ABC's Gibson falsely reported Bush said "too many innocents are dying" in Iraq
Reporting the results of a newly released survey of war-induced Iraqi civilian deaths, on the October 11 edition of ABC's World News, host Charles Gibson, while noting that President Bush "maintained" in a press conference earlier that day that the study "is just not credible," falsely reported that Bush "also said that too many innocents are dying" in Iraq. During his October 11 press conference, Bush said that he "know[s] that a lot of innocent people have died" in Iraq, not "too many innocents are dying," as Gibson asserted. In fact, Bush actually praised Iraqis for "tolerat[ing]" the "level of violence" that has occurred in Iraq.
Referring to the study by Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health, which found that "[a]s many as 654,965 more Iraqis may have died since hostilities began in Iraq in March 2003 than would have been expected under pre-war conditions," CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux asked Bush, at the press conference, if he "care[d] to amend" his earlier assertion that "30,000" Iraqi civilians have died since March 2003, and whether he considered the survey to be "a credible report." Bush replied: "No, I don't consider it a credible report," adding, "I do know that a lot of innocent people have died, and that troubles me, and it grieves me." Bush then said that he is "amazed that this is a society which so wants to be free that they're willing ... that there's a level of violence that they tolerate."
From the October 11 edition of ABC's World News with Charles Gibson:
GIBSON: There is a controversial new study about civilian deaths in Iraq that was released today. Researchers from Johns Hopkins claim more than 600,000 Iraqis have died in violence since the U.S. invasion. That number is a good deal higher than other estimates -- and President Bush maintained today that the new study is just not credible. But he also said that too many innocents are dying. And in our "Closer Look" tonight, ABC's Terry McCarthy reports the widespread killing is affecting every aspect of life in Iraq.
From the October 11 edition of CNN Newsroom:
MALVEAUX: Thank you, Mr. President. Back on Iraq: A group of American and Iraqi health officials today released a report saying that 655,000 Iraqis have died since the Iraq war. That figure is 20 times the figure that you cited in December, at 30,000. Do you care to amend or update your figure, and do you consider this a credible report?
BUSH: No, I don't consider it a credible report. Neither does General [George W.] Casey [commander of Multi-National Force, Iraq], and neither do Iraqi officials. I do -- I do know that a lot of innocent people have died, and that troubles me, and it grieves me. And I applaud the Iraqis for their courage in the face of violence.
I -- I'm, you know, amazed that this is a society which so wants to be free that they're willing to -- you know -- that there's a level of violence that they tolerate. And it's now time for the Iraqi government to work hard to bring security in neighborhoods, so people can feel -- can feel -- you know, at peace.
That Bush thinks a certain number of dead Iraqis is acceptable to preserve his ego. I guess the big question is, how many? How many dead American soldiers is your ego worth, Clueless George? How many dead Iraqi civilians?
There's a cool article on the bond between the leaders of North Korea and the United States: [link to www.huffingtonpost.com] "Manipulating a Narcissist: My Plan for Kim Jong Il" by Merrill Markoe.
BUSH: I do know that a lot of innocent people have died, and that troubles me, and it grieves me.
It being a rather cold matter, to debate how many "innocent" people have been killed in Iraq during the U.S. occupation of that country...
But if I could, I'd ask the president how many "guilty" people have been killed in Iraq during the occupation...
I'd ask him what they were "guilty" of, those "guilty" people who've been killed during the occupation...
I'd ask who judged them "guilty" of whatever it is they're supposed to be "guilty" of, all those "guilty" people killed...
Who sentenced them to death for their "guilt"?
The president "grieves" for the deaths of so many "innocent people"...
But if I could, I'd ask him...
How many "guilty people" in Iraq have been killed, Mr. Bush...
What were they "guilty" of, and who judged them "guilty", Mr. Bush...
Who sentenced them to death for their "guilt", Mr. Bush?
BUSH: I -- I'm, you know, amazed that this is a society which so wants to be free that they're willing to -- you know -- that there's a level of violence that they tolerate. And it's now time for the Iraqi government to work hard to bring security in neighborhoods, so people can feel -- can feel -- you know, at peace.
The Iraqi people are, according to the president, "tolerating" the daily slaughter of civilians, because they are...
"a society which so wants to be...
...free"
As for the daily slaughter of the Iraqi people in their own neighborhoods, the president thinks...
"it's now time for the Iraqi government to work hard to bring...
...security"
And the president thinks this about the Iraqi government, and thinks that the crisis needs to be made...
"so people can feel -- can feel -- you know, at...
peace"
"free", "security", and "peace" in Iraq.
The president is working very hard at trying to blow up a balloon that has a big giant hole in it.
Too many of the American People are on to that fact, and are on to the president's rhetoric on this issue.
"free", "security", and "peace" in Iraq: The president wastes his breath, trying to blow up that deflated balloon.
I've completely given up on Charles Gibson for starters, and all of Bush's comments are dependent that he really cares. Nothing this man has done in the past 6 years shows me that he cares about innocents.
Gibson didn't do false reporting, he just did lazy reporting.
Bush didn't maintain anything. Bush just said that he didn't find the report credible. That's it. He offered nothing else, and Gibson and Malveaux didn't ask good questions, they just blindly took Bush at his word.
I -- I'm, you know, amazed that this is a society which so wants to be free that they're willing to -- you know -- that there's a level of violence that they tolerate.
It's a completely asinine comment that totally disregards the reality of how the war started and the causes of the continuing violence. Is Bush losing grip? Is he lacking sleep? doing speed? (No - I'm not being facetious or trying to be funny with those questions.)
THIS TOTALLY INCOMPETENT PRESIDENT GRIEVES FOR NO ONE. I KNEW, THOUSANDS KNEW WHEN HE WAS ELECTED, THE FIRST THING HE WAS GOING TO DO, WAS ATTACK IRAQ. HE HAD TO DO THAT THROUGH AFGHANISTAN TO AVENGE WHAT HE CONSIDERED HIS FATHERS DEFEAT. I DIDN'T LIKE BUSH SENIOR, BUT HE DID HAVE SENSE ENOUGH NOT TO CREATE WHAT THIS IDIOT HAS MANAGED TO DO THROUGH LIES, STRATEGY, AND SET-UPS. THESE WERE LIES THAT A CHILD COULD SEE THROUGH, AND YET IGNORANT AMERICANS PUT THERE TRUST IN GEORGE BUSH ONLY TO DISCOVER SIX YEARS LATER THAT THIS ADMINISTRATION THROUGH LIES ,CORRUPTION, AND DECIEPT HAS DESTROYED WHAT IT TOOK US 200+ YRS. TO BUILD. THE MAN IS OBCEESSED WITH WAR. HE IS HELLBENT ON ATTACKING IRAN BEFORE WE CAN STOP HIM, AND THROUGH LIES HE WILL WRIGGLE OUT OF IRAQ BY CLAIMING SOME FALSE VICTORY, AND RIGHT INTO IRAN
"too many innocents are dying" Vs. "I know that a lot of innocent people have died, and that troubles me, and it grieves me.”
In context what is the difference? It seems to me that left wing loons have a lot of time on their hands. You must be among the 4.6 percent unemployed--Sept 2006. (5.2 Sept. 1996–Who was Pres. in 1996?) I have got to get back to work.
Probably no more than you. The apparent difference is that the "loons" use their brains in their spare time.
too many = an excessive amount, which would be tacit admission of failure
a lot = many, but does not necessarily too many. The rest of his statement, without action, are just empty words.