Press Missed ‘Mission Accomplished’ Meaning, Says Bush Staffer
EmailABC News’ Tahman Bradley Reports:
The man responsible for the visual production of the 2003 “mission accomplished” speech given by President George W. Bush aboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln says the media mischaracterized the president’s message that day.
It’s one of the most iconic and controversial moments of the Bush presidency.
On May 1, 2003, President Bush landed a fixed-wing aircraft aboard the Abraham Lincoln and then addressed Navy personnel returning from combat operations in the Persian Gulf.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo
The president delivered his televised remarks in front of a giant sign that said “mission accomplished.”
In an interview on the Sirius XM program “PoliOptics”, deputy assistant to President Bush for communications Scott Sforza said that people who were not aboard the ship do not understand the meaning of “mission accomplished,” but those who were there do.
“I think that the press really mischaracterized the entire event,” Sforza told host Adam Belmar. “And I say this because we personally met with those on the ship, and the intent of the message that was put on the ship ‘mission accomplished’ was really aimed at the families on the shore.”
The men and women aboard the Abraham Lincoln were returning home after being deployed for 11 months, much longer than the typical 5-6 months, Sforza said.
No one aboard the Naval vessel voiced any concern to Bush administration staffers that day about the “mission accomplished” banner because everyone understood the context of the message.
“If you ever play back the tape, roll back the audio of what the president said at no time did he ever say that that was the end of military action,” said Storza.
But President Bush did announce an end to major combat operations in Iraq.
He said, “In the battle of Iraq, the United States and are allies have prevailed.”
It was that declaration that Bush critics and critics of war used against the president for rest of his time in office.
The Iraqi insurgency would pick up in the months and years following the speech costing the lives of thousands of Americans.
In fact, the last U.S. combat troops would not leave Iraq until 2010 under Bush’s successor, President Barack Obama.
Sforza is not the first Bush staffer to argue the “mission accomplished” message got mangled. In April 2008, Bush Press Secretary Dana Perino told reporters the banner should have been more specific.
Republicans Duke it Out in Arizona 
Rick Santorum Defends Earmarks
The news media would do anything to bash Bush but coverup for Obama daily.
Posted by: Freedom | September 18, 2011, 11:34 am 11:34 am
Nice try at spin.
Posted by: Evan | September 18, 2011, 11:37 am 11:37 am
Freedom, if you read that news article as an attempt to “bash Bush”, you need reading lessons.
Posted by: Mike | September 18, 2011, 11:38 am 11:38 am
“On May 1, 2003, President Bush landed a fixed-wing aircraft aboard the Abraham Lincoln . . .” I’m pretty sure that the President was not at the controls. When people are transported by a piliot, the pilot lands the plane, not the passenger.
This story give too much credit to the former President for landing and too little blame for mismanaging the message that everyone else in the world got from the banner that his people produced.
Posted by: mark | September 18, 2011, 11:43 am 11:43 am
It only took them 8 years to clear that up.
Posted by: howdymo1 | September 18, 2011, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm
All that this shows is that Republicans tend to be revisionists: when their words backfire on them, they stand up and say “Oh, but you MISUNDERSTOOD what i MEANT!” Ever since “I am not a crook”, Republicans have NEVER taken actual responsibility for their words and deeds – whether the denial takes the form of “I honestly can’t remember” or “you misunderstood me” – it is all the same: “I am not responsible.” More like “i am irresponsible” IMHO.
Posted by: JLS1950 | September 18, 2011, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm
“In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment. Yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other made this day possible.” ~~~~~~~~~~~Note the consistent use of PAST TENSE in his speech. This is also the same speech he claimed we had “destroyed the Taliban.” How did that work out?
Posted by: Mike | September 18, 2011, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
JLS1950, like when a democrat speaks and ALL of the main stream media has to translate and clarify what they actually said.
Posted by: Lizzie | September 18, 2011, 1:07 pm 1:07 pm
Millions don’t understand. We few do. OK. Sure.
Posted by: attitude | September 18, 2011, 1:21 pm 1:21 pm
It has always amazed me at how the “Mission Accomplished” banner was misrepresented. The banner was requested by the Navy, and indeed the conventional phase of the war was over. One only needs to have a passing interest in history to realize that armed exchanges continue long after the major conventional battles have concluded, or even treaties are signed. The truth is, that the Left hated the idea that the Coalition had been successful in “winning” the war (truly, no one actually “wins” in war, but historians do declare victors in such conflicts), and wished to misrepresent the speech so that preemptive war does not become seen as a viable solution. Now, I myself am not in favor of preemptive conflict either, except under the most extreme scenarios, but nothing is gained from lying about history, when the truth will surely come out.
Posted by: MediaMan | September 18, 2011, 1:34 pm 1:34 pm
The media got the story right. The mission was not accomplished. It took a Democrat in the Presidency to kill Osama bin Laden. Our troops are still in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush frankly was a poor President and the Republican Congress a bunch of jerks who overspent and caused unemployment to skyrocket. As a independent voter, I distrust Republicans more than Democrats to act in the best interests of the country. Democrats have also performed poorly. Obama is not as good a President as Clinton was. However, the Republicans such as Cantor, Boehner, McConnell, Bachmann, and DeMint are considerably worse.
