Wednesday, March 26, 2003

Yet more on the massacre of the American mythology Iraqi people:

  1. Do you think this massacre would be happening if the Americans and British regarded the Iraqis as white people? In other words, would they attempt to massacre and terrify a country comprised mainly of white people in order to steal the assets of the country and enslave the population? The British call them 'wogs', and the Americans have the particularly evocative term, reaching back into American history, of 'sand niggers'. The whole point is that you can treat these people worse than you would treat animals only if you consider them to be subhuman. The people in the next countries on the hit list - Syria, Iran, North Korea, Cuba - all suffer from the same problem of being insufficiently pale.

  2. Much has been made in the American press about how Michael Moore's clever anti-war Academy Award acceptance speech was booed by the crowd at the Oscars. The truth, as always, is quite different, and the whole appearance of lack of support appears to be a studio trick. Moore's speech is the first time any public dissent has been shown in the oligarchical U. S. media (and they showed it only as they had no choice, and cut him off as soon as they could).

  3. One of the arguments that American gun fetishists use is that widespread personal ownership of firearms somehow prevents government tyranny. I note that just about everybody in Iraq seems to be armed (that American helicopter was apparently shot down with one shot by a peasant using an old hunting rifle - do you think the military contractors who supplied that helicopter will receive any punishment for charging millions of dollars for such an obviously useless piece of crap that has allowed its passengers to become POW's?). So does this extremely widespread ownership of guns prove that ownership of guns does not save a people from tyranny? Or, contrary to what we've been constantly told, do Iraqis not consider Saddam to be a tyrant?

  4. The media seems to have no trouble finding Iraqis who are still under the rule of Saddam and who don't seem to mind being identified and stating that they don't like Saddam. This again doesn't jibe with the idea that Iraqis are all quaking in fear of being tortured to death by the evil dictator. Could it be that the average Iraqi knows that he or she isn't in any danger as long as he or she avoids actively trying to overthrow the regime? Is it possible that Iraqis have more real freedom now than they will under the regime that their 'liberators' have planned for them? Is it possible that knowledge of this is behind the surprising - to the Americans at least - resistance of the Iraqis? Could it be that the wonderful story of how Americans just want to give Iraqis the gift of American democracy and save them from tyranny is another huge lie? I have read some Americans expressing concern for the wellbeing of the fellow who apparently is blogging from Baghdad, as if his comments will land him in an Iraqi prison. He, on the other hand, doesn't obviously censor himself at all, and is rightly more concerned about being blown to bits by one of the bombs of his 'liberators'.

  5. I think that a British group should take that picture of the Iraqi girl who has had her foot blown off, enlarge it, mount it on a poster, and ensure that for the rest of his pathetic life Tony Blair can never go outside of his house without constantly seeing it (for more pictures see here). I'd suggest the same treatment for George Bush, except 1) the Secret Service would probably kill anyone who tried it; and 2) George Bush would probably just find the picture funny.

  6. The Americans have nothing to worry about the safety of their POW's. Particularly as at least one of them is a woman, we've gotten a hint of American orientalist fears of what these swarthy men might do. The Iraqis, unlike the Americans, are too poor and powerless to afford to lie to themselves. They know they will eventually be enslaved or slaughtered by the Americans. I imagine they are trying to prove to their captives just how nice they can be, in the hopes they won't be too badly hurt when the crusaders arrive.

  7. Just how many times now has it been definitively announced that Basra has been captured? Are we in double digits yet? How many times has it been announced that Umm Qasr has been captured? When will the American military and media stop this constant lying? What's really scary is that if the Americans don't start winning soon, they'll have to make up some excuse to use their nuclear weapons.


0 comments: