FINALLY

There is a particular (and particularly unfortunate) sentence from a press briefing given by then-White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer that is relentlessly quoted as an example of this administration's desire to intimdate all who would dare question it. In context, of course, he meant no such thing, but it always takes forever to actually explain that in conversation (or on an academic panel.) So it's about time that Fleischer finally gets around to defending his words in their original context in a letter to the New York Times:

To the Editor:

In "Lifting the Shroud" (column, March 23), Paul Krugman alleges that at my White House press briefing on Sept. 26, 2001, I "ominously warned" Americans to "watch what they say, watch what they do." He accuses me of telling citizens "to accept the administration's version of events, not ask awkward questions."

At that briefing two weeks after Sept. 11, I was asked about a racist comment made by a Republican congressman from Louisiana who said that if he saw a Sikh-American with a towel wrapped around his head, he would tell the Sikh to get out of his state.

I said, "It's important for all Americans to remember the traditions of our country that make us so strong and so free, our tolerance and openness and acceptance." The president, I said, was disturbed by Representative John Cooksey's remarks.

Moments later, I was asked about Bill Maher's statement that the members of our armed forces who fire missiles are cowards while terrorists who crashed planes into buildings are not cowards.

I answered: "It's a terrible thing to say, and it's unfortunate. And that's why — there was an earlier question about has the president said anything to people in his own party — they're reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do."

My remarks urged tolerance and openness and were addressed to those who made statements and threatened actions against Muslims or Sikhs in America.

ARI FLEISCHER
Washington, March 23, 2004
The writer was White House press secretary from 2001 to 2003.

And good for the Times for publishing this letter with such speed.

Comments

[Bryon Gill]

This explanation would have been more useful when he was actually a public official. The snark in me wants to ask "why does he bring it up now in an election season..." but I know that's just stooping to the administration's level.

Look, first of all the subject was changed when Maher was mentioned. Second, it wasn't hard to find Fleischer's statement ominous in the "with us or against us" mindset of the days immediately following 9/11. What do you suppose the punishment for saying "The Bushes must truly love the poor -- they've made so many of us" is?

http://www.post-gazette.com/FirstAmendment/20020904arrest0904p3.asp

[dauber]

I realize there is a valid issue there, but I still think people have gone out of there way to mischaracterize the nature of the remark. It all depends on where you begin the quote. And while I think the issue here is valid I don't think its nearly the same as what people who have used the quote have suggested is coming.

[generic viagra]

That's a common problem on the administrative scene but it haves a really easy solution ya know.