Iraq Boss, President “Surge” W. Bush, Chastizes Iraqi Prime Minister Via Closed Circuit Television Conference; al-Maliki “Caves”
As we learned yesterday, an unnamed White House insider had accidentially hit the “Pipes and Tubes” button on his email application and broadcast worldwide the fact that Iraqi PM Nuri al-Maliki agreed with Barack Obama’s sixteen-month Time Horizon timetable. That same unnamed White House employee, of course, had actually intended to hit the “Pipes” button so only Bush insiders would get the Spiegel Magazine report, but by then, the damage had been done and the world could easily conclude the Bush Administration was going into major “damage control mode” over the troubling news.
Fast-forward to today. Now we learn al-Maliki didn’t really mean what he said; that it had been misinterpreted somehow. What he REALLY meant to say (again, very shortly after his boss in the White House had demanded an immediate teleconference with him), courtesy of CNN, was:
“… a spokesman for al-Maliki said his remarks “were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately.” …
(Snip!)
… “Who they choose as their president is the Americans’ business. But it’s the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that’s where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited,” he said.
“Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic,” al-Maliki said. …”
Okay, let’s see now. We had to do a lot of reading between the lines there to come up with the actual truth. Let’s see if we can recap it to where it all makes more sense…
First turn of events — al-Maliki says he is completely, 100% in agreement with Barry’s “timetable” to Spiegel. White House insider accidentally spreads what was meant to be an internal memo around the world (i.e., the “Pipes and Tubes” button) to blast the breaking news to White House insiders so they could go quickly into “damage control mode” (i.e., the “Pipes” button). OOPS!
Next turn of events — (just guessing on this one) President “Surge” W. Bush’s boss, Dick “Shotgun” Cheney goes ballistic, calls George into his office and demands he get in touch IMMEDIATELY with al-Maliki and “straighten him out” on this. “How DARE he use “timetable” instead of “time horizon”, he screams at his suboordinate. Frankly, I’d be shocked if Veep Cheney didn’t write him up for allowing Barry to come between him and his “Big Oil and Nation Buildin’ Bidness” in Iraq; a “bidness” John McCain most likely has a written contract to continue, but that’s just speculation on my part.
Last but not least — A beaten and now, completely torqued off “President” Bush demands his Iraqi puppet, al-Maliki, refrain from using the term “timetable” and get on board with the “time horizon” phrase. Furthermore, he is to immediately call a press conference and claim he was “misquoted” in his direct quote, “or else”. A depressed, defeated and beaten Nuri al-Maliki caves into his direct supervisor’s demand, calls a new press conference as directed and recants/reiterates the fact he REALLY meant to refer to any U.S. troop withdrawal plans as a “time horizon” from this day forward, and that it’s none of his bee’s wax who the Americans elect to lead them as long as the new president stays away from this “one hundred years or more” stuff.
Great — I think I’ve got it now. Thanks for clearing that up for me, gentlemen.
***
Again, a blogger roundup of my personal “faves” of the day — read them in their entirety…
“… given that al-Maliki said today that it’s time for an official timetable and that Obama “is right when he talks about 16 months,” will McCain honor that commitment and call for withdrawal or change his position that we should leave Iraq if asked?”
Andrew Sullivan of The Daily Dish (The Atlantic as well):
“… in reality Obama has consistently said conditions on the ground would inform his timeline for withdrawal. McCain may be able to argue he was right about the surge, but Obama can argue he was right about the war. …”
Matthew O’Keefe of Papamoka Straight Talk:
“… Maybe we should re-word how the retraction came. Maybe we should say that somebody in a sort of oval office with tons of interest in all events happening in Iraq placed a very angry phone call to the Prime Minister of Iraq? Maybe in that phone call some strong words were exchanged on a one sided basis and the guy in the oval like office told the supposed Prime Minister of Iraq to spin the statement backwards and twist it out of context? …”
Our friend Libby Spencer of The Impolitic:
“… it didn’t take long for the White House to walk Maliki back. He’s already said he was misinterpreted, but come on. That’s a whole lot of statement to misconstrue. …”
Warren Street of Blue Girl, Red State:
“… Am I the only person who believes we’re going to have do this all over again? In ten or twelve years, are we going to have to send five combat divisions to Kuwait in order to take down the dastardly Maliki regime? …”
Kevin Drum of The Washington Monthly:
“… The retraction claimed that Maliki’s comments were “were misunderstood, mistranslated and not conveyed accurately,” which might be plausible if there were only a single sentence in question. However, how likely is it that Spiegel mistranslated three separate comments? …”
Loading ...
10:03 pm on July 20th, 2008 1
Damn it I hate it when I find out that you and I talked about the same issue and came to the same conclusions!