November 18, 2002 06:00:53 AM new
I sat through the whole segment thinking Hitler, especially the part you mentioned where he doesn't have to answer to
anyone. I don't have concern just because he is a Republican. As an Independent I would feel that way about a Green Party or Democratic person.
The insurance segment after it ruined the rest of the night.
When are more people going to wake up and start emailing or calling senators or congressman?
posted on November 18, 2002 06:56:24 AM new "If you watched the segment, it was interesting to note what was NOT said. Some of those things that Bush said could have come from any Dictator"
I missed the show but your quote above, Borillar, reminds me of a quote by Martin Luther King, who said...
"The time has come when silence is betrayal. That time is now."
posted on November 18, 2002 03:22:06 PM new
That segment was done by Morely Schaffer, Helen. He had a tape recorded interview with Bush which he played parts of for this segment. He sat across from another guy and they talked about "things". Not terrible things, just boring, unimportant things mostly. Morely would play a shocking segment on the tape and then ask about some irrelevant aspect of the comment to the other guy. It was obvious that he did not want to be accused of taking anything Bush said out of proportion or to make conclusions for anyone. Therefore, the actual discussion was meaningless and the point was to get Bush's own words onto tape saying things that no President should ever want out in the public. That's what I meant about "what was NOT said".
posted on November 18, 2002 04:31:08 PM new
Hey! I found it!!!
Mr. Bush.
Woodward interviewed Mr. Bush in August at the president's ranch in Crawford, Texas.
"He said, 'One of the things I learned is, the vision thing matters,'" Woodward tells 60 Minutes about what Mr. Bush told him.
And his vision includes getting rid of the evil from what he calls the axis of evil: Iraq, Iran, North Korea. Talking with Woodward, Mr. Bush dropped all pretense of diplomatic language as he tore into North Korea's leader Kim Jong II. And the President permitted Woodward to tape record his interview.
President Bush: "I loathe Kim Jong II. — I've got a visceral reaction to this guy because he is starving his people. It appalls me. — I feel passionate about this. — They tell me, well we may not need to move too fast, because the financial burdens on people will be so immense if this guy were to topple. — I just don't buy that."
Clearly transformed by Sept. 11, the President makes a point of projecting strength, confidence, and determination.
President Bush: "A president has got to be the calcium in the backbone. — If I weaken, the whole team weakens. — If I'm doubtful, I can assure you there will be a lot of doubt."
And Mr. Bush wants strength, not doubt, in his cabinet.
"In the midst of tough times I don't need people around me who are not steady," Bush tells Woodward. "And if there's a kind of a hand-wringing attitude going on when times are tough, I don't like it."
Woodward managed to get the notes from more than 50 National Security Council and War Cabinet meetings, in which, he says, Mr. Bush dominates his more experienced cabinet members Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld - and even Vice President Dick Cheney.
Woodward says the president told him that when he chairs a meeting he often tries to be provocative. When Woodward asked him if he tells his staff that he is purposely being provocative, Mr. Bush answered: "Of course not. I am the commander, see?"
President Bush: "I do not need to explain why I say things. — That's the interesting thing about being the President. — Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."
Woodward reports that Powell believes Cheney and Rumsfeld are too quick to go for the guns - too macho; while Powell remains the reluctant warrior.
"When Powell would be asked to go on television talk shows, the White House would tell him no," Woodward tells Wallace "And Powell would say, privately to his deputy Richard Armitage, 'I'm in the refrigerator. — I'm in the ice box. — They've got me put away and they'll pull me out like a carton of milk when they need me, and then put me back.'"
Woodward says it is the hidden political hand in the White House, and communications operations.
"Often they called on Powell to carry the message, but sometimes into the refrigerator he went," Woodward says.
Woodward says the president was furious when he had to wait a week to bomb Afghanistan after the military told him they needed more time to prepare.
But while Mr. Bush was waiting for the military, at his direction, the CIA led by George Tenet, was already on the ground buying Afghan warlords.
Woodward: Tenet sent his secret paramilitary team in, and the team leader, who's named Gary, is riding in his helicopter and he has a big suitcase between his legs. — Giant. — What's in it is three million dollars in cash.
Gary, who reportedly met with the intelligence chief for the Northern Alliance put a half a million dollars in cash on the table.
"And the intelligence chief for the Northern Alliance said, essentially, 'What do you want us to do?'" Woodward says.
And at one time, the CIA offered a Taliban commander $50,000 to defect and he asked for time to think it over.
