The following is an archived copy of a message sent to the CASI Analysis List run by Cambridge Solidarity with Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of Cambridge Solidarity with Iraq (CASI).
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [CASI Homepage]
[ This message has been sent to you via the CASI-analysis mailing list ] This is an automated compilation of submissions to email@example.com Articles for inclusion in this daily news mailing should be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org. Please include a full reference to the source of the article. Today's Topics: 1. in case you missed it: "Abuse at Abu Ghraib, the Psychodynamics of Occupation" with a short addendum. (email@example.com) 2. A year from 'Mission Accomplished'-Patrick Cockburn (CharlieChimp1@aol.com) 3. U.S.-funded Iraqi newspaper staff quits (ppg) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 10:36:25 +0200 From: "redazione@DELETETHISuruknet.info" <redazione@DELETETHISuruknet.info> To: undisclosed-recipients:; Subject: in case you missed it: "Abuse at Abu Ghraib, the Psychodynamics of Occupation" with a short addendum. [ Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ] http://www.uruknet.info/?p=2328 Abuse at Abu Ghraib, the Psychodynamics of Occupation Stephen Soldz May 2, 2004 "ICH" -- This week, CBS' 60 Minutes II published the now infamous pictures of abuse and torture by US soldiers at the Abu Ghraib detention facility in Iraq (some of the pictures can be viewed on the New Yorker web site at http://www.newyorker.com/online/slideshows/pop/?04 0510onslpo_prison. <http://www.newyorker.com/online/slideshows/pop/?040510onslpo_prison.> Seymour Hersh has documented in the May 10, 2004 New Yorker (Torture at Abu Ghraib: http://informationclearinghouse.info/article6124.h tm <http://informationclearinghouse.info/article6124.htm> ) that the abuse shown in these photos was just the tip of the iceberg. A 53-page Pentagon report completed in February listed some of the abuse: "Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee." Other evidence in Hersh's piece indicates that in at least one instance, a prisoner was tortured to death under interrogation, then his injuries were disguised and body disposed of. Other deaths have also been referred to. As Hersh documents, the Pentagon was well aware of the abuses at Abu Ghraib. http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fa ct <http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact> An internal report by the Army's chief law-enforcement officer last November documented that the Military Police (MPs) guarding the prison faced tension between their responsibility to maintain an orderly prison and the involvement of the same MPs in softening up prisoners for interrogation. Yet, no action was taken. One of the six military defendants in this case has emphasized the lack of any training or guidance in how to treat the prisoners, and the absence of any orientation to responsibilities under the Geneva Convention. While it is easy to dismiss this complaint as an attempt to avoid responsibility for reprehensible actions, the complaint does raise an important issue. The MPs were not provided any orientation or guidance because protecting Iraqi detainees was simply not of interest to anyone in charge. Further, no doubt the attitude, common among prison guards, was that the detainees must have done something bad to be detained there. So protecting their rights or their bodies was not important and protecting their spirit was a hindrance to the important task of extracting intelligence about resistance activities. While the emerging official documentation of Pentagon awareness is useful, it's important to keep in mind that the conditions in Abu Ghraib and the other US detention facilities have not been a secret from anyone who wanted to know. There have been dozens, if not hundreds of accounts of former detainees describing the abuses. The international press has repeatedly published articles on this. Of course, the abuse has seldom been reported with any prominence in the American press, but this is not surprising, as the U.S. press has until quite recently been primarily a mouthpiece for official claims. Thus, for example, on July 23, 2003, Amnesty International published Iraq: Memorandum on concerns relating to law and order, which warned of "allegations of torture or ill-treatment" for those in US detention, including at Abu Ghraib. As stated there "the organization has received a number of reports of torture or ill-treatment by Coalition Forces not confined to criminal suspects. Reported methods include prolonged sleep deprivation; prolonged restraint in painful positions, sometimes combined with exposure to loud music; prolonged hooding; and exposure to bright lights. Such treatment would amount to 'torture or inhuman treatment' prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention and by international human rights law. Amnesty International's concerns with regard to allegations of inhuman treatment immediately after arrest and in detention camps run by the US military have been raised in its letter to Ambassador Paul Bremer of 26 June 2003. Regrettably, testimonies from recently