Thursday, May 12, 2005


I found this lovely little nugget from the Belgravia Dispatch which you can see in totality here:
"My first reaction to the capture of Saddam Hussein was both anger and disgust. Anger with the old dictator who could not even die honourably. He preferred to be captured by his old friends than to go down fighting, the one decent thing he could have done for his country.

I felt no pity for Saddam. He had killed some dear comrades of mine and imprisoned too many others, but the US had no right to do this. It was the responsibility of the Iraqi people.

I also felt disgust with the way in which the TV networks were covering this event. CNN and BBC World had become total propaganda networks, to such an extent that it must have made Berlusconi smile. Parading a captured prisoner in this fashion is the new model of imperialism. The latter-day equivalent of how barbarian chieftains were paraded in ancient Rome, prior to their execution."

Is there any way to describe how oddly this resonates in my ear? Saddam killed his friends, but nobody should have done anything about it? We are to respect the honor of Hussein and Iraq more than our interest in letting the baathists know that they were done for? How does THAT help the innocent iraqi people? This is the same sort of kowtowing to Arab machismo the Tariq Ali corner demands out of fear of the consequences; we are continually being threatened anyway, so how is it that protecting their sensibilities would stave off another WTC massacre?

Printed apparently in "counterpunch" (Alexander Cockburn's shrill, hysterical forum which as I recall commented that "the window of opportunity for proving that the WMD are in Iraq has closed now that Bagdahd airport is open to US airplanes" because they were getting ready to invent a conspiracy story about how if the WMD were found they were planted)this shows how really out to lunch Ali is.


Post a Comment

<< Home