Powell Convinces NBC's Panel But Not ABC's Martha Raddatz

MRC ^ | Wednesday, February 05, 2003 4:19:58 PM | Brent Baker

[fight_truth_decay]

After Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation to the UN Security Council, on NBC former UN chief weapons inspector Richard Butler "absolutely" agreed that Powell made the case as did former Democratic Congressman Lee Hamilton, and Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein conceded that Powell "laid out a very plausible, a very respectable case for" going to war. But, as usual, ABC was off to the left, to the left of a liberal like Feinstein.

Just before noon EST today, ABC News reporter Martha Raddatz told Peter Jennings how the French and Germans would still have legitimate reasons not to believe Powell's case and suggested ways they might do so: "I kept trying to listen to it through the ears of the French and the German. Much of what they heard today, much of what everyone heard today, has been heard before and it is the reason they went along with Resolution 1441, the reason they sent inspectors in and want inspectors to remain. A lot of this evidence they could try to refute. They could say perhaps these colonels, these Iraqi republican guards were freelancing, and who were these defectors? There's a lot here they can play with."

Now, more details about NBC versus ABC late this morning EST after Powell finished his presentation which all the broadcast networks carried:

-- NBC News. Brokaw got feedback: "Let's begin with former UN weapons inspector chief Richard Butler who is Sydney, Australia. Mr. Ambassador did he make the case in your judgement?" Butler affirmed, as taken down by MRC analyst Geoffrey

Dickens: "Absolutely, Tom. Beyond doubt. Now whether everyone will act accordingly or believe it we will see. The French, the Russians will have some problems. The Chinese, perhaps as well. But Tom my simple answer to you is absolutely clear. He has made a major challenge to the Security Council. Probably the most important challenge its faced in its history. It will deal this man and his weapons or it will fail and he made that clear. The game is now afoot big time."

Brokaw: "Thank you Ambassador Butler. At one point Secretary of State Powell said the Security Council's relevance is at stake here as well. Let's go to my colleague who is a former UN weapons inspector, himself. Mr. Kay did he make the case?"

David Kay: "I think he made a powerful case. He put his own integrity on the line. He put some of the most closely held intelligence information in the U.S. government before the Council. It's gonna be awfully hard for them to shrink from that."

Brokaw soon went to Feinstein and Hamilton: "Let's go now to Washington and the United States Senate and Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California who has had reservations about the need to go to war against Iraq, even though she voted for the resolution that came before the Senate last Fall. Senator Feinstein what was your reaction to the Secretary Powell's presentation today?"

Feinstein: "Well it was the most comprehensive case I've heard in a classified or a non-classified setting. And I think he laid out the many parameters of deceit and deception. In terms of threat the one that he laid out, [clears throat] excuse me, it was the most compelling to me was the Unmanned Area Vehicle and the development of that with spray tanks and he kind of laid down the fact that this could be in our country and there was a possibility that this might be used against the United States. I think that he made an argument that Iraq is a real threat to its neighbors. And he made the argument that it's a very real possible maybe even probable threat to the United States."

Brokaw: "And do you now believe that it will be necessary to go to war against Iraq to deal with that threat?"

Feinstein: "Well let me, let me say this. I think what's really necessary is for the Security Council to face up to its obligations and that obligation is to compel compliance. If we are gonna go to war and I think he laid out a very plausible, a very respectable case for that. You know war is a last resort. If arms inspections can succeed and I think he also made the, I hate to say this, but he made the argument as to why they can't succeed based on the past practice of Iraq and the belief that those practices are continuing. Then the Security Council has to measure up or they do, in fact, become irrelevant. So my hope is that we will have a positive response from the Security Council."

Brokaw: "Senator Dianne Feinstein of California thank you very much for being with us. One of the most highly regarded members of the Washington community is the former Indiana congressman Lee Hamilton, former chair of the House Foreign Relations committee, now the President of the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Peace. Congressman both in tone and content do you think the Secretary of State made the kind of argument that he needs to make to the American people to get them fully on board if there is to be a war?"

Hamilton: "Yes I do. First of all the staging was impressive. The administration's most persuasive advocate who has the greatest credibility in the world, the dove in the administration, makes the case. He's backed up the head of the Central Intelligence Agency. Secondly the intelligence capabilities of the United States came through this presentation powerfully. Just showing to all the world what we know about what's going on. Third, the manner in which he marshaled that evidence, I thought, was powerful. And that question that he asked at the end, whether we can take the risk with Saddam Hussein not using the weapons, I thought, was a powerful conclusion. This really does put the United Nations on the spot. Most of all, however, it puts Saddam Hussein on the spot. And now we are clearly on the path to war unless Saddam Hussein has a change of heart."

-- ABC News. George Stephanopoulos actually found that Powell delivered "a convincing indictment." Stephanopoulos opined, as transcribed by MRC analyst Jessica Anderson:

"Well Peter, first of all, when you talk about hearing new things, the most, I think, startling evidence to most people, particularly here in the United States, will be those telephone intercepts of the Iraqi commanders talking about how they are going to evade, if you take them at their word, the UN inspectors. I think that will be startling and quite convincing to a lot of American ears. It also gives a powerful tool to Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector. He's scheduled to go onto Baghdad in the next several days. He can confront the Iraqis with this evidence, ask them to produce the commanders. That will be a real test for the Iraqis, so all in all, I think this was a comprehensive, quite frightening and, I think in the end, convincing indictment."

