The Abu Ghraib Scandal: Who’s Shame is it?

Laila Kazmi,

this is one of the most honest pieces of writing that CHOWK

has seen in a while. And written with great style too.

Agree with most of your perceptions.

My only question now is

``How do we get out of this mess?``

Ras

Laila:

You have no need to justify you being in America. Whoever is questioning you, tell`em to fcuk off. Go back to England or whereever their forefathers came from.

I am afraid that when the critics of the Iraq invasion attack Bush Administration, they are being too narrow in their understanding of the American system of government. Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Powel etc are just a few front line players (or performers) of this gigantic military-industrial complex, otherwise known as United States of America. The distribution of behind the scene power and the matrix of vested interests is too complicated and too complex to simplify it in terms of blaming a single administration. For example, we all know the KEY role media played in selling this war to general public. Each administration does NOT bring a new ``media`` with them. This media is well entrenched regardless of which administration comes and go.


I would argue that the real target of this critcism should be the system that brought this administration to power.

- The judicial system is to be blamed for ``selecting`` this president
- The judicial system is to be blamed for keeping quiet while the civil liberties are being eroded
- The legislative system is to be blamed for acting like a rubber stamp congress / senate for passing legislation promoting wars
- The coporate media is to be blamed for providing an out of context, distorted and one-sided picture of the world affairs
- The interest groups (such as jewish lobby) are to be blamed for egging on the US government to fight a catastrophic war
- The process, which made un-elected officials (such as Perl, Feith, Wolfwowitz) more powerful than many elected officials, needs to be scrutinized
- The conflicts of interest, and the dual loyalties (to Israel and US) in the previously unknown think-tanks (like Foundation for the Defence of Democracies, American Enterprise Institute etc) need to be investigated.
- The system where 99 out of 100 senators are multimillionaires needs to be examined
- The system where rich people, like John Corzine of NJ, can effectively BUY their seats into senate needs to be examined.
- The system where the critics of war, like Cynthia Mckinney of Georgia, lose their seats in congress because of intense lobbying from out of state entities (like jewish lobby), needs to be examined.

Bush Adminstration is simply ONE SMALL entity (or I would say, `performer`) in this giant drama.

Romair:

I by and large agree with the context of your post.

I am outraged about two things:

1. The mode of killing. It is different from a shot to the head. All these idiots do is make themselves look barabaric. In the context of number killed, I see your point.

2. The wanton and deliberate nature of the act. I agree that comparing one individual to the thousands of civillians killed is grotesque. But the fact remains that the civillians killed in Iraq are not targetted in a deliberate and wanton manner, they are casualties in the course of war. If American civillians are killed in an attack on Troops or a supply depot, there will be NO moral outrage. It is a natural consequence of war.

If the US was to retaliate in the same measure, then with the firepower at its disposal, the life of every Iraqi would be at risk.

To put things in perspective, imagine the beheading and videotaping of a Hindu by the Hizbul Mujahideen in Kashmir. Now imagine what the reaction of Indian Army and BSF troops would be.

``People who play switch and bait games ought remember that most of us grieve for everyone wounded, raped, tortured and murdered in this fiasco called Operation Bullshite.``

Except the victims of class pogroms, Cultural Revolution, Siberian Death Camps etc.


``The topic here is Abu Gharaib. Stick to it``

Yup, the topics on Chowk seem to be rather convenient don`t they??

`` As a Pakistani-American, it is especially difficult to watch this war between “good” and “evil.” On the one hand, our government bombs countries and encroaches on the civil rights of people in the name of “national security” (many of the men carried off to Guantanamo Bay after 11 September without any charges were of Pakistani). On the other hand, religious fundamentalists commit atrocities in the name of Islam. Each side calls its adversary “evil.”"

How many Pakistanis living in America were sent to Guantanamo ? Most of the Pakistanis in Guantanamo were caught in Afghanistan. I wonder which cave you were crawling under when Taliban was busy sending Afghanistan to the stone ages.

`` As an immigrant to the United States, when criticizing my government, I have heard the arguments: “if you don’t like America then go back to your own country,” and “how can you criticize America when there is so much wrong in your native Pakistan?” To them I say that I am a citizen of the United States, I am an American and I value the freedom this country has afforded me. As such it is my duty to speak up when my government commits unjust acts of aggression. ``

I am glad you feel that way !!!

Shame is such a hard word..how do you tell someone to be ashamed? It`s like telling the Emperor he has no clothes.

general romair..you are promoted to the rank of field marshal...for the first time you made sense to me...hallelujah...there is hope for you yet...;)

Its insulting that our grief be demanded for Daniel Berg. People who play switch and bait games ought remember that most of us grieve for everyone wounded, raped, tortured and murdered in this fiasco called Operation Bullshite.

The topic here is Abu Gharaib. Stick to it.

stuka #9: ``Where is the moral outrage on the beheading``

There will not be too much moral outrage on the beheading in the Muslim world. And any moral outrage that does occur, will be in the way the individual was killed, not the fact that the individual was killed. Most individuals will see the killing itself (though not the manner) as a legitimate act against the members of an occupying force.

