Savagery All Around

GEORGE BUSH WAS right to say the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib represents a "stain" on the occupation. But the image conjured up by the admission-a lone mark on an otherwise clean war-is way off. As the media solemnly tracks the rise of the U.S. body count, the number of Iraqi civilian casualties invisibly passes 10,000, with only a handful the result of prison abuse. There is no official investigation into the rest. The American flag hanging in Paul Bremer's office doesn't just have a grape-sized splotch on it; it's so grossly spattered with blood and bodily fluids it might as well be the picnic blanket the 372nd MP unit uses for outdoor gangbangs.

Though Abu Ghraib was no isolated crime, its implications sink deep and wide, and spinning them hasn't been easy. As one Bush administration official dolefully admits, "The facts are not on our side." So it's fallen upon the more brazen guardians of American virtue to attempt damage control, even as it becomes clear the abuse was systemic and rampant, stretching from Baghdad to Kabul to Guantanamo.

The earliest efforts were clumsy, almost comic. Before the people of Iraq had received an Arabic translation of Donald Rumsfeld's apology on May 7, Joe Lieberman interrupted Senate proceedings to exclaim, apropos of nothing, "I cannot help but say?that those who were responsible for killing 3000 Americans on September 11, 2001, never apologized." Lieberman also reprised one of his favorite adjectives, "un-American," in describing the Abu Ghraib pictures. It was a theme picked up by his Republican colleagues newly eager to put distance between the U.S. and the U.S. military, as if the two entities shared a purely casual relationship.

"It was pretty disgusting, not what you'd expect from Americans," said Sen. Norm Coleman after seeing the second round of photos.

"I don't know how the hell these people got into our Army," said Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell.

Come on guys, where's that yellow ribbon spirit? Weren't you cheering the president when he exchanged a primordial "Huah!" with an air hanger full of fist-pumping Marines last spring? When he strapped on that Air Force-issue jock strap? Did you think sensitivity workshops and Islamic culture classes were part of basic training? Who do you think was scrawling "Happy Ramadan" and "Die Camel Fuckers" on those 500-pound bombs during Operation Desert Fox? The French Department at Yale?

Those engaged in increasingly desperate attempts to establish the un-American-ness of Abu Ghraib received some unexpected help from Nick Berg's executioners last week. When news of the Berg video hit Washington during a hearing on the prison abuse, newly energized Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum leapt up to announce, "If anyone wants to know what we're fighting and why we're fighting this war on terror, this is a good example of it." As with Lieberman's previous remarks, nobody thought to remind the senator that 9/11 and the "war on terror" have no reality-based connection to the mess we've created in Iraq. Nor did anyone mention that Berg's killers explicitly cited the humiliations of Abu Ghraib before cutting off the lad's head.

In most democracies, Santorum would have been pilloried for getting his wars mixed up again. But he knew that wouldn't happen. The opportunity was clear: For a confused country eager to scrub out the "stain" of Abu Ghraib, Berg's violent murder provided a kind of industrial-strength detergent, one that would remove dirt and brighten those Reds, Whites and Blues. It shifted the emphasis back onto some vague and savage Islamist threat, to be fought from Syracuse to Syria. Did the video not prove that we're still the civilized ones in Iraq, even if countless Iraqi men have been beaten and raped with Army issue glow sticks, their Muslim wives made to "show us your tits"? When we dismember noncombatants, don't we have the good sense to use bombs instead of blades, then destroy the evidence? ^^^ Here in New York, the tabloids pounced hard. The Post transitioned from its titillating treatment of Abu Ghraib ("LEASH GAL SEX PICS") to a snarl of imagined civility, calling Berg's killers "SAVAGES!" The Daily News saw "PURE EVIL," while AmNew York chimed in with "BARBARIANS." The always amusing Sun (an honorary tabloid) announced, "TERRORISTS BEHEAD AMERICAN," as if a group of masked Saudis had burst into Katz's Deli with scimitars and gone to work on Sam the dishwasher. On A.M. radio, Sean Hannity rallied his troops by broadcasting the video's excruciating soundtrack, explaining, "I think people need to know what we're dealing with." Rush Limbaugh told Dittohead Nation that the pictures of Berg's severed head made him want to nuke Iraq and "start over."

One of the more insightful comments from the pro-war camp came from Condi Rice, who compared Berg's killers to the KKK. It's a comparison that quickly leads to a useful thought-experiment. Imagine if an Arab nation invaded the U.S.-on the pretext, say, of our numerous active chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs. Let's imagine an Arab force bombed DC, stormed the capital, placed an Arab in the White House, disbanded the armed forces, legalized drugs, nationalized health care and swept thousands of innocent Americans off the streets and into the most notorious prisons of Texas and Florida.

During all of this, America's underground militias would no doubt unite into a well-armed and nationally organized resistance. Just like in the movies; just like in Iraq.

Now imagine that reports emerge that American prisoners are being sexually abused and tortured by giggling Arab soldiers, with graphic pictures appearing on BBC America and underground militia blogs. To quell U.S. outrage, the occupying defense minister, let's call him Muhammad Abdulfeld, reluctantly apologizes, calling the images "un-Islamic" (which is actually how Hezbollah described the Berg killing). Maybe Abdulfeld tosses some euros at the victims' families. "The American people must understand," the far-away sultan explains, "that in an Arab autocracy, mistakes are made, things are untidy." There are Arab calls for Abdulfeld's resignation, but the minister just flies to Texas for a photo-op after getting chewed out by the sultan, whereupon he declares himself a "survivor."

Now imagine the reaction among the more patriotic members of the American underground-the Central Arkansas Regional Militia, say. Imagine the fate of a young Arab entrepreneur unlucky enough to get caught by the Posse Comitatus or Aryan Nation on some back road in Georgia. Our hypothetical Arab would likely be introduced to some hedge-clippers, several shiny Bowie knives, a blowtorch, some gasoline, some buckshot, some rope and the rear bumper of a full-cab Chevy pick-up. Considering the ugly ends met in recent years by some of those in unoccupied America-Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. come to mind-it's a safe bet our young Arab would not receive the relatively quick slaughter afforded Nick Berg.

Which isn't to say Berg didn't die a horrific death. The point is that his death brings zero moral clarity to the invasion or the occupation. It does not justify some amorphous "war on terror," or dilute the meaning of Abu Ghraib. The lesson of Nick Berg is much more simple and timeless: Don't invade other people's countries and mess with their women. If you do, heads are gonna roll.