"If Bush, as I believe, has reliable information on the fact that Saddam Hussein is making weapons of mass destruction, I cannot not support the policies of his government"
About this Quote
Spielberg’s double negative lands like a nervous stutter caught on tape: “I cannot not support.” It’s the sound of a storyteller trying to turn uncertainty into a moral syllogism. The phrasing matters because it reveals the pressure of the early-2000s atmosphere, when “weapons of mass destruction” functioned less as a claim to be tested than as a civic shibboleth. If you accepted the premise, dissent started to look like irresponsibility. Spielberg’s sentence is built to accept the premise.
The key move is the conditional: “If Bush... has reliable information.” That “if” looks cautious, but it’s also a rhetorical escape hatch. It lets Spielberg align himself with authority while outsourcing the burden of proof to the state. He isn’t endorsing war in the abstract; he’s endorsing the idea that the president possesses decisive, private knowledge the public can’t access. The subtext is a kind of liberal institutional faith: intelligence agencies may be opaque, but they’re ultimately credible; leaders may be political, but they’re still custodians of facts too dangerous to share.
Coming from a director whose brand is moral clarity and heroic resolve, the statement reads like an attempt to inhabit the post-9/11 demand for unity without fully inhabiting its consequences. It’s also celebrity citizenship in a crisis: the impulse to be “responsible,” to say the sanctioned words, to avoid the cultural penalty of being wrong in public. In hindsight, the sentence isn’t just about Saddam; it’s about how quickly a narrative of certainty can conscript even professional narrators.
The key move is the conditional: “If Bush... has reliable information.” That “if” looks cautious, but it’s also a rhetorical escape hatch. It lets Spielberg align himself with authority while outsourcing the burden of proof to the state. He isn’t endorsing war in the abstract; he’s endorsing the idea that the president possesses decisive, private knowledge the public can’t access. The subtext is a kind of liberal institutional faith: intelligence agencies may be opaque, but they’re ultimately credible; leaders may be political, but they’re still custodians of facts too dangerous to share.
Coming from a director whose brand is moral clarity and heroic resolve, the statement reads like an attempt to inhabit the post-9/11 demand for unity without fully inhabiting its consequences. It’s also celebrity citizenship in a crisis: the impulse to be “responsible,” to say the sanctioned words, to avoid the cultural penalty of being wrong in public. In hindsight, the sentence isn’t just about Saddam; it’s about how quickly a narrative of certainty can conscript even professional narrators.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|
More Quotes by Steven
Add to List



