The War Partys Atrocity Porn
by
William Norman Grigg
Recently by William Norman Grigg: When
Tax-Feeders Revolt
"This is a
massacre," the frantic Libyan woman, speaking by telephone while
cowering in her apartment in Tripoli, told
CNN's Anderson Cooper.
"I hope you
know that people around the world are watching and praying and wanting
to do something," Anderson told her, as if he were a stage prompter
hinting at a performer's next line. Whether or not she had been
given a copy of the script, the caller performed as expected: "[T]he
first step [is to] make Libya a no-fly zone. If you make Libya a
no-fly zone, no more mercenaries can come in.... There needs to
be action. How much more waiting, how much more watching, how much
more people dying?"
It's entirely
possible, perhaps even likely, that the subject of Cooper's interview
was simply a terrified but resolute woman who risked her life to
describe the violence devouring her country amid the death throes
of Khadaffy's police state.
It's likewise
possible that her call for international action to impose a no-fly
zone was a desperate plea from a victim, rather than an act of media
ventriloquism in which an anonymous figure endorsed the first plank
of a military campaign proposed by the same neo-conservative kriegsbund
that manipulated us into Iraq.
Surely
it was a coincidence that the "Cry in the Night" from Libya was
echoed on the same network a few nights later by Iraq war architect,
former World Bank president, and accused
war criminal Paul Wolfowitz, who several days prior to Cooper's
dramatic broadcast called
for a NATO-enforced "no fly zone" over Libya.
In fact, the
day following that interview, an ad hoc group calling itself the
Foreign Policy Initiative, which coalesced from the remnants of
the Project for a New American Century, published
an "open letter" to Mr. Obama demanding military intervention
beginning with a no-fly zone in Libya. The neo-con framework
for managing the Libyan crisis would create a regional protectorate
administered by NATO on behalf of the "international community."
This would nullify any effort on the part of Libyans, Egyptians,
Tunisians, and others to achieve true
independence.
On previous
experience with media campaigns on behalf of humanitarian conquest,
my incurable cynicism leads me to hear in Cooper's "Cry in the Night"
a faint but unmistakable echo of the tearful, palpably earnest testimony
of "Nayirah" the wide-eyed Kuwaiti girl who, using an assumed
name to "protect her family," described what had befallen her country
in the wake of the Iraqi invasion.
Bravely composing
herself as she recounted horrors no human eyes should behold, the
precociously self-possessed 15-year-old volunteer nurse related
to the Congressional Human Rights Caucus how Iraqi soldiers stormed
into the al-Addan Hospital, tore newborn infants from incubators,
and hurled them to the floor. A short time later this testimony
was "confirmed" by others who offered similarly anguished testimony
before the UN Security Council.
During the
three-month build-up to the January 1991 attack on Baghdad, the
image of Kuwaiti "incubator babies" was endlessly recycled as a
talking point in media interviews, presidential speeches, and debates
in Congress and the UN. A post-war opinion survey found that the
story of the "incubator babies" was the single most potent weapon
deployed by the Bush administration in its campaign to build public
support for the attack on Iraq.
This atrocity
account was particularly effective in overcoming the skepticism
of people espousing a progressive point of view.
"A pacifist
by nature, my brother was not in a peaceful mood that day," recalled
Christian Science Monitor columnist Tom Regan, describing
his sibling's reaction to "Nayirah's" testimony. "We've got to go
and get Saddam Hussein now," Regan's brother insisted.
"I completely
understood his feelings," Regan pointed out. After all, "who could
countenance such brutality? The news of the slaughter had come at
a key moment in the deliberations about whether the U.S. would invade
Iraq. Those who watched the non-stop debates on TV saw that many
of those who had previously wavered on the issue had been turned
into warriors by this shocking incident. Too bad it never happened."
