About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Contrary to NY Times assertion, Sept. 21 wasn't the "first time" Bush linked terrorism and Katrina

September 22, 2005 1:27 pm ET

7 Comments

In a September 22 article by reporter David E. Sanger, The New York Times falsely reported: "President Bush on Wednesday [September 21] for the first time linked the American response to terrorism and its response to Hurricane Katrina, declaring that the United States is emerging a stronger nation from both challenges." In fact, last week, Bush did connect terrorism and the hurricane and in a far different way from his September 21 claim that "both challenges" had made the United States a "stronger nation." As the Times reported on September 14 in an article by Elisabeth Bumiller and Richard W. Stevenson, Bush "suggested that he was unsure whether the country was adequately prepared for another catastrophic storm or terrorist attack" at a press conference the previous day.

The September 22 Times report noted that Bush's September 21 comments "appeared to be part of a White House strategy to restore the luster of strong leadership that Mr. Bush enjoyed after the Sept. 11 attacks." But the report excluded Bush's remarks from the previous week that might undermine that strategy. During a press availability on September 13, Bush said that he wants to be able to answer the question "Are we capable of dealing with a severe attack or another severe storm."

As Media Matters for America has noted, while the Times did report Bush's statement at the time he made it, The Washington Post ignored it in its coverage of his September 13 remarks.

From Sanger's September 22 Times report:

President Bush on Wednesday for the first time linked the American response to terrorism and its response to Hurricane Katrina, declaring that the United States is emerging a stronger nation from both challenges, and saying that terrorists look at the storm's devastation "and wish they had caused it."

Mr. Bush's speech, at a luncheon for the Republican Jewish Coalition, appeared to be part of a White House strategy to restore the luster of strong leadership that Mr. Bush enjoyed after the Sept. 11 attacks, and that administration officials fear he has lost in the faltering response to the hurricane.

[...]

Until the speech on Wednesday, Mr. Bush had kept the issues of terrorism, Iraq and the hurricane separate. But the public has not: polls show declining approval of Mr. Bush's handling of both Iraq and Hurricane Katrina. By suggesting for the first time that America's enemies were pleased to see the devastation caused by the hurricane, he appeared to be linking the country's natural and human challengers.

Mr. Bush said he had been "thinking a lot" about the comparisons between the response to the attacks in New York and Washington, and the storm devastation. "We look at the destruction caused by Katrina, and our hearts break," he said. Turning the subject to terrorists, he said: "They're the kind of people who look at Katrina and wish they had caused it. We're in a war against these people."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by cantseefade (September 22, 2005 1:37 pm ET)
         

      I think I've figured it out. God is a terrorist. He must be stopped at any cost, and you are either against HIM, or you are against us.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by publius (September 22, 2005 2:12 pm ET)
         

      "appeared to be part of a White House strategy to restore the luster of strong leadership that Mr. Bush enjoyed after the Sept. 11 attacks."

      That's all it was, "luster". This guy is actually a mediocre leader at best. He has to keep bringing up terrorism and 9/11 because that's the only thing he's got.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Lynn (September 22, 2005 2:16 pm ET)
         

      Whenever Bush runs into trouble with the polls he starts talking about 911 and terrorists. I don't know how many people actually caught it, but during the height of the discussions about the Katrina rescue fiasco there was an elevated terror alert for LA. The press pretty much ignored except for making comment about the timing of it. I think the 5-year neoconservative PR campaign that passed for governance has finally lost its appeal. Bush's own peeps are beginning to distance themselves from the him.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (September 22, 2005 2:44 pm ET)
         

      I've come to expect at least five 9/11 references in every Bush speech. Why should Katrina be exempt? His mythical "leadership" after 9/11 is all he's got to hang his legacy on. He's pretty much stunk things up, otherwise.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sagra (September 22, 2005 4:50 pm ET)
         

      There seemed to be a little glimmer of truth in Bush's September 13 remark. If we are unprepared for somewhat-predictable natural disasters, it follows that we would be unprepared for not-very-predictable terrorist attacks.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by ufleirx (September 22, 2005 6:48 pm ET)
         

      Wait wasn't Gawd on our side in Aghanstan and Iraq. Is he punishing us as so many right wing preachers claim or is he supporting us as so many right wing preacher claim? I so confused, could we make another playing card deck?

      Report Abuse