Editor’s Notes:

I was once under the impression that the Israeli State was a proxy for United States’ interests in the Middle East. However, it is becomming abundantly clear that the US might not be the senior partner in this nefarious relationship. After all, although we might supply the Israelis with cluster bombs, I doubt that it is an extension of our own policy to drop these insidious weapons on populated areas, such as South Lebanon. And to the Israeli apologists who will no doubt scream that there is no evidence that cluster bombs where ever used, I direct you to the independent journalist, Robert Fisk, who documented casaulties who carried the scares associated with the use of these weapons of terror, following the Israeli onslought on Lebanon after two Israeli POW’s were captured when positioned in the occupied territories stolen by the Israelis from the Lebonese. The following article was originally published on Counterpunch. I did not obtain permission to republish it here. However, from my own impressions, Counterpunch appears more interested in the dessimination of truth than with the protection of its intellectual properties.

R Cole

Did Monty Python Fan Dupe Laurie Mylroie?

By CounterPunch News Service

A bizarre “interview” with imprisoned former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was circulated yesterday by MEMRI TV, a non-profit in Washington DC that specializes in translating and circulating mainly Arab-language materials, selected to display the Arab world in a poor light, to the advantage of Israel.

Releasing its translation of the purported interview, supposedly conducted over the phone to the imprisoned former dictator by Al-Fayhaa TV on on March 28, 2006, MEMRI TV trumpeted the news to its customers that “Saddam Hussein issues a Calls to Cut Off Nose and Ears of Former Iraqi VP ‘Izzat Al-Duri and Declares: It Will Make Me Happy if Iraq Turns Into Ashes, Iraq is Not Worth Two Bits Without Saddam Hussein.”

Saddam is allegedly reacting to a taped message issued by his former vice president and loyalist ‘Izzat Al-Duri, who addressed the Arab League summit in Sudan.

Saddam Hussein: “All ‘Izzat Al-Duri ever wanted was to address the Iraqis as their leader, even if just for a few short minutes. Everybody remembers that he once addressed the Iraqi Women’s Union without my knowledge. Do you know what I did to him?”

Interviewer: “We don’t know. Tell us.”

[…]

Saddam Hussein: “The first thing I did when they brought him was to spit in his face.”

Interviewer: “Why?”

Saddam Hussein: “I said to him: ‘You despicable man, I spit on your owl’s face. How do you address these glorious women without me knowing about it?’”

[…]

“The only one who makes speeches in Iraq is the supreme leader - meaning me.

Interviewer: “You’re in prison. How can you give speeches?”

Saddam Hussein: “That’s a good question. You watch the court sessions. How many sessions have there been so far? Fifteen sessions?”

Interviewer: “Seventeen.”

Saddam Hussein: “I give a speech at every single session.”

[…]

“If I don’t give speeches, I get heartburn.

“I call to punish ‘Izzat Al-Duri, because he burned my heart.”

Interviewer: “Why, because he published a statement without your permission?”

Saddam Hussein: “He gave a speech without me knowing it. The punishment that I want for him is to cut off his tongue and ears.”

Interviewer: “Why cutting off his tongue and ears?”

Saddam Hussein: “To make him the same as all the renegades whose tongues and ears I cut off. And if ‘Izzat Al-Duri continues giving speeches in sign language, like the deaf do, I demand that his hands be cut off. And so on and so forth, until ‘Izzat Al-Duri is finished, and we get rid of this degenerate.”

MEMRI TV circulated this as “Special Dispatch No. 1127″ to its customers and it was instantly seized upon by Laurie Milroie, now somewhat fallen in status, but once riding high as an “Iraq expert” and a prominent propagandist for the US-led attack of 2003.

Milroie rushed out the “interview” at 12.57 EST, March 28,to her e-mailed Iraq News, under the breathless heading “Saddam Interview (Stunning), MEMRI TV”.

Then, just over 5 hours later came a second, crestfallen communiqué:

From: “Laurie Mylroie”
Date: March 28, 2006 6:05:06 PM PST
To: “Laurie Mylroie”
Subject: Saddam Interview was Hoax

A knowledgeable US government official has informed “Iraq News” that that remarkable interview with Saddam Hussein, published by MEMRI TV, is almost certainly a hoax.

Had the credulous Mylroie and editors at MEMRI TV been familiar with the 1975 movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, they might have wondered about such choice lines attributed to Saddam Hussein as “You despicable man, I spit on your owl’s face.”

ARTHUR: If you will not show us the Grail, we shall take your castle by force!

FRENCH GUARD:You don’t frighten us, English pig-dogs! Go and boil your bottom, sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, so-called Arthur King, you and all your silly English k-nnnnniggets. Thpppppt! Thppt! Thppt!

GALAHAD: What a strange person.

ARTHUR: Now look here, my good man–

FRENCH GUARD: I don’t wanna talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper! I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!

GALAHAD: Is there someone else up there we could talk to?

FRENCH GUARD: No. Now, go away, or I shall taunt you a second time-a!
[sniff]

ARTHUR: Now, this is your last chance. I’ve been more than reasonable.

