Arrogant Propaganda

"Your BS detector must be on at full blast."

-- Michael Moore, March 28, 2003

In the good old days, the US used to tell a lie -- crass propaganda -- and it would stick for a long time.Journalists would have to scurry for months before they could expose the lies, but by then it would be almostirrelevant, e.g., the Tonkin incident lie provided to justify escalation in the Vietnam War, or the infamousthrowing-babies-out-of-incubators story concocted to swing American opinion in favor of the Gulf War in 1991.In the run up to the US-Iraq war, it became increasingly evident that propaganda has a diminished half-life[1]. Whereas years ago the reigning technique was to repeat a lie often enough, now it seems to have given wayto a constant barrage of lies or semi-lies with a very short half-life. As soon as a propaganda ploy has beenexposed, the current media spinners will move to the next tall story. They seem to count on either the poormemory of the population, their general disinterest or their credulity. There are also good reasons to believethat the current barrage-propaganda approach is losing its effectiveness.

It has become much more difficult to sell wars these days and the propagandists are remarkably inept.Watching CNN or BBC reveals jarring shoddy propaganda that is immediately transparent. Marines "discovered"a camouflaged chemical weapons factory, but then both CNN and BBC revealed the source of the story: TheJerusalem Post; it was then distributed by Fox News. This was the fastest way to discredit the story, whichonly lasted two days - later exposed as a fabrication by the March 25th Financial Times. In themeantime, one of the warmongering neocons appeared on CNN, repeating the story, elaborating the details andsaying that there was now proof of the existence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). A day later CNNmentioned finding a Scud missile inside a factory - another story with a half-life of a day. On March 26th,they were talking about finding 3,000 chemical protection suits, as if this proved something. It is likesmelling manure, and then claiming you have found a horse. This story also is destined for the trashcan ifonly because Hans Blix, the ex-UN weapons inspector, mustered a pixel of backbone to state that it didn’tprove anything. Finally, the first few missiles shot by the Iraqis on Kuwait were intimated to be Scudmissiles (illegal under UN resolutions), but this turned out to be false too.

One must admit that the so-called embedded journalists don’t have an easy time. They tag along with themilitary and have to amplify the statements made by the officers who direct them. High-ranking officers areinterviewed, but no critical questions are posed to them. Transparent nonsense is uttered, and it isn’tchallenged. The next day the recently uttered "news" has been discredited, but it also has entered boththe journalist’s and the officer’s memory hole. Never mind, today is another day and another opportunityto spew nonsense. "Chemical weapons find", "Scud missile find", "uprising in Basra", "a columnof 1,000 vehicles is making its way South", "it wasn’t our missile", "Syria is supplying nightvision equipment", "surrender en masse", "Basra has fallen", "a general has been captured"…How many times can self-respecting embedded journalists regurgitate the offal that is fed to them? While CNNor BBC issue warning labels for the reports issued from Baghdad where there is supposedly a minder/censorpresent, there is no such warning issued about the embedded journalists although their ability to report maybe even more restricted. Perhaps a wee warning beyond the usual "report from an embedded journalist"should be issued.

Jacques Ellul, in his book, Propaganda, states that for propaganda to be effective, it must havemonopoly and drown out everything else. One of the reasons that propaganda doesn’t stick at present is thatthere are so many alternative information channels. CNN doesn’t have a monopoly by any means; at anAmsterdam airport lounge recently, the waiting passengers rebelled and forced the attendants to change thechannel! The internet has also become a very important alternative news source. Robert Fisk’s reports on DemocracyNowor his columns in London’s The Independent prove that he is a one-man propaganda demolition machine.Listening to his reports from Baghdad allows one to peer through the fog, and obtain a clearer view of what ishappening on the ground. Every other paragraph of Fisk’s comments demolishes yet another nonsense statementuttered by Ari Fleischer & his ilk. The hard task of selling or justifying the war has given way to abarrage of lies or semi-lies that only last a few days - thereafter they are immediately forgotten. The nextlies follow directly.

On March 26th, a missile killed scores of civilians at a Baghdad market and wounded even more. Houses andshops were demolished. The subsequent stream of propaganda is very instructive. It went from: "must checkwhat happened", to "inevitably collateral damage occurs" (aka "shit happens"), to "likely that anIraqi missile was the cause of the explosion," and finally, on Mar. 28th it was: "it was a missile firedby the enemy" [2]. Another market bombing on March 29th killing 62+ civilians was immediately denied andblamed on the Iraqis themselves. Some historical background may reveal the real reason for these explosions.During the bombing of Serbia over the Kosovo situation, both the Americans and the general staff weresurprised because they expected a quick capitulation. Serious dissension grew within the ranks of the then "coalitionof the willing" [3], and it was necessary to increase the pressure on the Serbs to obtain their surrender.This was achieved by hitting more military targets, then bridges, railroads, factories, and even the TVstation (with some lame justification) [4]. After the war, it was revealed that most Serbian factories hadbeen bombed! Even with this bombing intensity, the Serbians didn’t yield, and at this point the laptopbombardiers started targeting the civilian population, i.e., plain and simple terrorism in the true sense ofthe word. In the Iraqi context, it is also clear that the resilience of the "regime" is far higher thanexpected, and it seems that US planners must have believed their own propaganda promising an instant collapse[5]. The current bombing of civilian areas follows the pattern of turning up the pressure, and reveals thatPentagon statements before the war -- that "there will be no safe place in Baghdad" -- are proving trueindeed.

