BBC journalist Matt Frei interviewed George W. Bush, who defends US policy in Darfur and his own ’seminal decision’ (sic) not to commit troops to Darfur (BBC transcript). I can’t upload the 15 minute video here, but you can watch it here or read a summary here.

Grim as most of the subjects the two of them canvassed were, and are, several of the things he said evoked mocking laughter or incredulous giggling. But other parts just made me shake my head in disbelief. Still others made me feel vaguely ill. Others evoked the usual helpless rage. The worst part is that I can still see, in a way, why people the people who liked him liked him, and why some might like him still. It was kind of an emotional roller coaster.

Among other things that would have upset me if I thought there was a chance of his persuading anyone, he once again misrepresented the position of those who oppose torture. He seems to think it’s because we don’t see terrorism as a threat instead of because we think (1) terrorism is morally wrong; and (2) a violation of international law. I oppose waterboarding and all forms of torture because, among other reasons, I consider it a cowardly and fearful response. Furthermore, my religious views, unlike, apparently, George W. Bush’s, require me to view it as a moral issue on which no compromise is possible. Even if I weren’t religious, I’d still believe in the Kantian precept of acting as if your own behavior would become the law for others. There is actually a certain rough common sense in the injunction to “do unto others, etc.” If you expect or demand that others comply with the highest standard of behavior, social, military, or otherwise, you have to set it yourself.

So I’d like to assure Bush and all hardliners and advocates of “harsh interrogation methods” that I am indeed afraid of terrorists and believe in the threat. But I am not a coward.

“We’re a nation of law,” Bush said, after explaining why he opposed the waterboarding ban. One law for us, another for the rest of the world, I suppose—at least if you assume that we wouldn’t put up with having the interrogation methods he wishes to preserved used against our own.

One of the things about Bush I will miss (in the way you miss a car alarm when it stops shrilling) is his way of walking up to, around and alongside what he means, so he’s always only ever in the general area. Like when he said that America “believe[s] in the human condition.” What?

When Matt Frei asked him if he could honestly say that America occupies the moral high ground, he somehow went off on a tangent of explaining his Middle Eastern policy. He rejected the previous policy of trying to achieve stability. “I chose a different course. Stability didn’t work.” And so…

Here are some of my favorite quotes (extracted from the transcript). The BBC was quite mean about faithfully transcribing his stumbling and stammers. Probably they do it for everyone, but somehow with Bush it’s more noticeable.

Here’s one example of Bush getting near what he means, but just not hitting the target.

BUSH: “America is trapped in this notion that we care about human life. We respect human dignity.”

To be fair, he immediately self-corrected.”And that’s not a trap. That’s a belief.” (BBC Transcript)

Here’s his explanation of terrorism. Note that he thinks an ‘ideology’ is something you join, like a church, and that ’suicider’ is a word. It is now, I guess, just like “Islamo-fascism.”

BUSH: ” And, those who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives are evil people. But, they have an ideology. And the only way you can recruit for that ideology is to find hopeless folks. I mean, who wants to join an ideology say women don’t have rights? You can’t express yourself freely. Religious beliefs are… you know, the only religious belief you can hold is the one we tell you. And, oh, by the way, it’s great. You can be a suicider. Well, hopeless people are the ones who get attracted by that point of view. And, therefore, it’s in the world’s interest from a national security perspective to deal with hopelessness. And it has to be in our moral interest.(BBC Transcript)

Frei asked if he regrets that he didn’t send more troops to Iraq earlier on “to achieve the kind of results that we’re seeing now.”

BUSH: “You know, my commanders didn’t tell me that early. My commanders said, “We got the right level of troops.” You know, war is - you know, it’s easy to second get [sic]… the tactical decisions of war. And I fully understand. And expect that to happen. All I can do is base decisions on the considered judgment of the experts. And I did.”

Immediately after which he added, “I take full responsibility for every military decision that’s been made in Iraq.”(BBC Transcript)

Also? He’s all about the law. Look at this (redacted) response to Frei’s questions about torture:

The reason I’m vetoing the bill - first of all, we have said that whatever we do… will be legal. Secondly, they are imposing a set of standards on our intelligence communities in terms of interrogating prisoners that our people will think will be ineffective. And, you know, to the critics, I ask them this: when we, within the law, interrogate and get information that protects ourselves and possibly others in other nations to prevent attacks, which attack would they have hoped that we wouldn’t have prevented? And so, the United States will act within the law. We’ll make sure professionals have the tools necessary to do their job within the law….

And I think the president must give his professionals within the law the necessary tools to protect us. So,we’re not having a debate not only how you interrogate people. We’re having a debate in America on whether or not we ought to be listening’ to terrorists making’ phone calls in the United States. And the answer is darn right we ought to be.(BBC Transcript; emphasis added)

FREI: But, given Guantanamo Bay, given also Abu Ghraib, given renditions, does this not send the wrong signal to the world?

BUSH: It should send a signal that America is going to respect law…. And, so, what people gotta understand is that we’ll make decisions based upon law. We’re a nation of law.

So, does America still occupy the moral high ground? YES. We still occupy the moral high ground.

FREI: Can you honestly say, Mr President, that today America still occupies the moral high ground?

BUSH: Absolutely - absolutely. We believe in human rights and human dignity. We believe in the human condition. We believe in freedom. And we’re willing to take the lead. We’re willing to ask nations to do hard things. We’re willing to accept responsibilities. And - yeah, no question in my mind. It’s a nation that’s a force for good. And history will judge - the decisions made during this period of time as necessary decisions. (BBC Transcript)

Why is he going to the Chinese Olympics? Frei points out that Steven Spielberg has decided not to go because the Chinese won’t do more to stop the killing in Darfur.

BUSH: That’s up to him. I’m going to the Olympics. I view the Olympics as a sporting event. On the other hand, I have a little different platform than Steven Spielberg so, I get to talk to President Hu Jintao. And I do remind him that he can do more to relieve the suffering in Darfur. There’s a lot of issues that I suspect people are gonna, you know, opine, about during the Olympics. I mean, you got the Dali Lama crowd. You’ve got global warming folks. You’ve got, you know, Darfur and… I am not gonna you know, go and use the Olympics as an opportunity to express my opinions to the Chinese people in a public way ’cause I do it all the time with the president. I mean. So, people are gonna be able to choose - pick and choose how they view the Olympics.

(BBC Transcript)

CROSS POSTED TO BUCK NAKED POLITICS