From: Jim Yarker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: The Disinformation Campaign [WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]

Visit our website: HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------------------------

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4270014,00.html

The Guardian Thursday October 4, 2001 Analysis

The disinformation campaign
Western media follow a depressingly familiar formula when it comes to the
preparation of a nation for conflict
Phillip Knightley
The way wars are reported in the western media follows a depressingly
predictable pattern: stage one, the crisis; stage two, the demonisation of
the enemy's leader; stage three, the demonisation of the enemy as
individuals; and stage four, atrocities. At the moment we are at stages two
and three: efforts to show that not only Osama bin Laden and the Taliban are
fanatical and cruel but that most Afghans - even many Muslims - are as well.
We are already through stage one, the reporting of a crisis which
negotiations appear unable to resolve. Politicians, while calling for
diplomacy, warn of military retaliation. The media reports this as "We're on
the brink of war", or "War is inevitable".
News coverage concentrates on the build up of military force, and prominent
columnists and newspaper editorials urge war. But there are usually sizable
minorities of citizens concerned that all avenues for peace have not been
fully explored and although the mainstream media ignores or plays down their
protests, these have to be dampened down unless they gain strength.
We now enter stage two of the pattern - the demonisation of the enemy's
leader. Comparing the leader with Hitler is a good start because of the
instant images that Hitler's name provokes. So when George Bush Sr likened
Iraq's takeover of Kuwait with the Nazi blitzkrieg in Europe in the 1930s,
the media quickly took up the theme. Saddam Hussein was painted as a second
Hitler, hated by his own people and despised in the Arab world. Equally, in
the Kosovo conflict, the Serbs were portrayed as Nazi thugs intent on
genocide and words like "Auschwitz-style furnaces" and "Holocaust" were
used.
The crudest approach is to suggest that the leader is insane. Saddam Hussein
was "a deranged psychopath", Milosevic was mad, and the Spectator recently
headlined an article on Osama bin Laden: "Inside the mind of the maniac".
Those who publicly question any of this can expect an even stronger burst of
abuse. In the Gulf war they were labelled "friends of terrorists, ranters,
nutty, hypocrites, animals, barbarians, mad, traitors, unhinged, appeasers
and apologists". The Mirror called peace demonstrators "misguided, twisted
individuals always eager to comfort and support any country but their own.
They are a danger to all us - the enemy within." Columnist Christopher
Hitchens, in last week's Spectator article, Damn the doves, says that
intellectuals who seek to understand the new enemy are no friends of peace,
democracy or human life. The third stage in the pattern is the demonisation
not only of the leader but of his people. The simplest way of doing this is
the atrocity story. The problem is that although many atrocity stories are
true - after all, war itself is an atrocity - many are not.
Take the Kuwaiti babies story. Its origins go back to the first world war
when British propaganda accused the Germans of tossing Belgian babies into
the air and catching them on their bayonets. Dusted off and updated for the
Gulf war, this version had Iraqi soldiers bursting into a modern Kuwaiti
hospital, finding the premature babies ward and then tossing the babies out
of incubators so that the incubators could be sent back to Iraq.
The story, improbable from the start, was first reported by the Daily
Telegraph in London on September 5 1990. But the story lacked the human
element; it was an unverified report, there were no pictures for television
and no interviews with mothers grieving over dead babies. That was soon
rectified. An organisation calling itself Citizens for a Free Kuwait
(financed by the Kuwaiti government in exile) had signed a $10m contract
with the giant American public relations company, Hill & Knowlton, to
campaign for American military intervention to oust Iraq from Kuwait. The
Human Rights Caucus of the US Congress was meeting in October and Hill &
Knowlton arranged for a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl to tell the babies' story
before the congressmen. She did it brilliantly, choking with tears at the
right moment, her voice breaking as she struggled to continue. The
congressional committee knew her only as "Nayirah" and the television
segment of her testimony showed anger and resolution on the faces of the
congressmen listening to her. President Bush referred to the story six times
in the next five weeks as an example of the evil of Saddam's regime.
In the Senate debate whether to approve military action to force Saddam out
of Kuwait, seven senators specifically mentioned the incubator babies
atrocity and the final margin in favour of war was just five votes. John R
Macarthur's study of propaganda in the war says that the babies atrocity was
a definitive moment in the campaign to prepare the American public for the
need to go to war.
It was not until nearly two years later that the truth emerged. The story
was a fabrication and a myth, and Nayirah, the teenage Kuwaiti girl, coached
and rehearsed by Hill & Knowlton for her appearance before the Congressional
Committee, was in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United
States. By the time Macarthur revealed this, the war was won and over and it
did not matter any more.
So what should we make of the stories in the British press this week about
torture in Afghanistan? A defector from the Taliban's secret police told a
reporter in Quetta, Pakistan, that he was commanded to "find new ways of
torture so terrible that the screams will frighten crows from their nests".
The defector then listed a series of chilling forms of torture that he said
he and his fellow officers developed. "Nowhere else in the world has such
barbarity and cruelty as Afghanistan."
The story rings false and defectors of all kinds are well-known for telling
interviewers what they think they want to hear. On the other hand, it might
be true. The trouble is, how can we tell? The media demands that we trust it
but too often that trust has been betrayed.
o Phillip Knightley is the author of The First Casualty, a history of war
reporting (Prion).
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001


_________________________________________________
 
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki
Phone +358-40-7177941
Fax +358-9-7591081
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
 
General class struggle news:
 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
subscribe mails to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Geopolitical news:
 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________

Reply via email to