Immediately after the news broke that George Bush's administration has now agreed to a hard-and-fast timetable for withdrawal of all American troops in Iraq (all troops will be gone -- no matter what the situation on the ground is -- by the end of 2011), I got the following press release. Now, I'm on a lot of strange press lists, so I get a lot of strange press releases, but this is the first time I've ever gotten one from another dimension, I have to admit.
Here is the full text of the press release:
*** BEGIN MINITRUECOM ***
Ministry of Truth Communication
All previous references to "a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq" which have been presented in a negative light (including, but not limited to, references by: Our Fearless Leader Bush; the man who was just defeated to be Our Next Fearless Leader; lesser politicians from The Party; the media, and anyone else in the public limelight) shall retroactively be updated to reflect what a glorious achievement today's news is of President Bush and Iraq agreeing all American troops will be withdrawn from the country by the end of 2011.
Previous instances of "timetable for withdrawal" which are linked with such phrases as: "surrender," or "waving the white flag of surrender," or "would rather lose a war to win an election," or "dangerous," or "terrible idea," or "put America at danger," (and all the other myriad negative comments made in the past few years) shall be changed to reflect today's news. Substitute phrases such as: "a good idea," or "what we'll probably do," or even "we will force the Iraqis to accept our timetable for withdrawal," should be inserted instead.
Newspeak releases should be changed from "timetab4pullout doubleplusungood" to "timetab4pullout doubleplusgood" or (for earlier articles), merely "plusgood" or "good."
Storylines should slant:
"Our Fearless Leader President Bush has been pushing the Iraqi leaders to accept his timetable for withdrawal. The Iraqi leaders were, of course, scared to let American troops leave their country, and wanted us to stay longer. But Bush held firm, and forced his timetable for withdrawal upon them, whether they liked it or not. Bush ignored calls from the Other Party to give up his insistence on a timetable for withdrawal, and has shown us once again why he has been such a great leader in a time of war. America has always held the upper hand in this negotiation, forcing the Iraqis to amend the agreement over and over again, even up to making last-minute changes just before a politically-sensitive time in Iraq. The Iraqis did not at first want to accept this timeline, begging for language which stated that a withdrawal would only happen if 'events on the ground' justified it. Then, earlier this year, they tried to sneak away from the language altogether by calling it merely an 'aspirational goal' of a 'time horizon,' but again, Bush held firm and wouldn't let them get away with it."
Change the following quote from being an official Bush statement to being an Iraqi politician's quote: "...agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq. The President and Prime Minister agreed that the goals would be based on continued improving conditions on the ground and not an arbitrary date for withdrawal."
Also change such quotes from Bush to being from Maliki or other Iraqis: "I believe setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East, and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments. Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure -- and that would be irresponsible."
And finally, change recent quotes from Iraqis such as the following, and credit Bush instead: "The total withdrawal will be completed by December 31, 2011. This is not governed by circumstances on the ground."
If the full Iraqi Parliament votes against this agreement, be warned that all of these records will need to be changed again at that point, to reflect the new reality.
*** END MINITRUECOM ***
I mean, it is so fantastical I had to actually laugh at it. Because of course every single right-winger in America who has been using such language will immediately start using the same language about George Bush. All who have called the concept of an American "timetable for withdrawal" as being: downright dangerous, weak, a surrender, cowardly, losing a war to al Qaeda, giving up on the War On Terror, giving the terrorists what they want, a crazy Democratic idea, a dangerously naive idea by [insert name of Democratic politician here], proof that Democrats love to lose wars, proof that Democrats are un-American, anti-American, and blame-America-first -- all of the people who have ever uttered anything of that ilk will of course be intellectually honest and consistent, and will now denounce Bush in exactly the same fierce language as they have used previously. Because to do otherwise would just reveal their monstrous hypocrisy. And of course they will not shirk their duty to do so, since they've been provided with such a shining example of an American leader "caving in to terrorists" and surrendering in the face of the enemy. Of course they'll denounce Bush just as strongly as they have been denouncing others who have espoused such views.
Of course they will, I thought, confident I was not living in a fantasy world... and then I crumpled up the "MINITRUECOM" and threw it down the Memory Hole.
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
-- Chris Weigant