So You Think You Know Whats Really Going On In Iraq?

#1 (external - login to view)
It is a lot worse than we are made to believe. Somebody in America is dictating what American media can report on this. They only show us what is "approved" to see, not the real atrocities that are going on there everyday.

If "W" can stop the media from showing coffins returning home, It begs the question, What else are we being prevented from seeing?
Here's a possibly interersting conjecture for you. There are many instances of male Sunni youth being rounded up by the U.S, military, private malitia and Iraqi police for no apparent reason. It is my view that these youth are being processed through detention camps for complete identification so that there will be a file of all potential enemies to the new American client state. Reminds me of the German Jews from 1934 to 1938.
Reverend Blair
There is little doubt that's going on to at least some extent, Pete...likely a large extent given the new technologies. The mistreatment and torture is rumoured to be continuing as well, although now outside of the official system.

Iraq's newly elected officials have also been unable to form a workable government, which leaves the US even more in charge than they would be of the usual client state.
Jo Canadian
There's lots that we're not knowing about. Has anyone seen how the occupying forces treat their democratically elected officials?


...a US army private threw an assembly member’s identity card in his face, pulled him from his car, handcuffed him and dragged him away in front of stunned onlookers. (external - login to view)
Reverend Blair
That's what imperial armies do. Should we be surprised?
Jo Canadian

That's what imperial armies do. Should we be surprised?

-er I guess not.

It should be assumed that crap like this goes on, unfortunately many don't realize what it's like and the media doesn't help very much either in informing the public.
Reverend Blair
I see the problem more and more as being one of people refusing to see though, Jo. That was in Iraq and involved a member of government...a rather blatant example of imperialism. The same thing happens all over the developing world to people in factories, on farms, and just trying to scratch out a living from the dirt though.

That is where the attitude that enabled the US soldiers' action ultimately came from. there is a feeling of entitlement that comes from western/northern nations that encourages that kind of attitude.
Jo Canadian
Yeah, I kind of see it now...Imperialism lets you bend/change the rules while others are trying to play with them if the game's not going your way.

UN bows to US pressure and ousts top human rights investigator after he releases report critical of US. To add insult to injury, the investigator was an American. (external - login to view)

yeah, progress... (external - login to view)
Reverend Blair

Yeah, I kind of see it now...Imperialism lets you bend/change the rules while others are trying to play with them if the game's not going your way.

That's the game. There have been rumours swirling about US abuses since they landed in Afghanistan. They will not allow themselves to be investigated.
Has anyone been watching The Passionate Eye? They are airing a 3 part documentary from UK called "The Power of Nightmares".

"The Power of Nightmares explores how the idea that we are threatened by a hidden and organized terrorist network is an illusion. Director Adam Curtis theorizes that it's a myth that has spread unquestioned through politics, the security services and the international media."

I haven't seen the first 2 parts of the series, but part 3 airs tonight. It looks pretty interesting:
You just starting to figure this out Laika?
Can you imagine if we had joined this ill fated coalition? For all the mess that Jean Cretien caused, I'm glad he said no to Iraq. How many Canadians would have lost their lives, cause you know the Yanks would have used to test the water and as bait. Just like we were used at Dieppe!
Reverend Blair
Everybody should watch The Power of Nightmares if they get a chance. It shows the history of neo-conservatism and points out just how long these bastards have been lying to us.
Quote: Originally Posted by mrmom2

You just starting to figure this out Laika?

Not at all!! I just thought this documentary would be relevant to anyone who is interested in this discussion.

I caught part three last night, I really wished I had seen the others; although the link I posted provides a pretty good synopsis. Great documentary. I would encourage anyone to check it out if they can.
Its a excellent documentary Laika, but so is the passionate eye, they have eye opening documentaries
Reverend Blair
It will be on again, Laika. That's the reality of the modern media...everything plays 20 or thirty times.
I think not
The Power of Bad Television

The BBC’s bizarre new documentary on terrorism and neoconservatism.