FRENCH GUARD: (Fetchez la vache.)

OTHER FRENCH GUARD: Quoi?

FRENCH GUARD: (Fetchez la vache!)
[mooo]

ARTHUR: If you do not agree to my commands, then I shall–
[twong]
[mooooooo]
Jesus Christ!

KNIGHTS: Christ!
[thud]
Ah! Ohh!…

ARTHUR: Right! Charge!

KNIGHTS: Charge!
[mayhem]

FRENCH GUARD: Hey, this one is for your mother! There you go.
[mayhem]

FRENCH GUARD: And this one’s for your dad!

ARTHUR: Run away!

KNIGHTS: Run away!

FRENCH GUARD: Thppppt!

FRENCH GUARDS: [taunting]

LAUNCELOT: Fiends! I’ll tear them apart!

The portion of the Saddam interview where the blustering ex-despot vows to chop off Mr al-Duri’s extremities is also strongly reminiscent of a scene in the Python classic where Arthur swipes off the arms and legs of the Black Knight.

BLACK KNIGHT: None shall pass.

ARTHUR: What?

BLACK KNIGHT: None shall pass.

ARTHUR: I have no quarrel with you, good Sir Knight, but I must cross this bridge.

BLACK KNIGHT: Then you shall die.

ARTHUR: I command you, as King of the Britons, to stand aside!

BLACK KNIGHT: I move for no man.

ARTHUR: So be it!

ARTHUR and BLACK KNIGHT: Aaah!, hiyaah!, etc.
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT’s left arm off]

ARTHUR: Now stand aside, worthy adversary.

BLACK KNIGHT: ‘Tis but a scratch.

ARTHUR: A scratch? Your arm’s off!

BLACK KNIGHT: No, it isn’t.

ARTHUR: Well, what’s that, then?

BLACK KNIGHT: I’ve had worse.

ARTHUR: You liar!

BLACK KNIGHT: Come on, you pansy!
[clang]
Huyah!
[clang]
Hiyaah!
[clang]
Aaaaaaaah!
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT’s right arm off]

ARTHUR: Victory is mine!
[kneeling]
We thank Thee Lord, that in Thy mer–

BLACK KNIGHT: Hah!
[kick]
Come on, then.

ARTHUR: What?

BLACK KNIGHT: Have at you!
[kick]

ARTHUR: Eh. You are indeed brave, Sir Knight, but the fight is mine.

BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, had enough, eh?

ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard. You’ve got no arms left.

BLACK KNIGHT: Yes, I have.

ARTHUR: Look!

BLACK KNIGHT: Just a flesh wound.
[kick]

ARTHUR: Look, stop that.

BLACK KNIGHT: Chicken!
[kick]
Chickennn!

ARTHUR: Look, I’ll have your leg.
[kick]
Right!
[whop]
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT’s right leg off]

BLACK KNIGHT: Right. I’ll do you for that!

ARTHUR: You’ll what?

BLACK KNIGHT: Come here!

ARTHUR: What are you going to do, bleed on me?

BLACK KNIGHT: I’m invincible!

ARTHUR: You’re a looney.

BLACK KNIGHT: The Black Knight always triumphs! Have at you! Come on, then.
[whop]
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT’s last leg off]

BLACK KNIGHT: Oh? All right, we’ll call it a draw.

ARTHUR: Come, Patsy.

BLACK KNIGHT: Oh. Oh, I see. Running away, eh? You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what’s coming to you. I’ll bite your legs off!

Lately Miyroie has been eagerly promoting the supposed disclosures in documents recently released by the US government of pre-2003 ties between Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda and Zarqawi. In flushes of battiness reminiscent of Clare Sterling (the Mylroie of the Rfeagan years) she has even accused the Bush administration of promoting a cover-up in this regard. The documents have been greeted ecstatically by the war lobby, even though there are documents which do not encourage the scenario they espouse, such as one in which Iraqi security, on hearing that Zarqawi is in Iraq, puts out an APB bulletin to establish his whereabouts.

MEMRI TV has been heavily touted by such promoters of the 2003 attack as former CIA chief R. James Wolsey who said in 2004 that “MEMRI is the single most important source for understanding what is happening in the Greater Middle East.” Another member of the War Party devouring MEMRI TV is Charles Krauthammer who has said “For anyone interested in what is really happening in the Middle East - what the Arab world is saying to itself - MEMRI is utterly indispensable.”

There are other intgriguing precursors in the Pythons’ movie, including one episode in Sir Galahad’s search for the Holy Grail:

GALAHAD: Open the door! Open the door!
[pound pound pound]
In the name of King Arthur, open the door!
[creak]
[thump]
[creak]
[boom]

GIRLS: Hello!

ZOOT: Welcome, gentle Sir Knight. Welcome to the Castle Anthrax.

