Supporting our troops

From Guerilla News, by way of Cursor, I got this exchange in a recent White House press conference discussing the administration's decision to block payment of a settlement against Iraq to Gulf War I POWs.

Guerilla News edits the dialogue in one small bit and attributes the questions to Helen Thomas, but I looked it up on the White House press page (which is what I've cut and pasted from), and it appears that while Ms. Thomas was involved in the questioning, it begins with someone named David, and it's not clear whether the continuing questioning is his, but I'd read it that way. That's not germaine to the content of the information, but I think it's important to try to keep all facts presented as undistorted as possible. Problems do ensue when quotes are misattributed, as Tom Daschle can tell you. Even though this particular misattribution would not have been serious, it has the potential of making the source of the misattributed quote seem less reliable. Something the conservative wing-nuts would use, as we all know by now, to smear anything else you had to say.

Q: Scott, there are 17 former POWs from the first Gulf War who were tortured and filed suit against the regime of Saddam Hussein. And a judge has ordered that they are entitled to substantial financial damages. What is the administration's position on that? Is it the view of this White House that that money would be better spent rebuilding Iraq rather than going to these former POWs?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know that I view it in those terms, David. I think that the United States -- first of all, the United States condemns in the strongest terms the brutal torture to which these Americans were subjected. They bravely and heroically served our nation and made sacrifices during the Gulf War in 1991, and there is simply no amount of money that can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering that they went through at the hands of Saddam Hussein's brutal regime. That's what our view is.

Q: But, so -- but isn't it true that this White House --

Q: They think they're (sic) is an --

Q: Excuse me, Helen -- that this White House is standing in the way of them getting those awards, those financial awards, because it views it that money better spent on rebuilding Iraq?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, there's simply no amount of money that can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering --

Q: Why won't you spell out what your position is?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm coming to your question. Believe me, I am. Let me finish. Let me start over again, though. No amount of money can truly compensate these brave men and women for the suffering that they went through at the hands of a very brutal regime, at the hands of Saddam Hussein. It was determined earlier this year by Congress and the administration that those assets were no longer assets of Iraq, but they were resources required for the urgent national security needs of rebuilding Iraq. But again, there is simply no amount of compensation that could ever truly compensate these brave men and women.

Q: Just one more. Why would you stand in the way of at least letting them get some of that money?

MR. McCLELLAN: I disagree with the way you characterize it.

Q: But if the law that Congress passed entitles them to access frozen assets of the former regime, then why isn't that money, per a judge's order, available to these victims?

MR. McCLELLAN: That's why I pointed out that that was an issue that was addressed earlier this year. But make no mistake about it, we condemn in the strongest possible terms the torture that these brave individuals went through --

Q: -- you don't think they should get money?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- at the hands of Saddam Hussein. There is simply no amount of money that can truly compensate those men and women who heroically served --

Q: That's not the issue --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- who heroically served our nation.

Q: Are you opposed to them getting some of the money?

MR. McCLELLAN: And, again, I just said that that had been addressed earlier this year.

Q: No, but it hasn't been addressed. They're entitled to the money under the law. The question is, is this administration blocking their effort to access some of that money, and why?

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't view it that way at all. I view it the way that I stated it, that this issue was --

Q: But you are opposed to them getting the money.

MR. McCLELLAN: This issue was addressed earlier this year, and we believe that there's simply no amount of money that could truly compensate these brave men and women for what they went through and for the suffering that they went through at the hands of Saddam Hussein --

Q: So no money.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and that's my answer.

There's no amount of money that can compensate for the horror which you endured and which we adamantly condemn; therefore, you won't be getting any.

So screw you POWs.

If that approach applied to all lawsuits, then there would never be a death settlement.

How, I wonder, can Scott McClellan continue to say the things he has to and live with himself? Simply another man in this administration with no scruples?

I cannot find a word that describes my disgust for these people. Revulsion comes about as close as I can get, and still does not do justice to the feeling.

If you want to check out some more on the blocked lawsuit, here's my previous post discussing it, and an Intervention Magazine article.

....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.