Taking on Daism

The Bremer Paradox

2004-04-19T12:12:00.000+01:00

"Events of the past two weeks show that Iraq still faces security threats and needs outside help to deal with them," Mr. Bremer said. "It is clear that Iraqi forces will not be able, on their own, to deal with these threats by June 30 when an Iraqi government assumes sovereignty. Instead, Iraq and troops from many countries, including the United States, will be partners in providing the security Iraqis need."

So let me get this straight - according to Bremer US troops are needed in Iraq to prevent attacks on the US troops stationed in Iraq.

Posted by Daism |

Comical Harry

2004-04-17T15:19:00.000+01:00

Harry Hatchett has lost the plot. According to Harry, dissenters are the ones who support the establishment line. He made this ridiculous posting today, Betrayal? They saved dissent, in which he claims that the true dissenters are the "pro-war left" (whatever that means), and it was people like Charles Kennedy and Tony Benn who had "fallen in line". Failing to realise he was being a tad controversial, he proceeded to delete all the comments made by people who....er....dissented from his opinion.
One of the offending comments criticised his use of the word "nihilism" to describe the left. I merely suggested that perhaps the reason that the views of the "pro-war left" differed from the views of the left anywhere else in the world was not because they are dissenters, but because they are in fact right-wing views.
According to Harry, these points are "irrelevant comments that have nothing to do with the original post. "

One thing to be said for Harry is that he has a great sense of irony.

Posted by Daism |

George Bush has legitimised terrorism

2004-04-17T11:22:00.000+01:00

By allowing Israel to annex Palestinian land, "Every claim by Osama bin Laden, every statement that the United States represents Zionism and supports the theft of Arab lands will now have been proved true to millions of Arabs, even those who had no time for Bin Laden. What better recruiting sergeant could Bin Laden have than George Bush." Robert Fisk article [link].

If Mr Sharon is "historic" and "courageous", then the murderers of Hamas and Islamic Jihad will be able to claim the same. Mr Bush legitimised "terrorism" this week - and everyone who loses a limb or a life can thank him for his yellow streak. And, I fear, they can thank Mr Blair for his cowardice too.

Posted by Daism |

At last something Rumsfeld has said that I agree with

2004-04-15T20:48:00.000+01:00

"A small band of terrorists are not going to be permitted to determine the fate of the 25 million Iraqi people,"

The neo-cons should let Iraqis determine their own fate.

Posted by Daism |

David Edwards' simple test

2004-04-15T01:07:00.000+01:00

David Edwards (Medialens co-editor) proposes a simple test for the integrity of journalists.

Applying the test to Jon Snow (Channel 4 news), he writes:

I think there's a simple test we can conduct to get an idea of Jon Snow's performance. We just need to ask: Is he a respected, well-liked journalist with a reputation for honest, objective reporting? The answer, of course, is yes.
If he were doing his job properly, by April last year, for example, he would have been ceaselessly reviled for constantly challenging the honesty of the government and monotonously questioning the existence of WMD in Iraq, for constantly harping on and on abut Iraqis supposedly killed by Western sanctions, and he would have been condemned by Blair, Straw and co as a fanatical, naive apologist for Saddam's crimes.

That's a useful rule of thumb, I think.

Posted by Daism |

Johann Hari has doubts

2004-04-15T00:29:00.000+01:00

Johann confessed today that he had a week of doubt about whether he was right about Iraq. It seems that, after a week in the wilderness, he convinced himself that he was right after all for two reasons: (1) a dubious prediction that Saddam would have killed 70,000 people in the last year had we not intervened, and (2) his often cited exiled Iraqi friends convinced him that Iraqis would once again welcome the occupiers once they had water and electricity.

The first point strikes me as being pretty sick. If that's to be used as a justification for the war, he seems to be saying that it's ok that the coalition killed tens of thousands because deaths haven't yet exceeded the 70,000 benchmark. And that's assuming the estimate is reliable.
Looking at reports by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, there's no mention of such a high figure. In fact political murders under Saddam Hussein throughout the nineties appear to run into hundreds per year (nowhere near Johann's figure). I think there must be many people waiting for him to justify that figure.
By contrast, according to Iraq Body Count, the invasion and occupation have so far caused 10,000 reported civilian deaths. Since the coalition doesn't do body counts, who know's what the true figure is. I'd guess, including non-reported civilian deaths, it's about double that. Including military deaths, possibly double again. I guess we'll never know...(in itself a tragedy of this whole dirty business).
In any case, in that light Hari's first justification is absurd.

