On 9/11, a Telling Seven-Minute Silence

gldstwmn · #1 06-19-2004, 07:36 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

Interpreting the President's Image in Crisis

By Joel Achenbach
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, June 19, 2004; Page C01

You're at a photo op, reading a book with schoolchildren and an aide suddenly whispers that a second plane has hit the World Trade Center. "America is under attack."

You're the president of the United States. What do you do?

There have been other moments like this in American history, when the chief executive was suddenly plunged into a crisis, but they weren't caught on videotape. George W. Bush was on camera in an elementary school in Sarasota, Fla. He could see the pagers of reporters and photographers going off, one by one. He was on the spot like few people have ever been.

From two different angles, Americans have new glimpses of that historic moment. One comes from rabble-rousing Michael Moore, whose Bush-eviscerating film "Fahrenheit 9/11" premieres next week, and includes an uninterrupted seven-minute segment showing Bush's reaction after hearing the news of the attack. He doesn't move.

Instead he continues to sit in the classroom, listening to children read aloud. Moore lets the tape roll as the minutes pass painfully by.

And now from a second angle: The staff of the 9/11 Commission this week released a report that summarizes Bush's closed-door testimony about his thoughts as he sat there.

"The President told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis . . . The President felt he should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was happening."

This moment will surely be used by the president's political opponents, and with equal fervor defended by his supporters. However it is interpreted, it points out a basic truth about any president: He's both an executive and a symbolic figure. He's the spiritual leader of the nation as well as the head of state. He's monarch and prime minister.

Sometimes he has to decide what role to take.

Presidential historian Robert Dallek of Boston University thinks Bush focused too much on appearances, rather than leaping into action.

"It speaks volumes about the preoccupation these politicians have about manipulating image," Dallek said yesterday. Bush should have immediately excused himself and started figuring out what was happening and what he could do. "The way to project calm and strength is to take care of business."

Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian at the University of New Orleans, concurs: "I don't understand how one sits there. I just don't. Minutes are an eternity in that sort of situation. . . . A quick presidential decision may save lives."

snip

Eventually, at the suggestion of an aide, Bush got up and went to a holding room. He spoke briefly to the vice president, his national security adviser, the governor of New York and the head of the FBI, according to the commission report. Then, the report states, Bush spent roughly 15 minutes working on what he'd say to the cameras at the elementary school. He was acting as Communicator in Chief, in a sense. With his senior aides, he worked on his lines.

"As far as we know, no one was in contact with the Pentagon. The focus was on the President's statement to the nation. No decisions were made at this time, other than the decision to return to Washington," the report states. The president was persuaded to fly to Louisiana and then Nebraska before finally returning to the capital.

snip

Bush was conscious on Sept. 11 of the need, for symbolic reasons, to return to Washington, but was persuaded by the Secret Service, Cheney and other aides that the situation was too risky. Some critics, Dallek among them, say Bush should have overruled his aides. The commission report states that all participants agree that Bush argued forcefully for returning.

The commission report portrays a discombobulated government that can't even keep track of the hijacked planes. Fighter planes fly in the wrong direction, pilots have no idea why they're in the air (maybe a cruise missile attack?), orders don't get passed along the chain of command. Everyone's flying blind. The president borrows a cell phone to try to get through to the White House.

Symbolically and substantively, the ship of state was foundering.

strandinthewind · #2 06-19-2004, 08:08 PM

They were caught with their pants down - no two ways about it. Then, they spin it to maintain image. What jerks

Did you read where they later could not get through to Wash. D.C. and the Pres. or someone close to him had to use a cell phone. SCARY!!!!!!

gldstwmn · #3 06-19-2004, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

They were caught with their pants down - no two ways about it. Then, they spin it to maintain image. What jerks

Did you read where they later could not get through to Wash. D.C. and the Pres. or someone close to him had to use a cell phone. SCARY!!!!!!

Yes. It's in the article I posted above.

strandinthewind · #4 06-19-2004, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Yes. It's in the article I posted above.

Oops - missed that part

But, I knew I had heard it elsewhere - I think it was on Letterman last night!!!!

dissention · #5 06-20-2004, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

Interpreting the President's Image in Crisis

By Joel Achenbach
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, June 19, 2004; Page C01

"The President told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis . . . The President felt he should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was happening."

This alone makes me cry. He sat there simply for the sake of appearance while our brothers and sisters were being burned alive, jumping out of high rises, and being decapitated by falling rubble. "My Pet Goat" was too absorbing to stop reading, I guess. The funny thing is, though, that he couldn't get a better understanding of what was happening by simply sitting there. That's what pains me the most and makes me madder than hell. Our "president" did nothing. It's going to be quite powerful to watch the full seven minutes when Fahrenheit 9/11 opens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Eventually, at the suggestion of an aide, Bush got up and went to a holding room. He spoke briefly to the vice president, his national security adviser, the governor of New York and the head of the FBI, according to the commission report. Then, the report states, Bush spent roughly 15 minutes working on what he'd say to the cameras at the elementary school. He was acting as Communicator in Chief, in a sense. With his senior aides, he worked on his lines.