released detainees held at Camp Cropper and Abu Ghraib Prison do not suggest that conditions of detention have improved." That report further states "Amnesty International has received a number of reports of cases of detainees who have died in custody, mostly as a result of shooting by members of the Coalition Forces. Other cases of deaths in custody where ill-treatment may have caused or contributed to death have been reported." This report contains several case studies of abuse and torture of detainees. Saudi Arabian national Abdallah Khudhran al-Shamran, for example, "alleged that he was subjected to beatings and electric shocks." As one other example from this report, Khreisan Khalis Aballey reported that while detained "he was made to stand or kneel facing a wall for seven-and-a-half days, hooded, and handcuffed tightly with plastic strips. At the same time a bright light was placed next to his hood and distorted music was playing the whole time. During all this period he was deprived of sleep (though he may have been unconscious for some periods). He reported that at one time a US soldier stamped on his foot and as a result one of his toenails was torn off. The prolonged kneeling made his knees bloody, so he mostly stood; when, after seven-and-a-half days he was told he was to be released and told he could sit, he said that his leg was the size of a football." This July 23rd, 2003 report was not Amnesty International's first complaint about the conditions of US detainees in Iraq. For example, the June 30, 2003 BBC News had this story: U.S. condemned over Iraq rights, which reported that Amnesty International warned that "conditions of detention Iraqis are held under... may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, banned by international law." As another instance, in the July 22nd issue of the British newspaper the Independent, veteran middle east journalist Robert Fisk published The ugly truth of America's Camp Cropper, a story to shame us all (available at: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41 91.htm). <http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4191.htm%29.> In this article, Fisk tells the story of Qais Mohamed al-Salman, an engineer and Iraqi exile who returned after Saddam was overthrown to help his country. He was lucky; he was only abused and had a label of "suspected assassin" pinned on his clothes. As Fisk reports, based on what he considers to be an impeccable Western source: "only 'selected' prisoners are beaten during interrogation" there. Eventually, Qais al-Salman was released, but his mother had already given him up for dead as the Americans never notified the families of those they detained. As a final example, the Iraqi blogger "Riverbend", in her blog Baghdad Burning, included in her March 29, 2004 entry: Tales from Abu Ghraib..., the story of a young woman, M., who had recently been released in mid January from Abu Ghraib, after being arrested with her mother and four brothers. While in detention, she herself was beaten and she witnessed several other beatings, including that of her mother, and "the rape of a male prisoner by one of the jailors." Riverbend concludes the heart wrenching tale with "By the end of her tale, M. was crying silently and my mother and Umm Hassen were hastily wiping away tears. All I could do was repeat, 'I'm so sorry... I'm really sorry...' and a lot of other useless words. She shook her head and waved away my words of sympathy, 'It's ok- really- I'm one of the lucky ones... all they did was beat me'" (italics added). These stories are among the many I have included on my web page: Iraq Occupation and Resistance Report over the last year of Iraqi occupation. If I, a single individual maintaining a web page in my spare time, was well aware of the abuses being reported in the US prisons in Iraq, the only way the top generals, Pentagon officials, senior Administration policy-makers such as the President and Vice-President, and U.S. reporters could be ignorant of them is if they willfully chose to be ignorant. Much more likely, they were aware but considered these abuses - like the ones documented among detainees in Afghanistan, and those reported by the few released detainees from Guantanamo - to be the inevitable costs of war and occupation, especially, as is the case in Iraq, when that occupation now is opposed by the majority of the occupied. Under conditions of occupation, the occupier is faced with the task of attempting to win the support of the occupied population when possible and of instilling fear and a sense of hopelessness when winning them over is not possible. Further, the occupation must be justified to the soldiers of the occupying power, who may have reservations about the role they are expected to play. Humiliation of the occupied is an important element in both of these tasks. The occupying army learns to view the occupied as inferior, as not as "civilized" as the occupiers view themselves. Thus, Hersh quotes the testimony of Specialist Mathew Wisdom, an M.P. at Abu Ghraib as he described one of the scenes of coerced sex between detainees depicted in the photographs: "I saw SSG Frederick walking towards me, and he said, 'Look what these animals do