Equal Time For A Monster! Congratulations Mr. Rather. You Won

When I first got wind of Dan Rather's interview with Saddam Hussein, what I immediately wondered was "Why?" The answer should have materialized just as quickly, though I admit I had to think about it. No, I'm not unaware of what drives the media, and considering much of my time is spent immersed in it, I should never have such questions. But then again I have trouble relating. You see, I consider the title of "American" more important than that of "writer", "reporter", "correspondent" or "host". And although I know my country isn't perfect, it represents far more than a duty free zone for journalistic ethics, or a continent-wide red light district where talking heads can indulge without regard for loyalty, responsibility, or any thought to good and evil.

News outlets are in business to make a profit. They accomplish this by drawing an audience, and in that respect CBS scored with the Rather/ Hussein sit-down. Media personalities are individually motivated by their own egos, and locked in an unending competition where getting there before the other guy is of far more relevance than the truth. As such, Mr. Rather is doubtlessly pleased with himself, considering Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings and others were all clamoring to chat with the Butcher of Baghdad. But Rather had an ace in the hole, his friend, former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark. Mr. Clark, in addition to being a much-heralded leader in the "peace movement", is a buddy of Saddam Hussein. Just how one reconciles this is beyond me, but then it's no more perplexing than Jimmy Carter's warm relationship with career terrorist Yasser Arafat, or Nelson Mandela's comradery with tyrants Muammar Al-Qadhafi and Fidel Castro.

No matter, the audience with Saddam was attained with conditions favoring him that not even the most beloved American leader would be granted. It went ahead on his timetable, filmed with his cameras, and cut by his editors. Yet the clichéd rationale hung in the air, as ever: "It's news", "The people have a right to know". As for the news value, that was exhausted once it was announced that an American "journalist" had interviewed the Iraqi dictator. That was the news. That's it!

The people may indeed have the right to know, but what is it that we now know after an hour's worth of unchallenged lies and propaganda, delivered by a sadistic autocrat? CBS refused to allow a Bush administration representative to undermine Saddam's PR spot, unless it was Colin Powell, Dick Cheney or the president himself. With the exception of Mr. Rather informing the audience that Hussein had attempted to assassinate former President Bush, following a segment where he professed respect for "Mr. Bush", there was no refutation whatsoever.

From the opening moments of the 60 Minutes II special a sensation of nausea and feeling of utter indignation gripped me. A conversation with a butcher, a genocidal maniac, the absurdity was all but incomprehensible. Before the interview began to roll, Rather introduced it as revealing, "a side of Saddam you have not seen". What it ended up being was exactly what we have always seen, a seemingly calm defiant leader, often wearing a nicely tailored business suit. The side we haven't been privy to, though it undeniably exists, is that which orders summary executions at the slightest provocation, that orders attacks upon his fellow citizens with the most hideous weapons ever devised and the side that kicks back, while watching films of his enemies being tortured.

The questions presented to Hussein boggled the mind, and were offered with the utmost deference. Granted, I've never been in the company of a mass murderer, but if one is predisposed to be rattled into timidity, why bother? Of course the same can be asked in any situation where honesty is expected from a psychopath. Dan Rather, for his part, left nothing to chance in his inquiries, admitting later, "I practiced them. I sat in front of the mirror and pretended he was on the other side and tried out the questions." The time put in bore nothing of value, nor could it possibly have.

Somewhere during the purported 3-hour interview, Rather may well have asked some pertinent questions, but the terms agreed to by CBS, giving Saddam the full freedom to delete them, the network's determination to air the interview irrespective, and the lack of any mention of them during the broadcast means, in effect, they never existed. But if they were put forth, responded to, and had survived the editing, considering the interviewee, what value could be placed on the answers?

Rather did ask, "Mr. President — do you intend to destroy the Al Samoud missiles that the United Nations prohibits?" Hussein then denied he possessed any missile prohibited by the U.N. What should we now do with this response? How can anyone justify believing a denial by this man?

"Do you have, have you had, any connections to al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden?", Rather inquired. Hussein replied with another denial. And who in their right mind would expect anything else? Should we have waited for Saddam to laughingly say, "all right, you got me Dan...Osama, come on out here and say hello to the folks back home"?

"Mr. President, if there is an invasion, will you set fire to the oil fields? Will you blow the dams, or your reservoirs of water, to resist the invasion?" "Of course not", was essentially Saddam's answer, while all evidence, and his history, suggest this is exactly what he intends to do.

"What's the most important thing you want the American people to understand, at this important juncture of history?" the tyrant was asked. It was then that Saddam expressed his desire for "direct dialogue" with President Bush and challenged him to a televised debate. Dan Rather breathlessly peppered Hussein with 10 follow-ups clarifying the proposal and how it might come about, but he blushingly passed on the role of moderator. In all the excitement, old Dan must have forgotten that during his last interview with Saddam, just before the Gulf War, he made a similar offer to the first President Bush and then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. What was also forgotten, or was simply of no importance, was that he was clamoring over the prospect of a debate between the leader of a democratic nation, who is answerable to its people, and an authoritarian who captured and retains power through merciless repression and wholesale slaughter.

Perhaps sensing viewer discomfort, Dan offered up a hilarious little punch line during his closing monolog. As he commented on the Iraqi dictator's suicidal self-confident in the face of American might he mentioned the possibility that Saddam "may unleash biological and chemical weapons that might kill even his own people". This could be nothing other than a tasteless joke, considering Iraqi civilians have existed as primary targets for Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and his murderous wrath in general for decades.

The most revolting part was a simpering Dan Rather calling Saddam Hussien Mr. President with such school girl awe when he refers to our commander in chief as Mr. Bush. What a jerk! If you ever doubt Rathers politics, on election night when it looked like Bush was winning, he was nearly having kittens in front of the camera, last time I ever watched him on the news.

In recent days, Dr. Hussain Al-Shahrisanti, a former Iraqi scientist, has made the rounds in the U.S. media. He has repeatedly spoken of his 11 years in solitary confinement for refusing to participate in Saddam's nuclear weapon's program. And he has spoken of the "hardest part of the whole ordeal" as the sounds of children being tortured in front of their parents, and women being raped in front of their husbands. These were only a few of the women and children that have suffered and died on the orders of the man that Dan Rather groveled to drink coffee with, who he lightheartedly cajoled to "speak some English for me", and with a strait face asked questions regarding life and death, while expecting worthwhile responses.

Congratulations Mr. Rather. You... are nothing but a disgusting, disgraceful, ignorant, treasonous, propaganda-tool/apologist for a genocidal, baby-gasing, child-torturing, terrorist/mass murderer!

YOU, Dan Rather, YOU are an enemy to all humanity for giving this mass-murderer an air of legitimacy and a stage to spread his propaganda on!

YOU Dan Rather, YOU would make Joseph Goebbels drool with envy with the kind of disgusting free publicity you are giving this KNOWN TORTURING, MASS MURDERING DICTATOR!!!

I've always hated Dan Rather, but just when my utter contempt and disgust with this inhuman, non-American sh!tstain reaches rock bottom, he always manages to dig himself even deeper into the sewage of human refuse and claim a unique spot for himself at the wretched, rotten underbottom of dispicable humanity.

Where are the bodies Saddam?

WHERE DID YOU DISPOSE OF THE BODIES?

Why didn't you ask him THAT Dan!??!

It's Not Just A Gun...

It's My "HOMELAND DEFENSE RIFLE"!!

Why didn't you ask him THAT Dan!??!

It's Not Just A Gun...

It's My "HOMELAND DEFENSE RIFLE"!!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.