And then they dropped a bomb on him in his area. — And then they went back and said, the offer now which used to be $50,000 is now $40,000. — And he said "I accept."
Woodward reports the president has the CIA actively pursuing al Qaeda in 80 countries now, no longer restrained by what had been a 25 year ban on assassination, as we saw two weeks ago in Yemen when a CIA plane fired a missile into a car killing six members of al Qaeda.
Woodward: The gloves are off. — There are no restraints on the CIA. — And there's this whole invisible war where the CIA has had foreign intelligence services and police forces arrest or detain terrorists, al Qaeda members, thousands of them.
Woodward reports that the United States has bought the intelligence services of Egypt, Jordan, and Algeria, among others.
Woodward: Tens of millions of dollars goes to these intelligence services. — They can get new equipment. — They can develop new agent networks within terrorist cells.
Woodward reveals that shortly after Sept. 11 FBI Director Robert Mueller told President Bush that 331 suspected terrorists had somehow slipped into the U.S., and that the FBI didn't know where they were.
When Woodward asked the President about this, he said, "I was floored."
Woodward: He directly said he did not release it publicly because It was so soon after 9/11, feeling that the country had gone through enough trauma. — So he kept it secret.
President Bush: "The idea of saying there's 331 Al Qaeda type killers lurking to the point where they made a list, just wasn't necessary. — On the other hand what was necessary was for our FBI to realize that their mindset had to change. — There has to be a sense of accountability."
Some of those 331 suspected terrorists have been apprehended, Woodward says.
"There are cells all over that are being watched. And there are 125 al Qaeda related investigations going on by the FBI that are very secret," Woodward says.
posted on November 18, 2002 04:53:24 PM new
"President Bush: "I do not need to explain why I say things. — That's the interesting thing about being the President. — Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."
The reporter's comments were not online...I would like to know how he skirted around that one.
posted on November 18, 2002 05:25:33 PM new
Thanks for putting that segment up, Helen. I was kinda tired when I wrote that last night and that comment stuck with me. It wasn't Morely Schaffer but anotherr reporter. You asked how he side-stepped making any comments, he simply ignored the whole thing and the segment went on. So why did he play it? I think that the recordings that gave a peek into how Bush really acts was the important thing. Obviously, as any President would be, he was coached on what to say. Yet, the attitude was there. As well as that extra tidbit that he gets into rages, not just from wanting to hit back at Afghanistan either. The whole segment was scattered as you can read and I still haven't groked the full significance.
posted on November 18, 2002 09:18:20 PM new
It was really disturbing to listen to Bob Woodward selling his new book about Bush on the Larry King Show. What a waste of journalistic talent and opportunity!
posted on November 18, 2002 10:06:32 PM new
I thought it a bit strange that they did not have a taped interview with Bush. While Bob Woodward is a great investigative reporter, you have to look at the fact that no one is criticising the President in the media - for anything whatsoever! Unlike when previous presidents have been in office, where criticism was rampant and during Clinton's years, they never let up for a single moment for over eight years of daily abuse. I find that remarkable as well. That's why such a simple interview was reported, with next to no point, unless you listen carefully to what was being said. I think that there had to have ben more, much more, but that was all that they allowed to be shown on 60 Minutes. I wish the damnable media would uncork their rear ends and start reporting the news again!
posted on November 19, 2002 05:58:51 AM new
I do think Bob Woodward's new book will be
a good read.
I don't think you will see the news changing
soon. Fox News felt it has to stage a car accident for ratings so we are already in trouble. We are pretty much a nation of idiots, buying tabloids and watching shows like "Entertainment Tonight." I think that
is the name.
When the FCC decides/decided all media in an area can legally be owned by one company or individual there will be no investigations of any substance. The wishes of that owner will cover cable, TV and radio.
I am able to listen to (or watch) Washington DC area stations/channels. One station, I believe it is Channel 7/ABC, has a reporter named Greta Kruz. I don't know if anyone
else who gets DC (Maryland) stations noticed
she would be on almost weekly (or more)talking about what the local Catholic Church was doing. I really noticed it when Cardinal McCarrick was
cardinalized or whatever it is. There was constant reporting for weeks. I was ready to call and ask if their news was going to be called THE CATHOLIC SCIENCE MONITOR! Since the scandals with the Catholic priests and the watering down by the bishops they don't report as much although I don't watch every night so I could be missing something.
I believe this is the kind of reporting we
are in for with the new changes. With this administration I have no doubt it will be
pushed through, if it hasn't been already.