When posted, this CyberAlert will be readable at: http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2003/cyb20030205_extra.asp ####

[fight_truth_decay]

FYI

[joesnuffy]

Muslims the world over arent convinced
neither are the french or germans
the kennedys clintons barney frank sean penn susan saranwrap the chinese communist party the sandinistas nelson mandulla robert mugabe most of the cannibals in the congo the world socialist party and nearly all of whorlywood
arent convinced....
SO WHAT
They all have their hatred of the American of 1776 and what it was founded on and for....

[FryingPan101]

"I kept trying to listen to it through the ears of the French and the German."

I have serious concerns as they relate to German opposition. I live just outside Fort Bliss, Texas. There may very well be thousands of German troops at Fort Bliss and in a nearby area of New Mexico. They have their own schools; their own motor pools; their own restaurants; their own barracks; their own everything.....just as we do in their country. My fear is regarding their total opposition to our President's leadership in forcing Iraq to comply with disarming. I wonder how they will react when we act against Iraq.

[The Vast Right Wing]

Texas is well armed, I wouldn't worry.

[kinghorse]

Martha Raddatz I have two questions for you.

1. Do you own dollars or euros?

2. Do you own gold?

Europe could end the standoff tomorrow if they backed the USA. So what's up with Europe? Their peace stance is furthering the prospects of war, not peace. Again, why are you doing this Europe? Surely you know the USA will act if Iraq does not disarm. Methinks you would welcome the USA acting unilaterally because it damages the USA individually.

I believe their cry for peace is nothing more than a cynical ploy to further weaken the USA financially through an orchestrated attack on the dollar.

[kinghorse]

Re those wild and crazy Luftwaffe (sic?) guys - They want cheaper electronic equipment to take back to Europe.

[FryingPan101]

LOL I hope so. The base seems empty whenever we go on.

[rickmichaels]

"I kept trying to listen to it through the ears of the French and the German..."

Just like trying to see it through the eyes of a blind man.

[the_doc]

German soldiers stationed in the U.S. will probably RESPECT our decision to go to war even if some of them are privately relieved that they are going to war with us.

The real goofballs in the scenario are the German civilians who command the German military. The same would be true if we had Gore in the White House.

[the_doc]

I meant to say "even if some of them are privately relieved that they are NOT going to war with us."

[cyncooper]

A lot of this evidence they could try to refute. They could say perhaps these colonels, these Iraqi republican guards were freelancing, and who were these defectors? There's a lot here they can play with."

My, this Raddatz babe is a regular Helpful Hannah, isn't she? I'm sure Iraq was taking notes to help them form their game plan. Thanks Martha!

[Howlin]

They left out the best one, IMO.

On MSNBC today, Brian Williams wondered OUT LOUD whether the things that Powell were saying would "come as news to the president."

[Nick Danger]

Feinstein: "Well let me, let me say this... If we are gonna go to war and I think he laid out a very plausible, a very respectable case for that... I hate to say this, but he made the argument as to why [inspections] can't succeed based on the past practice of Iraq and the belief that those practices are continuing. Then the Security Council has to measure up or they do, in fact, become irrelevant."

Attention, UN bureaucrats and French government officials:

The person quoted there is among the most liberal of opposition party members. She is one of the last 3 people in the United States government who would take this position, which means that you are down to two or fewer supporters. You are within days of destroying the United Nations as an institution. Game time is up. This will be your last warning.

[cyncooper]

On MSNBC today, Brian Williams wondered OUT LOUD whether the things that Powell were saying would "come as news to the president."

I saw the freeper report on Brian Williams. Still trying to get my jaw off the floor over that one.

[qvack]

Well put.

[ThinkDifferent]

They could say perhaps these colonels, these Iraqi republican guards were freelancing

My coworkers gave me strange looks when I burst out laughing after reading this.

[ThinkDifferent]

You are within days of destroying the United Nations as an institution.

Well yeah, but don't *tell* them that...

[tet68]

It also gives a powerful tool to Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector. He's scheduled to go onto Baghdad in the next several days. He can confront the Iraqis with this evidence, ask them to produce the commanders. That will be a real test for the Iraqis,

Stef, you really are a dim bulb. "He can confront the Iraqis"??? Ask the to produce the commanders???? A real Test???

What planet are you from?

[TigersEye]

I guess I just don't give a Radtzazz what Martha thinks.

[TigersEye]

Europe could end the standoff tomorrow if they backed the USA. So what's up with Europe? Their peace stance is furthering the prospects of war, not peace.

This bore repeating and emphasizing for doubters, fence sitters and moderate cynics. The U.S. has not been asking for support to go to war they have been looking to the world to support the disarmament of Saddam Hussein. The Bush administration has patiently and persistently pursued that support through a unified voice of nations and conceded that the UN would be an acceptable body to project that voice.

Any chance of convincing Hussein to cooperate peacefully rests entirely upon a solid majority of leading nations speaking in agreement. France, Germany, Russia and China have decided to oppose the course that is most likely to bring peace by withholding their support to stand in solidarity with the world against injustice.

You are either with us or against us in the war on terror. These nations have made their stand.