Skip to content or view screen version

A former human shield writes about his folly

A guy who actually knows an Iraqi | 23.03.2003 05:45

"Of course the Americans don't want to bomb civilians. They want to bomb government and Saddam's palaces. We want America to bomb Saddam." -- An Iraqi Taxi Driver

I was a naive fool to be a human shield for Saddam
By Daniel Pepper
(Filed: 23/03/2003)

I wanted to join the human shields in Baghdad because it was direct action which had a chance of bringing the anti-war movement to the forefront of world attention. It was inspiring: the human shield volunteers were making a sacrifice for their political views - much more of a personal investment than going to a demonstration in Washington or London. It was simple - you get on the bus and you represent yourself.

So that is exactly what I did on the morning of Saturday, January 25. I am a 23-year-old Jewish-American photographer living in Islington, north London. I had travelled in the Middle East before: as a student, I went to the Palestinian West Bank during the intifada. I also went to Afghanistan as a photographer for Newsweek.

The human shields appealed to my anti-war stance, but by the time I had left Baghdad five weeks later my views had changed drastically. I wouldn't say that I was exactly pro-war - no, I am ambivalent - but I have a strong desire to see Saddam removed.

We on the bus felt that we were sympathetic to the views of the Iraqi civilians, even though we didn't actually know any. The group was less interested in standing up for their rights than protesting against the US and UK governments.

I was shocked when I first met a pro-war Iraqi in Baghdad - a taxi driver taking me back to my hotel late at night. I explained that I was American and said, as we shields always did, "Bush bad, war bad, Iraq good". He looked at me with an expression of incredulity.

As he realised I was serious, he slowed down and started to speak in broken English about the evils of Saddam's regime. Until then I had only heard the President spoken of with respect, but now this guy was telling me how all of Iraq's oil money went into Saddam's pocket and that if you opposed him politically he would kill your whole family.

It scared the hell out of me. First I was thinking that maybe it was the secret police trying to trick me but later I got the impression that he wanted me to help him escape. I felt so bad. I told him: "Listen, I am just a schmuck from the United States, I am not with the UN, I'm not with the CIA - I just can't help you."

Of course I had read reports that Iraqis hated Saddam Hussein, but this was the real thing. Someone had explained it to me face to face. I told a few journalists who I knew. They said that this sort of thing often happened - spontaneous, emotional, and secretive outbursts imploring visitors to free them from Saddam's tyrannical Iraq.

I became increasingly concerned about the way the Iraqi regime was restricting the movement of the shields, so a few days later I left Baghdad for Jordan by taxi with five others. Once over the border we felt comfortable enough to ask our driver what he felt about the regime and the threat of an aerial bombardment.

"Don't you listen to Powell on Voice of America radio?" he said. "Of course the Americans don't want to bomb civilians. They want to bomb government and Saddam's palaces. We want America to bomb Saddam."

We just sat, listening, our mouths open wide. Jake, one of the others, just kept saying, "Oh my God" as the driver described the horrors of the regime. Jake was so shocked at how naive he had been. We all were. It hadn't occurred to anyone that the Iraqis might actually be pro-war.

The driver's most emphatic statement was: "All Iraqi people want this war." He seemed convinced that civilian casualties would be small; he had such enormous faith in the American war machine to follow through on its promises. Certainly more faith than any of us had.

Perhaps the most crushing thing we learned was that most ordinary Iraqis thought Saddam Hussein had paid us to come to protest in Iraq. Although we explained that this was categorically not the case, I don't think he believed us. Later he asked me: "Really, how much did Saddam pay you to come?"

It hit me on visceral and emotional levels: this was a real portrayal of Iraq life. After the first conversation, I completely rethought my view of the Iraqi situation. My understanding changed on intellectual, emotional, psychological levels. I remembered the experience of seeing Saddam's egomaniacal portraits everywhere for the past two weeks and tried to place myself in the shoes of someone who had been subjected to seeing them every day for the last 20 or so years.

Last Thursday night I went to photograph the anti-war rally in Parliament Square. Thousands of people were shouting "No war" but without thinking about the implications for Iraqis. Some of them were drinking, dancing to Samba music and sparring with the police. It was as if the protesters were talking about a different country where the ruling government is perfectly acceptable. It really upset me.