Hari's second point is one he makes over and over: he has Iraqi friends who convince him that invading Iraq was the only way. Without knowing anything about his friends, this is a bit of a tricky one. However, it strikes me as not the most reliable way to decide the rights and wrongs of going to war since exiles are always going to be deeply emotionally involved. I think if we talked to Iranians who had it cosy under the Shah (the tiny minority that did) and who are now exiles in the west, I would imagine that many of them would advocate invading Iran. A similar story with exiled Cubans.
The crux of it anyway, is that Hari would justify invading a country because he felt, with virtually no evidence, that the people of that country would welcome being invaded. Again, an untenable position.

Posted by Daism |

Mark Thomas on trial

2004-04-15T00:20:00.000+01:00

Mark Thomas was on trial today for allegedly causing 80 pounds worth of criminal damage to a minibus [Independent story by Ciar Byrne]. He and three others chained themselves to the minibus which was carrying delegates from BAE Systems to the Defence Systems Exhibitions International (DSEI) in London's Docklands last September.
What more evidence to we need that the extablishment of this country supports profit over people? Mark's attempt to prevent the killing and maiming of unpeople throughout the world results in him (rather than the people proliferating the arms trade) being put on trial for scratching the bumber of a car. Good luck Mark!

Posted by Daism |

Advertising

2004-04-12T22:52:00.000+01:00

A great quotation on advertising posted today on the Medialens chat board:

“My name is Octave… I’m an advertising executive… I pollute the universe. I’m the guy who sells you shit. Who makes you dream of things you’ll never have… when, after painstakingly saving, you manage to buy the car of your dreams… I will already have made it look out of date. I’m three trends ahead, and I make sure you’re always frustrated… No one in my profession actually wants you to be happy, because happy people don’t spend.” (Frederic Beigbeder, £6.99, 2002, Picador, London, p. 5)

Posted by Daism |

Email exchange between David Edwards (Medialens) and Alan Rusbridger (Guardian editor)

2004-04-12T17:43:00.000+01:00

It's revealing that Rusbridger seems more concerned about competing with rivals than providing balanced news reports.

DE: Alan

Your front cover today [of US Marines carrying an injured colleague] was so wrong. This should have been the picture [of a dead Iraq child from Aljazeera] - no words, just this. A dead Iraqi child captures perfectly the nature of the West's relationship with Iraq over the past 15 years - war, bombing, sanctions, more war...

Who has paid the price?

Best wishes

David

AR: You have t advantage over me.... Have been away and have not seen t paper and don't know what's on the front page! Happy easter. AR

DE: Your paper shows US troops carrying an injured colleague. The Indy shows an Iraqi beating a dead body beside a burnt out convoy. I find the emphasis amazing given that 450 Iraqis lie dead in Falljua alone, and 10 Iraqis are dying for every 1 "coalition" loss.

Best wishes

David

AR: But there again compare this morning's guardian (death toll hits 600) with indie (british hostage freed) or times and tel (british hostage freed in iraq). Swings and easter roundabouts.... AR

DE: Yes, swings and roundabouts, but in the same ballpark. What's been staggering is the level of media indifference to the slaughter of vast numbers of Iraqis. It's like a superpower army is waging high-tech war on city slums - so what! Amazing! The plight of a dozen or so Western hostages has been given far more, and far more emotive, coverage.

On March 12, your leader read: "It was like a modern version of the gruesome wartime images painted by Goya. A Spanish commuter train torn apart. A headless body lying on its front. A three-year-old child burned from head to foot. Amputated legs and arms scattered on station platforms, pieces of human flesh on the road..." and so on.

There's been nothing comparable to this about the far worse slaughter in Falluja. And it's not by foreign terrorists - it's by +our+ alliance.

There's a real problem here - Iraqi deaths just don't matter as much as Western deaths to even our best media; it's a horribly consistent theme. A lot of their suffering, and our suffering, is rooted in this kind of prejudicial compassion. That's the whole message of Easter, isn't it?

Best wishes

David

Posted by Daism |

"Divide and rule could only tear us apart"

2004-04-12T15:04:00.000+01:00

There's a worrying trend within the coalition of diverting attention away from attacks on Americans, and towards attacks by Iraqis on Iraqis. Both Geoff Hoon and coalition spokesman Dan Senor yesterday suggested that this was the true cause of instability. In reality this doesn't seem to be the case at all. In fact the opposite seems to be happening - there appears to be growing solidarity been the different shia factions and between the sunni and shia.

There's also been a lot of talk of the possibility of civil war if the coalition withdraws. Yet the evidence for this happening is minimal.

