-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Pilger / No Remembrance, No Remorse For The Fallen Of Iraq / Nov 14
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:07:38 -0800 (PST)
From: ZNet Commentaries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sustainers PLEASE note:

--> You can change your email address or cc data or temporarily turn off 
mail delivery via:
https://www.zmag.org/sustainers/members

--> If you pass this comment along to others -- periodically but not 
repeatedly -- please explain that Commentaries are a premium sent to 
Sustainer Donors of Z/ZNet and that to learn more folks can consult ZNet 
at http://www.zmag.org

--> Sustainer Forums Login:
https://www.zmag.org/sustainers/forums

Today's commentary:
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2007-11/14pilger.cfm

==================================

ZNet Commentary
No Remembrance, No Remorse For The Fallen Of Iraq November 14, 2007
By John Pilger

On Remembrance Day 2007, the great and the good bowed their heads at the 
Cenotaph. Generals, politicians, newsreaders, football managers and 
stock-market traders wore their poppies. Hypocrisy was a presence. No 
one mentioned Iraq. No one uttered the slightest remorse for the fallen 
of that country. No one read the forbidden list. The forbidden list 
documents, without favour, the part the British state and its court have 
played in the destruction of Iraq. Here it is:

1 Holocaust denial

On 25 October, Dai Davies MP asked Gordon Brown about civilian deaths in 
Iraq. Brown passed the question to the Foreign Secretary, David 
Miliband, who passed it to his junior minister, Kim Howells, who 
replied: "We continue to believe that there are no comprehensive or 
reliable figures for deaths since March 2003." This was a deception. In 
October 2006, the Lancet published research by Johns Hopkins University 
in the US and al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad which calculated 
that 655,000 Iraqis had died as a result of the Anglo-American invasion. 
A Freedom of Information search revealed that the government, while 
publicly dismissing the study, secretly backed it as comprehensive and 
reliable. The chief scientific adviser to the Ministry of Defence, Sir 
Roy Anderson, called its methods "robust" and "close to best practice". 
Other senior governments officials secretly acknowledged the survey's 
"tried and tested way of measuring mortality in conflict zones". Since 
then, the British research polling agency, Opinion Research Business, 
has extrapolated a figure of 1.2 million deaths in Iraq. Thus, the scale 
of death caused by the British and US governments may well have 
surpassed that of the Rwanda genocide, making it the biggest single act 
of mass murder of the late 20th century and the 21st century.

2 Looting

The undeclared reason for the invasion of Iraq was the convergent 
ambitions of the neocons, or neo-fascists, in Washington and the 
far-right regimes of Israel. Both groups had long wanted Iraq crushed 
and the Middle East colonised to US and Israeli designs. The initial 
blueprint for this was the 1992 "Defence Planning Guidance", which 
outlined America's post-Cold War plans to dominate the Middle East and 
beyond. Its authors included Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and Colin 
Powell, architects of the 2003 invasion. Following the invasion, Paul 
Bremer, a neocon fanatic, was given absolute civil authority in Baghdad 
and in a series of decrees turned the entire future Iraqi economy over 
to US corporations. As this was lawless, the corporate plunderers were 
given immunity from all forms of prosecution. The Blair government was 
fully complicit and even objected when it looked as if UK companies 
might be excluded from the most profitable looting. British officials 
were awarded functionary colonial posts. A petroleum "law" will allow, 
in effect, foreign oil companies to approve their own contracts over 
Iraq's vast energy resources. This will complete the greatest theft 
since Hitler stripped his European conquests.

3 Destroying a nation's health

In 1999, I interviewed Dr Jawad Al-Ali, a cancer specialist at Basra 
city hospital. "Before the Gulf War," he said, "we had only three or 
four deaths in a month from cancer. Now it's 30 to 35 patients dying 
every month. Our studies indicate that 40 to 48 per cent of the 
population in this area will get cancer." Iraq was then in the grip of 
an economic and humanitarian siege, initiated and driven by the US and 
Britain. The result, wrote Hans von Sponeck, the then chief UN 
humanitarian official in Baghdad, was "genocidal . . . practically an 
entire nation was subjected to poverty, death and destruction of its 
physical and mental foundations". Most of southern Iraq remains polluted 
with the toxic debris of British and American explosives, including 
uranium- 238 shells. Iraqi doctors pleaded in vain for help, citing the 
levels of leukaemia among children as the highest seen since Hiroshima. 
Professor Karol Sikora, chief of the World Health Organisation's cancer 
programme, wrote in the BMJ: "Requested radiotherapy equipment, 
chemo-therapy drugs and analgesics are consistently blocked by United 
States and British advisers [to the Sanctions Committee]." In 1999, Kim 
Howells, then trade minister, effectively banned the export to Iraq of 
vaccines that would protect mostly children from diphtheria, tetanus and 
yellow fever, which, he said, "are capable of being used in weapons of 
mass destruction".

Since 2003, apart from PR exercises for the embedded media, the British 
occupiers have made no attempt to re-equip and resupply hospitals that, 
prior to 1991, were regarded as the best in the Middle East. In July, 
Oxfam reported that 43 per cent of Iraqis were living in "absolute 
poverty". Under the occupation, malnutrition rates among children have 
spiralled to 28 per cent. A secret Defence Intelligence Agency document, 
"Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities", reveals that the civilian water 
supply was deliberately targeted. As a result, the great majority of the 
population has neither access to running water nor sanitation - in a 
country where such basic services were once as universal as in Britain. 
"The mortality of children in Basra has increased by nearly 30 per cent 
compared to the Saddam Hussein era," said Dr Haydar Salah, a 
paediatrician at Basra children's hospital. "Children are dying daily 
and no one is doing anything to help them." In January this year, nearly 
100 leading British doctors wrote to Hilary Benn, then international 
development secretary, describing how children were dying because 
Britain had not fulfilled its obligations as an occupying power under UN 
Security Council Resolution 1483. Benn refused to see them.