Posted by: Scott | September 18, 2011, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm
Scott, I was in the media. We got it wrong.
Posted by: MediaMan | September 18, 2011, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm
Gulf War II was about oil. Even ex-Fed reserve chief Alan Greenspan said so.
What was “accomplished”, installation of a theocratic government?
Posted by: saint_al | September 18, 2011, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm
This failed spin doctor is betting that all of us have collective amnesia. I REMEMBER what Bush said, and his meaning was clear…he was following the same unrealistic wishful thinking about the mess he started and was beginning to unfold. Cheney and Rumsfeld told him would be over in a matter of a few weeks as we were welcomed as liberators. Anyone else out there remember that? The message on the banner was clear and explicit, as were Bush’s remarks that day. This feeble attempt to re-write history is just one more lie.
Posted by: Steve O'Brien | September 18, 2011, 1:54 pm 1:54 pm
I remember listening to President Bush’s speech that day – there was no mistaking what he was saying.
The Leftist press simply chose to mischaracterize what he was saying for purely political reasons.
And America knows that now.
That’s how we got the bum idiot Obama – because of the Leftist press and their pathological lies.
Posted by: One American | September 18, 2011, 2:04 pm 2:04 pm
Regardless of what Gulf War II was about (and yes, the need to lubricate the economy with oil was a large factor), it doesn’t change the fact that personnel aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln felt that they had accomplished their mission, which is why they requested the banner. Even if you don’t like George Bush, or the war, one cannot deny that the conventional phase of the war was over (i.e. the message of his speech). Anyone who wants to simplify it to “bullets were still flying, ergo, Bush is lying” is not being intellectually honest. When you are a journalist you have an obligation to report events within their context, and not your worldview. Often, events will contradict with your worldview (i.e. there is truth on both sides of an argument), but that does not mean that your overall worldview is necessarily wrong. What you MUST be wary of, is having a worldview so fragile that you can never re-examine anything you believe. I think that is why this particular article is so challenging to some people. The true intellectual takes all truthful information (even if they don’t like it), and builds their worldview based upon the facts, and not attempt to arrange the facts as they wish them to be.
Posted by: MediaMan | September 18, 2011, 2:11 pm 2:11 pm
I know what I heard, and it wasn’t what this spin doctor claims it was. If, indeed, Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” remarks were meant for those military personnel aboard the carrier, why were they broadcast to the entire nation in front of that blatant banner? Of course the troops aboard that carrier had carried out their mission and deserved the accolade, but the mission had not been accomplished, a fact G.W. Bush acknowledged in his address, and so far as the nation was concerned, it still has not been accomplished for the simple reason that democracy cannot be imposed upon a people from the outside. Simply getting rid of a dictator accomplished little more than placing Iraq in a state of political disarray which has continued to this very day. The desire for democracy must come from within the population which must be prepared to fight for freedom. Unfortunately, in Iraq and many other countries of the Middle East tribal and theocratic differences must first be overcome before true democracy can be achieved.
Posted by: amn | September 18, 2011, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm
This was obvious from the day he made the speech. It was the liberal media that spun it into something that it was not meant to be. And it is those very same liberals that gripe when B H O is criticized in the media. Go figure.
Posted by: Ben Johnson | September 18, 2011, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm
If someone doesn’t understand what you’re saying, it’s not thet fault of the person listening, it’s the person speaking. Don’t blame the press if Bush couldn’t communicate. That was pretty much indicative of his time in office.
Posted by: Thomas | September 18, 2011, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm
“In fact, the last U.S. combat troops would not leave Iraq until 2010 under Bush’s successor, President Barack Obama.” Huh? What planet is Mr. Bradley reporting from? My son is serving in a combat unit in Iraq and would find it fascinating that he and his fellow soldiers actually left that country last year. What’s next: an undercover expose revealing that there are still US combat troops in Iraq?
Posted by: dayrunner | September 18, 2011, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm
One small footnote – in a long history of buffoonery … who cares now?
Posted by: yeah.i.said.it | September 18, 2011, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm
One American – Oh, the leftist press..as opposed to the rightist press?
Posted by: Thomas | September 18, 2011, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
Why is no one covering the fact that Obama’s Job bill has not even been brought to the floor of congress. Only a member of congress can introduce a bill to the floor.
Why has Nancy Pelosi not brought it to the floor. I am so sick of hearing pass the bill
now, that it is sickening. And ABC wants to report on old news that really does not
matter to all the people looking for jobs right now. It is time for some truth telling.
Posted by: deadwrestler | September 18, 2011, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm
No, GW missed the point. You don’t invade a foreign country under false pretenses. We were invaded by goons from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.
