I awaited the National Geographic Television event... "George W Bush: the 9/11 Interview" with some academic interest. (Aired Sunday August 28, 8 pm in most time zones)
It was interesting trying to deduce what question W was answering at any given moment because the "interview" is missing an interviewer. The answers are missing questions. That may be seen as a "stylistic" device. One might see it as the next caveat after the "no oath, no transcript, Cheney present" caveats of his last great interview on the topic.
However Democrats and Americans at large have been through a long and hard 10 years, and much energy has been spent since 2002 untangling the conflation that Republicans and many media figures made between the events of 9/11 and Hussein's regime in Iraq.
So how did NATGEO follow up its first showing of "George W Bush: the 9/11 Interview" ? What would make an appropriate topic to go to as the last image of 9/11 carnage and emotional tumult fade from the screen?
"Inside Saddem Hussein's Reign of Terror".
Really?