The Bush administration and its puppets CNN, ABC, CBS, Foxnews, NBC, the New York Times and Washington Post have called Iraqis "terrorist" for attacking U.$. troops by suicide bombing and for not always fighting in uniform.(1) The last meaningful distinction to the word "terrorism" has been lost in a swirl of non-stop Pentagon propaganda: terrorism is supposed to be violence against civilians to pressure a government toward a change of direction. Fighting against troops is supposed to be called "war," even according to the bourgeois experts of yesteryear who misused the word "terrorism."
While MIM also wants change from the days of 1776, we do not consider a return to British-style colonialism worth the dignity of considering; yet that is exactly what the Bush administration announces hour by hour and day by day. As of the end of March 2003, the Bush administration was still maintaining plans to administer Iraq as a colony--and pointing to the examples of post-war Japan and Germany as examples.(2) Even nutty exiles in the INC (Iraqi National Congress) organization of Iraqis have refused to adopt "adviser" roles under a Bush administration: at least that's what they say so far. Right now the plan is for Iraqi exiles recently assembled in Kuwait to advise 23 U.S. military officers who will run every ministry of the new U.$. administration in control of Iraq, if and when the united $tates wins the war. That's right: the Bush administration is so far openly planning a colonial administration of Iraq. (We say so far, because we wonder if the Bush administration will use this position to negotiate for the UN, Japan and European Union to pay for the costs of the war and subsequent occupation in exchange for allowing Iraqis or the UN to run Iraq.)
The United $tates has gone so far backwards, especially since 911, that the Bush administration criticizing "terrorism" now sounds identical to the Redcoat officers criticizing the American revolutionaries. It's not just that the Redcoats also claimed that their opponents were uncivilized nationalist fighters. The Redcoats were also anti-French. Those claiming to be Americans and calling Iraq's patriotic guerrillas "terrorists," supporting Bush's colonial administration idea and ridiculing the French for their opposition to colonialism are traitors to the American Revolution.
Thomas Paine wrote his famous quote: "These are the times that try men's souls" to refer to war in which American revolutionaries often in absolute poverty fought without uniforms, hiding behind trees and rocks, much to the disgust of the British Redcoats, who had bright red uniforms and fought out in the open, waiting for the enemy to come to fight with honor. The American revolutionaries learned their style of fighting from the indigenous people. The revolutionaries did not share the British idea of honorable fighting, because the American revolutionaries believed what they were doing was acceptable to save their nation.
"Indeed, every day brought more of those rebel soldiers to New York, including a rifle battalion and five battalions of infantry under General William Heath, who were seen to be young and well armed, but without uniforms. As fear grew among the populace--Tory and Whig alike--that the anticipated attack by British forces would be accompanied by a naval bombardment, thousands of residents fled--perhaps as many as 11,000 out of a population of 27,000."(3)
How similar that sounds to today: substitute "Iraq" for "America" and we will see that now it is the Iraqis who fight without uniforms. Instead of fighting in the open sand where Amerikkkan bombers can wipe out their armored vehicles as in 1991's Gulf War, Iraqis are in clumps of trees and buildings today, according to reporters in bed with the U.S. military in Iraq.
As Dr. Albert Carnesale, the head of University of California, Los Angeles said on April 27, 2002, "So in the American Revolution, Americans were considered terrorists because they fired from behind trees at the British Redcoats who were in formation in their bright red uniforms. But that's very different from killing innocent people as a means to bring about some political end." When Carnesale said that, he did not know how the Iraq war would intensify and Bush would make a mockery of the meaning of all words.
Notes:
1. "'The Iraqi regime's endorsement of terrorist tactics on the battlefield and
on the streets of the United States and United Kingdom is nothing less than
state-sponsored terrorism,' said Jim Wilkinson, a spokesman for U.S. Central
Command. 'But no determination has been made on whether any of the enemy
prisoners of war will be sent to Guantanamo.'"
http://www.msnbc.com/news/893662.asp?0cv=CA01 (The British appear to favor
calling the Iraqis "Prisoners of War," not "terrorists," so they reportedly
oppose sending the Iraqis to Guantanamo--either that or Bush lets the
British take that credit to help Tony Blair build public opinion in England
for an English role.)
See also, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82687,00.html
"Q: How concerned are you about potential continued use of suicide bombings or car bombings against U.S. forces in Iraq? And specifically, what can you do to guard against this tactic?
