Secret Slaughter By Night -
Lies, Blind Eyes By Day
By Robert Fisk
Sep. 15, 2003
FALLUJAH -- In the Pentagon, they've been re-showing Gillo
Pontecorvo's terrifying 1965 film of the French war in Algeria. The Battle
of Algiers, in black and white, showed what happened to both the guerrillas
of the FLN and the French Army when their war turned dirty. Torture, assassination,
booby-trap bombs, secret executions. As the New York Times revealed, the
fliers sent out to the Pentagon brass to watch this magnificent, painful
film began with the words: "How to win a battle against terrorism and
lose the war of ideas..." But the Americans didn't need to watch The
Battle of Algiers. They've already committed many of the French mistakes
in Iraq, and the guerrillas of Iraq are well into the blood tide of the
old FLN. Sixteen demonstrators killed in Fallujah? Forget it. Twelve gunned
down by the Americans in Mosul? Old news. Ten Iraqi policemen shot by US
troops outside Fallujah? "No information," the occupation authorities
told us last week. No information? The Jordanian Embassy bombing? The bombing
of the UN headquarters? Or Najaf with its 126 dead? Forget it. Things are
improving in Iraq. There's been 24-hour electricity for three days now and
-- until two US soldiers were killed on Friday -- there had been five days
without an American death.
That's how the French used to report the news from Algeria. What you don't
know doesn't worry you. Which is why, in Iraq, there are thousands of incidents
of violence that never get reported; attacks on Americans that cost civilian
lives are not even recorded by the occupation authority press officers unless
they involve loss of life among "coalition forces". Go to the
mortuaries of Iraq's cities and it's clear that a slaughter occurs each
night. Occupation powers insist that journalists obtain clearance to visit
hospitals -- it can take a week to get the right papers, if at all, so goodbye
to statistics -- but the figures coming from senior doctors tell their own
In Baghdad, up to 70 corpses -- of Iraqis killed by gunfire -- are brought
to the mortuaries each day. In Najaf, for example, the cemetery authorities
record the arrival of the bodies of up to 20 victims of violence a day.
Some of the dead were killed in family feuds, in looting, or revenge killings.
Others have been gunned down by US troops at checkpoints or in the increasingly
vicious "raids" carried out by American forces in the suburbs
of Baghdad and the Sunni cities to the north. Only last week, reporters
covering the killing of the Fallujah policemen were astonished to see badly
wounded children suddenly arriving at the hospital, all shot -- according
to their families -- by an American tank which had opened up at a palm grove
outside the town. As usual, the occupation authorities had "no information"
on the incident.
But if you count the Najaf dead as typical of just two or three other major
cities, and if you add on the daily Baghdad death toll and multiply by seven,
almost 1,000 Iraqi civilians are being killed every week -- and that may
well be a conservative figure. Somewhere in the cavernous marble halls of
Proconsul Paul Bremer's palace on the Tigris, someone must be calculating
these awful statistics. But of course, the Americans are not telling us.
It's like listening to Iraq's American-run radio station. Death -- unless
it's on a spectacular scale like the Jordanian or UN or Najaf bombings --
simply doesn't get on the air. Even the killing of American troops isn't
reported for 24 hours. Driving the highways of Iraq, I've been reduced to
listening to the only radio station with up-to-date news on the guerrilla
war in Iraq: Iran's "Alam Radio", broadcasting in Arabic from
It's as if the denizens of Bremer's chandeliered chambers do not regard
Iraq as a real country, a place of tragedy and despair whose "liberated"
people increasingly blame their "liberators" for their misery.
Even when US troops on a raid in Mansour six weeks ago ran amok and gunned
down up to eight civilians -- including a 14-year-old boy -- the best the
Americans could do was to say that they were "inquiring" into
the incident. Not, as one US colonel quickly pointed out to us, that this
meant a formal enquiry. Just a few questions here and there. And of course
the killings were soon forgotten.
What is happening inside the US occupation army is almost as much a mystery
as the nightly cull of civilians. My old friend Tom Friedman, in a break
from his role as messianic commentator for the New York Times, put his finger
on the problem when -- arranging a meeting with an occupation official --
he reported asking an American soldier at a bridge checkpoint for his location.
"The enemy side of the bridge," came the reply.
Enemy. That's how the French came to see every native Algerian. Talk to
the soldiers in the streets here in Baghdad and they use obscene language
-- in between heartfelt demands to "go home" -- about the people
they were supposedly rescuing from Saddam Hussein. A Polish journalist in
Karbala saw just how easily human contact can break down. "The American
guards are greeting passers-by with a loud 'Salaam aleikum' (peace be with
you). Some young Iraqi boys with a donkey and cart say something in Arabic
and suddenly, together, they run their fingers across their throats.
"'Mother...!" shout the Marines, before their translator explains
to them that the boys are just expressing their happiness at the death of
Saddam Hussein's sons ..." Though light years from the atrocities of
Saddam's security forces, the US military here is turning out to be as badly
disciplined and brutal as the Israeli Army in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Its "recon-by-fire", its lethal raids into civilian homes, its
shooting of demonstrators and children during fire-fights, its destruction
of houses, its imprisonment of thousands of Iraqis without trial or contact
with their families, its refusal to investigate killings, its harassment
-- and killing -- of journalists, its constant refrain that it has "no
information" about bloody incidents which it must know all too much
about, are sounding like an echo-chamber of the Israeli Army.