Anyone with half a brain must see that Saddam has to be taken out. It is extraordinarily ironic that the anti-war protesters are marching to defend a government which stops its people exercising that freedom.

A guy who actually knows an Iraqi
- Homepage: http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/03/23/do2305.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2003/03/23/ixop.html

Comments

Hide the following 17 comments

I'm not so sure

23.03.2003 07:21

So you found an iraqi and from him you realized that Iraqis don't want Saddam and want the war.
True Iraqis don't want Saddam. The point is: how many people have to die to be a just small casualities for him?
Did you ever asked this man if he is going to accepts his wife, children, friends if they were going to die?
Did you ever tell him that Saddam is US creation? And if he didn't behave, US/UK were going to arm him the weapons of mass destruction or neclear.
How long he is going to accept american and british presence in his territory? Does he think that when Saddam will be past they will go?
First I do not believe that Iraqis want any foreigners to invade their country or interfere.
Secondly it is not from outside intervention that Iraqis will be free, but for inetrnal resistance and fight.
Otherwise another Saddam will be put in place.

machno


Was that really a taxi driver

23.03.2003 07:43

It seems from reading the letter that the asssertions of one taxi driver was what caused a marked shift of oppinion.

Maybe the "taxi driver" was not who he claimed.

psyops


Bravo

23.03.2003 07:46

Firstly to machno: please shut up unless you have something useful to say. The quality of thought which went into your post was exceptionally poor. I'll tell you how many innocent Iraqis have to die to free Saddam - 3!!!! Yes, 3 Iraqis died in the bombing last night. Let me put that into perspective. 3 people is between 200 and 350 people less than are killed by Saddam every single day in his prisons and torture rooms. You got it now?

I am so glad that the author has now changed his mind. It just goes to show that not all the anti-war protesters are stupid after all. I suppose it's all about life experience and naivety.

Inspired


To psyops

23.03.2003 07:53

You really don't want to accept the truth do you?

Bravo


It is about a different country

23.03.2003 08:09

"It was as if the protesters were talking about a different country where the ruling government is perfectly acceptable. It really upset me. "

It's about Britain, stupid - it's about a Britain that most of us believe in, a country that isn't in thrall to an imperialist Zionist US executive.

Until the UK frees itself from the current government and its slavish admiration for every stupid idea that emanates from the mouth of Perle, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the other Zionists that run Amerikkka, we will be forever regarded as the lapdogs of war.

I know some Iraquis too - they tell me that they'd fight for their land just like we would.

Fuck Blair, fuck Bush, and fuck this stupid war.

P.S.
The Amerikkkans have just shot down an RAF aircraft with a 'Patriot' missile. Are you inspired now, Inspired?

Brian


Was that really a peace activist?

23.03.2003 08:35

"It was simple - you get on the bus and you represent yourself."
- Then why seek all the attention from the mass media?

The journey to Baghdad is not a simple one, and not without personal risk. Not something you'd do lightly. So I find it extremely suspicious that after all the thought and effort that would have gone into getting yourself there you would change your mind so easily, on the comments of just one or two Iraqi people.


Perhaps Daniel Pepper was not what he claimed.

yokojakamokototo


human shield? don't think so

23.03.2003 09:17

Everyone has sympathy with the Iraqis, who are between the devil and the deep blue sea. Saddam is guilty of atrocities, of course he is. Unfortunately, going on past records, the US invasion is unlikely to improve matters.
Most likely scenario is that the US will cobble together another puppet government, equally likely to continue repressive measures.

Take the experience of Afghanistan, which everyone appears to have forgotten. True, people have been freed from the repressive yoke of the Taliban. Instead they are ruled by warlords intent only on making a lot of money out of poppy fields while many people face poverty, hunger and lawlessness.

No, this humanitarian thing is being manipulated in the interests of the US, who don't give a damn about ordinary Iraqi people. Saddam was supported by all Western governments for years, to the tune of millions of dollarsalthough they knew full well what his human rights record was.

The US are intent on control, and they will do this by any means necessary. If they can control a country by economic and cultural means that's what they will do. If they encounter opposition, they will resort to military aggression.

skeptik


Infiltration, apropriation and disinfomation

23.03.2003 09:17

are all tricks we like to play.
Damn your truth, justice and equality.

george blair


You expect us to believe that?

23.03.2003 12:04

The peaceniks knew and protested about Saddam's atrocities all through the 1980s then they were at their height, and our governments were flooding him with weapons and support.

I cannot accept that anyone in the community from whom the human shields emerged would not know and have come to terms with this "news" which they have been aware of for far longer than most.

goat


MORE DISINFORMATION

23.03.2003 14:03

I suspect this is more disinformation. It is claimed that a taxi driver has stated that all the money from the oil goes directly to Saddam Hussein. This cannot be true because the money from selling the oil under the oil for food programmed goes directly to the United Nations which then provides food to Iraq.
If the 'taxi driver' has said this then should we believe the rest of what he says and should we believe Daniel Pepper?

Brian B
mail e-mail: brian@brianb.u-net.com


MORE DISINFORMATION contd.

23.03.2003 14:37


Details of the United Nations food for oil programme here:
 http://www.casi.org.uk/guide/off.html
Quote "The 'oil for food' programme, which commenced in December 1996, allows Iraq to export oil and use part of the money raised, which is kept in a UN bank account..."

If you still believe that Iraqi government is withholding the benefits of oil proceeds then read this answer to the question 'Isn't the problem that Iraq doesn't distribute the supplies that it receives?'.
 http://beta.metafaq.com/action/answer?aref=286178&id=HJBAK0N2LDBD9JLHB3J05MNKD0
Quote "In summary there is no evidence of systematic attempts by the government of Iraq to divert resources imported under the 'oil for food' programme. In fact it is the success of the government of Iraq's food rationing system which keeps many Iraqis from starvation."

Brian B
mail e-mail: brian@brianb.u-net.com


MORE DISINFORMATION contd.

23.03.2003 14:41


Details of the United Nations food for oil programme here:
 http://www.casi.org.uk/guide/off.html
Quote "The 'oil for food' programme, which commenced in December 1996, allows Iraq to export oil and use part of the money raised, which is kept in a UN bank account..."

If you still believe that Iraqi government is withholding the benefits of oil proceeds then read this answer to the question 'Isn't the problem that Iraq doesn't distribute the supplies that it receives?'.
 http://beta.metafaq.com/action/answer?aref=286178&id=HJBAK0N2LDBD9JLHB3J05MNKD0
Quote "In summary there is no evidence of systematic attempts by the government of Iraq to divert resources imported under the 'oil for food' programme. In fact it is the success of the government of Iraq's food rationing system which keeps many Iraqis from starvation."

Brian B
mail e-mail: brian@brianb.u-net.com


From someone who reads the news occasionally

23.03.2003 15:09

Anyone who went to Baghdad and was surprised that an Iraqi didn't like Saddam Hussein is so naive that I'm hardly going to stop dead in my anti-war beleiefs and have a Damascene conversion !
This kind of 'I spoke to an Iraqi taxi driver' drivel might impress Sun readers but those of us who really know Iraqi exiles know the ambivalence felt about deposing a dictator by illegal and immoral means in a bid for 'global pre-eminence' and 'full spectrum dominance'.

Cynical


a response

23.03.2003 15:30

I do not dispute this report, certainly not from someone so brave as to risk their own life in the defense of others, I am sure I would not have the courage to do so. But this does not change my personal stance on the war.
If I believed that the UK/US 'coalitions' main aim was the liberation of the Iraqi people, rather than a convenient and publically acceptable by product, I may, although not support military action, find it harder to demonstrate against.

I also do not believe the aims to be, as some suggest the aquisition of oil rights, these have already been divied out, mainly to the French and Russians I believe. The aims are more insidious. It is, I believe the creation of a westernised, Arab state in the centre of the middle east. A staging post for a westernised, or rather Americanised globe, which will soon progress to North Korea, and China, although these are obviously much harder and more dangerous targets. Perhaps this is within current western thinking, a noble cause. I personally do not.