GEN. MCCHRYSTAL: We're very concerned about it. It looks and feels
like terrorism." (Source:
http://usinfo.state.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/latest&f=03033001.elt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml )
"So the Army's senior ground commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. William S. Wallace, has found that 'the enemy we're fighting is different from the one we've war-gamed against' and that the Iraqis are using all means at their disposal to resist this invasion of their homeland [front page, March 28]. "Apparently, without any sense of irony, the general professes to be 'appalled by the inhumanity of it all.'
"Who taught this guy military tactics? Gen. Charles Cornwallis?
"Next thing you know we'll be complaining that the Iraqis won't come out from
behind the rocks and trees and march in a straight line toward our tanks wearing
red uniform." (Source:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55396-2003Mar30.html )
If the French were consistent, they'd aid the Iraqis just as they aided the Americans led by George Washington to fight British colonialism. (http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=23615 )
"Without France, the United States wouldn't even exist--it would still be a British colony.
"Every American schoolchild learns that a French naval blockade trapped
Cornwallis' forces at Yorktown, bringing the American revolution to its
victorious conclusion. But fewer people are aware that King Louis XVI spent so
much money on arms shipments to American rebels that he bankrupted the royal
treasury, plunged his nation into depression and unleashed a political upheaval
that ultimately resulted in the end of the monarchy."
(Source:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=127&ncid=742&e=6&u=/ucru/20030228/cm_ucru/the_case_for_the_french )
To see ABC News accept the "terrorist" pablum about Iraqis while also speaking
of Iraq as if it were as close as Ireland is to England, see
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2003/s821777.htm
The Washington Times also bought it:
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20030401-87334923.htm
To see Voice of America botch the difference between guerrilla warfare
against an army and terrorism against civilians, never mind failing to provide
any reasonable context of criticism of Amerikan military propaganda, see
http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=8F1F410A-F5AE-4080-9CD500AACFD99E94
Although Kanadian people oppose the war, the mainstream Canadian press also does not know the difference between "terrorism" and guerrilla warfare against an army, as proved by these blindly accepted quotes from the U.S. Army. "'We're fighting an enemy that knows no rules of law, that will wear civilian uniforms, that are willing to kill in order to continue the reign of fear of Saddam Hussein,' he told senior officials at the Pentagon. 'But we're fighting them with bravery and courage.' [MIM aside: yeah, bombing anything that resists from 30,000 feet and sending off thousands of missiles from the sea takes a lot of courage.]
"In Qatar, Gen. Renuart told reporters that his forces had come under attack
from
people dressed in civilian clothes, driving civilian buses and trucks. Calling
them 'terrorist-types forces [using] terrorist techniques. . .'"
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030325.wmain0325_4/BNStory/International
Likewise, CNN did not explain the difference between "terrorism" and war against
an army:
"Coalition forces are viewing the suicide bombing as a warning sign. U.S.
Central Command Director of Operations Maj. Gen. Victor Renuart Jr. condemned
Saturday's attack as a terrorist act but said it did not change the coalition's
strategy." (Source:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/30/sprj.irq.car.bomb/index.html )
CBS News called the Iraqi draft for its military "terrorism"--as if force did
not
back the draft in other countries and points of history as well.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/27/iraq/main546356.shtml
NBC bought into Iraq's warriors being "terrorist" while maintaining Amerikkkans'
warriors are not
in reference to attacks on soldiers, not civilians, e.g.
"'The practices that have been conducted by these paramilitaries are more
akin to the behaviors of global terrorists than they are to a nation,' says
Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks."
http://www.msnbc.com/news/891357.asp
Among other places, the movie "The Patriot" depicts how Americans hid behind tree and rocks without uniforms to kill British troops. If the South wants to be proud of the American military it should be proud of the irregular fighters who harassed the British General Cornwallis and not proud of U.S. troops now facing similar irregulars in Iraq. (The very word "irregular" means not professional army and hence in all likelihood not having a uniform.)
In an ocean of idiotic military propaganda, there was one exception from the New
York Times:
http://www.iht.com/articles/91171.html
2. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,927055,00.html
3. Richard Ketchum, Saratoga: Turning Point of America's Revolutionary War
(Henry Holt & Company, 1997), chapter 1.
[The author of this article learned all the above meaning of the American Revolution in 5th grade and distinctly remembers understanding it by 8th grade. Help us expand this article. Send your favorite quotes from the British colonialists and other historical references during the American Revolution to mim3@mim.org. We can rewrite this article together.]