What you are suggesting is not only not farfetched; there are several decades of historical experience to support your conclusion. If you have not read it, Edward Herman’s The Real Terror Network, written in the early ’80s documents the same sort of behavior across Latin America from the ’50s on. As an interesting aside, but quite relevant under the circumstances, the role of Israeli intelligence in Latin terror is also rather well documented. Ari ben Menashe, in his book Profits of War intriguingly reports that Ariel Sharon spent time in Central America during the ’70s after he left active military service and between election campaigns. The implication was that he was involved in Mossad operations there.
~ Chris Sanders, Sanders Research Associates Ltd.
As usual Raimondo puts forth bold ideas available nowhere else, and yet somehow makes even the toughest subjects readable. I appreciate an obviously witty guy dealing artfully with serious shit. Whether his theory will prove correct or not, thank you Antiwar.com for publishing it and all the other much needed articles that keep us from devolving into an entirely troglodytic nation.
(Making my donation now. Sorry it can’t be more. I’m a writer.)
I agree that there is something odd about the release (and timing of the release) of these photos – and that they have a staged quality. Today Rumsfeld testified to Congress that this is only the beginning – there are thousands more, including videos, to come.
In addition to the effect these photos are having on the Arab world, this initial set of photos, tame by pornographic standards, is desensitizing Americans to images of torture. Whether intentional or providential, the cause of the advocates for the sanctioned use of military torture (the administration, elements of the Pentagon) has been advanced by these photos.
Images that until a few days ago would have been considered horrifying to the average viewer, have now appeared on the front pages of every newspaper in the country and have been broadcast nonstop, 24 hours a day on every cable news channel. The imagery is no longer shocking – images of torture have now become a part of the fabric of American culture. Add to this the right wing’s newest talking point, advanced most horrifyingly by Rush Limbaugh, that this behavior is no worse than what is experienced in a fraternity hazing. Even the Republicans in Congress have softened their rhetoric after their initial horror.
Black Psy-Ops? Perhaps. But not only intended for the Arab world.
"Shock and Awe" was the term used to describe the reaction of Iraq to the overwhelming force that initially overtook Baghdad. It was always my belief that Shock and Awe – as a military philosophy – was more about desensitizing Americans to the horrors of warfare. With each bombardment, we are diminished: 9/11, the bombing of Afghanistan, the invasion and bombing of Baghdad, the siege of Falluja – and now these images of torture from Abu Ghraib.
With the summer Olympics in Athens, two national political conventions in Boston and New York, a planned presidential election in November and "thousands of photos to come," this is truly only the beginning.
Justin Raimondo offers a powerful explanation of the US prison abuse scandal in his column of 7 May 2004. I tend to agree that much of what passes for "blundering" in the big media is in fact much more purposeful, more sinister on the part of our government (or sectors within the government).
But I’d like Raimondo to incorporate into his explanation an account of the recent groveling of top administration officials, and of Bush himself, in response to criticism of the prison scandal. Bush & Co.’s groveling before Congress, the media, and on Arab TV looks like a massive humiliation to me. How can they purposefully humiliate the Arab world on the one hand, while submitting to the humiliation extracted by sniping critics on the other?
Keep up the good work. (And, yes, I donated!)
~ Jamie Hutchinson, Urbana, Illinois
A Free Press Is SO 20th Century
Two Rumsfeld quotes from his testimony before the Senate and House 5/7/04, which seem to state his frustration over the nature of a free American press, and the changes he might propose for the 21st century, in times of war:
- "We’re functioning in a – with peacetime restraints, with legal requirements in a wartime situation, in the information age, where people are running around with digital cameras and taking these unbelievable photographs and then passing them off, against the law, to the media, to our surprise, when they had not even arrived in the Pentagon."
- "As I indicated in my remarks, we are constantly finding that we have procedures and habits that have evolved over the years from the last century that don’t really fit the 21st century. They don’t fit the Information Age, they don’t fit a time when people are running around with digital cameras. Second, with 24-hour news and digital cameras, something like this can have an impact that is just enormous."
