Communications and Media

Introduction
Justice Will be Done speech was delivered by President George W. Bush on September 20, 2000 in Texas.
In one of the classic criticisms of the speech in context, it is said that the former American President deployed most possible tactics within his reach to get his message across to the world, that a war has been declared against the terrorism. (Presidential Studies Quarterly, 2003)

The president has the power to define political reality, that is to say, when he talks he spells out decisions, while giving the masses the rationale behind them, without giving them the option to reject the decision. Its firm and final and only a movement or revolution of sorts can prompt him to review his decision, thats the least he would be willing to do. Many critics have looked upon the speech and the message conveyed herein from this angle that is the President came on the pulpit and declared the war on terror, sought the help of other countries and compartmentalized them as being with terrorism or against terrorism, a sure short sign of master manipulation.

In another criticism, the president has been rather accused of repeating the same notions of freedom , war, fear, democracy, fraternity, fundamental rights, etc again and again so that they form a niche in the auditors mind and eventually they end up wanting the same thing as which is offered by the speaker. (Kellner, 2007)

I will take a slightly different stand in comparison to the analysis formed by the critics as the speech and its message had more to them than could be seen or felt at the first instance and I intend to do so by analyzing the text in the Neo-Aristotelian style of rhetoric criticism as proposed by Wichelns (Ross, 2004). The speech was only the second amongst the series of speeches delivered by the powerful President in the same context over a period of 8 years and it helps to see how the speech and the methods used stood to change the attitude of the target audience in agreement to that of the speaker.

Though the Neo-Aristotelian style doesnt take into account the fact that whether the audience reacted favorably to the speaker or not, it was worthwhile examining the results to see whether the audience swayed or no and if the rhetoric skills and measures used by the speaker were the only responsible elements used or there is more than that meets the eye.

The speech and the message it attempted to deliver are important from the point of view that it was delivered at a time when the country under the discussion, United States of America was going through the worst crisis of times, crisis severe than the Great Depression on 1929. Back then, it was the financial security that was at stake, but under the current scenario it was a question of national as well as personal security and undoubtedly love of life and love of self are the two most important things in a persons life.

Situation of the Artifact
Rhetorical situation is considered to be closely related to the determination of the style and technique of rhetoric employed by the rhetor to affect the perceptions of the targe audience in the desirable way (Dunn  Rogerson, 2003). A critic when analyzing the rhetoric situation of a rhetoric concerns himself with three major aspects, the rhetor, the occasion and the audience (Foss, 2009).

Occasion
The speech was delivered ten days after the worlds commercial capital New York City was caught in the worst terrorist attacks in the century. Before that the country as a whole had been on the receiving side of external attacks only once, 60 years back when Japanese had attacked the US Naval Base at the Pearl Harbor and forced the agitated superpower to join the World War II in retaliation and wreck havoc. On 9th September 2001, at around 8.45 a.m. in the morning, the symbols of US capitalism and financial prosperity, The Twin Towers (The World Trade Centre buildings) were destroyed after an American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, two of the four planes hijacked by the terrorists crashed into the North Tower and the South Tower respectively. The third plane was crashed into Pentagon at Washington D.C. and the fourth one crashed in the countryside of western Pennsylvania. The Islamic terrorist group, Al Qaeda, was responsible behind the attacks and the design as well as execution of the nefarious plot was the doing of the mastermind leader of the terrorist organization, Osama Bin Laden.

The attacks left thousands of dead and injured. It was the most gruesome act inflicted upon committed upon the innocent civilians. People were trapped inside the building and trying desperately to come out while fire fighters and paramilitary forces were trying their best to evacuate the building and save as many people as possible. There was an atmosphere of terror and misery all around. Nevertheless, the people did help the fellow citizens in need and over the week that followed there were marched processions, flag hoisting, candle lighting and community and mass prayers at various places of worship. All this while the nation and the world community at large waited impatiently to know the response of the leadership and the future course of action. Then President, George W. Bush had addressed the nation in the evening of 9th September, 2010 itself, but then the main motive was to strengthen the courage of the citizens and to assure them of no further attacks.

This rhetoric was delivered with much more decision and purpose of mind wherein the speaker declared an open war on terrorism and sought the support of all the countries of the world that did not support terrorism and the countries who failed to do so would be deemed as being pro-terrorism and United States will not scruple to wage a war against them.

Rhetor

George W. Bush was the 43rd President of the USA and an able administrator. He was first elected to the office of President in 2001 and reelected in 2005. During his tenure, he remained committed to the issue of national security and combating terrorism. His actions attracted much criticism from the national as well as international media, especially those related with bombing of Afghanistan and invasion of Iraq. He was instrumental in freeing Iraq from the scourge and tyrannical rule of Saddam Hussein, but the atrocities practiced in the Iraq and the bloodshed caused invited much criticism. Perhaps a visionary that looked forward to establishing America as the most powerful country in the world and a true champion of Global Peace.

