Has anyone asked George W. Bush what is the goal for this "war on terror"?
Imagine this, a press conference with a press corp with either the balls or just the facade of being fake news to ask the pertinent questions of the day. Here's the transcript of such satirical lunacy.
Q: President, sir, this war in Iraq has been lingering. What are we doing there? What really is the goal of this so-called "war on terror," really?
Bush: Well, ah, to end, ah, terrorism, you know. Hee, hee.
Q: Mr. President, your administration has mentioned that you would veto the Pentagon's spending bill if it included the provision to regulate treatment of prisoners by the U.S. military, stating it would hamper the war on terror. What in all likelyhood would be hampered in this war on terror by treating prisoners with a bit of humanity?
Bush: You know, all these prisoners are terrorists. Yeah, the bad guy, you know. And, you know, some of them have information, you know. Valuable information that we need for this war on terror. So, ah. You know we need to get that information out of them, and well, you know, they don't want to give it to us. So, well. We need to get that information out of them, so we need to be able to instill intense fear and threaten them so we can get them to talk. And, well, if they don't talk, then we have to use physical, uh, forc-er, ah persuasion to get them to give us this, ah, vital information, uh, so we can win this war on terror.
Q: Mr. President, with all due respect, do you know that the definitions of terror are a) intense, overpowering fear; b) one that instills intense fear; c) the ability to instill intense fear; and d) violence committed or threatened by a group to intimidate or coerce a population, as for military or political purposes?
Bush: Is this a multiple choice question? Ah, can I make up my own answer? I choose "e".
Q: No, Mr. President, all of those are definitions of terror.
Q: From the sounds of it, this provision to the Pentagon's spending bill is aimed at keeping our military forces from becoming terrorists.
Bush: No, you have that wrong. We are not the bad guys here. Terrorists are evil.
Q: So, what is your definition of terror, Mr. President?
Bush: Well, you know, uh. Terrorists are bad. Yeah. They're evil. Uh. Terror is, uh, something that is bad, very bad. And evil. You know. People that want to take away our freedoms and liberties and harm us because we are, uh, you know, Americans.
Q: So, Mr. President, why does the Patriot Act strip U.S. citizens of freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and allow for improper search and seizure, secret and unlimited imprisonment without justified charges, and in effect instilling fear for anyone who speaks their mind against the government?
Bush: We have to do what we have to do to stop terrorism. We have to protect our people. Uh, we have to sacrifice some things to do that.
Q: So, is it okay to compromise the Constitution, and in effect void some aspects and restrict parts of it? How far will you go to dismantle the Constitution to protect us from terrorism?
Bush: I don't think we are dismantling the Constitution. You know, it's just an old document, anyway. ... It's a piece of paper. ... It's not like a building that we can just implode to dismantle it. (winks, er twitches) ... Ah. We are in a new time in history. The world has changed. We are up against an evil force of terror. Terrorism is something different than fighting other nations, like we've had to fight in the past. Terrorists are not a nationality or government. They move around. They can be anywhere. We have to fight them differently. This Constitution wasn't written with terrorism in their minds. They had no idea we would be up against terrorists in the 21st century, you see. ... You know, really, I don't think those folks that wrote the Constitution actually thought that we would really need it in the 21st century anyway. They probably thought that we would be scooting around in hovercrafts and such, and paper would be obsolete.
Q: Mr. President, are you trying to tell us that the Constitution is not applicable anymore?
Bush: I'm not saying that it is bad. It's just that it doesn't help us to fight this war on terror on the home turf.
Q: I believe we have dealt effectively with terrorism on the home turf, with the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Constitution was in essence still intact for the most part. Why can't we do that now with terrorists on U.S. soil?
Bush: Well, that was a different ballgame altogether. Those kids that did the Oklahoma City deal, you see, they were Americans. We could prosecute them like Americans. These terrorists we are dealing with now, well, that's a totally different ballgame. These terrorists now, well, they're evil.
Q: So, now who is this war on terror waged against? And, who is the terrorist here?
Bush: Well, uh, it's against the enemy, you know. Really, didn't I answer this before? No? (Thinks: I'm really running out of talking points here, people.) You see, it's those people who want to take away what makes us Americans. They want to take away everything that makes living in the U.S. secure and safe. We've got to protect against that.
Q: Isn't that why we have the Constitution in the first place?
Bush: I think you guys have given me an earful. Hee. Hee. Constitutions are good. You know, we are trying to get Iraq to agree to a Constitution, and, you see, it's not an easy process. We need a good Constitution here too, one that will protect us from crazy terrorists. That's why I have nominated Harriet Meirs. She's going to be a strict constructionist, you see.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment