| |
8 Questions for Russert -- for George W. Bush
Published on Friday, February 6, 2004 by The Nation |
|
8 Questions for Russert -- for George W. Bush |
|
by David Corn |
| |
|
Tim Russert, the Grand Inquisitor of Sunday morning, is
scheduled to have George W. Bush in the witness chair for a
full hour on the next Meet the Press. He's a lucky
man--Russert, that is. This will be high drama, as the
nation's politerati--and millions of others--watch to see if
Russert gives Bush the hot-seat treatment.
There is, of course, much to ask Bush about. Did he
decide to use military force against Iraq before 9/11? Where
are the WMDs he insisted were there? Why is he using
phony budget numbers? Did he engage in
less-than-proper business dealings before he entered
politics? Why he has misled the public while promoting his
policies on stem cells research, global warming, and
missile defense? Why has he opposed certain homeland
security measures and not adequately funded others? It's a
long list, and I'm sure Russert is busy preparing his own
queries. But in an unsolicited act of kindness, I have crafted
eight questions for Russert--several on matters in the news,
a few on issues that have received less attention. And, Tim,
since you always like to display your source material when
you ask the tough questions, feel free to call me, and I'll send
you the citations or the clips. Unlike many of Bush's WMD
assertions, these questions are based on real evidence.
- In October 2002, during a speech in Cincinnati, you said
that Saddam Hussein had a "massive stockpile" of biological
weapons. But the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq did
not report there was any "massive stockpile" of bioweapons
in Iraq. And this past Thursday, CIA director, George Tenet
said, "We said we had no specific information on the types or
quantities of [biological] weapons, agent, or stockpiles at
Baghdad's disposal." So if the CIA did not say there was a
"massive stockpile" of biological weapons in Iraq, what was
your basis for asserting a stockpile existed? Did you know
something the CIA did not? Did you overstate the
intelligence?
- In December 2002, you said, "We do not know whether or
not [Hussein] has a nuclear weapon"--a remark suggesting
that Hussein might have one. But the National Intelligence
Estimate said that he did not have a nuclear weapon and that
it would take Iraq five to seven years to produce a nuclear
weapon--and then only if its nuclear weapons program was
"left unchecked." This past week, Tenet said, "We said
Saddam Hussein did not have a nuclear weapon." Was it not
misleading to tell the public that "we don't know" whether Iraq
had a nuclear weapon, when, in fact, we did know?
- Before the war, you said Hussein was "dealing" with al
Qaeda. On May 1, you called Hussein an "ally" of Al Qaeda.
At a press conference in July 2003, you were asked to
provide evidence to back up your claims that Hussein had
been working with al Qaeda. You replied,
"Yes, I think, first of all, remember I just said we've been
there for 90 days since the cessation of major military
operations. Now, I know in our world where news comes and
goes and there's this kind of instant--instant news and you
must have done this, you must do that yesterday, that there's
a level of frustration by some in the media. I'm not
suggesting you're frustrated. You don't look frustrated to me
at all. But it's going to take time for us to gather the evidence
and analyze the mounds of evidence, literally, the miles of
documents that we have uncovered. "
That is, you said that investigators were still looking for
evidence. But the question was, what evidence did you have
at the time that you made those prewar claims that al Qaeda
and Hussein were in cahoots? You did not answer that
question then. Can you tell us what evidence you had for
saying that Hussein was an "ally" of al Qaeda?
- In July 2001, US intelligence produced a warning that read, "Based on a review of all-source reporting over the last five
months, we believe that UBL [Usama bin Laden] will launch
a significant terrorist attack against U.S. and/or Israeli
interests in the coming weeks. The attack will be
spectacular
and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities
or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will
occur with little or no warning."
This was less than two months before the horrific 9/11
attacks. According to the final report of the joint inquiry on
9/11 conducted by the House and Senate intelligence
committees, this warning was prepared for "senior
government officials." The committees did not publicly say
who received the report, and they said this was because the
CIA would not permit them to tell the public which "senior
government officials" were warned. The committees were
angry about being gagged this way. But committee sources
did tell reporters that this report was sent to the White House.
Why wouldn't your administration tell the public who saw this
warning? Did you or any of your national security team see
this report? If so, what did you or they do in response? If this
report did not make it to you or your senior aides, wouldn't
you consider that a terrible mistake and want to find out who
was responsible for that?
- In your Air National Guard records, your annual
performance review, dated May 2, 1973, says that you did not
report for duty to your home base for an entire year. When
this was disclosed during the 2000 campaign, your
campaign said that you had spent part of that time doing
service at an Air National Guard base in Alabama. But the
commander of that base said--and recently confirmed--that
you never showed up there. In 2000, your campaign
promised to produce the names of people whom you served
with in Alabama and who could vouch for your presence at
the base there. It never did so. Why not? Can you now give us
names of men or women with whom you served in
Alabama?
- During the year in question, you lost your flight status and
were grounded for failing to submit to an annual physical
examination. In 2000, your campaign aides said that was
because you were in Alabama at the time and your personal
doctor was in Houston. But the Boston Globe noted, "Flight physicals can be administered only by certified Air
Force flight surgeons." Not personal physicians. And there
were military physicians stationed in Alabama, where you
were living for part of that year. Why did you not take a flight
physical? Why did your campaign put out an explanation that
was wrong?
- By your own account, you returned to Houston after the
November election of 1972. Yet the records show you did not
report in to your Air National Guard base there for six
months--not until after that performance review noted you
had been missing for a year. Why not? What were you doing
during that time?
- When you ran unsuccessfully for Congress in 1978 in
Texas, you gave an interview to the Lubbock
Avalanche-Journal newspaper. You were asked about
your position on abortion, and this is how that newspaper
reported your answer: "Bush said he opposes the pro-life
amendment [which would outlaw abortion] and favors leaving
up to a woman and her doctor the abortion question." Sixteen
years later, when you ran for governor in Texas in 1994, you
campaigned as an antiabortion conservative. Few people
seem to realize your position on abortion changed 180
degrees. Please tell us, when did you change your view on
abortion and why?
DON'T FORGET ABOUT DAVID CORN'S NEW BOOK, The Lies of George W. Bush:
Mastering the Politics of Deception (Crown
Publishers). A NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER!
The Library Journal says, "Corn chronicles to devastating
effect the lies, falsehoods, and misrepresentations....Corn
has painstakingly unearthed a bill of particulars against the
the president that is as damaging as it is thorough." For
more information and a sample, check out the book's official
website: www.bushlies.com
Copyright © 2004 The Nation ### |
Printer Friendly Version
E-Mail This Article
|
|
|