By Clive Davis
Even before the first episode went on air, the BBC's new documentary series, The Power of Nightmares was being showered with superlatives. "Brilliant," "fascinating," chirped the chorus of bien-pensant admirers. The Guardian, inevitably, was at the forefront: "This intelligent, scintillating series is a must for anyone who has the remotest interest in what is going on the world." Even the conservative Daily Telegraph joined in on Monday, heading its op-ed page with a column by the paper's political correspondent Rachel Sylvester, printed under the headline: "Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid . . . It's What Blair and [Home Secretary] Blunkett Want."
Thanks to Jim Geraghty's outraged response on the Kerry Spot, NRO readers will already have some idea of the arguments put forward in the series, written and produced by the award-winning film-maker Adam Curtis. The Power of Nightmares would have us believe that the international terrorist threat is a myth concocted by governments and orchestrated by a cabal of devious neoconservatives. Since the public has lost faith in ideology, politicians must now use fear in order to maintain their hold over the masses. Al Qaeda is a figment of our imagination; there are no sleeper cells, and talk of lethal dirty bombs is all so much radioactive hot air.
If that seems bizarre enough, the series also sets out to claim that the Islamists and the neocons are, in reality, soul mates. As Curtis explained in a magazine interview this week: "My original intention was to look at the neo-cons and then the radical Islamists. I was astonished to discover that they have the same philosophical roots. They both believe that the problem with modern society is that individuals question anything; by doing that they [those individuals] have already torn down God, that eventually they will tear down everything else and therefore they will have to be opposed."
This symbiotic relationship with Islamism will no doubt come as a surprise to the good folks at the American Enterprise Institute. It is a sign of how fevered political debate has become in Britain's media-land that such lurid, Michael Moore-ish notions are given a prime-time slot on the channel that once gave us Kenneth Clarke's Civilisation. BBC executives were nervous enough about the contents of Curtis's films to ban the showing of trailers in the immediate aftermath of the murder of the British hostage, Kenneth Bigley. But normal service was quickly resumed, blanketing the TV and radio airwaves with teasing clips juxtaposing fundamentalists and Cold Warriors.
After seeing a preview tape of the first installment of the three-part series, I can only say that Jim Geraghty's account — which was based on a Guardian report — was actually understated. The opening episode amounts to a ludicrously one-sided account of the rise of the neocons which manages to impute all manner of sinister motives to a tight-knit circle devoted to the teachings of Leo Strauss. In Curtis's world, it is Strauss, not Osama bin Laden, who is the real evil genius.
Slick editing and arty use of archive footage cannot hide the flimsiness of the concept. I am no expert on Strauss, but I know enough about him to be aware that much of his thinking was influenced by his first-hand observations of life in Weimar Germany. Curtis's narrative cleverly fails to mention this point, portraying Strauss and his followers as responding to the wickedness of American suburbia. The program is not short of American talking heads — Harvey Mansfield, Paul Weyrich, and Bill and Irving Kristol are among those taking part — but the editing of the interviews is manipulated to support Curtis's conspiracy theories. One of the most egregious examples is Curtis' portrayal of the Reagan-era arms build-up as the fruit of a devious "Team B" plot (supervised by Paul Wolfowitz and the eminent historian Richard Pipes) aimed at misleading the American public about the nuclear threat from the Soviet Union. While Pipes is allowed to present his arguments in the sketchiest of terms (he was, in effect, questioning the efficacy of the CIA long before it was fashionable), Curtis proceeds to rubbish him with the help of disarmament expert Anne Cahn, who concludes that the Harvard professor's claims were "fantasy." Pipes, perhaps the world's leading expert on Kremlin ideology, is left looking an amiable dunce. British viewers, unaware of his distinguished career, will be none the wiser. Pipes tells NRO in response to it all: "The allegations made by Ms. Cahn and others about Team B are so preposterous that I would be at a loss to answer them: they are similar to those made by the Holocaust deniers. They sort of leave you speechless."
Even odder is the treatment of Michael Ledeen. Curtis portrays the AEI maverick as the dupe of CIA "black" propaganda disseminated during the 1970s with the aim of portraying the Soviet Union as the coordinator of international terrorism. The program goes on to accuse Ledeen of using the dubious material in a bestselling book which subsequently convinced CIA director William Casey to over-rule his more cautious analysts and instigate a tougher line against Moscow.
There is one problem with Curtis's theory about Ledeen's book, The Terror Network: The Secret War of International Terror. It was written not by Ledeen, but by his friend, the investigative journalist Claire Sterling, whose death in 1995 was acknowledged on the floor of the Senate by one of her admirers, Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Ledeen was traveling in Spain this week. When I contacted him with a partial transcript of the program, he was understandably bemused: "Almost everything Claire said was borne out by the Stasi files," he told me. "The situation at the CIA in the '70s was very similar to what's happened over Iraq. The CIA was busy saying that the Soviets weren't involved in international terrorism. This at a time when the PLO actually had training camps in the Soviet Union."
Of course, nothing in the murky world of intelligence is ever straightforward. Nevertheless, British producers, hooked on Chomskyite visions of "Amerika" as the fount of all evil, are clearly not interested in even beginning to dig for the truth.

