|
Rotten to the Corps by
Adam Engel That
woman's impish white face and the rattish mug of her assistant, using
hooded brown bodies like giant dildos: striking, humiliating,
creepy, but not abnormal in a place where "striking" means
air-strikes; "humiliating" means demolishing of homes and
livelihoods, not to mention rape and plunder; and "creepy" is
blood, blood, blood everywhere, and not a drop to drink. Usually,
during the bleak hours in which I force myself, nightly, to face the
news on websites, such as this one, I read the text and just
glance at the photographs, but this gnome-like white woman and her pudgy
white male counterpart molding naked brown bodies like clay into various
obscene positions was grotesque enough to hypnotize. Something you
don’t want to see but can’t help looking at. A corpse in the road or
a fight in a family restaurant. And
of course, over the next few days this obscenity was spun by Mainstream
Media into the old "bad apple" theme. The "truth
angle" of this particular narrative, using the plot standards of
freedom and democracy versus totalitarian oppression, and the
“made-for-TV” characters of an evil dictator and his terrorist
minions: liberating Iraqis
from their political sovereignty, oil, and earthly incarnations.
Yawn. But
first the minds of the heroes and patriots who, by joining the military,
unwittingly “volunteered” to carry
out this dirty-work had to be flooded with flotsam – mad dictators and
evil-doers; Weapons of Mass Destruction;
undercurrents of racism, ethnocentrism, and religious zealotry
– in order for the
"crusade" to begin. And
of course a fake set of "morals, ethics and standards" had to
be put in place so the "few bad apples" who inevitably went
too far in their eagerness to please THE MAN with gung-ho hatred of HIS
enemy could be distanced from the rank and file and used, depending on
the situation, as "heroes" or "fall guys." So
after a year of bombing, shooting, beating, humiliating and terrorizing
20 million Iraqis, suddenly photos of this creepy woman and her
goofy cohort pop up, showing how different the BAD APPLES are from the
rank-and-file killers. So it's okay to follow the incineration of
100,000 Iraqis in 1991 with UN-supported sanctions that by 1996 killed
600,000 people, most of them children, according to Madeleine "It
was Worth It" Albright. The day Hans von Sponeck resigned the
counting stopped, and so the only tally of those who died in the years
leading up to March, 2003, is one compiled by Iraqis, and who’s gonna
trust THEM? It was okay to further terrorize these people with a
FULL INVASION--complete with depleted uranium, cruise missiles, and
cluster bombs for full Shock and Awe/Razzle-Dazzle effect--that's been
going on for a year and shows no sign of ending soon (and of course the
effects of the uranium 238 will be greater as years pass and yet more DU
nuggets are pumped into bodies, buildings, and vehicles). BUT,
while it's okay to turn an entire country into rubble, killing many
hundreds (thousands?) of civilians, in the process of taking out the
evil Saddam (What ever happened to him? Must be sitting in the
same Paris café with Bin Laden, reading Camus and writing his
memoirs.), collateral damage, and all that, and the inevitable
accidental shootings of civilians at "checkpoints" blah, blah,
blah--it's bad, VERY BAD, to play S&M Twister with POWs, molding
their masked brown bodies into scenes out of de Sade or some porn-flick
interpretation of The Master's sadistically boring prose. Study
the faces of the torturers and it’s evident they think they’re doing
a good thing. That they’re providing fun photos for the troops to send
home to Mom and Dad. That
they’re avenging the families who lost loved ones on 9/11/2001 (though
the WTC incidents are unrelated in fact, they are one and the same in
the MEDIAted lives of many, many Americans, as scribblings on bombs
(“It’s Payback time.” “This one’s for 9/11,” etc.) attest.
The fact that Mr. and Mrs. War Crimes filmed their fun and games
supports the supposition that these folks thought they would receive the
approval of the folks back home, the troops in the field, even (if
unofficially) their superiors. Why
should they NOT have thought this? After
all, unlike the censored photographs of G.I. coffins, these photos only
displayed one dead body. Their
fun and games humiliated the POWs, but did not, as far as I know, kill
them. The For
days we heard the official outcry of military personnel: “They let
down their fellow soldiers, they let down their country”; “They
abused their position”; “We would want American POWs to be treated
with respect, so likewise we must respect enemy POWs,” etc., etc.
Right on up to Bush’s “outrage and abhorrence” that the process of
death and destruction his father unleashed in 1991, in which Iraqi
bodies were abused and destroyed in every conceivable way, should
culminate in the acting out of concupiscent fantasies by HIS G.I.s,
sexing up HIS holy war. As
if he’d caught Rumsfeld and Powell getting all gay and perverty with
each other during HIS inaugural ball. If
only the photographs weren’t so damn symbolic: smiling white faces
ordering faceless brown bodies into “unnatural” sexual positions; or
if only the abuse hadn’t been sexual at all, Mr. and Mrs. War Criminal
might not have earned the “Bad Apple” epithet.
After
all, the majority of “our boys and girls” are good soldiers. They
adhere to the rules of war and merely bomb, shoot, beat, (and if
previous wars are any indication, we must assume rape) Iraqis and
destroy their property, homes and livelihoods.
For heavens sake, we support our troops precisely because
they’re clean, honest, efficient killers. They don’t get all gross
and perverty and film the enemy having simulated homosexual sex! It
would be a good war, really it would. If not for a few Bad Apples. discuss this column in the forum
Adam Engel is
shocked, simply shocked that |