"Characterizing" sounds like a neat trick. That means I can basically
do whatever I want with someone's
statement.

No, you can't just screw around with an acutal quote and claim that "Bush
said..................." if Bush did not. That's not characterization.

Reread the item that has you confused.
It compared two possible approaches to
diplomacy, from the perspective of the US
"speaking" to a foreign power.
There was no claim that either of the contrasting statements were attributable
to
any specific person or group. Why you now insist on infering that there was is
a bit puzzling. It's almost as if you're hoping to distract from the message by
shifitng discussion to the medium.