Transcript of "News Conference"

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Transcript of "News Conference"
46
Wed, 04-14-2004 - 12:00pm

Bush's opening statement

President opens third prime-time news conference
with 16-minute statement on Iraq conflict




BUSH ANSWERS FIRST QUESTION DURING NATIONALLY TELEVISED NEWS CONFERENCE
Jason Reed / Reuters

President Bush answers the first question Tuesday after his opening remarks at a White House news conference.



MSNBC

Updated: 11:00 p.m. ET April  13, 2004


Below are the remarks President Bush made as he opened his third prime-time news conference since he took over the White House

Good evening.

Before I take your questions, let me speak with the American people about the situation in Iraq.


This has been tough weeks in that country.  Coalition forces have encountered serious violence in some areas of Iraq.  Our military commanders report that this violence is being instigated by three groups.


Some remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime, along with Islamic militants, have attacked coalition forces in the city of Fallujah.  Terrorists from other countries have infiltrated Iraq to incite and organize attacks.


In the south of Iraq, coalition forces face riots and attacks that are being incited by a radical cleric named al-Sadr.  He has assembled some of his supporters into an illegal militia and publicly supported the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah.  Al-Sadr's methods of violence and intimidation are widely repudiated by other Iraqi Shi'a.  He has been indicted by Iraqi authorities for the murder of a prominent Shi'a cleric.

Although these instigations of violence come from different factions, they share common goals.  They want to run us out of Iraq and destroy the democratic hopes of the Iraqi people.  The violence we have seen is a power grab by these extreme and ruthless elements. It's not a civil war.  It's not a popular uprising.  Most of Iraq is relatively stabile.  Most Iraqis by far reject violence and oppose dictatorship.

In forums where Iraqis have met to discuss their political future and in all the proceedings of the Iraqi Governing Council, Iraqis have clear commitments.  They want strong protections for individual rights.  They want their independence and they want their freedom.


America's commitment to freedom in Iraq is consistent with our ideals and required by our interests.


Iraq will either be a peaceful democratic country or it will again be a source of violence, a haven for territory, and a threat to America and to the world.  By helping secure a free Iraq, Americans serving in that country are protecting their fellow citizens.  Our nation is grateful to them all and to their families that face hardship and long separation. 


This weekend at a Fort Hood hospital, I presented a purple heart to some of our wounded.  I had the honor of thanking them on behalf of all Americans.  Other men and women have paid an even greater cost. Our nation honors the memory of those who have been killed.  And we pray that their families will find God's comfort in the midst of their grief. 


As I've said to those who have lost loved ones, we will finish the work of the fallen.  America's armed forces are performing brilliantly with all the skill and honor we expect of them.


We're constantly reviewing their needs.  Troop strength now and in the future is determined by the situation on the ground.  If additional forces are needed, I will send them.  If additional resources are needed, we will provide them. 


The people of our country are united behind our men and women in uniform.  And this government will do all that is necessary to assure success of their historic mission. 


One central commitment of that mission is the transfer of sovereignty back to the Iraqi people.  We have set a deadline of June 30th.  It is important that we meet that deadline.  As a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not support an indefinite occupation, and neither does America.  We're not an imperial power, as nations such as Japan and Germany can attest.  We're a liberating power, as nations in Europe and Asia can attest, as well. 


America's objective in Iraq is limited and it is firm.


We seek an independent, free and secure Iraq.


Were the coalition to step back from the June 30th pledge, many Iraqis would question our intentions and feel their hopes betrayed, and those in Iraqi who trade in hatred and conspiracy theories would find a larger audience and gain the stronger hand.


We will not step back from our pledged.  On June 30th, Iraqi sovereignty will be placed in Iraqi hands.  Sovereignty involves more than a date and a ceremony.  It requires Iraqis to assume responsibility for their own future.  Iraqi authorities are now confronting the security challenge of the last several weeks.  In Fallujah, coalition forces have suspected offensive operations, allowing members of the Iraqi Governing Council and local leaders to work on the restoration of central authority in that city.


These leaders are communicating with the insurgents to ensure an orderly turnover of that city to Iraqi forces so that the resumption of military action does not become necessary.  They're also insisting that those who killed and mutilated four American contract workers be handed over for trial and punishment.  In addition, members of the Governing Council are seeking to resolve the situation in the south. Al-Sadr must answer the charges against him and disband his illegal militia. 


Our coalition is standing with responsible Iraqi leaders as they establish growing authority in their country.  The transition to sovereignty requires that we demonstrate confidence in Iraqis, and we have that confidence.  Many Iraqi leaders are showing greater personal courage, and their example will bring out the same quality in others. 


