This question really stuck out because it was when everbody in the room seemed like they would not let McClellan off the hook. My guess is whatever kind of sleeping gas they pump into the press room got turned off and our press started doing it's job. Here's the question and answer in full:
Q Scott, there's a difference between commenting on an investigation and taking an action --
MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead, Goyal.
Q Can I finish, please?
MR. McCLELLAN: You can come -- I'll come back to you in a minute. Go ahead, Goyal.
Q Scott, today also the President spoke about the war on terrorism and also, according to -- report, there was bombings in London and also bombings in India, and at both places, al Qaeda was involved. According to the India report and press reports, a Pakistani television said that Osama bin Laden is there alive and they have spoken with him, and his group is still -- as far as terrorism around the globe is concerned. So now the major bombings after 9/11 took place in London, and more are about to come, according to al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. They are still -- and again, the President is doing a great job as far as fighting against terrorism is concerned. But where do we stand now, really? Where do we go from London, as far as terrorism is concerned? How far we can go after Osama bin Laden now to catch him? Because he's still in Pakistan.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what occurred in London is a grim reminder that we are at war on terrorism. We are waging a comprehensive war on terrorism. You heard the President talk earlier today to the FBI personnel and others who are at Quantico, and the President talked about our global war on terrorism. He talked about our strategy for taking the fight to the enemy, staying on the offensive, and working to spread freedom and democracy to defeat the ideology of hatred that terrorists espouse.
And the President pointed back to the 20th century. He pointed out that in World War II, freedom prevailed over fascism and Nazism. And in the Cold War, freedom prevailed over communism. Freedom is a powerful force for defeating an ideology such as the one that the terrorists espouse. And that's why it's so important to continue working to advance freedom and democracy in the broader Middle East. And that's what we will continue to do. And the President also talked about the great progress we've made at home to protect the home front.
The families and friends of those who lost their lives in London are -- continue to be in our thoughts and prayers. We know what it's like to be attacked on our soil. And that's why the President made a decision that we were going to take the fight to the enemy to try to disrupt plots and prevent attacks from happening in the first place. And that's exactly what we are doing. But we're also going to work with the free world to support the advance of freedom and democracy in a dangerous region of the world. For too long we ignored what was going on in the Middle East. We accepted and tolerated dictatorships in exchange for peace and stability, and we got neither. As the President said, free nations are peaceful societies. And that's why it's so important that we continue to support the advance of freedom, because that's how you ultimately defeat the ideology of hatred and oppression that terrorists espouse.
Carl, go ahead. I'll come to you, David, in a second.
Q Does the President continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove?
What a great answer to a probing question!
Does this remind anybody of a Gannon Question?
It seems that since before Ari Fleishman's days, every time the heat is on, this guy asks when are we going to nuke Pakistan. He even helped out Mike McCurry.
From the Washingtom Post
Last week, when press secretary Ari Fleischer was getting peppered with questions about Enron Corp. and its chief, Kenneth L. Lay, Fleischer turned to the Goyal Foil. "Goyal," Fleischer said as others shouted to get his attention. Fleischer said to the others: "We'll come back. We'll come -- we'll -- "
The press corps resisted. "Ari?" one called out. "Let me follow that, Ari -- "
"Hold on," the press secretary commanded. "Goyal, go ahead."
Goyal did his usual. "If I may go back to India and Pakistan. . .," he began.
On the day the White House first disclosed that administration officials had been approached by Enron about its financial troubles, most reporters had only one subject in mind. After a battery of tough Enron questions, Fleischer reached for Goyal as if for a life raft. "As far as the home minister of India's visit," Goyal began. When others tried to jump in, the press secretary asked Goyal if he had a follow-up question. Goyal did, about Pakistani fighter planes.
At a Foreign Press Center Briefing, he asks tough questions like: Why do Muslims hate non-muslims? and, can't we fight these hateful Muslims by supporting non-Muslim's
QUESTION: Raghubir Goyal, Asia Today/India Globe.
Sir, first of all, why this has been ignored -- public diplomacy? And second, why do they hate us or what is going on now that maybe -- Islam is a religion of peace, of course, and no religion in the world teaches hatred against any other religion or against any other individual or country. But still, number one, why they hate America and, number two, why they hate non-Muslims or non-Islamics? What is the reason behind them? Do you have any solutions because, number one, now President also talking about faithful-based organizations that he wants to help the faithless to all religion and as a second-term President religion may have played a major role also and he wants to focus that and no one should use or misuse religion for their benefit or even terrorizing the innocent or peace-loving people.
Repost of a NYT Aritcle:
There are those who everybody in the room knows will be off-topic, like Raghubir Goyal, a reporter for India Globe, who sometimes sits in one of the front rows when there is a vacancy. He is primarily interested in the tensions between India and Pakistan. The other reporters have taken to calling him "Goyal the foil," contending that Mr. Fleischer, like previous press secretaries, relies on him to break up tense moments.
More of the same at On the Media
So it seems like it is well documented that this guy is a great help when the heat is on. I guess one could make the argument that since he is a foriegn reporter, he would not be as interested as the U.S. press in the sort of scandal that has developed, but wasn't that question off the wall? He actually asked about terrorism without saying anything about it getting worse, and praised the president on his handing of terrorism in the same question that noted that Bin Laden is still on the loose.
The next step is to look into his actual publication record and even personal ties. One reference gave the publication name Asia Today/India Globe. But I have not been able to find any actual articles he has written. This is a little odd, since the Asia Today Webspace
apears to be in english.
I hope this is enough information to spark some searching. Now I am very interested in finding some of this guy's work.
Comments are closed on this story.