The Assassinated Press


Americans Grapple With Beheading In Iraq; Someone Creates Another Agenda Bender:
Exploding The Affliction Of A 'Moral High Ground':
After Abu Graib World Health Organization Classifies U.S. Imperialism As A Sexually Transmitted Disease:
"U.S. Military's Failure To Embrace And Promote Healthy Gay Environment Leads To Repression And Abuse," Says Sen. James Inhofe

By TORRID HINTER
Assassinated Press White House Correspondent
May 12, 2004,

WASHINGTON -- Americans grappled with shocking new images of horror, from scenes of unknown masked individuals beheading a Pennsylvania man to descriptions of U.S. soldiers torturing and humiliating Iraqi prisoners. After days of shedding crocodile tears between smirks, faux President Bush shifted from defense to offense with a tough condemnation of the beheaders whom he labeled terrorists and, in the process, disassociated them from any formal governmental apparatus like Saudi security or the Mossad.

Splashed across front pages, the adrenaline producing anticipation just before the decapitation of Nicholas Berg provided convenient yet false parallels for those whose job it is to foster the thinking that the world's outrage over prisoner abuse at the hands of an occupying power with the status of nationhood has been overblown or misdirected, when the real enemy is a stateless al-Qaida and like-minded terrorist groups drawn to Iraq by the U.S. invasion itself.

"As bad as the shit that was done to Iraqi prisoners, it didn't involve beheading as far as we know," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. "That doesn't justify it, but it does to some extent if you take a post-modernist approach and isolate these two series of events which puts us for the moment on a slightly higher 'moral ground', e.g. beating deaths compared to beheadings, than whoever beheaded Nicholas Berg and shows you what you're dealing with in terms of the enemy who we can conveniently identify as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, though the timing of the murder would indicate we don't know who they are or, public relations, the manipulation of public opinion to foster the agenda of the few, is unfamiliar or simply held in contempt by those who are guilty."

"From a P.R. perspective, the murder of Berg would be a set up," said Edward Bernays," organized to take the heat off the brutal sex and death scandal that threatens not only to expose the sadistic, depraved underpinnings of the western military establishment, but expose the sexual impulse to create huge penal systems that, given the simple collecting of monies, have that violent, homo-erotic edge that Hollywood loves to exploit in its Schwarzeneggers and Willis's. For days, conservative talk radio shows have simmered with sexual anger from the arousal they are experiencing generated by the heavy coverage paid to abuses in Abu Ghraib prison. They live in fear and excitement of having their own sexual predilections exposed. The anxiety spilled out in the Senate when Republican James Inhofe said he -- and others -- were 'more outraged by the possibility of being outed as sadists than we are by the treatment' of the prisoners. But, in a regime of institutional perversion and violence, calls for further establishment solutions rank as conformity. Thus the conformal is always comprised of the most sexually repressed and violent cultural and political elements for therein resides protection from exposure. What conservatives most fear is exposure and what the U.S. military, through Abu Graib, has accomplished is to expose conservative America's sexual preferences through its most conservative and revered institution, the military. That's why people who have a lot of free and consensual sex find the conservative mindset so inscrutable and ungenerous. For their own health, the military should be promoting healthy gay sex as should Rush Limbaugh and his audience."

"If you're like Limbaugh and his minions and you need the Abu Graib level of violence and repression to spooge, we got tne tapes for you," said Agnes Chatterley of Mistress of Leather Productions. "Porn is America's number one industry ahead of weapons and drugs and we welcome the competition from the sick puppies over at the military. After all, its just another healthy expression of capitalism."

Charlie Don't Need No R&R.

"But if it wasn't a CIA/Mossad set up, then the perpetrators don't care a good goddamn about my theories of public relations," said Bernays. "Even more interesting, they don't seem to follow the tenets of Game Theory even though a soppy Hollywood movie and several documentaries have been made about one of its key figures, John Nash. I guess Charlie don't need no R&R. The 'reasons' for murdering Berg become to the western mind, a set of eccentric possibilities. A report allegedly written by the Abu Musab al-Zarqawi organization captured months ago discusses radical Islamic groups' inability to recruit large numbers of Iraqis to their cause. Though the authenticity of the report has been questioned, if true, Berg's beheading at least in part could have been directed at an Iraqi audience in order to rally support for the purity of their cause or simply to intimidate them though the killing of hundreds of collaborators. Al-Qaeda are not the imperialists. They don't have imperialist concerns or agendas. And they are the underdogs. Not the faux underdogs that Americans fancy themselves as, through their fantasy heroes like Schwarzenegger and Willis, but people facing a vastly superior technologically driven force that has laid seige to their lives and property ever since that same technology sought to develop and profit from the blood desires of its minions of SUV driving living dead.

