IRAQ WAR PHOTOGRAPHER DIARY - MILITIAS

Below is a re-post of Zoriah's blog post (with permission).

June 26, 2008 IRAQ WAR PHOTOGRAPHER DIARY - MILITIAS

© Zoriah/www.zoriah.com

The above image is of a confiscated weapons cache housed inside of a US/Iraqi army base in Sadr City. Notice that there are no magazines in these weapons. As I was taking these photos, U.S. soldiers filled their pockets with loaded magazines, intending to distribute them to local militias. I am lying in my cot in a dank, concrete room in Joint Security Station Sadr City when one of the Army commanders who bunks next to me walks though the door, obviously frustrated an annoyed. He is stationed upstairs in the Tactical Operations Center, which is basically a command center for all the troops in the area and a relay point between them and other commands around the area. "What's wrong man? You look pissed," I say, as he throws his bag down on his bunk. "Everyone upstairs is all fucking pissed off because the fucking New York Times just broke a story about how the U.S. is arming and funding all of these neighborhood militias and gangs all around Iraq," he says. I mention to him that I happen to know for a fact that this is true because not more than two days ago I saw it with my own eyes. He responds, "Yeah, I know its true too, we are taking guns out of one guys hand and putting them into the hands of another guy. I'm not pissed about the article, I just have to work with a bunch of idiots who are pissed about the article. That is what makes my life miserable." I have decided to post what I wrote a few days ago, now that I am sure that hunch was correct.

© Zoriah/www.zoriah.com

I am a photojournalist. It is my job to be a visual story teller, showing people what other's lives and struggles are like, when they would otherwise have no way of visualizing these lives. I don't consider myself to very an expert in politics, warfare or the situation in Iraq. It puts me in the unique position of seeing and experiencing without pre-conceived notions or ideas. Since my job is based on truly "seeing", I am at ease with learning things along my path. I am noticing a disturbing trend in Iraq right now, one that I feel pretty sure will prove to be a major mistake in this war and cause a fair amount of grief to the Iraqi people and most likely beyond. The U.S. Military is arming and funding militias and civil military groups across the country. After a discussion with a soldier about the Sons of Iraq, what is now called a "neighborhood guard" by the US military, the soldier said, "We are basically paying these guys off with money and weapons to not kill us."

© Zoriah/www.zoriah.com

The streets of Iraq are now filled with various militias and private security forces. Think of these militias as Blackwater without background checks, rules or any kind of oversight whatsoever (ok, so just think of it like Blackwater!) . Often, they are composed mainly of children not old enough to drive and carrying AK-47 assault rifles nearly as big as themselves.

© Zoriah/www.zoriah.com

Another soldier explains to me that most of the members from the militant groups and death squads a year or two ago, are now either wearing the uniforms of the Iraqi National Police Force, or in one of the hundreds, if not thousands of militias. As I said before, I no expert on such things, but in my humble opinion this appears to be a disaster waiting to happen.

A few links

Robert Fisk discusses the semiotics of conflict reports - 'Civilians pay price of war from above', which gives Al Jazeera's report, 'US probe 'confirms' Afghan deaths', greater resonance. The use of language by US officials is spookily similar to that of the Israeli government’s justification of the Israel Defence Force's activities. The story itself is receiving little or no attention from mainstream British news organisations.

Dave’s Part assesses the perceived moving left of Labour under Brown -'SDP, the second time as farce'.

'Monbiot meets... Hazel Blears' is extraordinary. It might not sound that interesting but wait for Blear's reaction to Monbiot's question about Islam Karimov, the brutal dictator of Uzbekistan. At about 7:02 comes a moment of near David Brent proportions awkwardness.

An overlooked story from Michael Crick's Newsnight blog

If you are still hungry for interesting and informed reading matter, A Very Public Sociologist is a pretty good place to look. I recently discovered that they have linked The Polemical Report (it is listed in the ‘Counter-Hegemonies’ section), which I am pretty pleased about. Thank you if you are reading this A Very Public Sociologist team.

A few links about death, war, lies, homophobia, and the Media

Robert Fisk reflects on the time that he met Baha Mousa’s father as British operations in Iraq come to an end. ‘Robert Fisk: A historic day for Iraq – but not in the way the British want to believe’.  For Fisk’s first article about meeting Baha Mousa’s father - ‘Robert Fisk: A cry for justice from a good man who expected us to protect his son’.

A good post from Tabloid Watch on racism in the press and crime reporting - ‘How the tabloids cover crime’

Another good post from Tabloid Watch on homophobia in the Sun. ‘Sun's shower of homophobia’

3 good blogs on the evidence presented to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee.

• Five Chinese Crackers – ‘Paul Dacre's evidence to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’
  

• Rhetorically speaking…  - ‘paul dacre: the daily mail was never against the MMR vaccine’
  

• Roy Greenslade on Peter Hill’s 'mistakes' as he gave evident to the committee on behalf of the Daily Express - ‘Express editor's catalogue of 'mistakes' in evidence to MPs’ 
  

100 Days: Barack Obama has taken some steps in the right direction - but let’s not kid ourselves

Unless connected to their predecessor, presidents are able to enjoy the luxury of blaming their predecessor for a while. Obama may have extended this period through some impressive political posturing. The disclosure of the memos authorising detainee abuse was inevitable due to an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit, releasing the memos early allows Obama to distance himself from their contents.

The closure of Guantánamo Bay is to be welcomed, but it too seems more likely to be politically motivated rather than morally. Its geographical proximity and historical connotations means that it carries considerable symbolic value beyond its terror suspect prison status both in the US and elsewhere. Nowhere will the symbolism resonate more greatly than Cuba, it was, after all, once Cuban land before US ‘intervention’.

