Am I missing something here? What’s up with Bush’s National Security Advisor? Does he not want to say Tibet or Monks or rioting in Tibet when responding to the human rights violations that are going on? I know China owns us and all. I’m not an expert on this, so please fill me in too…
Hadley: The president is going to the Olympics. What he’s doing on Nepal is what we think the international community ought to be doing, which is approaching the Chinese privately through diplomatic channels and sending a very firm message of concern for human rights, a concern for what’s happening in Nepal, urging the Chinese government to understand that it is in their interest to reach out to representatives of the Dalai Lama, and to show, while the whole world is watching China, that they are determined to treat their citizens with dignity and respect.
Nepal did just hold their first elections, so maybe it’s on Hadley’s mind, but the representatives of the Dalai Lama would be in Tibet. Is it too much to expect the National Security Adviser to keep that straight?
And if there is a good reason, please post it in the comment section. Read/Watch this and step into Bizarroland: via ABC’s This Week:
Download | Play 
Download | Play (h/t bill w)
Full transcript below the fold.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Does that mean he’ll attend the opening ceremonies, or not?
HADLEY: What the president said is that he will go to the Olympics. He wants to support our Olympic athletes, the wonderful men and women who are going to participate.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So that means he’ll go to see events, but he won’t go to the opening ceremony?
HADLEY: The president has said he’s going to the Olympics.
I think this whole issue…
STEPHANOPOULOS: How come he — how come you don’t want to answer the question?
HADLEY: The whole issue of opening ceremonies is a non-issue. I think it is a way of dodging what really needs to happen if you’re concerned about the Nepal...
STEPHANOPOULOS: Does that mean the president will be going to them?
HADLEY: The president is going to the Olympics. The president is going to — to think that the way to deal with the issue of Nepal is not by some — a statement that you’re not going to the opening ceremonies and say, therefore, I checked the Nepal box…
STEPHANOPOULOS: But he may not go to the opening ceremonies. You just don’t want to say it.
HADLEY: No. The president is going to the Olympics. What he’s doing on Nepal is what we think the international community ought to be doing, which is approaching the Chinese privately through diplomatic channels and sending a very firm message of concern for human rights, a concern for what’s happening in Nepal, urging the Chinese government to understand that it is in their interest to reach out to representatives of the Dalai Lama, and to show, while the whole world is watching China, that they are determined to treat their citizens with dignity and respect.
There is an opportunity here. And if countries are really concerned about Nepal, we shouldn’t have this sort of non-issue of opening ceremonies or not. They should do the hard work of quiet diplomacy to urge the Chinese government — in their interest — to take advantage of this opportunity to do something about…
STEPHANOPOULOS: But…
HADLEY: … meeting the concerns about people in Nepal.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you call it a non-issue, yet you won’t say clearly that the president is attending the opening ceremonies. And I’m just trying to figure out why.
HADLEY: The president, at this point, is going to the Olympics. We haven’t worked out the details of his schedule at this point in time.
But from his vantage point, if you listen to what he has said, he has no reason not to go. Because what he has said is, we need to be using diplomacy to try and deal with the issue of Nepal.
Filed Under: International Perspectives, This Week/George Stephanopoulos
No Trackbacks To “Why does Stephen Hadley focus on the Nepal instead of Tibet in the Olympics controversy?“
His representatives are in Nepal. And India. Not in Tibet. That’s why Hadley is talking about Nepal.
What the hell is Hadley talking about?
well, at least he didn’t say “Nipple”
Well, it was a slip of the tongue. Anyone can mistake Tibet for Nepal one or two or eight times in a conversation. I do it all the time. The plate in my head makes it hard for me to say “Tibet.” Perhaps Hadley has a similar plate in his head.
Nepalling!
Hadley is a professional, that’s why he holds the position he does.
If he says Nepal enough times we will forget about Tibet. Spin, spin, spin, spin….
Tibet: The Lord Voldemort of international geography.
Gads. Thanks Stevie. You’ve given me yet another thing to be embarrassed about over dinner with our European friends. And I’m already apologizing for my country before the salad course!
And why doesn’t Stephanopoulos correct him? Is he equally uninformed?
I guess the fact that Georgie wants to go to the Olympics is much more important then any of the human suffering going on in Tibet. He is such a psychopath….
