Posted by
toady on Tuesday, May 27, 2008 7:10:22 AM
By Michael Abramowitz
updated 11:07 p.m. MT, Mon., May. 26, 2008
WASHINGTON - Sometime in the next few weeks, a special envoy of President Bush plans to meet with Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, whose government sheltered Osama bin Laden and pursued a scorched-earth policy in southern Sudan that resulted in more than 2 million deaths. Bashir's government has been accused by Bush of participating in a "genocide" in Darfur, the only U.S. government use of such a strong accusation. Yet Richard S. Williamson's visit to Khartoum follows a series of direct contacts by senior Bush administration officials with the Sudanese president, including Secretaries of State Colin L. Powell and Condoleezza Rice, Rice's deputies, and several special presidential envoys.
Bush has spoken to or exchanged letters with Bashir on numerous occasions, underscoring how White House policy has departed from his pointed public call to shun talks with radical tyrants and dictators.
Toady asks; You can't have it both ways. Either talking to you adversary, even without preconditions, is not appeasement OR George Bush is trying to appease Bahir, a man who has butchered more than a million people. So which is it?
I will ask Chasby this question, but I am guessing he will not answer, because by answering he will be forced to acknowledge what a phony-balony we have for a president. If he does choose to respond I will, of course, print his comment for anyone here to read.