New relations with Cuba are, so far, tiny steps in the right direction. The archaic trade embargo, a hangover from the cold war, is still in place. In fact, all that has been undone are additional restrictions brought in by George Bush Junior. Nonetheless, Obama’s move away from Bush’s stance on Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and Europe is to be welcomed. Welcomed but not exaggerated.

His burgeoning presidency has seen some less contestable successes, for example, allowing wider research on stem cells is unquestionably the right move. The planned departure of US troops from Iraq, on the other hand, is an unquestionable fudge.

Obama is all too willing to make concessions when he deems it politically expedient. His pledge to speak “truthfully about the Armenian genocide” was avoided through deliberate obfuscation. His calls for peace in the Middle East feel like empty platitudes. The subtext of past speeches has revealed him to be reluctant to criticise Israel. Given that Israel's coalition government is particularly right-wing and the shift rightwards of Israel’s Labour party, it seems peace can only come at the expense of Palestinians.

Obama has not had it all his own way, Europe rejected sending more troops to Afghanistan and refused an economic stimulus package on Obama’s terms. Nor will he have it all his way in the future: Pakistan is becoming increasingly unstable. North Korea seems as defiant as ever having fired ballistic missiles. Afghanistan’s impending national elections will likely trigger greater disturbance in the region.

His nation awaits a much-vaunted health care reform plan.

Obama's 100 days - the mad men did well

John Pilger has written an excellent exposition on ‘Obama's 100 days’. Below is a select extract.

In his first 100 days, Obama has excused torture, opposed habeas corpus and demanded more secret government. He has kept Bush’s gulag intact and at least 17,000 prisoners beyond the reach of justice. [...]

All over the world, America’s violent assault on innocent people, directly or by agents, has been stepped up. During the recent massacre in Gaza, reports Seymour Hersh, “the Obama team let it be known that it would not object to the planned resupply of ‘smart bombs’ and other hi-tech ordnance that was already flowing to Israel” and being used to slaughter mostly women and children. In Pakistan, the number of civilians killed by US missiles called drones has more than doubled since Obama took office. […]

He is proceeding with Bush’s provocation of placing missiles on Russia’s western border, justifying it as a counter to Iran, which he accuses, absurdly, of posing “a real threat” to Europe and the US. […]

Perhaps the biggest lie – the equivalent of smoking is good for you – is Obama’s announcement that the US is leaving Iraq, the country it has reduced to a river of blood. According to unabashed US army planners, as many as 70,000 troops will remain “for the next 15 to 20 years”. […]

Lawrence Summers, Obama’s principal economic adviser, is throwing $3trn at the same banks that paid him more than $8m last year, including $135,000 for one speech. Change you can believe in. […]

At a stroke, he has seen off serious domestic dissent to war, and he brings tears to the eyes, from Washington to Whitehall. He is the BBC’s man, and CNN’s man, and Murdoch’s man, and Wall Street’s man, and the CIA’s man.

For more on Obama’s first 100 days see:

• 'Barack Obama has taken some steps in the right direction - but let’s not kid ourselves he still has some way to go.'

For more on Obama click here.

“In relation to Iraq I tried every other option [to invasion] there was”. It was Blair's classic lie, which passed unchallenged.

John Pilger on Blair’s current role – ‘Fake faith and epic crimes’.

In a separate indictment, former Judge of the New Zealand Supreme Court E.W. Thomas wrote: “My pre-disposition was to believe that Mr. Blair was deluded, but sincere in his belief. After considerable reading and much reflection, however, my final conclusion is that Mr. Blair deliberately ands repeatedly misled Cabinet, the British Labour Party and the people in a number of respects. It is not possible to hold that he was simply deluded but sincere: a victim of his own self-deception. His deception was deliberate.” […]

Protected by the fake sinecure of Middle East Envoy for the Quartet (the US, EU, UN and Russia), Blair operates largely from a small fortress in the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem, where he is an apologist for the US in the Middle East and Israel, a difficult task following the bloodbath in Gaza. […]

On 8 February, Andrew Rawnsley, the Observer’s former leading Blair fan, declared that “this shameful period will not be so smoothly and simply buried”. He demanded, “Did Blair never ask what was going on?” This is an excellent question made relevant with a slight word change: “Did the Andrew Rawnsleys never ask what was going on?” In 2001, Rawnsley alerted his readers to Iraq’s “contribution to international terrorism” and Saddam Hussein’s “frightening appetite to possess weapons of mass destruction”. Both assertions were false and echoed official Anglo-American propaganda. In 2003, when the destruction of Iraq was launched, Rawnsley described it as a “point of principle” for Blair who, he later wrote, was “fated to be right”. He lamented, “Yes, too many people died in the war. Too many people always die in war. War is nasty and brutish, but at least this conflict was mercifully short.” In the subsequent six years at least a million people have been killed. According to the Red Cross, Iraq is now a country of widows and orphans. Yes, war is nasty and brutish, but never for the Blairs and the Rawnsleys. […]

Ginny Dougary of the Sydney Morning Herald and the Times. Dougary recently accompanied Blair on what she described as his “James Bondish-ish Gulfstream” where she was privy to his “bionic energy levels”. She wrote, “I ask him the childlike question: does he want to save the world?” Blair replied, well, more or less, aw shucks, yes. The murderous assault on Gaza, which was under way during the interview, was mentioned in passing. “That is war, I’m afraid,” said Blair, “and war is horrible”. No counter came that Gaza was not a war but a massacre by any measure.