It is easier for a President/Dictator to control a few "men" owning many types of media.
[ edited by aposter on Nov 19, 2002 06:06 AM ]
posted on November 19, 2002 06:37:41 AM new
Reading is my favorite pastime. I consider books my most precious possessions.
I have read thousands of books even books by and about people that I don't admire or respect.
Of all the books that have been available to me during my lifetime, Bob Woodward's book about George Bush is one that I will not buy and will not read.
Helen
ed to remove children because they are not possessions.
posted on November 19, 2002 06:48:17 AM new
Why Helen? Is it because Woodward's observations of Bush are so diametrically opposed to yours? I am curious why you might not want to see another perspective about "the great satan".
I saw part of that King interview with Woodward, switching back and forth to Chris Matthews who was also discussing the book. Actually, I was intrigued. I might buy it and read it. A very different picture painted than what I had thought.
One thing about that Bob Woodward though. Listening to him in ANY interview is so tortuous. He talks so sloooooooooow!
I have no problem reading anything diametrically opposed to mine or in finding such ingratiating perspectives about George Bush. In fact, I have to wade through these "perspectives" every day in search for the truth.
Woodward represents to me the tide of journalism that is so quickly turning away from reporting the news to sucking up to power and corporate interests. I resent that very strongly. Journalism should be in the business of keeping a check on power not in printing whatever pleases the advertisers.
I won't comment on why Woodward may be talking so "sloooooooooooow!" as you mentioned. I don't know the answer to that.
posted on November 19, 2002 08:19:20 AM new
Oh ok, Helen. But I'm still not understanding in what way you feel that Bob Woodward is "sucking up to power and corporate interests". Do you feel he had a hidden "agenda" when writing his book? Do you think he has somehow "changed" from the investigative journalist he was when he co-authored "All the President's Men" which exposed the dirty dealings of Richard Nixon? I'm just not sure for what precise reason you are eager to dismiss Woodward observations out of hand.
Q He had access, total access to the administration, didn't he? (referring to Woodward)
MR. McCLELLAN: We did work with him on this book.
Q Okay. Then wouldn't you imagine that he's reflecting exactly what goes on?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there are a lot of people that I imagine he talked to. And I can't speak to the accuracy of every conversation or everything there.
Q Is that how you get access? If you're writing a book you can get that? (Laughter.) I'm writing a book.
posted on November 19, 2002 10:37:18 AM new
Q How about the reaction to the book?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think it's what I expressed earlier. I haven't read the book. The President has not read the book. From reading the excerpts, it appears to offer some interesting perspectives on recent history. And as time goes by and as we continue to reflect on history, I'm sure there are going to be a lot of other perspectives and insights offered, as well.
Q Well, is it true or not? I mean, this is a very simple question.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I'm not up here to do book reviews. I'll leave that to others that do that as a profession.
Q Well, you've got the inside information right here.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we can sit here and talk about a lot -- there have been other books written. There's been books written by one of our own correspondents here at the White House, as well. I'm just not going to sit up here and do book reviews or promote books.
Q He had access, total access to the administration, didn't he?
MR. McCLELLAN: We did work with him on this book.
Q Okay. Then wouldn't you imagine that he's reflecting exactly what goes on?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there are a lot of people that I imagine he talked to. And I can't speak to the accuracy of every conversation or everything there.
It would seem that Mr. McClellan did not read the book so could not offer an opinion as to the accuracy of the content. Makes sense to me.
posted on November 19, 2002 11:14:37 AM new
I missed the show but they're talking about it constantly at work, all favorably.
Woodward wrote an "on the road with George book".
The thing that amazes me about the excerpts, is how truly powerful our organizations can be. Afghanistan was basically 200 ground troops and the CIA. The Russians told the CIA we'd get our a**es kicked in Afghanistan. The CIA liason reportedly said "we'll have their heads on sticks".
I think the last election was less a turn to more conservative ideology than it was outrage.
I think the average American is angered at successive Congresses ham-stringing the CIA and FBI and developing a sign-your-name and disappear immigration policy. They rejected the blame America first mentality as the cause of fellow citizens being murdered in their workplaces by stone age thugs and retaliated.
posted on November 19, 2002 11:27:34 AM new
I am sure that most Americans who watched the show do see it as favorable. Most Americans didn't bother to vote in the last election either. It takes a bit of effort to dig into a segment like that to get at the real content underlying the surface impressions. It takes an understanding that a segment that jumps around in so many directions with so little to report that was truely newsworthy at the very least should inspire the thought that there might be more. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer Americans are taking the effort to do anything but try not to be bothered by what they can't control.
posted on November 19, 2002 11:38:20 AM new
Borillar,
You consistently attribute opinions other than yours to the fact that people are not quite as clever as you. Did the possilbilty ever wiz by your brain that they just don't agree?
posted on November 19, 2002 11:55:04 AM newUnfortunately, fewer and fewer Americans are taking the effort to do anything but try not to be bothered by what they can't control.