The transition to sovereignty also requires an atmosphere of security, and our coalition is working to provide that security.  We will continue taking the greatest care to prevent harm to innocent civilians, yet we will not permit the spread of chaos and violence.


I have directed our military commanders to make every preparation to use decisive force if necessary to maintain order and to protect our troops.


The nation of Iraq is moving toward self-rule, and Iraqis and Americans will see evidence in the months to come.  On June 30th, when the flag of a free Iraq is raised, Iraqi officials will assume full responsibility for the ministries of government.  On that day the Transitional Administrative Law, including a bill of rights that is unprecedented in the Arab world, will take full effect.  The United States and all the nations of our coalition will establish normal diplomatic relations with the Iraqi government.  An American embassy will open, and an American ambassador will be posted.


According to the schedule already approved by the Governing Council, Iraq will hold elections for a national assembly no later than next January.


That assembly will draft a new permanent constitution which will be presented to the Iraqi people in a national referendum held in October of next year.  Iraqis will then elect a permanent government by December 15th, 2005, an event that will mark the completion of Iraq's transition from dictatorship to freedom.


Other nations and international institutions are stepping up to their responsibilities in building a free and secure Iraq.  We're working closely with the United Nations envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, and with Iraqis to determine the exact form of the government that will receive sovereignty on June 30th. 


The United Nations election assistance team, headed by Carina Perelli, is in Iraq developing plans for next January's election. NATO is providing support for the Polish-led multinational division in Iraq and 17 of NATO's 26 members are contributing forces to maintain security.


Secretary of State Powell and Secretary of State Rumsfeld and a number of NATO defense and foreign minister are exploring a more formal role for NATO, such as turning the Polish-led division into a NATO operation and giving NATO specific responsibilities for border control.


Iraqis' neighbors also have responsibilities to make their region more stable, so I'm sending Deputy Secretary of State Armitage to the Middle East to discuss with these nations our common interest in a free and independent Iraq and how they can help achieve this goal.


As we've made clear all along, our commitment to the success and security of Iraq will not end on June 30th.  On July 1st and beyond, our reconstruction assistance will continue, and our military commitment will continue.  Having helped Iraqis establish a new government, coalition military forces will help Iraqis to protect their government from external aggression and internal subversion.


The success of free government in Iraq is vital for many reasons.  A free Iraq is vital because 25 million Iraqis have as much right to live in freedom as we do.  A free Iraq will stand as an example to reformers across the Middle East.  A free Iraq will show that America is on the side of Muslims who wish to live in peace, as we've already shown in Kuwait and Kosovo, Bosnia and Afghanistan.  A free Iraq will confirm to a watching world that America's word, once given, can be relied upon even in the toughest times. 


Above all, the defeat of violence and terror in Iraq is vital to the defeat of violence and terror elsewhere, and vital, therefore, to the safety of the American people.  Now is the time and Iraq is the place in which the enemies of the civilized world are testing the will of the civilized world.


We must not waver. 


The violence we are seeing in Iraq is familiar.  The terrorist who takes hostages or plants a roadside bomb near Baghdad is serving the same ideology of murder that kills innocent people on trains in Madrid, and murders children on buses in Jerusalem, and blows up a nightclub in Bali, and cuts the throat of a young reporter for being a Jew. 


We've seen the same ideology of murder in the killing of 241 Marines in Beirut, the first attack on the World Trade Center, and the destruction of two embassies in Africa; in the attack on the USS Cole, and in the merciless horror inflicted upon thousands of innocent men and women and children on September the 11th, 2001.


None of these acts is the work of a religion.  All are the work  of a fanatical political ideology.  The servants of this ideology seek  tyranny in the Middle East and beyond.  They seek to oppress and  persecute women.  They seek the death of Jews and Christians, and  every Muslim who desires peace over theocratic terror.  They seek to  intimidate America into panic and retreat, and to set free nations  against each other.  And they seek weapons of mass destruction to  blackmail and murder on a massive scale.


Over the last several decades, we've seen that any concession or  retreat on our part will only embolden this enemy and invite more  bloodshed.  And the enemy has seen over the last 31 months that we  will no longer live in denial or seek to appease them.


For the first time the civilized world has provided a concerted  response to the ideology of terror: a series of powerful, effective  blows.  The terrorists have lost the shelter of the Taliban and the  training camps in Afghanistan.


They've lost safe havens in Pakistan.  They lost an ally in Baghdad.  And Libya has turned its back on terror.  They've lost many leaders in  an unrelenting international manhunt.  And perhaps most frightening to  these men and their movement, the terrorists are seeing the advance of  freedom and reform in the greater Middle East.