The Audience

It is clear that the chief target audience is the citizens of the United States of America who were waiting impatiently for administrations response, while reeling from the pain and anger of the attacks. They were asked to shun any fear and continue believing in the benefits of the democracy and being part of one of the largest democracies in the world. Arguments in favor of launching a full fledged military operation against Afghanistan, Taliban and other hostile nations that serve as terrorist bases were also given and all attempts were made to make an ordinary American see reason in counter-attacking the phenomenon of global terrorism.

The speech was also aimed at the world at large, the world countries, leaders, organizations, communities, sects, the terrorist groups that wrecked so much havoc and the countries that supported them, either directly or indirectly. He thanked the British Prime Minister for his countrys support in the war against terrorism, while implored upon other countries to support the cause. In his address, the President assured the Muslims that the country did have faith in the religion and their caste would not be discriminated against just because a handful of radical miscreants are spreading terror in the name of the religion. This was to garner the support of the Islamic nations and other nations where Muslims formed a good proportion of overall demographics.

He shares the plight of the people of Afghanistan, the very country it seeks to destroy in order to end the Taliban rule there. This was to win over the support of the people of Afghanistan which can be instrumental in deciding the turn of events in the war against Afghanistan.

The personnel in FBI, Armed Forces, and police and investigation departments have already been made a privy to the war on terrorism and a message is sent across to them that they will have to fight for countrys victory.

The decision the President wants the target audience to make or rather accept is clear that it is going to wage a war against terrorism and Afghanistan was the first target. The citizens as well as the world at large was expected to see US move as right, ethical as well as only way for the country to set things right.

Rhetorical Method and its use
The neo-Aristotelian method of criticism is being used here, which borrows greatly from the methods prescribed by Aristotle in the book Rhetoric. According to Wicheln, it is a very efficient method of dissecting and judging the effectiveness of a rhetoric and works mainly by the critic answering such rhetoric questions like is the speaker trying to appeal to the logical or the emotional faculties or how does the speech fare on the five canons of rhetoric

Application of Canons

Invention
The speaker may make use of available facts and figures in connection with the situation of the rhetoric in order to persuade the audience or he may create his own internal proofs based on logos, ethos and pathos. In addition to citing the statistical information about the expanse of the terrorism, the President makes a remarkably good use of the tools of ethos and pathos. Logos is used in fairly moderate ways and restricted to where the citizens raw instincts and rational faculties are concerned.

The speech begins on a rather informal note and with this the President aims to strike a chord with the citizen of the nations. By mentioning the plight of the people entrapped in the debris and the zealous courage of those trying to rescue them, he appeals to them emotionally. They are reminded of the fateful and gruesome events, not that they had forgotten them, the mention of them made them more vivid. By naming two ordinary citizens, Todd Beamer and Lisa Beamer, he tried to reach out to them, with every citizen on a personal basis.

He applauds the nation at the courage and zeal they have shown and asks them to continue doing it. We have seen the state of our Union in the endurance of rescuers, working past exhaustion. We have seen the unfurling of flags, the lighting of candles, the giving of blood, the saying of prayersin English, Hebrew, and Arabic. We have seen the decency of a loving and giving people who have made the grief of strangers their own. 1.

There are various other instances of pathos such as naming the famous places in the world where prayers were performed or candles were lit and appeals to the other communities and countries of the world for support in the war against terrorism because what happened in USA can happen in any part of the world.
Now his speech takes a turn and audaciously tries to equate a civilian terrorist attack with a war, a war that needs to be fought with equal fervor on both the sides. From the terrorist point of view, its a war against freedom and democracy but from the point of view of America, it will wage a war against terrorism and fear. The miscreants will have to pay for their deeds as Our grief has turned to anger, and anger to resolution. Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done 1.
This was an attempt to influence the citizens in a rather logical way though the attempt was complete with fallacies.

When the President names Al Qaeda as being responsible for the attacks, he says it rather being politically correct as in evidence we have gathered all points to a collection of loosely affiliated terrorist organizations known as Al Qaeda. But this was soon replaced by a rather strong tirade, symbolical of logos as well as ethos when he says that They are the same murderers indicted for bombing American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, and responsible for bombing the USS Cole. Al Qaeda is to terror what the Mafia is to crime. But its goal is not making money its goal is remaking the worldand imposing its radical beliefs on people everywhere. 1

The loose syllogism that Taliban is guilty of aiding and rescuing the terrorist and thus a party to these gruesome murders is aimed at winning the support of citizens as well as the international community in waging and justifying a war against Afghanistan and Taliban. His attempts at wooing the Islamists is are simple and again logical in nature as he mentions that the religious text doesnt say anything about mass hatred or spreading terrorism and it is the work of extremists who also stain the religion. This was done in attempt to win the support of Islamic countries like Egypt lest they should see Americas invasion of Afghanistan and terrorism as a potential war against Islam.