Worse still, their intelligence information is still as warped by ideology
as was the illegal Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. Having failed to receive
the welcome deserved of "liberators", the Americans have to convince
themselves that their tormentors -- save for the famous Saddam "remnants"
-- cannot be Iraqis at all. They must be members of "Al-Qaeda",
Islamists arriving from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan
... Among its 1,000 "security" prisoners at Baghdad airport --
the total number of detainees held without trial in Iraq is around 5,500
-- about 200 are said to be "foreigners". But in many cases, US
intelligence cannot even discover their nationalities and some may well
have been in Iraq since Saddam invited Arabs to defend Baghdad before the
In reality, no one has produced a shred of evidence Al-Qaeda men are streaming
into the country. Not a single sighting has been reported of these mysterious
men, save for the presence of armed Iranians outside the shrines of Najaf
after last month's bombing. Yet President Bush and Donald Rumsfeld have
talked up their supposed presence to the point where the usual right-wing
columnists in the US press and then reporters in general write of them as
a proven fact. With powerful irony, Osama Bin Laden's ominous Sept. 11 tape
suggests that he is as anxious to get his men into Iraq as the Americans
are to believe that they are already there.
In practice, fantasy takes over from reality. Thus while the Americans can
claim they are being assaulted by "foreigners" -- the infamous
men of evil against whom Bush is fighting his "war on terror"
-- they can equally suggest that the suicide bombing of the UN headquarters
in Baghdad was the work of the Iraqi security guards whom the UN had kept
on from the Saddam regime. Whatever the truth of this -- and the suicidal
expertise of the UN attack might suggest a combination of both Baathists
and Islamists -- the message was simple enough: Americans are attacked by
"international terrorists" but the wimps of the UN are attacked
by the same Iraqi killers they helped to protect through so many years of
There are foreign men and women aplenty in Baghdad -- Americans and Britons
prominent among them -- who work hard to bring about the false promises
uttered by Messrs Bush and Blair to create a decent, democratic Iraqi society.
One of them is Chris Woolford, whose account of life in Bremer's marble
palace appeared only in the internal newsletter of the UK regulatory Office
of Telecommunications, for whom he normally works. Woolford insists that
there are signs of hope in Iraq -- the payment of emergency salaries to
civil servants, for example, and the reopening of schools and administrative
But it's worth recording at length his revealing description of life under
Bremer. "Life in Baghdad can only be described as bizarre," he
writes. "We are based within a huge compound... in Sadam (sic) Hussein's
former Presidential Palace. The place is awash with vast marble ballrooms,
conference rooms (now used as a dining room), a chapel (with murals of Scud
missiles) and hundreds of function rooms with ornate chandeliers which were
probably great for entertaining but which function less well as offices
and dormitories ... I work in the 'Ministries' wing of the palace in the
Ministry of Transport and Communications. Within this wing, each door along
the corridor represents a separate ministry; next door to us, for example,
is the Ministry of Health and directly across the corridor is the Finance
Ministry. Behind each door military and civilian coalition members (mainly
American with the odd Brit dotted about) are beavering away trying to sort
out the economic, social and political issues currently facing Iraq. The
work is undoubtedly for a good cause but it cannot but help feel strange
as our contact with the outside world -- the real Iraq -- is so limited."
Woolford describes how meetings with his Iraqi counterparts are difficult
to arrange and, besides, "key decisions are still very much taken behind
the closed doors of the CPA (the Coalition Provisional Authority), or for
the most significant decisions, back in Washington DC".
So much, then, for the interim council and the appointed Iraqi
"government" that supposedly represents the forthcoming "democracy"
of Iraq. As for contacting his Iraqi counterparts, Woolford admits that
Iraqi officials are sometimes asked to "stand outside in their garden
between 7 p.m. and 8 p.m. so that we can ring them on satellite phones"
-- a process that is followed by the departure of CPA staff for their meeting
with "bullet-proof vests and machine-gun mounted Humvees (a sort of
beefed-up American Jeep) both in front and behind our own four-wheel drive..."
Thus are America and Britain attempting to "reconstruct" a broken
land that is now the scene of an increasingly cruel guerrilla war. But there
is a pervading feeling -- among Iraqis as well as journalists covering this
conflict -- that something is wrong with our Western response to New Iraq.
Our lives are more valuable than their lives. The "terrible toll"
of the summer months -- a phrase from a New York Times news report last
week -- referred only to the deaths of Western soldiers. What is becoming
apparent is that we don't really care about the Iraqis. We may think we
want to bring them democracy but, on an individual level, we don't care
very much about them or their lives. We liberated them. They should be grateful
to us. If they die now, well, no one said democracy was easy.
Donald Rumsfeld -- who raged away about weapons of mass destruction before
the invasion -- now admits he didn't even discuss WMD with David Kay, the
head of the US-led team looking for these mythical weapons, on his recent
visit to Baghdad. Of course not. Because they don't exist. Rumsfeld is equally
silent about the civilian death toll here.
Bin Laden must be grateful. So must the Palestinians. In the refugee camps
of Lebanon last week, they were talking of the events in Iraq as a form
of encouragement. "If Israel's superpower ally can be humbled by Arabs,"
a Palestinian official explained to me in one of the Beirut camps, "why
should we give up our struggle against the Israelis who cannot be as efficient
soldiers as the Americans?" That's the lesson the Algerians drew when
they saw France's mighty army reduced to surrender at Dien Bien Phu. The
French, like the Americans, had succeeded in murdering or "liquidating"
many of the Algerians who might have negotiated a cease-fire with them.
The search for an interlocuteur valable was one of de Gaulle's most difficult
tasks when he decided to leave Algeria. But what will the Americans do?
Their interlocuteur valable might have been the United Nations. But now
the UN has been struck off as a negotiator by the suicide bombing in Baghdad.
Bush declared "war without end". And it looks as though Iraqis
-- along with ourselves -- are going to be its principal victims.
Reprinted from Al Jazeerah:
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.