A desperate enemy is also a dangerous enemy, and our work may  become more difficult before it is finished.  No one can predict all  the hazards that lie ahead or the costs they will bring.  Yet in this  conflict, there is no safe alternative to resolute action.  The  consequences of failure in Iraq would be unthinkable.  Every friend of  America in Iraq would be betrayed to prison and murder as a new  tyranny arose.  Every enemy of America in the world would celebrate,  proclaiming our weakness and decadence and using that victory to  recruit a new generation of killers.


We will succeed in Iraq.  We're carrying out a decision that has  already been made and will not change.  Iraq will be a free,  independent country and America and the Middle East will be safer  because of it.  Our coalition has the means and the will to prevail.  We serve the cause of liberty and that is always and everywhere a  cause worth serving.


Now I'll be glad to take your questions.


 Â© 2004 MSNBC Interactive

cl-nwtreehugger


 


Community Leader: In The News & Sports Talk


I can also be found at Washington, TV Shows & QOTW


Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Thu, 04-15-2004 - 6:46pm
<>

My POV is really not important. What I believe is that there are two sides to every issue (at least). I don't know where you get the "Chinese" from. Asia is not composed of only China. Actually, you didn't notice that the author "Ehsan Ahrari, PhD, is an Alexandria, Virginia, US-based independent strategic analyst." The purpose of this online paper is to provide news for the Asian population.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Thu, 04-15-2004 - 7:33pm
Your POV isn't important? OK, I'll keep that in mind in the future.

I went to the home page of this newspaper. It is Chinese. The author may be based in the U.S. but it was written for, sold to, and printed for the communist Chinese. Of course they would buy this - It is Anti-American.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Thu, 04-15-2004 - 8:33pm

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-16-2004 - 9:22am
There probably ought to be some legislation written outlawing Botox for politicians. It's hard enough to get the truth in words. Of course, they're unlikely to vote it into law though pay raises slide right through! Imagine what it would be like if we can no longer "read" their faces! And since most camera shots are head and upper torso, it's nigh impossible to gauge thought based on body language.

Gettingahandle

Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Fri, 04-16-2004 - 9:48am
<>

My opinion doesn't matter because I wasn't presenting an opinion. I would like to correct your above statement, for others who my believe what you say. China is a part of Asia, of course it would be covered. I want to call your attention to the first paragraph where it says, "We look at these issues from an Asian perspective; this distinguishes us from the mainstream English-language media, whose reporting on Asian matters is generally by Westerners, for Westerners. Our Chinese-language edition presents our articles to Chinese readers around the world."

As far as it being in Communist China, I would like to remind you that Hong Kong was an English colony until 1997. They were democratic and are trying to remain so since their turn over.

You have jumped to conclusions to prove your point--For those interested the statement is copied below. I try to get my information from many sources, this has proved to be a good one. I was able to get information about Pakistan and Afghanistan that wasn't covered in US papers. Don't forget that much of the middle-east is Asia.


Asia Times Online, http://www.atimes.com and http://www.asiatimes-chinese.com , is a quality Internet-only publication that reports and examines geopolitical, political, economic and business issues. We look at these issues from an Asian perspective; this distinguishes us from the mainstream English-language media, whose reporting on Asian matters is generally by Westerners, for Westerners. Our Chinese-language edition presents our articles to Chinese readers around the world.


We are served by more than 30 correspondents and contributors in 13 Asian countries, the US, and Europe. Additional content is provided by news services and renowned think tank and investment analysts and academics.

Asia Times Online was founded at the beginning of 1999 and is incorporated and duly registered in Hong Kong. It derives its revenues from advertising and the resale of original content to other publications and news services.

Historically, in our publication policy and editorial outlook, we are the successor of Asia Times, the Hong Kong/Bangkok-based daily print newspaper founded in 1995 and associated with the Manager Media Group, which had to cease publication in the summer of 1997 as a result of the Asian financial crisis. Like its predecessor, Asia Times Online gives its readers worldwide an overview of Asian news events, looking behind the headlines that are the stuff of the news agencies and networks.

We reach a global readership that is rapidly increasing. Readers are people of influence - investors, company executives, politicians, diplomats, academics, analysts, journalists - who need to know about Asian affairs. One of our aims is to become a "must read" for Westerners and Asians who do business with each other.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-16-2004 - 10:18am
Interesting point on the pay raises.

I love when politicians say that they voted against a pay raise. These politicians are assuming that the average person does not know that they get an automatic 3% to 4% increase in their pay and benefits every year, regardless.

I want a politician to come out and say that they didnt vote for the pay increase because they were already getting one. That would make front-page news, and may even be the lead story on the evening news.

"Fox News Alert: Politician tells the honest truth about their pay in Congress."

"CNN Breaking News: Politician admits to having automatic pay increases all along." LOL

Pages