The reason is simple. People are looking at it in the context of the overall scenario, and the number of Iraqis killed, i.e. USA has invaded a country and occupied it and is daily killing its citizens, left and right. Each day, tens of Iraqis are killed by US soldiers. The total number is between 10 and 15 thousand now, according to Iraqbodycount, i.e. approximately one thousand per month, through the war. Just yesterday, US soldiers killed civilians, including toddlers at a wedding party, and refused to even acknowledge it.

People thus, now view all killings of Americans, within the context of the people the USA is killing, and the lack of moral outrage in the USA over those killings. How many people in the USA bothered about the tens of thousands of individuals killed in Iraq? How many feel sorry for them? Hardly any. Most were on the forefront of encoruaging the killings of Iraqis. The only outrage seen, amongst Americans, throughout this war was at the pictures. Because there was absolutely no way the pictures could be spun. While the invasion itself and the killings of Iraqis (an event much more damaging for Iraqi families than the prison abuse, since the prisoners are at least alive) can be justified through a minimum amount of spinning.

Moral outrage, under such scenarios, becomes a relative term and a victim of the context in which actions occur. This is unfortunate. This is what wars do to people. And such killings only furthur such coldness.

Compare this to when Daniel Pearl was killed in Pakistan. There was nation-wide moral outrage. The whole country was turned upside down to find him. More so than ever done for even a Pakistani victim. His wife is all praise for the Pakistanis she met, in her book. The reason was simple. The USA had not invaded Pakistan, and was not killing Pakistanis. Hence Daniel Pearl`s killing was seen in a different context.

The problem with moral outrages is that people only want moral outrages when their own are killed. They don`t worry about moral outrages when they are killing. This is how the individuals who kill others justify their killings.......This is why the individuals who have benefitted the most from the Iraq war is the neo-con US govt. and Al-Qaeda.

If you ask me, the individuals who killed Mr. Berg should be tried for terrorism. And George Bush and the US govt. should be tried for state terrorism also. Until both of the events happen, I doubt you will see too much moral outrage from any side.

P.S. would it be correct to assume you are morally outraged about the US invading a country, and killing tens of thousands of individuals. If you aren`t, then I am afraid you lose the moral highground for demanding moral outrage from others........

Where is the moral outrage on the beheading|? Oh sorry, Jews do not count AS VICTIMS!! How could I make such a mistake....besides the Zionists did it.

Urstruly:

http://209.0.144.17/ogrish-dot-com-american-nick-berg-beheaded-in-iraq.wmv


MALYCK put this up for u on Unplugged.

not only the higher ups but the whole country has to be made accountable. i know one thing which the world has experienced is that the cruels..have been crushed. for e.g. the russians.
i have seen videos how they have cut the throats of innocent people..and p.o.w. by knives and that was totally sickening.

and what do u think..americans by nature are cooperative and soft hearted..i think abu ghraib has itself answered this. wat is a soldier a civilian in other sense in the army ranks who takes orders and works.

mind u..as u said..democracy is choosing the president according to the will of the people. americans chose bush to rule america..if logically and arithmetically seen what ever bush does is the will of the americans...and what ever the military does is what bush and rumsfeld want.
i guess by now americans would start hating arithmetic and mathematics. anyways it is in their genes to hate anything which has emancipated from muslims.

More Images Emerge in Prison Torture Scandal
New details in the prison torture scandal in Iraq have emerged as the Washington Post has obtained hundreds of more photos of abuse as well as sworn statements by detainees at Abu Ghraib describing the torture. One photo showed a naked prisoner who appears to be covered in excrement being paraded down a hallway. Another shows a U.S. soldier beating detainees sprawled on the floor. A video shows a prisoner slamming his head repeatedly into a metal door, that he is shackled to, until he collapses. In sworn testimony, prisoners have reported they were force-fed pork and alcohol against their Muslim religion. One detainee said a soldier asked him if he believed in anything. The prisoner said ``I said to him, `I believe in Allah.` So he said, `But I believe in torture and I will torture you.``` Then the soldier hit the detained man who had a broken leg and ordered him to curse Islam. The prisoner said ``Because they started to hit my broken leg, I curse my religion. They ordered me to thank Jesus I`m alive.``

www.democracynow.org

Radio Quran has been broadcasting that Mr. Berg cut off his own head and then lifted it above his body in order to defame the pure, innocent, and totally victimized Muslims. The broadcasters are willing to support their stand by swearing over Mohammad`s mother`s grave. Yesterday, some callers to Radio Quran also swore that they saw Mohammad`s mother lurking in the background behind Mr. Berg before he defamed Muslims by beheading himself. This organized, and state-sponsored atrocity by non Muslims against Muslims was seen as the sure sign of Muslims` imminent victory over their Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Jain, Sikh, Buddhist, Animist, and Pagan oppressors.

and the Americans Wonder....and perplexed ....why are they.....hated the

world over...


Wait till this shock of their attorocites is Over...