"However, perhaps it is just what the online site alleged. The beheading was revenge for the treatment of prisoners at Abu Graib and the groups failure to secure their release by using Berg as a bargaining chip. As many right wing commentators have pointed out, this group is certainly capable of this sort of violent action, and one might quickly add that they'd better be, given the fact that their adversary is capable of not only beheading a human being but using a daisy cutter bomb to do it, decapitating dozens of people at a time.

"Such mere public relations amateurs remind one of the caricature propounded of the lack of solid governmental institutions in Republican France. According to the History Channel, those fuckers just indiscriminately cut off a bunch of heads leading to rise of Napoleonic tyranny and war. Likewise, the first years of the Bolshevik Revolution or Castro's take over are looked at in the same light, as the expression of senseless violence, as though no outside threat existed that certainly would have led to immediate loss of power if dire measures were not effected to control counter-revolution from within in league with the Americans and British in the above cases.

"If that were the case with the French Republicans with republicanism sweeping Europe, think how much more dire the condition of Islamic fundamentalist groups still outside the U.S. supported monarchical or dictatorial frameworks that exist in Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Egypt and elsewhere. Look especially at the case of Kuwait which the U.S. 'rescued' like a defenseless, tawny maiden from the grasp of its ideological half-brother, Saddam Hussein. But the U.S. doesn't school Kuwait in the sinewy safety of democratic institutions and their ability to fend off the tyrant. The U.S. again props up the old Kuwaiti monarchy, the West's old invention. But Iraq is required to swallow the horse pill canard of American democracy because a private group of American kleptocrats, the PNAC, forecast a strategic and economic interest in Iraq as the U.S. new aircraft carrier in the region as well as a source of cheap oil for the multinationals even as the world's public has been left out of the equation.

Further, when will the U.S. begin again to accommodate the jihadist as it did in Afghanistan against the Soviets? The answer is simple. When its suits their strategic interests. Is some strategic interest being served by beheading one American? Witness Daniel Pearl. Not likely?

"No. the timing is different here. Its symbiotic. When Pearl was beheaded there was no inquiry into rape and murder in U.S. military prisons, nothing to bounce the outrage off of and get it to resonate. Now, there is. Every homo-erotic spooger in the American suburbs can uncomfortably hide behind Rush Limbaugh's moral equations. He's showering listening to Limbaugh feeling those old self-justifications surging again throughout his body. Jacked off and Zest clean.

"But it was a beheading. Though a traditional form of execution in the region, nonetheless graphic. Only serial killers behead people in Illinois. And it was caught on video tape seen by some and then withdrawn. Maximum impact. Beheadingrequires very visceral body to body contact even if the victim is already dead. This is within the same sexual paradigm as the Abu Graib prison abuse but carried to its most extreme, the serial killer stream parodied to political perfection. Geared to inflame some. With most Americans it won't be for long. Too many distractions unlike the much of the rest of the world which is just "looking for a place to die" as one Peruvian campesina put it. But as short term propaganda it was great. Minimum loss of life with maximum impact. The whole gesture seems to be challenging the U.S. designed as much as possible to reinvigorate a flagging commitment and goad the Amreican public back into the fray. To whose benefit is that? Zarqawi's? So that he can show what the rest of the world expresses everyday, the deep contempt he feels toward the U.S. for controlling his existence and the existence of the people of the Middle East so thoroughly? Sure. Why not? A random act of contempt without regard to western justifications for even more oppression if such a thing is possible. Or did THEY do it my way for maximum PR advantage, springboarding off the energy of a negative while the Pentagon cheers "WHAT LUCK! Those dumb fucks around Abu Musab al-Zarqawi got us off the hook. We are really God's chosen ones, and sorry Rush, we're pretty much 100% anal when the choice is ours. Fuck! Just like in the Iliad."