If we have a right to torture our real, potential or imaginary enemies to extract information then so did Saddam. So he had no WMD’s, no links to al Qaeda and we have no right to condemn him for torture. Any more excuses for starting a war? …
F.A.A. Official Scrapped Tape of 9/11 Controllers’ Statements
"…[O]fficials at the center never told higher-ups of the tape’s existence, and it was later destroyed by an FAA official described in the report as a quality-assurance manager there. That manager crushed the cassette in his hand, shredded the tape and dropped the pieces into different trash cans around the building….
"The quality-assurance manager destroyed the tape between December 2001 and February, 2002. By that time, he and the center manager had received an e-mail message sent by the FAA instructing officials to safeguard all records and adding, ‘If a question arises whether or not you should retain data, RETAIN IT.’"
Is it possible that the Bush cartel has the media drop these ‘little’ stories into the Friday newspapers when there is a prison abuse story taking front page so that WE MISS THE STORY? If that is true what would a GOOD NEWSPAPER OR MEDIA OUTLET DO? How about repeat the story on MONDAY MORNING. How about doing that all the time – at least a paragraph on the bottom of MONDAY announcing what we all missed on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday… Isn’t the news all about bringing this sh*t up?
The Abu Ghraib Prison Photos (warning: graphic photos)
Quote of the Week (quick lecture in the newspeak of imperial euphemisms and cynicism):
"Whereas detainees used to cry at the very thought of Abu Ghraib, for many the living conditions now are better in prison than at home. At one point we were concerned they wouldn’t want to leave."
– Army Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the U.S. commander in Iraq in charge of the prison system /apparatus of terror.
Published December 14, 2003: "Her job: Lock up Iraq’s bad guys," St. Petersburg Times
This is nothing compared to what Saddam and the rest of the Arab dictators did and do to their prisoners. Sure, it shouldn’t have happened, war really is hell, but if you anti-America people had your heads on straight you would realize the good the US has accomplished. Freedom and democracy is within a whisker for almost 50,000,000 Muslims plus the rest of the Arab people when they decide that goodness is better evil. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Why don’t you move to one of their countries if you think the US is sooo bad?
You asked for comments, this is mine.
Eric Garris replies:
You measure our morality against Saddam’s? For shame!
Sam Koritz replies:
The Bushies’ use of democratic rhetoric to justify the invasion of Iraq is discrediting democracy in the region. See for example "Violence in Iraq chills Saudis’ democratic urges."
I survived the Terror in Peru, when Shining Path was trying to destroy my country and the US kept heckling us because they disapproved of our President, Alberto Fujimori, as he dared tell the American he did not want a multinational task force in South America because he did not want another Vietnam. Of all the abuses laid at our door (how we mistreated the poor social fighters who had murdered 25,000 of us) no such abuse as those perpetrated by the so-called civilized American soldiers was attributed to us. …
I fear that the future will indeed turn black, especially for the "virtuous American" tourist, who will henceforth shake in fear that retribution be meted out to them, whether they are personally responsible or not. It seems that not only individuals but also societies can be stupid enough to ‘cut off their noses to spite the face’. Though it is always good when the blindfold is torn off one’s eyes and we can see Truth in the rare light of the Sun.
~ Leonard E. Hussey, Educator, Lima, Peru
I was shocked when I saw the photos. I feel ashamed for what the soldiers did. I think the war itself has distorted the kind nature of American soldiers. The soldiers were all nice persons before they went to war. They made these brutal actions because they saw death, torture and other atrocities every day. They lost the sense that the prisoners are human beings. However, they should not be blamed but the war itself should be blamed and the government who initiated the war should be blamed.
