The President's interview with Al Arabiya Television was another dunderheaded monstrosity:

In our country, when there's an allegation of abuse -- more than an allegation in this case, actual abuse, we saw the pictures -- there will be a full investigation and justice will be delivered. We have a presumption of innocent until you're guilty in our system, but the system will be transparent, it will be open and people will see the results.

I can't help but get nitpicky for a moment. To say that the abuse was "actual" because "we saw the pictures" is just plain moronic. Sure, I believe the abuse was actual, but a picture hardly answers in terms of the final verdict. While Bush is no lawyer, I still expect a better understanding of evidentiary theory from him than this. Especially since he follows up this brain-fart with that crack about "presumption of innocence"; I mean...holy shit! Does he even know what's coming out of his mouth? And that comment about how "the system will be transparent" – honestly, can anyone listen to this and not recall Guantanamo Bay? Continuing...

Again, it's very important for people, your listeners, to understand, in our country that when an issue is brought to our attention on this magnitude, we act -- and we act in a way where leaders are willing to discuss it with the media. And we act in a way where, you know, our Congress asks pointed questions to the leadership. In other words, people want to know the truth. That stands in contrast to dictatorships. A dictator wouldn't be answering questions about this. A dictator wouldn't be saying that the system will be investigated and the world will see the results of the investigation. A dictator wouldn't admit reforms needed to be done.

Gosh, I seem to recall Dan Rather sitting down and asking Saddam Hussein some rather pointed questions. Unless I'm mistaken, dictatorial behavior is characterized by the behavior of the dictator rather than by the behavior of the media. I'm also under the impression that "saying" that the system will be investigated, etc., is rather unrelated to the question of whether or not action is actually taken. But these are minor quibbles. What makes me really giggle is that, while not necessarily a dictator himself, he sure has been rather secretive from time to time himself. ("...reforms needed to be done"? Oh dear me.) And then we get this little beauty:

There are a few people there in Iraq that want to claim credit for any situation on the ground, but the people in Fallujah are tired of foreign fighters and radicals and extremists preventing them from living a normal life.

I guess it just doesn't occur to him that American soldiers qualify as foreign fighters. No matter. Let's look at the bigger picture: what was the through line of Mr. Bush's interview? Apology? An expression of sympathy for the victims? Regret? Nope. Like all good students of language, let's look to the text for the answer:

Secondly, it's important for people to understand that…

Secondly, it's very important for the people of the Middle East to realize that…

Again, it's very important for people, your listeners, to understand,…

And so the people in the Middle East must understand that…

The Iraqi citizens must understand…

…first of all, you've got to understand, sir, that…

Secondly, it's very important for the people of the Middle East to understand that…

Ah! The President is sticking to his strength – telling y'all what you need to know. God knows, there ain't nothing the Iraqis are saying that he "must understand". Right? That's right Mr. President. You can't listen your way to dominance.

UPDATE: Here's something else that the folks in the Middle East need to "understand": "U.S. soldiers who detained an elderly Iraqi woman last year placed a harness on her, made her crawl on all fours and rode her like a donkey."