Loath to express regret, Bush has been forced like a child who feels nothing has been done wrong to apologize repeatedly for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. The issue has deepened doubts about his handlers Iraq policy at a time when his approval rating is at the lowest point of his presidency, but still as though in some sort of pathological denial the word oil does not enter into the dialogue. Our people can be depraved enough to force fuck Iraqi detainees 95% of whom are innocent by our own estimates, but a bunch of latter day Robber Barons are not corrupt enough to seize the executive branch and use the U.S. military to steal another country's resources. I can hear Smedley Butler howling with laughter from his grave. Hasn't anybody seen enough of Rumsfeld and Cheney in action to realize we ain't talkin' choir boys? But that's the media romance. "I'm standin' next to tough guy Rumsfeld" without any understanding of what being Rumsfeld requires in the way of murder nearly every minute of the day. Some people have contempt for these media delusions and dosconnect. Most others are just victims of it.

And, for the first time, Americans are divided over whether Bush or Democratic rival John Kerry would better handle Iraq because that is the only choice the pollster gave them.

Berg's death gave Bush an excuse to stop saying sorry.

"The actions of the terrorists who executed this man remind us of the nature of the many people who want to stop the advance of freedom in Iraq. They want to be power brokers like Dick and Don and Paul" Bush said at the White House. "Their intention is to shake our resolve to exclude them. But we knocked off the Soviets with them and conveniently put them in Ivan's place on the food chain. Their intention is to shake our confidence. Yet, by their actions, they remind us of how desperately parts of the world feel in the face of the U.S. overwhelming power and maniacal material need."

Hours after Bush spoke, members of Congress went to private screenings of new photos of torture, murder, humiliation and forced sex that rekindled the controversy about abuse by U.S. troops.

"I don't know how the hell these people got into our army given we take such care with our educational system to deprive so many of any choice but the military," said Ben Nightshirt Mumbell, R-Colo., said as grim-faced lawmakers pretended to be shaken by what they saw.

Political analysts said the death might give Bush some breathing room, but probably not much because this had become a highly politicized issue and Cheney had left so many powerful people out of the Iraqi money loop.

"The scandal points to kind of a poisonous situation," said Princeton University political scientist Fred Greenstein. "I think the bottom line finally, almost certainly, becomes, we, meaning the elites probably shouldn't have gotten in there to begin with unless the looting was going to be spread equitably among the American kleptocracy."

Brookings Institution presidential specialist Thomas Mann said Americans will be outraged at Berg's killing and demand retribution. "On the other hand," he said, "it occurs in the midst of what appears to be an unraveling of our effort in Iraq and growing public doubts about the value of our having gone in. I suspect that even though the murder was timed to gain energy from the Abu Graib prison fiasco, the anger will give way to dismay and continue the trends that we've seen."

Political psychologist Stanley Renshon of City University of New York said it was "a matter of strategic stupidity" for the terrorists to release the Berg video now. "So why'd they do it, Dr. Renshon," I asked. "I dunno. They're strategically stupid , I guess."

"What happened in the prison was awful and disgusting and disturbing but in no way begins to match the brutality, the purposeful brutality of the beheading" -- as well as the killings and mutilations of U.S. contract workers in Iraq or the beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl, said Renshon. "So why did they choose to 'one up' American brutality at least one on one." "They have a need to be better than us at everything. But they're not," Renshon answered. "Make the check out to my bookie."

He said the video of Berg was "a fairly big deal. I don't know that it turns the corner (on the U.S. controversy). But it represents a rationalization away from being submerged in the sexual guilt and faked distaste that those prison pictures made most people feel they better act like they feel."

Abdullah Sahar, a Kuwait University political scientist, agreed that the tactics of the Islamic militants who killed Berg may backfire. The treatment of Abu Ghraib prisoners has been the top story in the Middle East for the past 10 days. "We were winning international sympathy because of what happened at Abu Ghraib, but they come and waste it all," said Sahar. "Why?" I asked.

mycopyrightorwrongasspr04


home