War always destroys humanity. When you visit Germany and Japan, you find every person there is kind. However, during World War II, German soldiers gassed millions of naked Jews including children … ; Japanese soldiers raped 20,000 to 80,000 Chinese women from ages of 12 to 80 during Nankin massacre; some Japanese soldiers impaled babies in the tummies of pregnant women and then tossed them into pots of boiling water. How could the kind German and Japanese people change to cruel war criminals during World War II? It was because of the war initiated by their government. Killing and death due to war numb the sensory nerves of both sides; eventually only hatred and revenge remain. That’s why invasion should never be justified in this world. In fact, no invasion has been just in history. We should stop the war right now.
The pictures coming in from Iraq demonstrate a profound ignorance of truly effective torture. If we really want to inflict devastating trauma against our enemies, I suggest the following:
1. Leave Iraq immediately so that the Iraqis will have the chance to build exactly the kind of hell they want to live in.
2. Never again invade a country that hasn’t attacked the US
3. Arrest the next Commander in Chief who ignores Article I Section 8 of the Constitution and sends soldiers anywhere to die without the legally required declaration of war by Congress.
If we do these 3 simple things, fanatic Islamists will go completely insane, not having any idea why we suddenly stopped fulfilling Osama bin Laden’s predictions about American "crusaders" being bent on control of Middle Eastern oil fields.
What can one possibly say that would be adequate enough for condemnation of this kind of human abuse.
How can any American look himself in the mirror without throwing up knowing his fellow man is capable of such monstrosities.
I’m sure there will be lots of excuses like ‘we didn’t know’ etc. that this was wrong – but every human being understands quite adequately the difference between right and wrong.
This is the country that wants to impose American ‘values’ on another country?! I think not. These people have been shamed beyond ever accepting American values, now that they have seen ‘first hand’ what American ‘values’ stand for. Contempt and arrogance for other nations and their people along with what is of ‘value’ to these people.
For the first time I can be happy that my Prime Minister turned away from sending our troops into Iraq. …
~ Frances Greenfield, Lansdowne, Ontario, Canada
Rumsfeld says more have been tortured
… What struck me in Rumsfeld’s testimony today was the point at which he makes a lot of the distinction between the verbal reports of the prison abuse and the photos, which he hadn’t seen before they were aired by CBS. At one point it seemed he was saying that the photos and their circulation was the bad thing here, not so much the events themselves (as conveyed by verbal communication). It occurred to me as he was speaking how much these people hate the light of truth. The point is that as long as you can have a distance from reality created by words that can be manipulated to conceal the truth, war and its atrocities can be sold to a gullible public. As long as you can refer to the horrible slaughtering and maiming of thousands of human beings as "toppling Saddam Hussein," or "action" (as opposed to French or German "inaction"), or some other of the hundreds of sanitized euphemisms for a deliberate war of aggression that kills both Americans and foreigners, everything will be fine. This is why we are not supposed to see pictures even of our own dead soldiers, or, for that matter, of anything of the war’s gore that it is not glimpsed from a distance such that it looks like a video game. Similarly, all of our armchair chicken-hawks have never seen the realities of war, but are geniuses at formulating the noble reasons, foreign policy goals, that justify the killings they and we never have to see. And most of our killing can be done from thousands of feet in the air, where we do not – ever – have to look into the eyes of the human beings we are exterminating. They can be referred to as collateral damage, or a military target….
This from Black Commentator says it all:
"This is not America," said George Bush on Wednesday, pleading the national case to the Arab world. "America is a country of justice and law and freedom and treating people with respect."
No, America is a country built on genocide, slavery and insatiable land-piracy, where even the lowest status white person is a king or queen compared to a "hajji" or "gook" or some other variety of "nigger." This is the cultural well from which springs America’s ceaseless domestic and international wars, the fountainhead of aggression as a national trait.
America’s manifest destiny = a cult of death and depravity.
~ Bjorn Rafto, former US Naval Officer
Alan Bock replies:
Without denying any number of shameful actions, episodes and attitudes in America’s past and present, I still think there’s much that’s admirable in America, especially the vast majority of those who work, play, raise their families, start businesses, invent things and generally live their lives without impinging on the rights of others. While most Americans can get riled up (or all too often gulled) enough to support military actions for a while, few Americans outside a small class of professional policy wonks have any interest in running a global empire. Now if only we could find honest jobs in the private sector for all those wonks.
