Video: Diane Sawyer asks Syrian fascist what’s on his iPod

posted at 1:49 pm on February 5, 2007 by Allahpundit

From this morning’s GMA. Not quite as flirtatious as Wallace’s pattycake session with Ahmadinejad, but at least he sprung a few tough questions about Hezbollah and the Holocaust. Sawyer’s most probing moment was asking in the broadest terms about jihadis coming across the border into Iraq, a subject for which Assad was surely prepared and which he batted away with a pat answer about spillover.

Part two airs tomorrow morning. Maybe the big guns come out then.

I had to be draconian about cutting for fair use purposes so you should read the full transcript. Here’s one bit that got left out. Read this first, though, so that you’re in the right frame of mind to appreciate his answer:

Sawyer: So the influence of the neighboring countries can create a cease-fire?

Assad: Yes, this is something mainly that they don’t understand. It doesn’t matter how strong economically or what army you have, it’s a matter of credibility. We have credibility. We have good relations with the other factions. They should trust you to be able to play a role.

We have this good relations with all the parties, including the parties participating in this government and the other who oppose this political process. So that’s how we can help. As Syria. Maybe other countries as well.

Also left out, but worth quoting for its red-meat value:

Sawyer: And is there anyone operating on the world stage today that you admire? Any leader, any diplomat?

Assad: Maybe Bush, the father, because of his will to achieve the peace in the region. Of course, President Clinton, he has the same will, and he is admired in our region and respected.

That line about peace in the region passed without any rejoinder from Sawyer about Lebanon, of course, as did his statements about the virtues of democracy and the alleged similarity between Syria’s and America’s border problems, as you’re about to see. The killer, though, is his crack about what good democracy is if you’re dead; as both a summation of the fascist mindset and a threat to reformers in the region, you can scarcely do better.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

We lost around 4,000,000 troops before we unabashedly occupied any country in WW2.

Where’s honora with the flag on this one? The U.S. military casualty total for WWII is 407,300, and a substantial portion of those occured AFTER Pearl Harbor. Try again.

Definition of indiscriminate is “failing to make or recognize distinctions” — exactly what happened with dropping the nuclear weapons. Whether it was the right move or not there is no way it was anything but indiscriminate.

Actually, the bombs we dropped in Japan were not indiscriminate as you defined it there. We KNEW we were killing civilians when those targets were chosen, and Truman was depending on the immense shock value to make them stop fighting. Although horrible, not indiscriminate.

Freelancer on February 6, 2007 at 6:33 PM

We lost around 4,000,000 troops before we unabashedly occupied any country in WW2.

Where’s honora with the flag on this one? The U.S. military casualty total for WWII is 407,300, and a substantial portion of those occured AFTER Pearl Harbor. Try again.

Definition of indiscriminate is “failing to make or recognize distinctions” — exactly what happened with dropping the nuclear weapons. Whether it was the right move or not there is no way it was anything but indiscriminate.

Actually, the bombs we dropped in Japan were not indiscriminate as you defined it there. We KNEW we were killing civilians when those targets were chosen, and Truman was depending on the immense shock value to make them stop fighting. Although horrible, not indiscriminate.

Freelancer on February 6, 2007 at 6:33 PM

Even JaiBones makes a mistake once every five years or so… I added too many commas and zeros .. sue me.

BTW Freelancer where is the link for the 4,000 automobile deaths due to illegal aliens you mention? That sounds a little high as well. Prove it.

Wyrd,
According to http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWdresden.htm there were an estimated 35,000 – 100,000 deaths in Dresden.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki Hiroshima suffered 140,000 deaths and Nagasaki 74,000.
Hiroshima made sense for the reasons, Nagasaki only three days later made no sense since there was no imminent danger in waiting a bit longer for the Japanese to assess what had just happened.

Bradky on February 6, 2007 at 7:27 PM

Hey, at least he’s supporting democracy and capitalism by buying an Ipod – as well as giving Sawyer a chance to retain her employment by actually interviewing someone occasionally – even if it is a shameless puff piece. :)

Emmett J. on February 6, 2007 at 9:54 PM

Honora, I’m sure he was referring to the automobile deaths caused by illegal immigrants last year, that’s just over 4,000. Nice of you to make his point for him by correcting his number upwards, though. Yeah, there was a point, and yeah, as usual you evaded it in favor of something less important but also less dangerous to your ability to ignore the truth.

By the way, we ARE occupiers in Iraq, it pains me no end that politicians think we dare not say so. Beyond that, Wyrd has it right, we WON the invasion, and we are now helping the indigenous people of Iraq to restructure their government in favor of liberty rather than tyranny. It’s too bad that there’s still many people who don’t want it that way. That’s who we are fighting.

Freelancer on February 6, 2007 at 6:22 PM

No, he meant all deaths and if you actually read the thread, you would see that he later made that correction himself. Sorry if that doesn’t fit your narrative.

I suggest you look up the definition of occupier in this context–when MacArthur was in charge in Japan, he was in charge completely and absolutely. We claim the Iraqis are running their country.

It is easy to see why you would be confused, I’ll give you that.

honora on February 7, 2007 at 9:36 AM

Bradky, your arguments make no sense. Which is it? Did we do the right thing in Japan or not? Were we the “indiscriminate” butchers you seem to think I wish we were now? You seem to be arguing just for arguments sake.

Rick on February 7, 2007 at 11:20 AM

Bradky, your arguments make no sense. Which is it? Did we do the right thing in Japan or not? Were we the “indiscriminate” butchers you seem to think I wish we were now? You seem to be arguing just for arguments sake.

Rick on February 7, 2007 at 11:20 AM

The bombing of Hiroshima is understandable – Nagasaki was not necessary and arguably indiscriminate as was Dresden.
What are you suggesting for Iraq that should be or should have been done? Your comments seemed to indicate we should have been more “indiscriminate”. Correct me if I am misinterpreting your intent.

Bradky on February 7, 2007 at 1:04 PM

Sawyer: “So, Assad… Do you think you’re as cute as I do?”

Mephistefales on July 13, 2007 at 1:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2