when you leave them alone for two seconds'" (italics added). In case we are tempted to dismiss this as simply the aberration of a sick individual, consider the comments of a senior British officer in Iraq to a reporter from the British Daily Telegraph on April 12, 2004 (available at: British commanders condemn US military tactics: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/11/10816 21835663.html <http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/11/1081621835663.html> about the attitude of the U.S. military toward the Iraqi populace: "They don't see the Iraqi people the way we see them. They view them as untermenschen. They are not concerned about the Iraqi loss of life in the way the British are." (Of course, recent revelations of torture of detainees at British hands raise questions as to the degree of concern the British have for Iraqi life. And the over 100,000 Iraqis killed in the British occupation earlier in the century make clear that Iraqi life was cheap when Britain was the dominant colonial power. See Hussein Askary: Lessons To Be Learned: Iraqi Resistance to British Occupation 80 Years Ago) To view the Iraqis as animals, or as subhuman, as untermenschen, makes it easier to dominate them, to break down their doors in the middle of the night, to imprison them without charges and without notifying their families, and to use torture and "torture lite" (to use that apt term of Ira Chernus: U.S. "Torture Lite Led to Saddam Capture) in order to break their spirit as an aid to interrogation. If, further, one can get the occupied to view themselves as inferior to the occupiers, the occupation may eventually be seen as acceptable, as natural, even as beneficial. This was the psychology of colonialism and it is the unconscious logic dominating the Iraqi occupation. Of course, the occupiers usually begin more benevolently. The occupied are more akin to children, who need to be "educated", to the standards of "Christian civilization" in the old days, to "Western democracy" in the present world. Trouble arises when this projected image - with all its accompanying fantasy of being welcomed with open arms by the "children" eager to be educated - collides with the unfortunate reality that the occupied are really adults from a different culture, with their own traditions, wishes, and dreams. Then the occupation gets ugly. If the children are so ungrateful as not to welcome the education the invaders so graciously provide, it's surely a sign of their inferiority. Only animals or untermenschen would be so crass as to refuse the kind offer of civilization. Well, they're not worthy of us any way, so it doesn't much matter how we teat them. If one thing became clear in the 20th century, it is that ordinary people are capable of the most horrendous acts. As both psychoanalysts and social psychologists have pointed out, the capacity to do evil resides in us all. Certain circumstances are more likely to encourage the expression of this universal capacity. These circumstances include being one of a group, being able to attribute responsibility to others or to lofty goals, being in an environment experienced as alien and dangerous, and being in an overall climate in which there is little or no accountability. All of these circumstances are present to a great degree among the occupying army in Iraq. We have known for a long time that absolute power corrupts. Therefore, those who create an environment in which occupying soldiers - Americans - have absolute power with virtually no limits and no accountability, bear the ultimate responsibility for the horrors that occurred at Abu Ghraib, and that continue to occur on a daily basis throughout occupied Iraq. If President Bush, the senior US generals, and all the other commentators filling the airwaves with pious outrage are not directly lying, it is solely because of that marvelous human ability, identified by psychoanalysts and novelists, to know and not know something at the same time. As the soldiers caught in those horrifying photos are crucified in the press and in the courts, let's not pretend that its because of their personal weaknesses that these horrors occurred. Let's not protect ourselves by pretending that it's only the evil that resides in a few bad soldiers that allows such barbarities to occur. Such pretense is but a defense, in both the legal and the psychoanalytic meanings of that term. Rather, let's remember that it's a direct consequence of the logic of occupation and it is the planners and organizers of that occupation who bear primary responsibility. Further, each and every one of us who has not done our best to know what was being done by our country in a foreign country, who has let ignorance, hopelessness, and the desire for a normal life interfere with the citizens' responsibility to know, and to act to change that which is bad in our country's behavior, bears our own responsibility. These atrocities were truly committed in our name. They are our atrocities. So what should be done? Of course, the overall goal must be to end the occupation, to bring the soldiers home and allow the Iraqis to determine their own fate. They may not make the decisions we would make, but that's what adults