— Clive Davis writes for the Times of London and the Washington Times.

I saw this documentary 3 months ago, I would say at best it's thought provoking.
Reverend Blair
Everybody should see it. If nothing else, it reveals the gross misrepresentation that the neo-conservatives are given to. Anything that reveals that Straussian political thought is based on the twin lies of religion and jingoism is okay in my books.
I think not
I have no love for the neocons, I think they're all bastards. However this documentary conveniently omits alot of information, creatively edits interviews and as a result distorts many facts. Using holywood "special effects" did not impress me. Soundtracks and a guy running through a door afraid for example. In addition he does'nt have his facts straight.
One example, the notion that the CIA was training Egyptians to torture under Nasser is utterly ridiculous. Under Nasser's rule, Egypt was a Soviet puppet. The documentary is very weak in terms of any hard evidence, but again, it's always food for thought.
ITN I'm reading a book right know where the guy says that Russia was courting Nasser But had no real influence Its called Breaking With Moscow very interesting look at the world through .The Russian goverments eyes
I think not
I've actually read it mrmom. I don't buy alot of the things it says, but I always pick and choose things that are common sense. And it does raise certain points. The Soviets at that time were supplying everything from a bullet to jet aircraft to Egypt. When Nasser kicked the bucket and Sadat (or however his name is spelt) took over, the KGB was all over the place. In fact, Sadat had to meet with the US ambassador in private so the KGB wouldn't notice. Bah, this is about the neocons, burn the f***kers.
Never Give Up
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Everybody should watch The Power of Nightmares if they get a chance. It shows the history of neo-conservatism and points out just how long these bastards have been lying to us.

Check out Gwynne Dyer's book, "Future: Tense - The Coming World Order" Excellent book on the neo-con's agenda.

Check out Gwynne Dyer's book, "Future: Tense - The Coming World Order" Excellent book on the neo-con's agenda.

I like him He's a real thorn in the side of the Neocons I wish there were more old school reporters like him .All we have now are guys on the take
The neo-cons had a secret agenda ?

Then how do all of you significant people know about it?

Your agenda would put complete faith in the porous containment of Saddam which would:

1. allow the UN Food for Oil to finance another palace.

2. pay off another family losing a child wanting to be a suicide bombers to the ultimate liars of the world, the hate-minder of the Palestinian terrorism industry.

3. pay for the continual state sponsoring of hate

4. pay for the nazi nightmare of families not trusting their own members for fear of being "turned in" to Saddam.

5. maintain this festering status quo until Saddam dies and so we face 5 to 10 years from now a worse situation than what we face now.

6. and give France (if you look back at the headlines 2 years before the war) wanting to end the embargo so it can recoup the debt Saddam owed them

And now Europe in its moral indignation, far from wanting to give this new Iraq, this new country a chance, still want back some of the debt Saddam owed them.

Not all the debt of European contracts has been forgiven.

There's a lot of evil here to ponder.

But it's fashionable to ponder only that evil which is fashionable.

Moral indignation on this board is correct on many of its misgivings of American actions, but has HUGE gaping blind spots.

But beyond looking at the current situation where we consider nationalism and jingoism to be bad so much that we support worldwide government, we will beget a new paradox, where terrorism will be the only real check on that worldwide govt.

Be careful what you wish for when nations no longer exist.

I'd rather have the nation-state conflict of checks than something we have not even remotely imagined.
Reverend Blair

There are none so blind as those who get their news from the right-wing American media.
It suits you to think that way.

You cannot possibly understand that there are other valid, sincere points other than your own.
More good news for the Iraqi's coutesy of the US (external - login to view)
Reverend Blair
Human Rights Watch issued yet another report (external - login to view) on US check-points in Iraq today.
Corporations have a huge role in many issues, and it's usually a role that controls even the governments decisions. I'd suggest readin Naomi Klein's "No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies." It's definately changed the way I myself look at the world.

Similar Threads

Whats your elf name
by peapod | Oct 4th, 2004
whats up with iraq?
by Anonymous | Apr 21st, 2003
no new posts