"Nayirah" was
not a traumatized ingιnue who had witnessed an act of barbarism
worthy of the Einsatzgruppen; she was actually the daughter
of Saud Nasi al-Sabah, Kuwait's ambassador to the United States
(and a member of the emirate's royal family). Her script had been
written by the Washington-based
PR firm Hill & Knowlton, which under the supervision of
former Bush administration Chief of Staff Craig Fuller had put
together a campaign to build public support for the impending war.
It wasn't
difficult to convince the public that Saddam was a hideous thug.
Selling the idea of a major war in the Middle East was a more daunting
proposition. In late 1990, Hal
Steward, a retired Army propaganda officer, defined the problem
for the administration: "If and when the shooting starts, reporters
will begin to wonder why American soldiers are dying for oil-rich
sheiks. The U.S. military had better get cracking to come up with
a public relations plan that will supply the answers the public
can accept."
The image of
newborn Kuwaiti infants being ripped from incubators was an updated
riff on a classic war propaganda theme performed by British intelligence
and its American fellow travelers in their efforts to provoke
U.S. intervention in World War I.
The WWI-era
equivalent of the Kuwaiti "incubator babies" were the Belgian infants
who were supposedly spitted on bayonets by hairy-knuckled Huns in
Pickelhaube helmets. German soldiers did this to amuse themselves
once they could no longer sate their prurient interests by raping
Belgian women and then amputating their breasts. So the American
public was told, in all seriousness, by people working on behalf
of a secretive British propaganda committee headed by Charles Masterman.
In 1915, an
official Commission headed by Viscount James Bryce, a notable British
historian, "verified" those atrocity stories without naming a specific
witness or victim. This didn't satisfy Clarence Darrow, who offered
a reward of $1,000 to anyone who could produce a Belgian or French
victim who had been mutilated by German troops. That bounty went
unclaimed.
"After the
war," recounts
Thomas Fleming in his book Illusion of Victory, "historians
who sought to examine the documentation for Bryce's stories were
told that the files had mysteriously disappeared. This blatant evasion
prompted most historians to dismiss 99 percent of Bryce's atrocities
as fabrications."
War emancipates
every base and repulsive impulse to which fallen man is susceptible.
So it's certain that some German troops (like their French, Belgian,
British, and American counterparts) exploited opportunities to commit
individual acts of depraved cruelty. But the purpose of the war
propaganda peddled by the Anglo-American elite, as Fleming observes,
was to create a widespread public image of Germans as "monsters
capable of appalling sadism" thereby coating an appeal to murderous
collective hatred with a lacquer of sanctimony.
I've described
agitprop of this variety as "atrocity porn." It is designed to appeal
to prurient interests and manipulate a dangerous appetite in this
case, what
Augustine calls the libido domimandi, or the lust to rule
over others.
The trick is
to leave the target audience at once shivering in horror at a spectacle
of sub-human depravity, panting with a visceral desire for vengeance,
and rapturously self-righteous about the purity of its humane motives.
People who succumb to it are easily subsumed into a hive mind of
officially sanctioned hatred, and prepared to perpetrate crimes
even more hideous than those that they believe typify the enemy.
Rhetoric of
that kind abounded during the French Revolution, particularly the
Jacobin regime's war to annihilate the rebellious Vendee. It also
figured prominently in the Lincoln regime's war to conquer the newly
independent southern states. However, it's difficult to find a better
expression of that mindset than the one offered in an editorial
published in 1920 by Krasni Mech (The Red Sword), a publication
of the Soviet Cheka secret police:
"Our morality
has no precedent, and our humanity is absolute, because it rests
on a new ideal. Our aim is to destroy all forms of oppression and
violence. To us, everything is permitted, for we are the first
to raise the sword not to oppress races and reduce them to slavery,
but to liberate humanity from its shackles ... Blood? Let blood
flow like water ... for only through the death of the old world
can we liberate ourselves forever." (Emphasis added.)