I read with mounting anger the remarks made by this person. He or she had the gall to speak out with such hatred against America. Why is this person still living in this country? Why doesn’t someone send them back to their home country where they don’t have this freedom of speech and where I am sure that will be life under a much, much worse form of government. It is persons like them that are the downfall of our country and should not be allowed to live here.
I expected an objective thought; what a disappointment. I am a left-wing Israeli and I object to Sharon’s methods, but I know a religious patriotic terrorist from a misguided Jew defending his country.
The only time you mention terrorism and suicide bombers is in the note on ALLEGED "TERRORISTS." This war has two sides. Your myopia makes you one sided.
Your writing misses information and biases the rest of your writing. Your writing therefor is worthless in the war against war and is grossly misleading.
Your writing will help revulsion against antiwar people among thoughtful people objecting to the war and others looking for worthy arguments against Sharon.
Ran HaCohen replies:
Indeed, in all wars there are two sides. This doesn’t make them equal. In this war, one side uses primitive weapons and stones to free its own land, whereas the other side uses one of the strongest and best equipped armies on earth to occupy and dispossess its neighbors’ land.
As for not mentioning suicide bombers: I am convinced that you and all my readers have heard about them at length elsewhere; the accusation of "missing information" is absurd.
It is interesting that even an Israeli who considers himself "left-wing" thinks "suicide bombers" are a recent addition to the Jewish prayer book, which one is obliged to say three times a day. I cannot blame you: you live in a country where most of the media believes its duty is to repeat what everyone already knows. In my eyes, journalism is about saying new and lesser known things, not about recycling state propaganda over and over again.
You’re doing a fantastic job!
Nothing like it here in England, though we’re deep in the sh*t with the US in Iraq. Blair is a war criminal – we’ll get him in the end.
A cheque for $100.00 is in the post to you!
~ Richard Turnbull, London, England
It was an interesting article about the lack of a military solution. However I still don’t think that author (either of the piece or the report) have a clue about what the Iraqis think.
Near the end there is this comment: "At the same time, Washington should threaten to leave Iraq if an interim Iraqi leadership fails to cooperate in the effort to form a stable and efficient government."
As we used to say in the school playground in my youth, "is that a threat or a promise?"
The Mideastization of the US, or: Rumsfeld Must Resign
Professor Cole’s call for resignations (Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz) does not go far enough. VP Cheney must resign and his puppet President Bush. A gratuitous war with no legitimate purpose resulting in war crimes and thousands of casualties and the destruction of America’s image is far worse than Watergate and demands resignation.
I think it is obvious that Bush wanted to devastate the country. The more chaos the better for him and the other fascists. He has the troops to act as cannon fodder while they take out the oil. Add up the pieces:
Project for New American Century is the plan. There were 100,000 body bags ordered BEFORE the war started. The troops will tell you their main job was to protect the oil wells. They set by and let everything else be destroyed. Oil tankers have been bringing in the oil to the Port of LA on a regular basis since the troops’ feet hit the ground. Bush knows if the people of Iraq are in control they will not allow the oil to be stolen. …
Now the US can start the draft which will provide endless cannon fodder for their plan. The initial draft bill was written over a year ago and the doors to Canada and Mexico have already been closed in preparation. Bush can take over the rest of the Middle East and continue to rape and pillage. They are constructing several military bases in Iraq as we speak. Why would they need several military bases if they are turning over control to the people of Iraq? Negroponte will be the new ambassador. He is quite adept to running death squads and killing innocents. He fits Bush’s need to the T. I don’t find it that difficult to connect these dots. Do you ? …
~ Vickie L. Wilson, LCSW, Veteran US Navy 02/70–12/72
Your letter writer, Gary Hankin, says that if a draft doesn’t get Bush’s daughters in the first wave, he’ll send his son to Canada. I’d send my three children (all late teens/ early 20s) to Canada in a heartbeat to keep them out of the US military if the draft were reinstated.
