Speeches & Lies, both crispy and stale

Before the speech even played, Scott McClellan was lying about how fresh the subject matter would be:

Tomorrow, the President will also talk about the strategy for success. He will talk in a very specific way about the way forward. There is a clear path to victory. It is a two-track strategy: there is the military and political track. On the military front, it's important to continue training and equipping the Iraqi security forces so that they're able to defend themselves, and then our troops can return home with the honor that they deserve. And then there is the political track. The Iraqi people are showing that they're determined to build a free and democratic and peaceful future, and we must continue to do all we can to support them as they build a lasting democracy.

So the President looks forward to speaking to the American people tomorrow night. You will hear from him in much greater detail, but I wanted to give you a little bit of a preview to begin with. And with that, I'll be glad to go to your questions.

Q Scott, are there new details in the strategy for success? Is there a new direction, or is the President basically summing up what he has said before?

MR. McCLELLAN: As I said, this is a new speech. And the President will be talking in a very specific way about the strategy for succeeding in Iraq. And he will talk about the two-track strategy that we have in place. He touched on it a little bit last week; he's touched on it in -- many times over recent weeks. But this is going to be the President talking about it in a very specific way, about where we are for succeeding and where we are in implementing that strategy.

Given this high and mighty rhetoric--and lathering on the b.s. the way only Scotty can--one might feel that Bush really was going to put out a helluva chat in front of the GIs.

Um, no:

[paragraph 2] The troops here and across the world are fighting a global war on terror. This war reached our shores on September 11, 2001. The terrorists who attacked us – and the terrorists we face – murder in the name of a totalitarian ideology that hates freedom, rejects tolerance, and despises all dissent. Their aim is to remake the Middle East in their own grim image of tyranny and oppression – by toppling governments, driving us out of the region, and exporting terror.

Hmm, speech about Iraq. Paragraph 2. Lie #1: The troops are fighting a global war on terror. Iraq was not part of the war on terror until all of the terrorists came to help out a bit. Lie #2: This war reached our shores long before September 11, 2001. Lie #3: Terrorists in Iraq = Terrorists of 9/11 (This was one that earned support for the Iraq war in spades). Lie #4: Hates freedom, etc. No, that's not true. They hate our policies of interference in their countries and their politics. Can we please stop with this lie already? Very stale. Lie #5: OUR aim is to remake the middle east. What is this guy fucking talking about?

So far I'm wondering about Scotty's claims. Not much freshness in this bag.

[par 7]Some of the violence you see in Iraq is being carried out by ruthless killers who are converging on Iraq to fight the advance of peace and freedom. Our military reports that we have killed or captured hundreds of foreign fighters in Iraq who have come from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Libya and other nations. They are making common cause with criminal elements, Iraqi insurgents, and remnants of Saddam Hussein’s regime who want to restore the old order. They fight because they know that the survival of their hateful ideology is at stake. They know that as freedom takes root in Iraq, it will inspire millions across the Middle East to claim their liberty as well. And when the Middle East grows in democracy, prosperity, and hope, the terrorists will lose their sponsors, lose their recruits, and lose their hopes for turning that region into a base for attacks on America and our allies around the world.

I'm really quite sick of this framing. They are converging on Iraq to kill Americans, but there certainly seems to be no advance of peace or freedom in the Iraq I'm looking at. Americans walk their streets armed to the hilt, and their police officers explode almost daily. Why don't we call the insurgents and the remnants of Saddam's guys, "The part of Iraq that didn't surrender"? That's what they are, right? There were some people that didn't want to give up. They didn't. I don't like these people, but it is interesting to consider what we're being told they are. Freedom is not taking root. Millions are being inspired to hate America more, as Abu Graib and other scandals become clear, and as the series of American torture prisons becomes more fact than fabrication in everyone's mind. We promised American freedom and rights and the abolition of torture, and appear to have brought none. Lose their sponsors? Lose recruits? Abizaid said the insurgency is not losing strength. Get a grip, Mr. President.

[par 8]
Some wonder whether Iraq is a central front in the war on terror. Among the terrorists, there is no debate. Hear the words of Osama Bin Laden: “This Third World War … is raging” in Iraq. “The whole world is watching this war.” He says it will end in “victory and glory or misery and humiliation.”

Yikes. I don't think you should have mentioned that, sir. I want victory, but only because it sounds good. I still don't know what I would consider victory, much less what your simpleton thinking might call a "w", if you'll pardon the pun.

[par 9]
The terrorists know that the outcome will leave them emboldened, or defeated. So, they are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to take.

No limit to the innocent lives they are willing to take. Oh, that's rich.

mcolley
I'm not liberal, I'm just paying attention