Donald Rumsfeld also claims that meticulous care is taken to avoid hitting civilian areas with smartweapons. Hey, they triple check this type of thing! The fact that some missiles have hit other countries,e.g., Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey, should safely dispose of such assertions about avoiding civiliancasualties or missile accuracy. The first Baghdad market bombing took place in the middle of a sandstorm! Howcan anything be expected to be accurate under such conditions? Either the bombings are premeditated, and thuscivilians are targeted or the claims of accuracy and care in avoiding civilians are bogus. Perhaps reality issomewhere in between.

During the past few days, both BBC and CNN have reported with increasing frequency that the resistancefighters are dressing in civilian clothes, and that Iraqi soldiers deviously use the white flag to attack theMarines. Presto, now we can expect a massive increase in the number of civilians slaughtered by the Marines.Maybe the imprisonment of Iraqi soldiers is becoming burdensome too, and the US was poised to abrogate theFourth Geneva Convention in any case. Throw in a bit of the usual disdain of killing "mere Arabs" and thiswar is fast becoming an incredibly bloody fiasco.

The positioning of B52 bombers and the location of their refueling are also part of propaganda. A squadronof B52 bombers is based at the Fairford airbase in the UK. Why couldn’t they be located in, say, Israel thatis closer to the action? Israelis and their apologists always justify the US’s support, funding and armingof Israel on the grounds that it is "America’s aircraft carrier in the Middle East". Israel is also partof the coalition of the willing - although Israel deserves a category of its own like: "chief cheerleader".The vast majority of Jewish-Israelis also supports the war; they are cheerleading the war with blue and redpompons. So why not base the B52s there?

Refueling is also an issue. B52s and other bombers fly over Spain on their way to Iraq. For some reason, itis deemed important to refuel the airplanes over Spain [6], and Prime Minister Aznar has made certain thatthis is possible. The only apparent reason for the positioning of the B52s and their refueling location hasreally to do with propaganda. It is a means of suggesting that many countries are part of the "coalition"- one of the most ridiculous propaganda terms in use. In reality, only the US, UK and a handful of Australianmilitary are involved in actual fighting; even then, the Australian contingent may actually be recalled bytheir Parliament. It would be far more accurate to refer to the "US-UK" forces, but to obtain anappearance of support the B52s must be stationed in the UK. It suggests that it is not only the US with bloodon its hands; furthermore, it is very eager to smear some off on others.

Often when a BBC journalist approaches an Iraqi official, questions are posed about the futility of furtherstruggle starting with: "surely the Americans will win…". On March 27th, a BBC reporter approached Iraq’sex-ambassador to Paris, and the same question was asked in various forms yielding the predictable Iraqiresponse. NB: No question of any other nature was even asked! Perhaps the US-UK should empower BBC/CNNjournalists to accept an eventual Iraqi surrender. The BBC would love to take credit for the finalcapitulation of the Iraqis, just like it allowed the silly story that the entry of one of its journalists,John Simpson, into Kabul had coincided with the Taliban capitulation.

Even more acutely, when Saddam Hussein gives a speech neither CNN nor the BBC discusses what he actuallysaid, but debate whether he is the real Saddam. The only thing that is missing is criticism of the way he isdressed or the way he looks. Anything is proffered to avoid substance. The statements made by other Iraqiofficials are similarly slighted, although the persistent claims of shooting down this or that should make allskeptical of their claims.

Propaganda also entails censoring things. Most Americans remember the TV scenes where dead US soldiers weredragged through the streets of Mogadishu. Within a week the US’s appetite for that intervention collapsed.Americans only accept clean wars, only the ones that appear like a video game. All the blood and gore must beexcised, especially if there is blood of American soldiers, and Americans will not see this on TV. When AlJazeera showed dead Americans it elicited a vicious reply from the censors shutting down websites andhindering Al Jazeera from broadcasting in the US. If the US finds out the coordinates of the Al Jazeerajournalist in Basra, then this could be bombed. During the attack on Afghanistan, the Al Jazeera offices inKabul were bombed when their reporting proved awkward to the media spinners. [Postscript: Their hotel andoffices were bombed on April 1, 2003; Jason Deans, "Al-Jazeera's Basra hotel bombed", The Guardian, April2, 2003]