do, they make their own decisions. And the occupation will end. The recent CNN/USA Today poll of Iraqi attitudes demonstrated strong opposition to occupation before the recent uprising. All accounts indicate that, over the last three weeks, Iraqi sentiment has moved decisively against the occupation. The release of these photographs will be the final straw. No claims to moral authority or legitimacy with Iraqis will survive. All that will remain is brute force, and brute force is a weak weapon against modern nationalism. Thus, the US will either withdraw soon, without further loss of life, or it will be thrown out after massive conflict, suffering, and death. But it will leave. In the meantime, there are steps that can be taken to reduce the levels of abuse at Abu Ghraib and other detention facilities. These must be based on limiting the corrupting absolute power that naturally adheres there, as well as on recognizing that institutions usually place self-protection at the top of their list of priorities. Thus, the world should not allow this be a matter for the American military alone to deal with. We must support the call of Amnesty International for an independent investigation of the conditions at Abu Ghraib and the other detention facilities. But, we must not stop there. It is vital that all prisons and detention centers be routinely monitored by independent observers not bound to speak privately. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) does occasionally visit these centers, but they do not have observers based there and the ICRC policy is only to make their conclusions known privately to the institution they inspect while not releasing any report to the public. These horrors make clear that this level of oversight is no longer sufficient. We need an international campaign to demand permanent, independent, international observers in every Iraqi prison and detention center. Further, this is the time to demand the same for the detention centers in Afghanistan and Guantanamo. The world outcry over these atrocities creates a moment to have our message paid attention to and an opportunity to act. Let's not lose the opportunity to start turning around the barbarities we have come to accept as normal, or despicable but impossible to challenge. Stephen Soldz (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org) <mailto:%28mailto:email@example.com%29>is psychoanalyst and a faculty member at the Institute for the Study of Violence of the Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis. He is also a founder of Psychoanalysts for Peace and Justice ( http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/ <http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/> ), and maintains the the Iraq Occupation and Resistance Report web page ( http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/ORR.htm ). http://informationclearinghouse.info/article6121.htm <http://informationclearinghouse.info/article6121.htm> <http://informationclearinghouse.info/article6121.htm>http://www.uruknet.info/?p=2328 and again from: http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/ORR.htm: Treatment of Prisoners. In response to my article: Abuse at Abu Ghraib, the Psychodynamics of Occupation, and the Responsibility of Us All <http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=5439>, I have received the following comment from an Iraqi correspondent. Of course, I can't vouch for the details, but these accounts of treatment at US hands circulate widely in Iraq: (POSTED: May 2, 2004) Thank you for e-mailing your article on the recent revelations on US troops'abuse of iraqi POW's. Its really a comprehensive one. I sent it to several friends and Iraqi web sites. Iraqis,however were not surprised at those horrible photos and data. A few months ago an Iraqi newspaper published a letter from an Iraqi woman POW at abu-ghraib prison. Disclosing that she and many of her fellow women POW's were raped, she appealed to Iraqi resistance to "bomb the prison so as to wipe out the disgrace to your honour which is now growing in our wombs." We hear a lot of stories about vicious and immoral ways of torture and degradation ranging from pouring sweet and sticky oil on POW's naked bodies and leaving them overnight in rural out-door areas to attract insects of various kinds to forcing newly jailed POW"s to stand naked for thirty-six hours and to hear very loud noisy music to raping male and female POW's and killing others in torture. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ www.uruknet.info <http://www.uruknet.info>: a site gathering daily information concerning occupied Iraq: news, analysis, documents and texts of iraqi resistance available in Italian and English. Any link will be greatly appreciated: you can get our banner or link coordinates from our homepage. Please let us know about new links, so that we can recall them in our link-page. www.uruknet.info <http://www.uruknet.info>: finalmente, un sito dove trovare informazione aggiornata sull'iraq occupato: notizie, analisi, documenti e testi sulla resistenza in italiano e in inglese, aggiornate ogni giorno. Un grazie fin d'ora per ogni link al ns. sito: potrete scaricare il banner e trovare le coordinate sulla testata della ns. homepage. Informateci di ogni nuovo link, in modo da poter contraccambiare e segnalarlo. grazie! --__--__-- Message: 2 From: CharlieChimp1@DELETETHISaol.com Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 16:54:43 EDT Subject: A year from 'Mission Accomplished'-Patrick Cockburn To: firstname.lastname@example.org [ Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ] www.counterpunch.org Weekend Edition May 1 / 3, 2004 A Year from "Mission Accomplished" An Army in Disgrace, a Policy in Tatters, the Real Prospect of Defeat By PATRICK COCKBURN Baghdad. Wisps of grey smoke were still rising from the wreckage of four Humvees caught by the blast of a bomb which had just killed two US soldiers and wounded another five. It seemed they had been caught in a trap. When the soldiers smashed their way into an old brick house in the Waziriya district of Baghdad last week, they were raiding what they had been told was an insurgent bomb factory, only for it to erupt as they came through the door. The reaction of local people, as soon as the surviving American soldiers had departed, was to start a spontaneous street party. A small boy climbed on top of a blackened and smouldering Humvee and triumphantly waved a white flag with an Islamic slogan hastily written on it. Some other young men were showing with fascinated pride a blood--soaked US uniform. Another group had found an abandoned military helmet, and had derisively placed it on the head of an elderly carthorse. A year after President George Bush famously declared "major combat" in Iraq over, how is it that so many Iraqis now have such a visceral hatred of Americans? One reason is that the photographs of brutality and humiliation of Iraqi detainees by British and American troops, which have so shocked the rest of the world and angered Arab countries, have come as little surprise to Iraqis. For months it has been clear to them that the occupation is very brutal; for weeks they have been watching pictures of the dead and injured in Fallujah on al--Jazeera satellite television which CNN did not broadcast. Iraqis, who are cynical about their rulers, may also suspect that real as well as simulated torture is going on in Abu Ghraib prison, where US intelligence calls the shots. They may suspect that, as under Saddam Hussein, the humiliation and ill--treatment were quite deliberately inflicted to soften up prisoners before they were interrogated. More graphic pictures of real torture are said to have been taken as well those shown on US television last week. Saddam should not have been a hard act to follow. Iraqis knew that he had ruined their lives through his disastrous wars against Iran and Kuwait, and were glad to be rid of him. Even the supposed beneficiaries of his rule, the Sunni Arabs of cities such as Tikrit and Fallujah, could not see why they were so much poorer than the people of other oil states such as Kuwait and Abu Dhabi. Watching the dancing, jeering crowd in Waziriya was Nada Abdullah Aboud, a middle--aged woman, dressed in black. She had a reason for hating Americans, though she claimed she did not do so. "I do feel sorry for the young soldiers, though they killed my son," she said quietly. "They came such a long distance to die here." It turned out that her son, Saad Mohammed, had been the translator for a senior Italian diplomat working for the ruling Coalition Provisional Authority. She said: "My son was driving with the Italian ambassador last September near Tikrit when an American soldier fired at the car and shot him through the heart." Saad Mohammed was one of a large but unknown number of Iraqis shot down by US troops over the past year. There seems to have been no rational reason why he had been killed. But the high toll of Iraqi civilians shot down after ambushes or at checkpoints has given Iraqis the sense that, at bottom, American soldiers regard them as an inferior people whose lives are not worth very much. Iraqis make very plain what they think about the occupation in private conversation, but Paul Bremer, the US viceroy in Iraq, and the US military command, shut away in their headquarters in Saddam's old Republican Palace, had no idea of the growing hostility towards them until April. Then, when they started the sieges of Fallujah and Najaf, they discovered that aside from the Kurdish minority, Iraqis had turned decisively against the occupation. Another simple reason for disillusionment with the US is simply the Americans' failure to restore normal life. Iraqis in Baghdad continually say that Iraq recovered more quickly from the damage inflicted by the first Gulf War under Saddam in 1991 than it did after the second war in 2003. Baghdad is a city on edge. Shopkeepers keep their stock at home in case there is another outbreak of looting. The police are back on the streets and there is less casual crime than last year, but it is still more dangerous than it was under the old regime. Abu Amir, a shopkeeper in the middle--class Jadriyah district of the capital, said: "Under Saddam I sometimes did not make money in my store, but I could go home in the evening without worrying if my son had got back safely. Now there is looting everywhere. If you walk in the