The Americans need an excuse for an indefinite military presence (which seems like their intention). Perhaps in stirring up animosity between Iraqis, they believe they will achieve this. This is the well known colonial tactic of divide and rule which the British used to great effect in maintaining control of the empire. Many Indians believe that the animosity between the hindus and muslims, which led to the terrible massacres during partition, was fueled by the British.

For the time being, if this is truly American policy, it looks like it has back-fired badly.

Posted by Daism |

Iraq, America's Lebanon

2004-04-12T02:21:00.000+01:00

The resemblance between our invasion of Lebanon and America's invasion of Iraq is amazing. We wanted to create a new order in Lebanon; they wanted to create a new order in Iraq. Within a short time, in both cases, the Shia had woken up and the invading armies became targets of attack. We pulled out without achieving a thing and Bush is still there, mired in a sea of blood from which no good will come. If I were him, I'd send Saddam Hussein back to Iraq - he would know how to sort this mess out in no time.
Commentator in Haaretz - Israel

Posted by Daism |

The courageous Americans lay seige to Falluja

2004-04-11T21:25:00.000+01:00

"I would say more than 600 have been killed, but the number may not be absolutely accurate because many families have already buried their dead in their gardens," Rafa Hayad al-Issawi, the director of Falluja's hospital

Posted by Daism |

Unbelievable Straw

2004-04-09T17:40:00.000+01:00

A year to the day after the toppling of Saddam Hussein's statue in Baghdad, and Jack Straw is still blaming him for everything wrong in Iraq:

Mr Straw said "the lid of the pressure cooker has come off," but he blamed events on the Saddam regime's legacy.

"Some of the tensions and pressures which were there, and would have come out in any event, have to a degree been directed towards the coalition."

Look in the mirror Mr Straw!

Posted by Daism |

US retaliation

2004-04-08T23:34:00.000+01:00

The lack of any form of subtlety in the American response to the Falluja killings has surprised no one. But the heavy-handedness of the retaliation has surely got to be counter-productive even on American terms. 300 Iraqis killed so far in just three days, and not just militants: Al-Jazeera is showing graphic images of children killed and maimed by American violence.

According to Rumsfeld, the militants are "thugs, gangs and terrorists". So what then, according to Rumsfeld, constitutes a legitimate uprising? This whole war was supposed to be about liberation, but are the Iraqis not allowed to try to liberate themselves?

It's starting to become a little unclear just which Iraqis exactly we are supposed to be liberating. First the enemy was Saddam Hussein. After his fall it was the Saddam loyalists or just random "terrorists". The problem was the so-called Sunni triangle. Then the Shias became another enemy. As I write there are uprisings in Falluja, Ramadi, Baghdad, Karbala, Kut, Amarah, Nasiriya, and Basra. The towns of Falluja, Kut and Nasiriya are no longer under coalition control. Around 35 coalition troops have been killed in about three days and Japanese and Korean civilians have been taken hostage.
But never fear, the uprisings will surely be crushed in the manner of....errr....Saddam Hussein?

Posted by Daism |

News, Iraq, terror, etc.

2004-04-05T00:39:00.000+01:00

- Observer story on secret pact between Bush and Blair nine days after 9/11 to go to war with Iraq.

- A bloody day in Iraq [BBC story]. Loads killed and wounded on all sides; according to the BBC the cause was clashes with shia supporters of Moqtada Sadr.

- Cornered Madrid bombing terrorists blow themselves up [BBC story]

Posted by Daism |

Naomi Klein in Baghdad

2004-04-04T15:10:00.000+01:00

Article in The Nation on the current situation in Baghdad. Even the most optimistic Iraqis are wavering. Article 39 of the new Iraqi constitution opens the ecomony to 100% buy up by foreign companies - a model which, according to Noam Chomsky, has proven disastrous for the economies of other countries on which it was been imposed.

Posted by Daism |

Colin Powell UN presentation "mistake"

2004-04-04T01:46:00.000+01:00

Commentators here are shocked and stunned by Colin Powell's admission that his evidence presented to the security council before the war was less than solid [BBC story]. Perhaps now is good time to recall what Medialens (and others who didn't have their heads firmly wedged up Bush's arse) thought of the presentation at the time [Media Lens Alert: Blair's Betrayal Part 1 - The Newsnight Debate - Dismantling The Case For War].

Powell's anthrax powder (or was it his personal stash of charlie...???)

