PDA

View Full Version : Bush may or may not have ordered assassination of Saddam Hussein- does not recall


renata
26th February 2003, 10:09 PM
Link (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/cdh/20030226/lo_cdh/bush__doesn_t_recall__talk_of_assassination)


Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) could be a military target during war, but President Bush (news - web sites) "doesn't recall" whether he told U.S. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald he would order the Iraqi leader's assassination if the opportunity arose, Bush's chief spokesman said Tuesday.

..

That debate was sparked after Fitzgerald, an Inverness Republican, recounted to the Daily Herald editorial board Monday how Bush recently told him he would reverse the ban and sign off on Hussein's assassination.


"I have personally talked to the president about this and if we had intelligence on where he was now, and we had a clear shot to assassinate him, we would probably do that," Fitzgerald said, later adding that Bush said he would reverse the ban during a talk the two had aboard Air Force One.
..

Assassinating Hussein rapidly became the topic of national and international headlines Tuesday. Fitzgerald's remarks were the subject of the first question Fleischer fielded at the daily White House press briefing.


"The president doesn't recall if he said it or he didn't say it. The staff doesn't recall the president saying it," Fleischer said. "But (the) bottom line remains the same, the executive order is in place, and so it's a hypothetical that doesn't exist."


Fitzgerald refused Tuesday to discuss his conversation with Bush, even after Fleischer said there was "some uncertainty in Sen. Fitzgerald's mind" about when and where the conversation took place.



Now, I do not think assassinating Hussein is a bad idea. It may be a grand idea- I do not know enough to judge. I also do not know whether Senator Fitzgerald is prone to lying, exaggeration or bad memory. But I would hope that the President of the United States would be able to recall whether he discussed assassinating Saddam Hussein. It is not like they are asking him to remember what he had for breakfast! Perhaps it would not be in the interest of national security to reveal this issue, but I would hope the White House would come with a better double-speak.

corplinx
26th February 2003, 10:33 PM
In the Woodward book, it is mentioned that sometimes Bush will speak candidly and throw wild ideas into the mix while brainstorming with others. The book implied that the leaf-free nature of the meetings allowed him this flexibility.

So, I guess Fitzgerald will never be privy to open and frank discussions with the president I assume.

Clinton had it the worst though, he told Dick Morris that he never said anything of substance with two or more people in the room. He went through most of his presidency never being able to have a frank discussion or throw wild ideas and hypotheticals into a meeting for fear of leaks.

The Fool
27th February 2003, 04:04 AM
Dammit, you can't expect him to remember the names of all the people he has ok'd for execution....After all, executing people was one of his main support raising activities in texas.

crackmonkey
27th February 2003, 06:10 AM
What a non-issue.

Kodiak
27th February 2003, 08:08 AM
Originally posted by The Fool
Dammit, you can't expect him to remember the names of all the people he has ok'd for execution....After all, executing people was one of his main support raising activities in texas.

Apples and oranges, Fool...shame on you.

Aoidoi
27th February 2003, 08:27 AM
Well, to be a bit picky I believe his statement is that he doesn't recall if he told the Senator about a possible assassination... which is a little different than not remembering if he ordered an assassination. A conversation where he off-handedly says "man, it'd be nice if I could just have the bastard shot" could have been a throwaway line to him but interpreted as a serious policy by a listener. While the presidential order is in place I doubt he'd order one, though it's certainly likely he's discussed the possibility.

I'm betting Senator Fitzgerald isn't getting too many opportunities to talk with Bush again, though. :D (unless this was a stunt to feel out public sentiment on an assassination.)

Tmy
27th February 2003, 08:41 AM
Whats so bad about assination? Is it taboo because our leaders dont want to be targets themselves.

Brooklyn Dodger
27th February 2003, 09:42 AM
Nothing wrong with it once the war starts. At present it would take a reversal of the Presidential Decision Memorandum (which one I forget) originally signed in the mid-1970s by that idiot President Ford. At the time, Ford was being hounded by the Senate Intelligence Committee under Senator Church (since deceased) which was busy castrating the CIA. That's ironic, since testicular cancer resulted in Sen Church's eventual castration. Turnabout is fair play I suppose. Every president since Ford has reaffirmed the memorandum. In war, however, Saddam and his senior staff become legitimate command and control targets.

subgenius
27th February 2003, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by renata
Link (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/cdh/20030226/lo_cdh/bush__doesn_t_recall__talk_of_assassination)




Now, I do not think assassinating Hussein is a bad idea. It may be a grand idea- I do not know enough to judge. I also do not know whether Senator Fitzgerald is prone to lying, exaggeration or bad memory. But I would hope that the President of the United States would be able to recall whether he discussed assassinating Saddam Hussein. It is not like they are asking him to remember what he had for breakfast! Perhaps it would not be in the interest of national security to reveal this issue, but I would hope the White House would come with a better double-speak.
Maybe the greatest Bushism of all. Maybe, like Ronnie, he's already got (convenient) Alzheimer's. (Or Waldheimer's, where you forget you were a Nazi--just a joke.)
With all due respect to his apologists here, he's not the sharpest tool in the shed, and that's sad and bad for America.
Whatever happened to the best and the brightest?

27th February 2003, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by subgenius


Whatever happened to the best and the brightest?

He's building homes for the poor and shuttling around the world monitoring elections.

subgenius
27th February 2003, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by sundog


He's building homes for the poor and shuttling around the world monitoring elections.
Sho you right.:)