Bush has made us weak. He has us firmly under China’s thumb. We can can’t speak out against China or their human rights abuses lest they call our debt and collapse our economy….not that we have any room to talk by lecturing other nations about human rights abuse after the death, carnage and torture Bush has caused.
Thanks again Chimp!
Apparently Stephenopoulas doesn’t know the difference either. I guess they both just figured it was close enough for government work. Nepal, Tibet, Iraq, Iran,Sunni, Shia, what the hell’s the difference???
Still, he’s probably one of the few American who could find Nepal (or Tibet) on a world map.
“Why does Stephen Hadley focus on the Nepal instead of Tibet in the Olympics controversy?”
Because Hadley’s an even bigger idiot than Bush?
I’m convinced that whenever the Chimperor is allowed to make staffing choices all by himself, he invariably picks people who are dumber, more psychotic, less qualified and more corrupt than he( that’s quite a trick). He obviously subscribes to the management/leadership philosophy borrowed from corporate Amerika that “It’s easy to make yourself look pretty if you surround yourself with gorillas“. Of course he’s too dim-wiited and dishonest to realize that such choices make him look even uglier than he already is.
14All @ 10:
Yeah that. Or he doesnt want to embarras him
Send a good article to the comment section that explains Hadleuy’s position and I’ll update the post…
CNN has an article about this conversation online. However, the quoted quotes aren’t exact and they’ve, very politely, corrected him and included ‘Tibet’ where they think he meant to say it. Is it a journalists job to help these guys be manufacturing quotes for what they think they meant to say?
In their conversation, Bush “raised the issue of human rights, he raised the issue of what’s going on in Tibet and he sent a very clear message that he believes it’s in the interest of Chinese authorities for them to meet with representatives of the Dalai Lama,” Hadley said.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/.....index.html
Nepal - Tibet
Sunni - Shiite
al Qaeda - Iran
Who needs facts?
Ignorance is Strength!
We’ve always been at war with
EurasiaEastasia.It wouldn’t have taken but a second for Stephanopoulos after Hadley’s first gaffe to interrupt and say: “You mean Tibet, right?” And Hadley would’ve been like, “D’OH! Yeah Tibet.” But for whatever reason it just went on. If the quality of such shows is this good then well we’re screwed.
The way he keeps repeating “Nepal, Nepal, Nepal” kind of reminds me of the old “Ellen” show when they kept saying “Lebanese” over and over.
That is what they refer to in the con-man industry as the ol’ shuck ‘n jive.
.
N O T I C E:
Snuffleupagus doesn’t correct Stephen Hardley.
.
Alice Hussein @ 19:
B I N G O!
.
Hadley was obviously misspeaking, since he was talking about the Dalai Lama and Nepal. It wouldn’t surprise me though if this administration was far more concerned about Nepal becoming a Maoist state than Tibet who China has had stranglehold of for years. And we already know they don’t care about human rights violations. Now that Nepal is Maoist, they are on the doorstep to India. It’s that old domino theory again.
Max-Hussein-1 @ 23:
Or did they BOTH share a McMoment of McSpeak?
.
I was listening to NPR a few days ago and apparently China made a deal that in order to get the Olympics they would have to deal measurably to improve their human rights record with Tibet as well as within their own country.
Obviously they are saying “Chuck You Farley!” to the world considering how they’re been dealing with Tibet and also by the fact that they recently imprisoned a political dissident for three years.
Yet I hear no one in the MSM discussing this “deal” they made. I have a feeling this is the reason Hillary Clinton and others are calling for a boycott of the opening ceremonies.
This is the question that they should be asking in my opinion. “What is the deal China made with the Olympic Committee to get the games, how have they complied or not complied with that deal?
Moose @ 25:
The Taliban may be stuck in the middle ages, but Bush and his junta are stuck in the 19th century. Quick, let’s contain communism and invade Nepal [/snark].
This is totally off topic, but, has anyone noticed how in both Pakistan and Zimbabwe the leaders (Mugabe & Musharraf) are unwilling to step down despite being voted out in democratic elections? I wonder if Bush is taking notes.
