As regards the Tufts article, it’s been my experience from years of university employment that university PR offices — especially those at private universities that depend heavily on endowments — seldom write controversial press releases that might upset the big donors.
The fact remains that the two links you provided, The Times & truthout.org reported overall sentiment and facts that could in no way be interpreted from the speech alone that Pres. Bush (I) gave. They mentioned no sources other than the speech, and if you follow Mark’s link and read the speech, there is no logical way anyone could interpret this as “reflecting unease among the Bush family and its entourage at the way that George W. Bush is ignoring international opinion and overriding the institutions that his father sought to uphold.” (sic) As the cover of Boston’s original album said ‘Listen to the Music!’, you should 'Read the speech!.
The Tuft’s article that I linked earlier could be excused as PR from the University (heaven forgive that institutions of higher learning lean left or right!), but Mark’s link was to the actual words of the former President, and reflect, IMHO, the liberal slant of the Times and those who purport it as reporting the news. The fact that you excuse the error as coming from the Times of London, other than at least you responded to Mark’s salient point, is revealing that you still did not admit that they might have got it wrong. Times: “Although not addressed to his son in person, the message, in a speech at Tufts University in Massachusetts, was unmistakeable. Mr Bush Sr even came close to conceding that opponents of his sonÂ’s case against President Saddam Hussein, who he himself is on record as loathing, have legitimate cause for concern.” Where did they get that from the speech? His actual words were "And I now I stay out of the President’s way and try not to complicate his life. I have an appreciation for the big job he has to do. And so I don’t go around giving advice to the 43rd President of the United States. "
James,
When a politician gives a speech, he or she has to expect the public and the media to look for messages between the lines. So a less-than-ringing endorsement of parts of our Iraqi policy can justifiably be taken as a warning, and reported as such. Here is a quote from the Q&A after the speech. Of course partisans will always hear what they want to hear, but others will hear the language of diplomacy, and Bush Sr is smart enough to know that he was voicing criticism [emphasis added below]:
Q. … Are you troubled by the willingness of the U.S. to act unilaterally without broad based international support?
A. PRESIDENT BUSH: I agree with the President, it would be much better to act with as much international support as possible. The difference between '91 and today is that the objective was clearer, in a way, back when I was President. You could see the occupying forces. You could get the reports of the brutality of the Iraqi soldiers to the Kuwaiti women, and to the torture of the young men. You could see that the forces, in my view, were determined to go even further south to try to take over – that was my view – to take over Saudi Arabia. Today it’s less clear. The violations of the U.N. resolutions by Saddam Hussein are clear. But, the question is how much does he have in a way of weapons of mass destruction? That could be debated. But, I think, most people conclude that he has not done what he was called on to do, to fully disarm. So, it’s a little fuzzier today. But, then you have another ingredient today that we didn’t have back then. You saw September 11th. Now, I’m not saying that this is a big conspiracy between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, but the United States must do what it can to protect itself and its friends against the use of weapons of mass destruction. And here’s somebody that’s violated these norms. And, I think, that it is understandable we’re trying to get him to live within those resolutions, and whether we stay together enough to make him change his ways without fighting, I don’t know, I just don’t know.
Marty, thanks for reminding me that I have feet. No problem with humor. I thoroughly enjoyed Marty’s duck tape (although I was compelled to forward the picture to PETA). It is the off topic (i.e., political) stuff that is annoying/distracting. I will heed your advice.