‘OK. Where I come from in the ol' US of A, three strikes
and you're out. 

Were Americans the only people in the world taking
terrorism seriously? 

On the US side of the pond, security experts are hard at
work wiretapping telephones, posting a strong police presence in public
locations and constantly reminding people to be afraid of terrorists.  

Here, the Europeans were apparently having a picnic.  

The Swiss behaving themselves during a celebration,
without police keeping an eye on things? The French enjoying a drive across the
countryside, without highway patrolmen? The Dutch political representatives
being close to and living like the people they represent? 

These seem like pretty radical notions in post 9/11 world. 

There can be only one explanation: Europe must be crazy. 

Society
Without Security

‘Timing is everything. To the managers of the Iraq War,
perception has always trumped reality. From the beginning it was a war of media
stunts - the attempt to assassinate Saddam with 50 cruise missiles before the
invasion, the Shock and Awe, the bringing down of the statues, Jessica Lynch,
Saddam in the hole, the purple-fingered Iraqi voters and many other events
staged for media consumption. 

The essence of information/media
warfare is to seize the advantage, frame the story, and capture the audience's
imagination. Its been a key part of modern warfare from the set-up flags of Iwo
Jima in World War II to that not-so-safe house in Baquba in Iraq. 

And now we have the bloodied head
of the feared Zarqawi displayed on TV by the very military that will not allow
us to see the American dead coming home. He was brought down by not one but two
500 pound bombs, in an operation that CNN tells us cost $500,000 and has been
under way for months. 

What a coup! What a show! And
what an event for Iraqi "leaders" to show off, using terms like he
has been "eliminated." Within hours, the more polished US military
spinmeisters were showing the airstrikes at a press conference, declaring a
"major victory" and pronouncing another "turning point." 

Think also of the timing. Yes,
they think about timing all the time. Timing is, as I have said, everything. A
day earlier, the NY Times had the defeat of the CIA-backed warlords in Somalia
on page one. The day and week before, it was All the Haditha, All the Time,
with many commentators like Paul Rodgers, to cite one example, arguing that
responsibility for the crimes and the cover-up goes way up the chain of
command. 

At the Pentagon, this was seen as
Not Good. Not good at all. In fact, a very public opinion-conscious
administration was aware, had to be aware, that a new AP poll was coming out
reporting that well over 50% of the American public was sick of the war.’ 

The
"Elimination" Of Zarqawi: A New Episode Of The Media War

‘The
killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was a symbolic blow against the al-Qaida
network, but it is unlikely to represent a turning point in either the Iraq war
or the global fight against terror, terrorism specialists and former
administration officials said yesterday.

The elimination of an important insurgent leader was a tactical military
success, they said, but there are as many as 60 insurgent groups in Iraq, so
the civil strife that al-Zarqawi helped incite will continue. 

His
death is at least a short-term setback for al-Qaida, with which he merged
efforts in 2004, they said. But there is little consensus on what impact, if
any, it will have on al-Qaida's global jihad campaign. 

"Had
we gotten Zarqawi a year and a half ago, you might have seen this as actually a
substantial change in the direction of things," said Noah Feldman, a
former adviser to the U.S. government in Iraq. 

"The
man is dead, but what lives on are his methods - the intentional killing of
Iraqi civilians as a tactic in the insurgency."’ 

A
Mostly Symbolic Blow To al-Qaida

‘They got him - the big, bad, beheading berserker in Iraq.
But, something's gone unreported in all the glee over getting Zarqawi - who
invited him into Iraq in the first place? 

If you prefer your fairy tales
unsoiled by facts, read no further. If you want the uncomfortable truth, begin
with this: A phone call to Baghdad to Saddam's Palace on the night of April 21,
2003. It was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on a secure line from
Washington to General Jay Garner. 

The General had arrives in
Baghdad just hours before to take charge of the newly occupied nation. The
message from Rumsfeld was not a heartwarming welcome. Rummy told Garner, Don't
unpack, Jack - you're fired. 

What had Garner done? The
many-starred general had been sent by the President himself to take charge of a
deeply dangerous mission. Iraq was tense but relatively peaceful. Garner's job
was to keep the peace and bring democracy. 

Unfortunately for the general, he
took the President at his word. But the general was wrong. "Peace"
and "Democracy" were the slogans. 

"My preference," Garner
told me in his understated manner, "was to put the Iraqis in charge as
soon as we can and do it in some form of elections." 

But elections were not in The
Plan.’ 