Bush’s practice session for his "war ultimatum" speech was shown to Portuguese and Italian TVaudiences, but it was never shown on American TV stations. Perhaps the non-flattering appearance didn’tportray the dear monosyllabic president as a "statesman". The media spinmeisters prefer to have thepresident with his mouth firmly shut, and at a safe distance from the media. On the eve of the impending war,they chose to film the dear president from a distance on the White House lawn. The weight of the burdenworrying about the impending deaths and destruction required some light distraction by throwing some balls forhis dogs. But wait, even his dogs ignored him, and they didn’t run after the balls he threw! Maybe it istime for a "pet change" -- Tony Blair could give the president a corgi, the Queen’s favorite dog breed.

The most important propaganda topic deserving some discussion is the reason to go to war and its evolutionover time. Months earlier, the warmongers uttered "regime change" as a justification for the war. This wasconsidered too crass, and it briefly made way for "Iraq has links to terrorism", a very short-livedjustification. This gave way to "rid Iraq of WMD." A UN inspection team was set up, and it was clear fromthe beginning that this was meant to fail [7]. Once the UN didn’t lend its imprimatur to justify the war,and the fact that many Europeans sought to continue the inspections regime, then another justification wasnecessary. Now, "let’s liberate Iraq" - in other words, a euphemism for "regime change" - wasconcocted without much reflection. Within days of the war starting, the stiff Iraqi resistance revealed theabsurdity of the new justification. If the Iraqis are not being liberated, then what are American troops doingthere to begin with? Maybe the only way this mythological justification can be stretched is to starve thepopulation of Basra (water supplies have been cut), and at a later point when the situation is reallydesperate, then soldiers can hand out food parcels for the benefit of CNN viewers. Some plastic flowers may beflown in as currency for the Iraqis to receive their parcels. Cheering heartily may earn some chewing gum [8].

There are several reasons for this war of aggression, but the position on this decision and theintellectual depth thereof were inadvertently revealed during Bush’s ultimatum speech practice session. Therein the dear monosyllabic president states: "FUCK SADDAM, we’re taking him out". After the eloquent"Axis of Evil" or "good vs. evil" phrases, one expected yet another eloquent justification for thiswar. This impromptu statement thus reveals a president with a mean-spirited streak, and a very shallowunderstanding of what is going on. It would be interesting for Americans to view their president’srehearsal, but unfortunately, this will not be shown to American or British publics thanks to theself-censorship of CNN and BBC, the main purveyors of the current war propaganda.

One of Dr. Josef Goebbel’s cardinal rules for effective propaganda was that all news should be asaccurate as possible and credible. Current practice overthrows this rule by a rapid succession of lies, andnews about the war on major networks isn’t credible anymore. A key question is why this has happened. Onetheory is that US propaganda has become a victim of its own spin; propagandists also have been permeated bythe same arrogance afflicting the warmongers. Propaganda is something fed to others to sell your "product",and the spinmeisters are not meant to consume this themselves. So, they failed because they accepted the basicpremise of an imminent Iraqi collapse. Given that this didn’t happen, the situation has created panic amongthe propagandists, and their only response seems to be to live day-by-day. A few more lies today, some moretomorrow, and then hope - really PRAY - to obtain a total Iraqi capitulation. If this doesn’t happen thenthe US risks the unraveling of its propaganda line. It doesn’t fear that foreigners will rebel - thesealready don’t buy the US line - but it is the American people who they fear losing. Many more tall stories,and suddenly many questions may arise from this quarter. Too many questions and the whole edifice maycollapse.

Propaganda is about selling a war in such a way that the core populations don’t realize the realities ofwhat such a war entails. The American population wants to see "enemy" defeats, no losses of their owntroops, and they want the effects to be antiseptic - video game style. Propaganda will attempt to direct yourfocus to the glamorous aspects of battle. Above all, propaganda papers over the fact that this is a war ofaggression, that there are home team losses, and that the results are massively bloody. Propaganda hides thefact that there are virtually no painkillers left in Iraqi hospitals, and that the hundreds or thousands ofIraqi wounded will be operated on without anesthetics. The screams of the Iraqi victims as their limbs areamputated without anesthetics are what propaganda tries with all fervor to drown out. The propagandists mustbe pleased, as they have made it possible to demolish a country and to exact on the Iraqi people a horrendoustoll - without the American public even noticing.

There is only one antidote against propaganda, and that is a relevant sense of history and a strongcollective memory. When we remember the lessons from the past, and when we remember what happened even a fewdays ago, then the job of the propagandists and their warmongering bosses, becomes much more difficult. It isultimately when their message is challenged that war can be stopped; bloated armament budgets can be pared;international law can be upheld; and shallow mean-spirited politicians with blood soaked hands can be put ontrial in an international war crimes tribunal.