Professor Anthony H. Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) discounts the possibility that any Iraqi anthrax produced in bulk prior to 1991 could still be effectively weaponised:

"Anthrax spores are extremely hardy and can achieve 65% to 80% lethality against untreated patients for years. Fortunately, Iraq does not seem to have produced dry, storable agents and only seems to have deployed wet Anthrax agents, which have a relatively limited life."
('Iraq's Past and Future Biological Weapons Capabilities', 1998, p.13 http://www.csis.org/stratassessment/reports/iraq_bios.pd)

Readers will recall that Colin Powell held up a vial of dry powder anthrax in his presentation to the United Nations, referring to the anthrax attacks on the United States. This is the anthrax that Iraq "does not seem to have produced", according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Powell is regularly described in the media as a 'dove'.

Powell's mobile bio-labs

Fisk wasn't impressed... Certainly we don't trust Saddam but Secretary of State Powell's presentation was a mixture of awesomely funny recordings of Iraqi Republican Guard telephone intercepts à la Samuel Beckett that just might have been some terrifying little proof that Saddam really is conning the UN inspectors again, and some ancient material on the Monster of Baghdad's all too well known record of beastliness. I am still waiting to hear the Arabic for the State Department's translation of "Okay Buddy" – "Consider it done, Sir" – this from the Republican Guard's "Captain Ibrahim", for heaven's sake – and some dinky illustrations of mobile bio-labs whose lorries and railway trucks were in such perfect condition that they suggested the Pentagon didn't have much idea of the dilapidated state of Saddam's army.

...neither was Scott Ritter for that matter. But who ever listens to him? He was only chief UNSCOM weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998 after all...[znet article]

"He just hits you, hits you, hits you with circumstantial evidence, and he confuses people - and he lied, he lied to people, he misled people," Ritter said of Powell.

Ritter argued that the United States is giving weapons inspectors too little time to do their job.

He said many things in Powell's presentation should be properly investigated, such as a Nov 26 communications intercept in which two senior Iraqi military officers were overheard talking about the need to hide from U.N. weapons inspectors a "modified vehicle" made by an Iraqi company that Powell said is "well known to have been involved in prohibited weapons systems activity."

"What vehicle? I mean, obviously Colin Powell's concerned, he presented it, so let's find out what the vehicle is - but let's not bomb Iraq based upon that," Ritter said.

Posted by Daism |

Tanya Reinhart article

2004-04-03T12:35:00.000+01:00

As in Tienanmen Square

The Geneva convention determines that an occupied people have the right to fight for their liberation but not to use terror against civilians. Reinhart argues that by shooting "at sitting demonstrators, like in Tiennamen square", Israel leaves terror as the only option for the Palestinian people to struggle for their liberation.

Posted by Daism |

Massacre in Fallujah

2004-04-02T00:42:00.000+01:00

Not that I ever doubted it but yesterday's attrocities in Fullajah [Fisk article] are stark evidence of the way Iraqis view their supposed "liberation". For Paul Bremer, however, this was just a "slight uptick" in violence and that things overall are looking up. He's beginning to sound like the ex-Iraqi Information minister, "Comical" Ali, who kept trying to persuade us that they were winning the war, even when you could hear US tanks approaching in the background.

Posted by Daism |

Tony Benn on Democracy Now!

2004-03-30T00:50:00.000+01:00

Of the BBC, Benn says they are "...independent of government and of commercial pressures" I wonder what medialens would have to say about that.

Posted by Daism |

The capture of "Surdaaarm"

2004-03-28T20:17:00.000+01:00

I just remembered something I read a couple of weeks ago on a blog that made me laugh:

...The arrest of Saddam Hussein has profound consequences for many issues of great significance and has had a dramatic impact on events in Iraq - a lot of things to give careful thought to. And yet, i doubt that i'm alone when i confess that my first thought was "Whoa - he's got a beard." I really should remember for future major historical events to try and make my first thought something interesting. September 11th, the fall of the Berlin Wall etc. - can hardly remember my first reaction, but it was nothing great....[post by Alex]

Posted by Daism |

Chomsky responds to Monbiot

2004-03-28T12:10:00.000+01:00

Chomsky's response to Monbiot's "A Charter to intervene." Monbiot's article is interesting but full of obvious flaws, namely:
- the failure to interpret Iraq surveys in the light of the ending of sanctions (as raised in other posts below)
- the paradox that the powerful nations would have to all agree to Monbiot's charter in order for it to be implemented. If they were to agree to it, then it probably wouldn't be necessary
- nations militarily powerful enough to intervene, tend not to be without "an obvious interest in the outcome"
- misinterpretation of the Hippocratic principle (as pointed out by Chomsky)