4 Destroying a society

The UN estimates that 100,000 Iraqis are fleeing the country every 
month. The refugee crisis has now overtaken that of Darfur as the most 
catastrophic on earth. Half of Iraq's doctors have gone, along with 
engineers and teachers. The most literate society in the Middle East is 
being dismantled, piece by piece. Out of more than four million 
displaced people, Britain last year refused the majority of more than 
1,000 Iraqis who applied to come here, while removing more "illegal" 
Iraqi refugees than any other European country. Thanks to 
tabloid-inspired legislation, Iraqis in Britain are often destitute, 
with no right to work and no support. They sleep and scavenge in parks. 
The government, says Amnesty, "is trying to starve them out of the 
country".

5 Propaganda

"See in my line of work," said George W Bush, "you got to keep repeating 
things over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult 
the propaganda." Standing outside 10 Downing Street on 9 April 2003, the 
BBC's then political editor, Andrew Marr, reported the fall of Baghdad 
as a victory speech. Tony Blair, he told viewers, "said they would be 
able to take Baghdad without a bloodbath, and that in the end the Iraqis 
would be celebrating. And on both of those points he has been proved 
conclusively right. And it would be entirely ungracious, even for his 
critics, not to acknowledge that tonight he stands as a larger man and a 
stronger prime minister as a result." In the United States, similar 
travesties  passed as journalism. The difference was that leading 
American journalists began to consider the consequences of the role they 
had played in the build-up to the invasion. Several told me they 
believed that had the media challenged and investigated Bush's and 
Blair's lies, instead of echoing and amplifying them, the invasion might 
not have happened. A European study found that, of the major western 
television networks, the BBC permitted less coverage of dissent than all 
of them. A second study found that the BBC consistently gave credence to 
government propaganda that weapons of mass destruction existed. Unlike 
the Sun, the BBC has credibility - as does, or did, the Observer.

On 14 October 2001, the London Observer's front page said: "US hawks 
accuse Iraq over anthrax".  This was entirely false. Supplied by US 
intelligence, it was part of the Observer's staunchly pro-war coverage, 
which included claiming a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda, for which 
there was no credible evidence and which betrayed the paper's honourable 
past. One report over two pages was headlined: "The Iraqi connection". 
It, too, came from "intelligence sources" and was rubbish. The reporter, 
David Rose, concluded his barren inquiry with a heartfelt plea for an 
invasion. "There are occasions in history," he wrote, "when the use of 
force is both right and sensible." Rose has since written his mea culpa, 
including in these pages, confessing how he was used. Other journalists 
have still to admit how they were manipulated by their own credulous 
relationship with established power.

These days, Iraq is reported as if it is exclusively a civil war, with a 
US military "surge" aimed at bringing peace to the scrapping natives. 
The perversity of this is breathtaking. That sectarian violence is the 
product of a vicious divide-and-conquer policy is beyond doubt. As for 
the largely media myth of al-Qaeda, "most of the [American] pros will 
tell you", wrote Seymour Hersh, "that the foreign fighters are a couple 
per cent, and then they're sort of leaderless". That a poorly armed, 
audacious resistance has not only pinned down the world's most powerful 
army but has agreed an anti-sectarian, anti al-Qaeda agenda, which 
opposes attacks on civilians and calls for free elections, is not news.

6 The next blood letting

In the 1960s and 1970s, British governments secretly expelled the 
population of Diego Garcia, an island in the Indian Ocean whose people 
have British nationality. Women and children were loaded on to vessels 
resembling slave ships and dumped in the slums of Mauritius, after their 
homeland was given to the Americans for a military base. Three times, 
the High Court has found this atrocity illegal, calling it a defiance of 
the Magna Carta and the Blair government's refusal to allow the people 
to go home "outrageous" and "repugnant". The government continues to use 
endless recourse to appeal, at the taxpayers' expense, to prevent 
upsetting Bush. The cruelty of this matches the fact that not only has 
the US repeatedly bombed Iraq from Diego Garcia, but at "Camp Justice", 
on the island, "al-Qaeda suspects" are "rendered" and "tortured", 
according to the Washington Post. Now the US Air Force is rushing to 
upgrade hangar facilities on the island so that stealth bombers can 
carry 14-tonne "bunker busting" bombs in an attack on Iran. Orchestrated 
propaganda in the media is critical to the success of this act of 
international piracy.

On 22 May, the front page of the London Guardian carried the banner 
headline: "Iran's secret plan for summer offensive to force US out of 
Iraq". This was a tract of unalloyed propaganda based entirely on 
anonymous US official sources. Through-out the media, other drums have 
taken up the beat. "Iran's nuclear ambitions" slips effortlessly from 
newsreaders' lips, no matter that the International Atomic Energy Agency 
  refuted Washington's lies, no matter the echo of "Saddam's weapons of 
mass destruction", no matter that another bloodbath beckons.  Lest we 
forget.



_______________________________________________
FRIENDS mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sffreaks.org/mailman/listinfo/friends

Reply via email to