Using Constructive argument, he goes on to explain the citizens of his country and the rest of the world as to how he plans to go about the war and also prepare them for the fact that the war wont get over instantly but will be a lengthy campaign. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism 1. It is towards the end that he lays bare the real strategy that is of waging a war not only on Afghanistan but every other nation that supports terrorist activities. The binary thought that nations may be either supporting USA or the terrorist organizations and the latter would invite US invasion raised many an eyelid. The President had very smoothly left the world with two options either join US or be prepared for war.
In the epilogue, his entire attention is focused on the citizens of the country, pacifying them, rekindling the hope in their heart, igniting their passion towards the war against terrorism, imploring them to keep patience and co-operate with FBI and other security personnel at various places in the city and not to lose confidence in the economy just because the symbol of American Economic Prosperity, the Twin Towers lay grounded.

Organization
Organization of the speech has three main parts it starts and ends with the President commending the efforts and courage of the American Population in dealing with the crisis. In between, it takes up a more strategic tone wherein the President lays bare the plans and strategies aimed at fighting and revenging the terrorist and also makes announcement of the key appointments and creation of new security departments. Intermingled with this are the various outbursts of Tirade against Al Qaeda and its members which evoke a feeling of disgust against them in the minds of the people. Historical references to Nazism and Fascism are also made to further incite the masses and garner their support. At one point, the President directly communicates with Taliban and lays down his terms and conditions, exerting the superpower status of the American nation.

Style
As far as the style is concerned, the speechmaker has done a rather commendable job, except for some presumptuous exaggerations. Good use of anaphors, metaphors, simile, personification and other figures of speech have been made good use of in getting the message across. All the time, the president kept referring to America as our country, the damages as our wounds and the potential war as our struggle. Interestingly, to prove his case to the international audience, he refers to the citizens of America as Americans, that is in third person, so as to give the notion that whatever steps he is taking is in the greater interest of the entire world and he is speaking as a spokesperson of that world and not as the President on United States of America.
The language is elusive and words simple and this is because it was meant to appeal to a wide base of targets, all of whom may not be intellectuals or well versed in language and vocabulary. Anyway, it stands to reason because when dealing with the social world, the ordinary use of ordinary language makes metaphysicians of us (Lacy  Wilkins, 2006, 111)

Delivery
The method of delivery of speech was quite effective. His expression was filled with remorse, pity, condolence, anger, revenge and passion for war, as and when the different parts of the speech demanded. Perfectly at ease, he delivered the speech with lan and did not miss a word or a syllable. Most of the times, he looked the audience in the eye, visibly making an attempt at personal connection. As the President of the United States of America, he was aware of the power and authority he wielded and made the utmost use of it while appearing at the same time a messiah who had taken up the cause of Global Terrorism and its scourge.

Memory
Though one of the frequently unused grounds for the critical analysis of a rhetoric, memory does play a role when it comes to determining the rhetors control over the words. The President probably had read the speech before but had not memorized it. The use of a teleprompter was quite evident.

Assessing the effects
The address by the President was eagerly awaited and a redressal mechanism against the scourge of terror was expected by the audience. The rhetoric furnished them with everything they were looking for and in addition creating an impression in their mind that it is Afghanistan and Taliban that are responsible for this massacre and in days to follow, the American nation also held the people of the Islamic world as somewhere being connected with these terrorist activities.

Conclusion

Reasonableness of the speech
If looked upon objectively, the speech loses on a lot of grounds and had it been delivered under other situation, it would have failed to generate the desired affect. It suffers from exaggerations and takes advantage of the fact that the psyche of the primary target, the Americans is charged with emotions and they will find anything thats consoling and showing empathy towards them as being reasonable. The attempt of the President at reinstalling hope in the hearts of the citizens was met with success because he implored upon the notions of democracy, freedom and fundamental rights, the virtues which are enshrined in the constitution and are prized above everything else by every American.

Impact of the speech
The impact was as desired. People wanted answers, the President gave them and in return the citizens extended their full co-operation towards any security measures that the government planned to undertake.
The global community at large agreed with USA and those who did not, kept quite lest they should be termed as allying sides with the terrorists. Most of the nations had faced the brunt of terrorist civilian attack some or the other time and were appalled when the worlds superpower was caught off guard and attacked so brutally. They were willing to align sides with USA in waging the war against terrorism.

Value of Using Search Model 
The current search model enabled a thorough dissection and analysis of the speech let justice be done and as a result of which, the speech stands to be seen in an entirely new light than it was before. The only drawback is that it doesnt consider the utility of other factors, particularly media in this case, which further strengthened the case of the speaker as the stories and images of violence in public domain had become commonplace and people respond more empathetically to visuals then mere descriptions.