Bush flubs test on Iran and nuclear weapons

What is it with Republican leaders getting confused about basics in the Middle East this week? John McCain got confused (on four separate occasions) about Sunni and Shia, Iran and al Qaeda. And then yesterday, Bush flubbed one of his own on Iran and nuclear weapons.

President Bush contended that Iran has “declared they want a nuclear weapon to destroy people” and that the Islamic Republic could be hiding a secret program.

Iran, however, has never publicly proclaimed a desire for nuclear weapons and has repeatedly insisted that the uranium enrichment program it’s operating in defiance of U.N. Security Council resolutions is for civilian power plants, not warheads.

Asked about the president’s comment, Gordon Johndroe, a White House spokesman, said Bush had “shorthanded” Iran’s desire “to wipe Israel off the map,” its refusal to heed U.N. Security Council demands to suspend its enrichment work and Iran’s continued development of ballistic missiles.

Ah, yes, “shorthanded.” The White House uses this euphemism once in a great while to explain that while what the president said is clearly false, the inaccurate comments help summarize his broader point, thus making his mistake less of a mistake.

Asked if Iran could exploit Bush’s inaccurate remarks for political purposes, Johndroe said, “I’m not concerned about that.”

But like McCain’s explanation for his confusion, the White House’s reasoning for Bush’s errors of fact and judgment doesn’t exactly add up.

Indeed, Bush and McCain have the same problem. When McCain falsely insisted that Iran is responsible for training al Qaeda terrorists and sending them into Iraq, he said he “misspoke.” The rationale looked foolish when examples emerged of McCain saying the exact same thing more than once.

Similarly, the president falsely argued that Iran has “declared they want a nuclear weapon to destroy people” and that the Islamic Republic could be hiding a secret program. Even Bush aides acknowledge that this is unsupported by the facts, but before they argue that he “misspoke,” remember that he made the same bogus claim in August. It’s likely, then, that the president, like the Republican who hopes to succeed him, just believes things that aren’t true.

Dan Froomkin hammered this home quite nicely.

President Bush on Wednesday said something demonstrably false and inflammatory about Iran — asserting that the Iranian government has “declared they want to have a nuclear weapon to destroy people.”

The Iranians have never done any such thing — and for Bush to say so at a time of great tension between the two countries is bizarre at best.

So why did he say it? Was he actively trying to misrepresent the situation? Was it just a slip of the tongue? Or does he believe it, despite the abundant evidence to the contrary?

It seems unlikely that Bush would choose this particular venue to launch a disinformation campaign: His comment came midway through a softball interview with an obscure U.S.-funded Farsi-language radio station, on the occasion of Persian new year. And the Iranian audience knows best that what he said is untrue. Such a blatant distortion only strengthens the Iranian government’s position that Bush is a liar.

So did Bush just misspeak? The White House certainly suggested that yesterday, with a spokesman insisting that Bush had simply spoken in “shorthand,” combining Iranian threats against Israel with concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.

And yet, as disturbing as the third possibility is — that Bush is operating in an alternate reality — it’s supported by this simple fact: He’s said almost exactly the same thing at least once before.

It’s a reminder that having a clueless president is not without consequences. For that matter, it’s also a reminder of why McCain represents four more years of the status quo.

Shorter Dan Froomkin: “Bush is bat sh&* fuc*^%$ insane!”

  • From the GeeDubya Dictionary Book of Words-

    Shorthand: v A quick wank to relieve the burning urge to tell a big honking lie.

    As to the question: Why does Bush lie?

    Because he can.

  • There is a difference between a mistake and a lie, but frequency has nothing to do with it. And “shorthand” is code for esoteric language intended to be understood by a select few while amazing those who don”t understand it.

  • Let me know if the MSM picks up on the drums of war banging again. We see how it played out last time.

    A little frigging journalism from our supposed ForThe State.

    BANG BANG BANG the drum.

  • Steve, there is something I think should be mentioned whenever that quote about “wiping Israel off the map” surfaces — namely that the quote isn’t accurate. They are intentionally making the worst possible assumptions based on tenuous (translated) soundbytes. And nobody calls them on it.

  • Bu$h himself is quite clearly insane. He keeps pushing this “imminent threat” rubbish, hoping to nudge the Iranians into committing that first “hostile act” so as to justify an expanded Persian Gulf war. But the Iranians haven’t taken the bait—so he’s left stewing in his own wet-dreams of eternal war without end. However, watch for the following clue:

    “And this shall be a sign unto you: When all of the newer warships have been pulled out of the Persian Gulf and the Straits of Hormuz—and replaced with a fleet of tired warships that are viewed as “scheduled for retirement”—then you shall know that the opening of the Iran War is but days away.”

    Bu$h knows that if he tries to hit the Iranians, they have the capability of smashing most, if not all, of whatever naval units are within range of the shore-based missile batteries. They also have a top-notch air defense system and tracking network—not like the string-and-baling-wire mishmash that Iraq had when “Shock-n-Awe” hit—so they’ll see anything that’s incoming and respond accordingly against any-and-all opposing military targets. That will include any US warships within range. Sure—Bu$h can play the “stand-off game” with the Ohio-class boats, and lob missiles galore from over the horizon—but the Iranians can detect those and summarily target anything in the Gulf, using the “use-’em-or-lose-’em” philosophy of warfare.