Posted by: heretic zero | September 18, 2011, 11:46 pm 11:46 pm
From the actual speech of : “We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We are bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We are pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime, who will be held to account for their crimes. We have begun the search for hidden chemical and biological weapons, and already know of hundreds of sites that will be investigated. We are helping to rebuild Iraq, where the dictator built palaces for himself, instead of hospitals and schools. And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by, and for the Iraqi people. The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done. And then we will leave — and we will leave behind a free Iraq.” Doesn’t sound as though Bush thought the job was finished – only that the old government had been brought down..
Posted by: Publius | September 19, 2011, 1:52 am 1:52 am
deadwrestler wrote, “Why is no one covering the fact that Obama’s Job bill has not even been brought to the floor of congress. Only a member of congress can introduce a bill to the floor. Why has Nancy Pelosi not brought it to the floor.”
This article has nothing to do with President Obama, Congress, or his jobs bill. The MAJORITY PARTY in the House controls the agenda. The Speaker of the House decides what does and does not make it to the floor. Virtually every single bill in the House goes through a committee or two, including the Rules Committee. Which sets the rules for debating said bill if it ever makes it to the floor. Republicans don’t really want more jobs in the USA right now, so this bill will die in committee and never make it to the floor for discussion. Even if by some miracle it does, it will get voted down by the majority party, since they oppose everything Obama has ever done or will ever do………….
Posted by: Searambler | September 19, 2011, 9:02 am 9:02 am
Look again, the Former President is aligned to the center of the banner, like a caption over his head. His head has a slight “Halo” for the round part of the superstructure… yet they say they were not trying to send a message of accomplishment for the President… but for the sailors aboard the ship?
Why were they not centered under the banner? Do all you can to recover from getting caught, but the intent is quite clear.
Posted by: DewyB | September 19, 2011, 9:31 am 9:31 am
Many of us knew at the time exactly what the ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner referred to, and were enraged at the deliberate distortion by the presstitutes who rarely get anything right.
For instance even in this story the ‘jour-no-list’ gets it wrong when he writes, “…President Bush landed a fixed-wing aircraft aboard the Abraham Lincoln…”
I wouldn’t be surprised if GWB actually flew the plane in flight for some brief period of time, but to state that he landed it on the carrier shows, well, to be charitable, a total and complete lack of understanding as to how the military operates and what is involved in making a carrier landing – the President of the United States would NOT be at the controls of a plane landing on an aircraft carrier, which is ALWAYS an extremely dangerous operation requiring constant training. I suppose this ‘jour-no-list’ would have no problem writing about how Obama killed Osama, too…
Posted by: Not Chicken Little | September 19, 2011, 9:33 am 9:33 am
If you are a liberal with a peanut sized brain than you will believe that mission accomplished was referring to the war being won and over with. Of course the rest of us know what was implied.
Posted by: billy bob | September 19, 2011, 9:37 am 9:37 am
Well Billy bob, if you figured out that the mission accomplished manner really didn’t mean mission accomplished then you must have figured out that Iraq had no WMDs, right? Next you’re going to tell us the illegal war was fought for freedom or just so we could save Arabs from a terrible dictator. Us liberals recognize what happened here and this is why it is such a shameful mark on our great country. We are the true patriots dragging you into the 21st century and holding the bush admin accountable for the atrocity of the Iraq war. Shameful.
Posted by: Not bill bob | September 19, 2011, 10:22 am 10:22 am
Billy Bob Jimbo wrote, “If you are a liberal with a peanut sized brain than you will believe that mission accomplished was referring to the war being won and over with. Of course the rest of us know what was implied.”
LOL! So you are in the ‘the rest of us’ group that has a peanut sized brain and ‘knows what was implied’ here. Hilarious.
Being a Liberal with a normal human-sized brain, I understand exactly what GW and his team was trying to portray with that photo op. Regardless of what the people on the ship meant, GW and his team usurped that message by plopping Bush onto that carrier and making sure he was smack dab in the center of the banner for his speechifying. Basically he stepped on the military personnel there in order to get his photo ops………..
Posted by: Searambler | September 19, 2011, 10:38 am 10:38 am
My post was deleted by design. That’s understandable but I will say again, why this article now not in 2003. The GOP and Independents need to stay focus on JOBS, NATIONAL DEFICIT, GOVERMENT SPENDING
Posted by: acdc2012 | September 19, 2011, 10:54 am 10:54 am
I remember the speech, and, although the sign is NOT for Bush’s speech, it WAS a good sign to go with the message. Why ANYONE is bringing up this as an important subject is weird.
Posted by: arryandan | September 19, 2011, 11:26 am 11:26 am
There were a lot of facts that were twisted by the President Bush Haters. Propaganda spread with no facts behind it.
Posted by: Hopenchangescam | September 19, 2011, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm
Yeah the press mischaracterized EVERY STUPID thing done by gw bush because he was really a genius. I love the way these people keep trying to back up and CHANGE history when it comes to the MANY idiotic things that bush did in his two terms. I especially like the question posed to gw towards the end of his second term when asked what his best day was as President and the jerk answers that he caught some freeking big fish – yeah georgie, THAT was really something great for our Nation. WORST President in US History was gw bush!!!!
Posted by: demnme | September 20, 2011, 10:28 am 10:28 am