Thursday, January 18, 2007

Tony Snow: Busted

Tony Snow on Thursday:

Go ahead, Sarah.

Q Tony, for the first time, the United States has agreed to bilateral talks with North Korea if North Korea agrees to give up its nuclear weapons program. Would it be better to put all issues on the table before negotiations begin?

MR. SNOW: Well, the premise of your question is wrong. In the September 19, 2005 agreement, one of the things that's in there is the possibility of bilateral negotiations within the context of the six-party talks. We have not had bilateral talks. What you had over the week -- this week in Berlin were talks with Chris Hill and a North Korean representative as preparations for the six-party talks. Chris is then moving on to Beijing and Seoul and also Tokyo. So he's going to be meeting with heads of state in Japan, South Korea, and also China.

All the parties of the six-party talks -- we'll speak with the Russians at some other venue, I'm sure -- at this particular point are in the loop. They know that he's been having these conversations. But this is not bilateral -- number one, this is not an instance of bilateral negotiations on the side. And secondly, bilateral relations between the North Koreans and the United States has always been part of the agreement laid out in that September 19th accord.

So if the North Koreans return to the table without preconditions, then you've got the opportunity to move forward.

Interview with Christopher Hill, August 9, 2005:

MARGARET WARNER: Just back from two weeks of negotiations in Beijing over ending North Korea's nuclear program is Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill. He was U.S. point man in the six-nation talks, and also held numerous private sessions with his North Korean counterpart.

It's the first time the Bush administration has engaged in such intense bilateral talks with Pyongyang. But the negotiations were suspended for three weeks on Saturday with no agreement.

Don't you just love it when Bushco rewrites history?

And then there was this:

Yes, Wendell.

Q Two questions on public perceptions. Are you saying that four years into this war, the American people don't have an accurate picture of what's going on in Iraq?

MR. SNOW: I think, Wendell, four years into a war, the picture constantly changes. The picture that we saw in April of 2003 was different than the one we saw a year ago. If you think a year ago, Wendell, there was considerable optimism, Democrats and Republicans both coming back from the region saying, you know, we think things are going okay. We've had the election. They did not anticipate the, I guess, eruption of sectarian violence.

There was "considerable optimism"? Really? Then why did Tony Snow feel the need to write this article dismissing those so-called optimistic critics in January, 2006? (Added bonus: he was also defending the domestic spying program at that time.)

Meanwhile, contrary to the frettings of the pant-soiling Murtha brigades, the war hasn't failed. Previously inimical Shi'a, Sunni and Kurdish factions are busy cutting deals and forming a new government — that's progress — and we haven't had a repeat Sept. 11. That's progress, too.

As for establishing conditions for justice and global order, the war has put terrorists to flight, reducing al Qaeda to little more than a production company for bad jihadi videos. Death-loving Islamosadists, while still active, have been forced to alter their plans and targets. And tiny seeds of democracy have begun to sprout throughout the region.

Now why were the so-called 'Murtha brigades' have been soiling their pants if everything was really so wonderful one year ago?

Methinks Snow was just projecting his optimism onto everybody else while slamming them for being concerned about the reality on the ground.

No comments:

Post a Comment