In pursuing
his Grand Crusade for Democracy, Woodrow Wilson was squarely
in that tradition, extolling the supposed virtue of "Force without
stint or limit ... the righteous and triumphant Force which shall
make Right the law of the world and cast every selfish dominion
in the dust." To fortify the American "war will" through a steady
diet of atrocity porn, the Wilson administration created a Department
of Public Information that liaised with its British equivalent,
as well as quasi-private British propaganda fronts such as the Navy
League. That organization, Fleming points out, included "dozens
of major bankers and corporate executives, from J.P. Morgan Jr.
to Cornelius Vanderbilt."
Through absolutely
no fault of his own, Anderson Cooper is a great-great-grandson of
Cornelius Vanderbilt. Of considerably greater interest is the fact
that as a student at Yale, Cooper spent two summers as an intern
at Langley in a CIA program designed to cultivate future intelligence
operatives.
When asked
about Cooper's background with the CIA, a CNN spokeswoman insisted
that he chose not to pursue a job with the Agency after graduating
from Yale. The same can be said, however, of many of the CIA's most
valuable media assets.
As Carl
Bernstein documented decades ago, the CIA "ran a formal training
program in the 1950s to teach its agents to be journalists. Intelligence
officers were 'taught how to make noises like reporters,' explained
a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations
with help from management. 'These were the guys who went through
the ranks and were told, 'You're going to be a journalist,' the
CIA official said. Relatively few of the 400-some [media] relationships
described in Agency files followed that pattern, however; most involved
persons who were already bona fide journalists when they began undertaking
tasks for the Agency."
By way of
an initiative called "Operation Mockingbird," the CIA built a large
seraglio of paid media courtesans. This was carried out through
the Office of Policy Coordination, which was created by Allen Dulles
and Frank
Wisner the latter being the official who went on to
organize coups (and the attendant propaganda
campaigns) against governments in Iran and Guatemala. (Wisner's
son and namesake, incidentally, was
a vice chairman at AIG the CIA's favorite global insurance
conglomerate until 2009; more recently he was tapped by the Obama
administration to serve as a
back-channel contact with Hosni Mubarak and Omar Suleiman.)
The tendrils
of "Operation Mockingbird" extended through every significant national
media organ, from the Washington Post and Newsweek
to the Time-Life conglomerate, from the New York Times to
CBS. As a result, according to
former CIA analyst Ray McGovern, the Fourth Estate "has been
captured by government and corporations, the military-industrial
complex, the intelligence apparatus." It is, in everything but name,
an appendage of the Regime. This is clearly seen every time the
Regime decides the time has come to mount another campaign of humanitarian
bloodshed abroad.
Having "learned
nothing from the horrors that they cheer-led like excitable teenage
girls over the past 15 years, these bohemian bombers, these latte-sipping
lieutenants, these iPad imperialists are back," sighs
a wearily disgusted Brendan O'Neill in the London Telegraph.
"This time they're demanding the invasion of Libya."
On O'Neill's
side of the Atlantic, the Fleet Street Samurai are peddling "rumors
of systematic male rape" in Libya. Others insist that the prospective
war in Libya would in no way resemble "the foolishness of the Iraq
invasion" just as similar self-appointed sages promised that the
ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, each of which has lasted at
least as long as the Vietnam War, would not be "another Vietnam."
For
some reason, this brings to mind the image of Bullwinkle repeatedly
trying to pull a rabbit from his hat, blithely batting aside Rocky's
complaint that the trick "never works" by exclaiming, "This time
for sure!" This time, we're supposed to believe
or at least, pretend to believe that the atrocity accounts are
true, that military action sanctified by the "international community"
is a moral obligation, that warlust and hatred are virtuous, and
that the impending bloodshed will be a cleansing stream.
As is the case,
one supposes, with any other variety, war pornography is nothing
if not predictable. However, unlike Bullwinkle's inept attempts
at thaumaturgy,
war porn is a trick that seems to work every time.
March
1, 2011
William
Norman Grigg [send him mail]
publishes the Pro
Libertate blog and hosts the Pro
Libertate radio program.
Copyright
© 2011 William Norman Grigg
The
Best of William Norman Grigg
|