However, it’s my understanding that Canada no longer offers the haven of the 1960s and ’70s. Emigrating to Canada is a lengthy and difficult process. Would the Canadian government again offer asylum to US citizens trying to avoid military conscription?
Sam Koritz replies:
The people at the Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors (objector.org) should be able to answer your questions.
The Backtalk writer who wrote that the Abu Ghuraib scandal is trumped by the recent events in Fallujah would do well to heed the words of Juan Cole … : "Fallujah and Abu Ghuraib: No Comparison."
Bush Sorry for Abuse of Iraqi Prisoners
Numerous outlets have reported that Bush finally apologized for the prisoner abuse scandal. Unfortunately, these reports gloss over a crucial fact: Bush still has not apologized to the Iraqi people. I can only speculate about the strategy behind this Clintonesque word game, but – as any decent human being knows – an apology doesn’t mean much unless it is given to the injured party. As such, Bush’s private apology to King Abdullah and his public announcement of that apology (to King Abdullah) simply won’t do.
~ Greg Brownfield Bartlett, IL
Sam Koritz replies:
Sunni religious fanatics attack America and Bush overthrows Iraq’s secular government. Americans victimize Iraqis and Bush apologizes to the king of Jordan. Irrational and vindictive? Perhaps, but consider this excerpt from a Strategic Command study:
“[I]t hurts to portray ourselves as too fully rational and cool-headed. … That the U.S. may become irrational and vindictive if its vital interests are attacked should be a part of the national persona we project to all adversaries."
As this study suggested they should, the Bushists behaved irrationally and vindictively after the U.S.’s vital interests were attacked. The Bushist innovation was to behave this way towards people who had no role in the attack.
Bush reportedly has said, "I was sorry for the humiliation suffered by the Iraqi prisoners and the humiliation suffered by their families." This was widely reported as an "apology." In fact, however, it was not. An apology is not merely a statement of sorrow, as in "I feel sorry for all the people suffering from famine in this world." After all, the whole world – including the Moslem world – is "sorry" to see the humiliation of the prisoners. A true apology includes, in addition to a statement of sorrow, an acknowledgment of responsibility: "I am sorry for what I/we did." This is glaringly missing from Bush’s statement. It is not, therefore, an apology, but just another manifestation of his inability to admit a mistake.
Some facts should be injected into the Malic – Stojanovic exchange over Montenegro. Montenegro is about the size of Rhode Island and has a population of about 600.000, of which one third aren’t Montenegrins (Muslims, Albanians, Croats). Almost as many Montenegrins live in Serbia as in Montenegro itself.
At present, Montenegrins are split into three factions according to their (un?)patriotic feelings:
– those who feel that Montenegrins are a branch of Serbs.
– those who feel only Montenegrin and won’t have to do anything with Serbia, i.e. the Separatists.
– those who feel only Serb and won’t have anything to do with Montenegrin Nationalism.
Although Montenegro provides Serbia an important exit to the sea, Serbia’s attachment to Montenegro is also, very much emotional. Montenegro is the cradle of Serbian Nationalism and the Liberation struggle against the Muslims. The greatest Serbian poet is a Montenegrin Bishop – Njegos.
Montenegrins have also very strong ties with Serbia, and Serbs in general, on all levels. Slobodan Milosevic, the famous prisoner in Hague, is of pure Montenegrin stock. So is Radovan Karadzic the ex-Bosnian leader in hiding. The most notorious Serbian War Lord during the Yugoslav civil war, Arkan,was also Montenegrin.
Separation from Serbia will be difficult (unless Nato intervenes as in Kosovo – an ardent desire of some Separatists) because its victory in referendum would, at best, be minimal and achieved only through a collusion with minorities (all solidly anti-Serb), which in turn, could cause resentment and would be likely to provoke civil strife. The only war that can result is a civil one. War with Serbia is unthinkable.
~ Peter Vujacic