    And we’ve heard the chimp-in-chief use the “good, you’ve covered your ass” line once before, in the days leading up to the brutal deaths of Americans on 9/11….

  • Isn’t the next end of times scheduled or 2012? I guess Bush thinks it’d a deadline.

  • I hear that Bush & McCain were C students at best…with age & time do you really think their brains are sharper? more retentive? sigh

    I really hate being ashamed of my “leader’s” (I use the term loosely) lack of intellect.

  • Isn’t the next end of times scheduled or 2012? I guess Bush thinks it’d a deadline. — beep52, @7

    *The one* benchmark which has to be reached?

  • January 20, 2009 can’t get here fast enough. Of course if McCain ends up president then we have at least 4 more years of this kind of “misspeak” to look forward to.

  • Bush is not insane, nor is he operating in an alternate reality. There’s nothing really wrong with his brain or his sense of the here-and-now, except that he’d probably score in the 60%-64% percentile if tested. I remember, as if it were yesterday, Rush Limbaugh saying, “…there are people in this White House who could blow you away with their intellect, and the President is one of them, if he chose to address you in that way.” Ahhh…I don’t even need to look it up, it’s one of those things that makes me smile every time I think about it. The reality, of course, is that if intellect were truly measured by its ability to generate plosive force, George W. Bush would have a hard time blowing a corn puff off the breakfast table. Suffice it to say he’s not very bright, although he’s probably about average.

    No, The Answer Is Orange was closest in his analysis. Bush flips off with his piehole and says whatever makes him feel good for two reasons – one, there’s a good chance that a significant sampling of his audience (since they’re usually hand-picked) are either so hammerhead dumb or so fawningly loyal that they’d believe him if he said he was the reincarnation of Elvis, hummed, “Unh-huh-huh” and shot his hip to the left. Two, because his administration has systematically removed the checks and balances that prevented leaders from lying in the faces of those they were elected to serve. There’s no penalty for lying, so why not?

  • Once again the White House is using a misquote of Ahmedinejad’s to support their posturing towards Iran. Well, John Edwards used the same misquote from the MSM who got it from the Iranian press who were the original misqouters, so there’s plenty of blame to go around. “The correct translation of the statement is as follows: “Imam (Khomeini) said this occupying regime in Jerusalem must vanish from the page (stage) of times.” See the whole article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-sedaei/the-biggest-lie-told-to-t_b_70248.html
    It’s just so frustrating that this misunderstanding still stands and is being used to beat the war drums.

  • I am so damn sick of this “mispoke” crap….he lied and that is the bottom line. All this crap about “mispoken, misquoted, mislead, misunderstanding.”.it is all a fancy way of saying that the Republican White House and leadership are all liars. They wouldn’t know the truth if it stepped up and slapped them on the face.

  • Lets get further into the Froomkin “article”:

    Iran’s foreign minister later said the comment had been incorrectly translated from Farsi and that Ahmadinejad was ‘talking about the [Israeli] regime,’ which Iran does not recognize and wants to see collapse.

    Gee, how does one think that will happen, the Israeli government will fart itself out of existence? Gloss over it as much as they want, the Iranian government wants to “wipe Israel off the map”. There’s other words for it: genocide, racism, anti-Semitism.

    “According to Farsi-speaking commentators including Juan Cole, a professor of Middle Eastern history at the University of Michigan, Ahmadinejad’s exact quote was, ‘The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.’ Cole has written that Ahmadinejad was not calling for the ‘Nazi-style extermination of a people,’ but was expressing the wish that the Israeli government would disappear just as the shah of Iran’s regime had collapsed in 1979.”

    Cole is a terrorist-supporting hack and can be dismissed outright.

    Oh, here’s a gem [emphasis mine]:

    Robin Wright writes in this morning’s Washington Post: “Experts on Iran and nuclear proliferation said the president’s statement was wrong. ‘That’s as uninformed as [Sen. John] McCain’s statement that Iran is training al-Qaeda. Iran has never said it wanted a nuclear weapon for any reason. It’s just not true. It’s a little troubling that the president and the leading Republican candidate are both so wrong about Iran,’ said Joseph Cirincione, president of Ploughshares Fund, a global security foundation.

    “Others said it is unclear whether the president believes what he said or was deliberately distorting Iran’s position.

    ‘The Iranian government is on the record across the board as saying it does not want a nuclear weapon. There’s plenty of room for skepticism about these assertions. But it’s troubling for the administration to indicate that Iran is explicitly embracing the program as a means of destroying another country,’ said Suzanne Maloney, an Iran specialist at the State Department until last year and now at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center.”

    Of course we can trust the Iranian government, because an ex-State Department official, one who was probably a terrorist-enabling flunkie, said so. Sure. Brilliant. The Weekly Standard tears apart Wright and Cirincione.

    Froomkin is the liar. Or would Froomkin and the “liberals” have us believe this is just one of Ahmadinejad’s “little ways”? Or possibly that it means “I really want to be friends with Israel, and that this talk of having to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ is just a way to reach out to them”.

    Guess what; it ain’t just a river in Egypt. And “liberals” know of what I speak.

  • Comments are closed.