The Zarqawi Invitation

‘I am Iraq. I am old, and I am sad. Iraq is
pronounced EE-RAQ, not EYE-RAQ. Actually, Iraq is not my real
name. This name was given to me by the British at the end of World War I when,
having defeated the Ottoman Empire (usually referred to as the Turks) with the
help of the French and other allies, including the U.S., which joined in toward
the end, they carved up the ancient Middle East, and created kingdoms for those
whom they believed to be their friends. It was now payday for the Hashemi
desert family in "Iraq," who had helped them against the Turks.  

East of the Jordan River they created the
kingdom of Jordan; on the Arabian peninsula they created the kingdom of Saudi
Arabia; and I became the kingdom of Iraq. Syria also became a kingdom, under
French control. All this was done in accordance with a so-called League of
Nations "mandate." They had no problem finding suitable
profit-motivated family members to become kings, and the dynasties they created
still rule in Jordan and Saudi Arabia. I was a kingdom for some 40 years. My
first King was Feisal I, who had originally been appointed King of Syria; he
survived, with British support, until his death in 1933. Since there was no
apparent heir, I was ruled by a regency until Feisal's grandson, who became
Feisal II, took over in 1953. Kings who are appointed usually have rivals and
enemies, and Feisal II was assassinated in 1958.’ 

I
Am Iraq

George Galloway on al-Zarqawi and the war crimes committed
by Bush and Blair. 

BBC
Question Time

‘Because of the defilement of our political culture in the aftermath of 9/11, it is now acceptable for a Pentagon General to describe the suicide of three Guantanamo inmates as “an act of war” and not be laughed out of Washington. Because of the timidity of academia, it is now acceptable for Dr James Carafano of the US Heritage Foundation, currently a visiting professor at the National Defence University, to state on ABC radio that the Iraq people were really the ones who organised the killing of al Zarqawi, and that all the US army did was “drop the bombs”. In another age, he would have been laughed off campus. 

All reports relating to Zarqawi’s life and death should be treated with caution. It takes a bit of digging to learn that two women and a child perished in the farmhouse along with the Psy-Ops embellished villain. Once upon a time, the targeting of a toddler might have been a matter of regret. Today it is barely a matter worth mentioning. The war against terror is marketed as a defence of civilisation, but from its opening aerial assault on the mud huts of Afghanis, it has been a betrayal of civilisation.  

While the Pentagon can sometimes shoot straight, often at civilians, it can never talk straight. It was inevitable that within hours of Zaqarwi’s reported death by bombing, the official story was revised. He was found to be still alive when the Iraqis arrived and remained so while he was loaded into an ambulance. Next to appear were US soldiers, who “took him off”, according to Gen. George Casey on Fox News, where he was “rendered first aid, and he expired”. Not a surprising outcome.’ 

The Dread Of Being A Bystander

and in yesterday’s Crikey, Peter Ward, a Perth lawyer, wrote:    

‘Please congratulate the troops on the ground for "bringing Zarqawi to justice", said US President George W Bush speaking from Camp David on 12 June. But as far as I can see, the only "justice" to which Zarqawi was brought is Old Testament (or perhaps wild west) "justice", in the hands of his Maker (should you be so inclined to believe). Certainly Zarqawi was not brought to any civilised, democratic form of justice such as has been recognised in Australia or other "democratic" countries for hundreds of years. But why not?  

It has astounded me that, in all of the media reports since Zarqawi's assassination, no-one has asked why no attempt was made to arrest him. If the US knew where he was and was able to locate troops sufficiently close to his safe house that they could administer first aid to Zarqawi immediately after the bombing, why was no attempt made to arrest him? Such an attempt might have spared the lives of the apparently innocent woman and child "collaterally damaged" in the bombing.   

Have we, both as a nation and as a member of the "Coalition of the Willing", so lost sight of the Rule of Law that we do not even think to challenge the Bush regime for this extra-judicial killing? Our Foreign Minister smiled with positive joy at the result. No doubt al-Qaeda did as well – the US and its allies had just illustrated the kind of behaviour which al-Qaeda and other terrorist organisations charge as hypocritical and corrupt.   

Magna Carta, issued in 1215, says:   

No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.

The fifth amendment to the US Constitution, adopted in 1791, provides:   

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; … nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, provides: 

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.. 

Now, therefore, The General Assembly, proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction 

Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person...

Article 10. Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him 

Article 11. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.  

These are the principles for which our forefathers stood, fought and died. These are the lessons learnt from a more barbaric and tyrannical history. These are the foundations of the free and democratic lives we lead today. Our Foreign Minister smiles and our political leaders pat each other on the back as these principles are abandoned. And the fourth estate does not even ask the question.  

Well may Zarqawi have been an evil murderer deserving of his fate. But the method of his delivery – not to mention the collateral loss of innocent lives – diminishes us.’