Matching Grant Challenge
BruceMatch
We’re slowly making headway in our annual fund drive, but not nearly fast enough to meet our make-or-break goal.  On the bright side, a generous CounterPuncher has stepped forward with a pledge to match every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, he will give CounterPunch a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate.
 unnamed

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

CounterPunch Diary How to Kill Saddam

How to Kill Saddam

by ALEXANDER COCKBURN

The last time I saw pictures of a man in need of a haircut being displayed as a trophy of the American Empire it was Che Guevara, stretched out dead on a table in a morgue in Valle Grande in the eastern Bolivian mountains. In those edgier days, in late 1967, the Bolivian army high command wanted him dead, the quicker the better, though the CIA wanted him alive for interrogation in Panama.

After a last chat with the CIA’s Felix Rodriguez, George Bush Sr’s pal, a Bolivian sergeant called Terran shot Che in the throat and Rodriguez got to keep his watch. They chopped off Guevara’s hands for later checking to make sure the ID was correct. Years later, his skeleton, sans hands, was located and flown back to Havana for proper burial.

"It is better this way," Guevara told Rodriguez at the end. "I should never have been captured alive"–showing that even the bravest weaken at times. At the moment of his capture by the Bolivian army unit, a wounded Guevara had identified himself, telling the soldiers he was Che and worth more to them alive than dead.

Back in 1967 most of the world mourned when Che’s capture and death seized the headlines. A million turned out in Havana to listen to Fidel Castro’s farewell speech. It’s been downhill all the way since then. The revolutionary cause has mostly gone to hell in a handcart and the next time America’s Most Wanted came out with his hands up, badly in need of a haircut, it was a mass murderer called Saddam Hussein, helped into power by the CIA a year after Guevara’s death. "I’m the president of Iraq," he said, and then tried to cut a deal.

I went straight from Monday morning newsclips of the US Army’s film of Saddam having his teeth checked to have my own teeth cleaned by Tom, an oral hygienist in Santa Rosa, northern California. To try to deflect Tom from his stern rebukes for my own flossing failures I mentioned the footage of Saddam with his mouth open, while someone checked out his teeth.

Though he gave no professional opinions on the state of Saddam’s gums, it turned out Tom had spent a couple of years in Basra in southern Iraq imparting the elements of oral hygiene to the locals. "I’d point out to them that their gums were bleeding, and they’d sigh, and say it was Allah’s will." Then, like millions round the world that morning we (though, of necessity, I did most of the listening) reviewed the various options awaiting Saddam.

There were plenty of pieties in the opinion columns that Monday morning about the need for a manifestly independent tribunal where Saddam could be accorded every legal courtesy and the administration of justice would be scrupulous.

It was impossible to read this claptrap without laughing since that same morning Wesley Clark was testifying in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), a body conjured into existence by the UN Security Council. As being anything other than the US’s puppet ICTY was looking pretty slutty that morning, since the US government had successfully bullied the court into allowing Clark to testify in the absence of public or press, in what the ICTY demurely termed a "temporary closed session" with delayed transmission of the transcript, to allow the US government to "review the transcript and make representations as to whether evidence given in open session [sic] should be redacted in order to protect the national interests of the US". Further to protect the interests of General Clark, he would only have to endure limited cross examination by Milosevic, a feisty cross examiner.

All the US wants is for Saddam to be hauled into some kangaroo court and after a brisk procedure, in which Saddam will not doubt be denied opportunities to interrogate old pals from happier days, like Donald Rumsfeld, only to be dropped through a trap door with a rope tied around his neck, maybe with an Iraqi, or at least a son of the Prophet pulling the lever.

These pretenses at judicial propriety are absurd. I prefer the posture of the Arab-American woman who said Saddam should be put in a cage and drowned with spit. If it’s a demonstration of power we’re after, let’s go to the history books and check on an execution in 1571 that set the Christian world abuzz with horror for decades thereafter and helped give Islam (Turkish division) a somewhat undeserved reputation for oriental refinement in the cruelest arts of killing. (Undeserved? Check out the method by which Christians finished off Joan of Arc, in effect a pioneering exercise in slow cooking.)

For months the Ottoman hosts of Islam had being trying to capture the city of Famagusta on the island of Cyprus. Under the brave leadership of their Venetian commander, Marcantonio Bragadino, the garrison held on, but finally came the moment of surrender. Pledges of fair treatment of prisoners were made and Bragadino led out his defeated forces, to be greeted with courtesy by Lala Mustafa Pasha. It’s unclear what happened next. It may well have been an impolitic crack by Bragadino, taken the wrong way by the sensitive Turk. At all events the Pasha decided to make an example of Bragadino, just to remind the world who’s boss–the message the US wants any trial of Saddam to demonstrate.

Three times Bragadino’s decapitation was ordered, the sword flourished then laid aide. His ears and nose were cut off, his bodyody mutilated. For ten days he was forced to carry baskets of dirt in front of the pasha, and then kiss the ground. Finally he was taken to the main square of Famagusta, tied to the stocks, skinned alive, the skin then stuffed with straw, paraded around on a cow, with a red umbrella over it as a sign of contempt. When the pasha returned in triumph to the Golden Horn, the stuffed skin was tied to the bowsprit.
Now that’s what I call a robust demonstration of political power. (The Christians got their own back later that year at the battle of Lepanto.) No nonsense about "tribunals", international law, dispassionate judges. It’s actually the plain blunt approach George Bush affects to favor. He should pick a skinner from one of the Texas abattoirs and head for Baghdad.