Tags: american empire, israel, lebanon
Categories: Commentary
No Comments »

I agree that the hyperbole and rhetoric is deployed by all sides of this issue. However, there is a more fundamental dynamic that seems to be organizing this problem in a manner that prevents the relevant parties from coming under the direction of any form of multilateral internationalism. This condition results from the failure of Israel - similarly to the United States - to recognize international provisions for adjudicating these types of matters; implementations of international law that are nearly universally accepted. The United States, of course, fails to submit itself to very basic standards of international law because officials would be vulnerable to prosecutions for war crimes and other related crimes against humanity. Obviously, Israel is motivated by the same considerations as the United States.

Neo-conservatism is not an ideology that is limited in its scope to the politics of the United States. Neo-conservatism is simply the form that a more general ideology presents itself in the context of United States politics. I would describe this larger ideological phenomenon as the metropolitan discourse of Anglo Empire; an entity with which Israel is in collusion, and, in fact, an extension - a conclusion supported by reference to the Oslo Accords.

Remember, the Middle East assumed its current sociopolitical configuration from a source stemming from the vestiges of a colonialism that was organized and orchestrated not only by the British but by America as well. An example would be the protection of business interests that resulted in the British convincing Eisenhower to cause a regime change in Iran in order to thwart the nationalization of oil resources in that country that were intended to usurped control of the resources from British corporate interests. By helping the Americans procured for themselves a share of the exploits.

To put it in a nutshell, there are larger forces at work - which I am doing a poor job in identifying - that actively seek to prevent any resolution to this conflict, because if the Middle East was to resolve this issue it would effectively create a condition where Anglo interests could no longer impose themselves via a mechanisms, which it currently possesses, functions through its role as a broker of power; a capacity currently assumed through an extension of Anglo Empire that is essentially the Israeli regime.

Russ Cole

Tags: colonialism, foreign policy, hezbollah, israel, lebanon, middle east, neo conservatism, palestine
Categories: Commentary, Global, Russell Cole's Blog, Power, Empire
No Comments »

American politicians - with the exception of the atypically principled Chuck Hegel - refuse to even consider the possibility that Israel is anything less than fully justified in its ferocious attack upon the country and inhabitants of Lebanon. Apparently, the dehumanizing expression, collateral damage, is a sufficient rhetorical device to effectively obfuscate the destruction of non-combatant human life during military operations that are planned under the auspices of the foresight that such atrocities can likely occur and are in fact probable.

Israeli soldiers, who retain their humanity during the strategic considerations of the Israeli war technicians are not to be endangered through their deployment on the ground until the area has been thoroughly bombarded with artillery and bombs from the air. As it has been announced, Israel will take its time and choose when to actually attempt to occupy the Southern portions of Lebanon. Transparently, an Israeli life is far more esteemed than a Lebanese noncombatant civilian. Of course, Israel in a great gesture of consideration for the Lebanese inhabitants has dropped leaflets warning the indigenous population to leave their homes in order the avoid an impending assault from the American supplied planes dropping ‘high-precision’ American bombs upon the Lebanese that apparently are not precise enough to compensate for the imprecise intelligence of the Israeli war technicians as they coordinate their targets.

I, personally, am too the point of exasperation over the inability of this country, America, to even raise objection to this onslaught. In order for me to express the reasons for my dismay, let us go over the events that precipitated this slaughter. Israel currently detains, against international law, approximately 9000 Lebanese and Arabs in its prisons. In order to barter for the release of these prisoners, held in extrajudicial limbo, the militant group in Southern Lebanon, which formed in response to Israel’s earlier invasion and occupancy of Lebanon, captured 2 Israeli soldiers. Well, I suppose the value of a Muslim life has increased in its evaluation by two fold because it is now worth, approximately, 1/4500th, of an Israeli’s life, because this is what has ‘justified’ Israel’s unrelenting incursions with accumulating ’collateral damage’ into Lebanon.

I have some basic proposals for the general conditions that might eventually lead to an end of this ongoing conflict between Israel and virtually all of its geopolitical neighbors. First, and I borrow this recommendation from Chomsky, Israel can begin by following the Geneva Convention. Second, Israel can unconditionally withdrawal from the West Bank. Third, Israel will end what amounts to the guidoization of the Gaza Strip, as it continues to isolate to the most densely populated area in the World - I wonder why? - from all transactions it might conduct with its neighbors and fellow nationals.

Enough is enough, and I personally am not going to be inhibited from speaking out against this outrage due to it making me vulnerable to these ridiculous accusations of anti-Semanticist. The ”Little Warrior Nation,” Israel, must end this mistreatment of the indigenous inhabitants whom Israel has already displaced from much of their traditional homeland.

I am publicly, at this point, not an anti-Semite, but most certainly, and unapologetically, an anti-Zionist. There is nothing I can really affect with respect to this, but I have seen enough this dehumanization of Muslim life, and I refuse to politely swallow my own vomit any longer as these crimes against humanity continue, and members of my very own country refuse to consider that this should end, right now!

R Cole

Tags: anti war, collateral damage, foreign policy, israel, lebanon, middle east, war
Categories: Commentary, Global, Russell Cole's Blog, Politics, War
12 Comments »