Exactly, only I would also add the word understand.
Personally, I'm awaiting the publication of Totalitarianism for Dummies. Then I'll know that we've fully arrived and begin marketing little desk signs with the epigram "The pendulum stops here" and a picture of our beloved leader. This is my business plan and it should guarantee my 15 minutes of fame and a secure bureaucratic appointment.
posted on November 19, 2002 12:44:22 PM newWhen you mentioned, "A very different picture painted than what I had thought." were you referring to this change?
No, Helen, I wasn't referring to any "change" on the part of Bob Woodward. I'm not aware of any "change" on his part, or his journalistic skills or abilities. Frankly, I have no opinion about him one way or the other (except when I watch him on TV, I keep wanting to finish his sentences before he gets them out, LoL!). But I try to keep an open mind, and unlike "some" posters here, I don't view individuals as ALL evil or ALL good. That is mostly what I meant. At any rate, I might buy the book, or maybe I'll check it out at the library. It sounds like an interesting read.
posted on November 19, 2002 01:43:24 PM new
>Borillar,
>You consistently attribute opinions other than yours to the fact that people are not quite as clever as you. Did the possilbilty ever wiz by your brain that they just don't agree?
I already answered that sentiment in my previous post that you are referring these thoughts of your to.
To answer you anyway, if you ask the vast majority of Americans why they did not vote is because they either do not want to be bothered, or are not bothered by things that have not yet come to pass. That does not translate to an open endorsement of the current regime in Washington, BTW.
That very same complacent sentiment expressed by the majority of Americans concerning where their civil liberties are headed are also seen in those who even bothered to watch a news segment of 60 Minutes this past weekend. That they did not care to look further than what was presented right in front of their noses is expressed in the surface impressions given in the 60 Minute segment. They got out of the segment what the surface impression that was there meant for them to find. Those are the majority who think that Bush was Hot To Trot.
For those who realized that there was more to that segment that was not being openly expressed - even a very important sentence or two, it was highly significant.
As far as your charges of arrogance goes, let me explain this simile to you:
You should be aware that advertisers, for instance, use subliminal persuasion to try to get your mind to tell you to purchase their product or service. Those stories of magazine ads for Whiskey and Beer that have naked women hidden within the magazine advertisement are true. In fact, there was even an art exhibition of works done (and exposed) of these Machiavellian picture-within-picture magazine and billboard advertisements a while back. It is an established fact that it occurs.
Now, most people - the vast majority, would never bother to look closely enough at any magazine advertisement to see what hidden pictures that have been placed there to influence your mind are there. Does that invalidate the fact that there are those subliminal pictures there? Of course not! And, DeSquirrel, for those of us who DO take the time to look further into the advertisement and we DO see what is hidden there, are we more intelligent than the others because of that? No. It is merely a matter of TRYING, as in EFFORT.
Now, I am perpetually angry at corporations who use advertising in such manners that is, in effect, brainwashing. *I*, DeSquirrel, am the type of person who L@@KS to see the hidden pictures so I will NOT be remotely controlled! And these days with the mainstream media being the mouthpieces for the Bush Administration, I look for the "hidden pictures" there as well. That I do find them and I do post that fact here in the RT is not being arrogant of me -- is it?
I don't view people as ALL GOOD or ALL EVIL either. I don't expect any change in Woodward's writing abilities either.
Furthermore, in response to other zingers directed at me or not...I will keep myself informed and believe it or not, I can do that without the assistance of Bob Woodward.
Maybe I got the wrong impression because he was just tired...tired of having total access to the Bush administration and tired of cozying up to George Bush.
Helen
If you like the book, let me know Katy and I'll read it.
posted on November 19, 2002 02:31:49 PM new
LOL! Helen. No zingers at you. Most of mine are meant for the one who would benefit most from one of Snowy's beanies! You're okay.
If I buy the book, I'll send it to you when I'm done, but I've got one I'm finishing now and two more waiting, so it might be awhile. Now..go have a cup of coffee.
You're okay.