streets maybe you will be shot by the Americans or by criminal gangs fighting each other." A curious achievement of the US over the past year has been to revive Iraqi nationalism in Iraq. This had been largely discredited by Saddam. But Fallujah and the pursuit of Muqtada al--Sadr, the radical Shia cleric, has meant that nationalism is once more respectable. The extraordinary political weakness of the US in Iraq became evident as never before last week. Despite having an overwhelming military force available to take Fallujah and Najaf, the US did not dare do so. It had become evident even in Washington that to crush the resistance in either city -- not a difficult task against a few thousand lightly armed gunmen -- would spread rather than end the rebellion. Even so, it was extraordinary to see Jassim Mohammed Saleh, a general in Saddam's Republican Guard -- disbanded like so much else in Iraq last May -- being driven into Fallujah on Friday in full uniform past cheering crowds. The old Iraqi flag, now dropped by the US--appointed Iraqi Governing Council, was being waved from his car window. It is a measure of how far the Governing Council is out of touch with ordinary Iraqi opinion that they should have voted to change the flag in the first place. Mohammed, an engineer trying to patch up a broken sewage pipe in Baghdad, still had time to express his fury at the change. "Of course the occupation is a disaster," he said. "We understand the Governing Council are American agents. But a man has to be the worst of collaborators to change his country's flag." On 30 June the US will be handing over very little to Iraqis. Security remains firmly in US hands; so does control of money. One of the biggest US mistakes was not to hold elections earlier, something British and US officials admit in private could have been done. This would have produced a legitimate Iraqi authority to which Iraqi security forces could have given real loyalty. Dr Mahmoud Othman, a member of the Governing Council, says: "Iraqis are never going to fight other Iraqis under the orders of an American." This was amply borne out when half of the US--trained security forces deserted or mutinied in early April. The tide is going out for the US in Iraq. They were not able to use their military strength against Fallujah and Najaf. They have very little political support outside Kurdistan. They can no longer win. It may be one of the most extraordinary defeats in history. --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "ppg" <ppg@DELETETHISnyc.rr.com> To: <email@example.com> Subject: U.S.-funded Iraqi newspaper staff quits Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 19:36:48 -0400 BOSTON GLOBE http://tinyurl.com/2agn2 Editor-in-chief of U.S.-funded Iraqi newspaper quits, complaining of American control By Lee Keath, Associated Press, 5/3/2004 BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) The head of a U.S.-funded Iraqi newspaper quit and said Monday he was taking almost his entire staff with him because of American interference in the publication. On a front-page editorial of the Al-Sabah newspaper, editor-in-chief Ismail Zayer said he and his staff were ''celebrating the end of a nightmare we have suffered from for months ... We want independence. They (the Americans) refuse.'' Al-Sabah was set up by U.S. officials with funding from the Pentagon soon after the fall of Saddam Hussein last year. Since its first issue in July, many Iraqis have considered it the mouthpiece of the U.S.-led coalition, along with the U.S.-funded television station Al-Iraqiya. Zayer said almost the entire staff left the paper along with him and that they were launching a new paper called Al-Sabah Al-Jedid (''The New Morning''), which would begin publishing Tuesday. Zayer had sought to break Al-Sabah away from the Iraqi Media Network, which groups the paper, Al-Iraqiya and a number of radio station and is run by Harris Inc., a Florida-based communications company that won a $96 million Pentagon contract in January to develop the media. ''We informed (Zayer) that the paper would remain part of the IMN,'' said Tom Hausman of Harris' corporate communications. ''He made the decision to resign.'' Hausman said Al-Sabah would continue publishing on Tuesday with a new staff. ''We had a project to create a free media in Iraq,'' Zayer said of the founding of Al-Sabah. ''They are trying to control us. We are being suffocated.'' Zayer accused Harris of interfering in the paper's workings, including trying to stop some of its advertising and speaking to reporters about articles. Among the ads that he said Harris tried to prevent was advertisement from a new political organization called ''the Iraqi Republican Group.'' The ad ran in Monday's issue the last put together by Zayer's staff. The ad complained of the ''griefs of occupation'' and called on Iraqi elite to rally ''to preserve our nation from destruction.'' Zayer said he was told by Harris that the ad was ''too political.'' End of casi-news Digest _______________________________________ Sent via the CASI-analysis mailing list To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-analysis All postings are archived on CASI's website at http://www.casi.org.uk