Then I read this. They make no mention of cell phones that were "broken" or the ridiculous order Cheney gave to shoot down the plane headed for the Pentagon...after it had crashe dinto the Pentagon.

Dont'cha just love how the incompetence of elected officials is just shrugged off by the public? Kinda sad, in all actuality.

gldstwmn · #6 06-20-2004, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

This alone makes me cry. He sat there simply for the sake of appearance while our brothers and sisters were being burned alive, jumping out of high rises, and being decapitated by falling rubble. "My Pet Goat" was too absorbing to stop reading, I guess. The funny thing is, though, that he couldn't get a better understanding of what was happening by simply sitting there. That's what pains me the most and makes me madder than hell. Our "president" did nothing. It's going to be quite powerful to watch the full seven minutes when Fahrenheit 9/11 opens.

Then I read this. They make no mention of cell phones that were "broken" or the ridiculous order Cheney gave to shoot down the plane headed for the Pentagon...after it had crashe dinto the Pentagon.

Dont'cha just love how the incompetence of elected officials is just shrugged off by the public? Kinda sad, in all actuality.

That's why I read the Guardian UK and to a certain degreee Reuters. Did you watch the CHUM clip I posted? Our media has been seemingly unable to ask a follow up question since 2000. CBS has been doing a good job lately I will admit. The New York Times has become a joke. It's hard for me to read anymore. The WaPo still has it's moments but then they also have their whore pieces as well. Gotta go along to get along, I guess.

dissention · #7 06-20-2004, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

That's why I read the Guardian UK and to a certain degreee Reuters. Did you watch the CHUM clip I posted? Our media has been seemingly unable to ask a follow up question since 2000. CBS has been doing a good job lately I will admit. The New York Times has become a joke. It's hard for me to read anymore. The WaPo still has it's moments but then they also have their whore pieces as well. Gotta go along to get along, I guess.

Michael Moore told off Matt Lauer on Dateline the other day and said that if the media did their jobs and asked real questions instead of cheerleading this administration, the American people probably wouldn't have supported ChimpCo's every move. Then he called Lauer out personally and said that he should've grilled the Iraq war ringleaders just as hard as he was grilling Moore. Of course, Matt Lauer had no real response other than to say that F9/11 was full of lies. He read from the 9/11 commissions findings and then Moore excoriated him for only reading a little snippet that supported what Lauer was saying, then went on to quote the report that Lauer didn't read.

gldstwmn · #8 06-20-2004, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

Michael Moore told off Matt Lauer on Dateline the other day and said that if the media did their jobs and asked real questions instead of cheerleading this administration, the American people probably wouldn't have supported ChimpCo's every move. Then he called Lauer out personally and said that he should've grilled the Iraq war ringleaders just as hard as he was grilling Moore. Of course, Matt Lauer had no real response other than to say that F9/11 was full of lies. He read from the 9/11 commissions findings and then Moore excoriated him for only reading a little snippet that supported what Lauer was saying, then went on to quote the report that Lauer didn't read.

Lauer isn't even a journalist. He's an entertainer. He's also a terrible interviewer. Remember when he interviewed Stevie and kept asking her questions about Coke? Guess why? He's a former cokehead?

dissention · #9 06-20-2004, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Lauer isn't even a journalist. He's an entertainer. He's also a terrible interviewer. Remember when he interviewed Stevie and kept asking her questions about Coke? Guess why? He's a former cokehead?

It's almost as funny as when Couric peers over and asks the hard questions:

"So, what did it feel like to say goodbye after so many years?" as Jennifer Aniston goes through her 569th tissue.

DrummerDeanna · #10 06-20-2004, 04:20 PM

I think the media IS asking hard questions....but that doesn't mean they get answered...I've witnessed this first hand....you can ask anything, they don't have to answer...in fact....the administration is very talented at answering different questions the exact same way....it's amazing.

strandinthewind · #11 06-21-2004, 11:59 AM

I agree, most of the hard questions got asked. The administration answered most of them. They just did not answer them clearly. AND - this brings me back to my point about the WMD - the administration had years of UN resolutions and R and D support for claiming their existence. I mean when W gave that recent WH interview. He was asked hard questions and he responded with political spin, which they all do. So, until we can figure out a way to make someone answer a question with the truth . . .

chiliD · #12 06-21-2004, 12:32 PM

I find it very difficult to understand how ANYONE could vote for the incumbent POTUS in his re-election bid. He's incompetent, his administration is incompetent...we here in California had a (supposedly) incompetent Governor and we voted him out of office...mid-term. Not that we got anyone BETTER (that is yet to be seen, but it is not promising, I'll tell ya). Let's rid ourselves of incompetent elected officials across the board.

No, I'm not calling for anarchy, just INTELLIGENT voting habits.

dissention · #13 06-21-2004, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I agree, most of the hard questions got asked. The administration answered most of them.

Do we watch the same press briefings?

The media is the biggest cheerleader for this administration. They believe everything they're told, print it as gospel, and then distort everything they're told. No offense to anyone who works in the media, but the media in general these days is just one big collective whore for this administration.