Posted by Daism |

US security council veto and the murder of Sheikh Yassin

2004-03-28T00:59:00.000Z

For how long will the denial continue? US backing of Israel's every move is surely obvious to all. It's about time that +serious+ international pressure was put on the US to order Israel to get out of Palestine. Here's a recent list of US vetoes in relation to Israel:

RECENT US VETOES ON ISRAEL
Oct 2003: Draft resolution seeking to bar Israel from extending security barrier
Sep 2003: Draft resolution against Israeli threats to "remove" Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat
Dec 2002: Draft resolution condemning the killing of UN employees in the West Bank
Mar 2001: Draft to set up UN force to protect Palestinian civilians

(List and BBC news story)

Posted by Daism |

The Iraqi poll

2004-03-27T01:53:00.000Z

The first time I've read this opinion in the mainstream, albeit a Guardian commentary:

The poll also fails to take into account the UN's lifting of sanctions in May. These restricted access to food, medicine and basic materials. Perhaps it was the end of sanctions, more than the end of Saddam, that improved Iraqis' "day-to-day lives". (Brendan O'Neill in the Guardian)

Why did it take so long for someone to state the obvious?

Posted by Daism |

Bewildering Bush

2004-03-27T01:30:00.000Z

An initial thought...

Not that I think Bush ever comes up with any of these ideas (or anything significant for that matter), but this is seriously taking the piss! US President George W Bush has sparked a political row by making a joke about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. (BBC story) Apart from this being outrageous and insensitive, I can't figure out whether it represents immense stupidity or if this is some kind of well-calculated stunt to divert attention from the failure of the justification of the war.

Posted by Daism |

Did the White House ignore the Al Qa'ida threat?

2004-03-25T13:46:00.000Z

The Kurds

2004-03-25T13:01:00.000Z

In Chapter 14 of Life of Pi, Yann Martel writes:

It is interesting to note that the lion that is the most amenable to the circus trainer's tricks is the one with the lowest social standing in the pride, the omega animal. It has the most to gain from a close relationship with the super-alpha trainer. It is not only a matter of extra treats. A close relationship will also mean protection from the other members of the pride. It is this compliant animal, to the public no different from the others in size and apparent ferocity, that will be the start of the show, while the trainer leaves the beta and gamma lions, more cantankerous subordinates, sitting on their colourful barrels on the edge of the ring.
The same is true of other circus animals and is also seen in zoos. Socially inferior animals are the ones that make the most strenuous, resourceful efforts to get to know their keepers. They prove to be the ones most faithful to them, most in need of their company, least likely to challenge them or be difficult. The phenomenon has been observed with big cats, bison, deer, wild sheep, monkeys and many other animals. It is a fact commonly known in the trade.

I thought this was a good analogy for the compliance of Iraqi Kurds at the moment with the super-alpha American lion trainer. While the Kurds put on a good show of democracy and cooperation for the world, the cantankerous sunnis and shias appear to be undermining the transition to Iraqi self-rule.

Posted by Daism |

2004-03-20T22:12:00.000Z

Who will Emperor Murdoch choose for primeminister? Typically, so-called British democracy comes down to the courting of Rupert Murdoch by Labour and the Tories like flies around shit...BBC story

Posted by Daism |

2004-03-16T15:15:00.000Z

Email to the BBC's Richard Sambrook:

The findings of the recent Iraq survey conducted by Oxford Research International are indeed positive. The problem I have with the BBC's reporting of these findings is that they are made out to justify the invasion. In none of the BBC's news reports that I have seen today has there been any mention of the decade of sanctions imposed by the US and UK on Iraq. If we are to believe the various United Nations' and human rights organisations' reports, the effects of sanctions caused some of the worst suffering on Iraqis in recent history. Indeed chief UN humanitarian coordinator Dennis Halliday resigned over them, describing the sanctions as "genocidal".
Would you not agree that the ending of sanctions had at least a part to play in Iraqis' optimism about the invasion?
Given that we could have ended sanctions without going to war, and that Saddam Hussein is still more popular in Iraq than either the Americans or their puppet Ahmed Chalabi, don't you think that it is essential to mention sanctions as a vital component to the interpretation of the survey's results?

Posted by Daism |

2004-03-16T12:10:00.000Z

Some news links

Spain's new prime minister, the Socialist José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero accuses Bush and Blair: "Mr Blair and Mr Bush must do some reflection _ you can't organise a war with lies"
Link to story in the Guardian

|

An opinion poll suggests most Iraqis feel their lives have improved since the war in Iraq began about a year ago.
Link to BBC story
The poll was carried out by Oxford Research International

|

Both Venezuela and Jamaica have refused to recognise the new Haiti government Link to BBC story

Posted by Daism |