Prachanda wins, Red star rises over Nepal
” The Maoists’ rise will not make the US comfortable either, but given the fact that the elections have been declared fair by a whole host of international observers, they cannot possibly disown them either.” - Times of India
Just another Loyal Bushie lying asshole figuring all of us to be stupid like W.s 20% base following.
Andy @ 18:
I don’t expect much from CNN anymore. I just subjected myself to 15 minutes of their “Ballot Bowl” (because us Americans won’t watch anything unless it is disguised as sport) and found their feature tonight is “The Compassion Forum”, where Hils and Obama are going to discuss their faith, religion and it’s PLACE IN POLITICS???!!!
My head just exploded. Religion has no place in politics, period. And I say that as a (fundamentalist) Christian. I don’t want to hear candidates talk about their faith - I want to hear my pastor talk about faith.
And why are they not including McCain? Or is it only the Dems that have to explain their religion? And why is this more important than Bush admitting to sanctioning torture?
justabill @ 31:
Like a poster on that blog noted, it could be an attempt to discredit Carter. Why? My assumption is because Carter is willing to sit and talk with Hamas, a democratically elected government I might add.
Stephanopoulos is a supreme brown-noser. He’s trying to do a Russert, trying desperately to get a “gotcha” moment on the demand for an answer. He’s not listening to a word Hadley is uttering. He just wants the answer!! If he’d been listening, he had his “gotcha” moment, but then he’d embarrass the stupid guest, who, by obfuscating, makes Georgie look like a moron, which, or course, he really is.
Andy @ 18:
Actually, it looks like CNN was quoting Hadley from his FNS interview which was taped before the This Week appearance (probably before the memory pills he borrowed from Sen Pat Roberts wore off).
14All @ 10:
Please, these guys aren’t stupid, we are. They rehearse this before the show starts. Govt. guest or syncophant (fill in the blank) goes on talk show (fill in blank) and gets softball questions or total non-follow-ups from host (fill in blank) who is paid by defense-contractor owned network to make sure the public is kept stupid and complacent. And the ones who notice this keep thinking they’re not doing their jobs. Amazing .
I have an idea: every time a Bush administration official “explains” to us how the world works, let’s have a monkey throw a dart at a map of the world and a list of verbs and nouns and see who has the more cogent analysis.
Steph reminds me of the DJ in “Wayne’s World”, played by Harry Shearer, who, while his guest is talking, shuffles his papers and plays with his equipment, saying “Yup. Uh huh.” while ignoring what they are actually saying.
Why do murkins feel entitled to diss China about Tibet while we beat Iraq to a bloody pulp? Sounds kind of hypocritical to me.
OK, not kind of… Very.
We are being ruled by a governing body of idiots. After all, look at the decider…and then you honestly won’t expect much more.
Bitter, bitter, bitter, bitter, bitter.
Oh yeah. BITTER!!
Propagandists. And bad ones at that. I have more respect for REAL prostitutes. At least they are up front about the business they are in.
Abbybwood @ 27:
Last week I read that IOC pres. Joques Rogge came out and referenced the agreement by China to the IOC to criticize China. The first time anyone from the Olympic Committee has said something critical of China. Surprising too. I wouldn’t have expected it, myself. But, as you have written in your post, it didn’t get the justified news play it deserved.
Just FYI, this is hardly the first elections held in Nepal as you suggest. Nepal’s first elections were held in 1959, although then King Mahendra carried out Nepal’s first “royal coup” and dissolved the elected government in 1961 or ‘62. Democracy was first restored in the early 1990s.
Tibet is next to Nepal, but Tibet is not Nepal. I wonder if HADLEY knows the difference between Canada and USA. How are our government officals so stupid?
Mmm…
A Bush administration ‘official’ doesn’t know his arse from a hole in the ground?
Who’d a thunk?
The clip mysteriously disappeared, was big brother watching? Ah Oh. And I guess he somehow corrected it on Fox,,of course. These guys don’t even know what they are talking about. They miss a word in the script and keep right on going.
Because Neocon school never taught Hadley how to read a map.
Isn’t it comforting to know that when the folks who don’t know their Nepalis from their Tibetans exit the stage, there’s a good chance the next buffoons on the scene won’t know their Sunnis from their Shi’ites.
America, do you hear that gurgling sound? That’s the last of your international reputation going down the drain.