This cause is based on an archaic belief in the organisation and control of the worlds population through centralised government and nation states. In a country like Iraq where the population is made up of many diverse cultural and religious groups how can any centralised government, be it a totalitarian regime or western friendly 'democracy' claim to be truly representative of the people.
I believe this faith in centralised government is ignoring the social evolution of this planet, where individuals are now so much more inteligent they are capable of self representation, no longer needing the elected representative to help organisation and development. I believe this to be central to many of the worlds problems, especially the current threat from terrorism. We should start to recognise that the world and its people are changing, for, I believe the better, and not attempt to hold it back with millenium old notions of states and borders. I return now to the problems the Iraqi people are suffering, of course they need to be liberated, as do we all, the Iraqi regime makes this harder but I believe the mass upsurge of the people against a political system and the gradual creation of a new system is better and more desirable than the miliary action followed by imposition of another equally outdated political system as we are about to see in Iraq. This is my opinion, I do not intend to patronise or preach, that is what the mass media is currently trying to do by telling the anti-war protesters that they are wrong, that they some how lack the ability or right to make their own decisions.

Ps. I also know a few Iraqi's and Kurds, although they are resident in the UK, they do have family in Iraq, whilst bitterly opposing Saddam they in no means support this US/UK war.

ben


a response

23.03.2003 15:32

I do not dispute this report, certainly not from someone so brave as to risk their own life in the defense of others, I am sure I would not have the courage to do so. But this does not change my personal stance on the war.
If I believed that the UK/US 'coalitions' main aim was the liberation of the Iraqi people, rather than a convenient and publically acceptable by product, I may, although not support military action, find it harder to demonstrate against.

I also do not believe the aims to be, as some suggest the aquisition of oil rights, these have already been divied out, mainly to the French and Russians I believe. The aims are more insidious. It is, I believe the creation of a westernised, Arab state in the centre of the middle east. A staging post for a westernised, or rather Americanised globe, which will soon progress to North Korea, and China, although these are obviously much harder and more dangerous targets. Perhaps this is within current western thinking, a noble cause. I personally do not.

This cause is based on an archaic belief in the organisation and control of the worlds population through centralised government and nation states. In a country like Iraq where the population is made up of many diverse cultural and religious groups how can any centralised government, be it a totalitarian regime or western friendly 'democracy' claim to be truly representative of the people.
I believe this faith in centralised government is ignoring the social evolution of this planet, where individuals are now so much more inteligent they are capable of self representation, no longer needing the elected representative to help organisation and development. I believe this to be central to many of the worlds problems, especially the current threat from terrorism. We should start to recognise that the world and its people are changing, for, I believe the better, and not attempt to hold it back with millenium old notions of states and borders. I return now to the problems the Iraqi people are suffering, of course they need to be liberated, as do we all, the Iraqi regime makes this harder but I believe the mass upsurge of the people against a political system and the gradual creation of a new system is better and more desirable than the miliary action followed by imposition of another equally outdated political system as we are about to see in Iraq. This is my opinion, I do not intend to patronise or preach, that is what the mass media is currently trying to do by telling the anti-war protesters that they are wrong, that they some how lack the ability or right to make their own decisions.

Ps. I also know a few Iraqi's and Kurds, although they are resident in the UK, they do have family in Iraq, whilst bitterly opposing Saddam they in no means support this US/UK war.

ben
mail e-mail: ooooo
- Homepage: ooooooooooo


a response

23.03.2003 15:37

I do not dispute this report, certainly not from someone so brave as to risk their own life in the defense of others, I am sure I would not have the courage to do so. But this does not change my personal stance on the war.
If I believed that the UK/US 'coalitions' main aim was the liberation of the Iraqi people, rather than a convenient and publically acceptable by product, I may, although not support military action, find it harder to demonstrate against.

I also do not believe the aims to be, as some suggest the aquisition of oil rights, these have already been divied out, mainly to the French and Russians I believe. The aims are more insidious. It is, I believe the creation of a westernised, Arab state in the centre of the middle east. A staging post for a westernised, or rather Americanised globe, which will soon progress to North Korea, and China, although these are obviously much harder and more dangerous targets. Perhaps this is within current western thinking, a noble cause. I personally do not.

This cause is based on an archaic belief in the organisation and control of the worlds population through centralised government and nation states. In a country like Iraq where the population is made up of many diverse cultural and religious groups how can any centralised government, be it a totalitarian regime or western friendly 'democracy' claim to be truly representative of the people.
I believe this faith in centralised government is ignoring the social evolution of this planet, where individuals are now so much more inteligent they are capable of self representation, no longer needing the elected representative to help organisation and development. I believe this to be central to many of the worlds problems, especially the current threat from terrorism. We should start to recognise that the world and its people are changing, for, I believe the better, and not attempt to hold it back with millenium old notions of states and borders. I return now to the problems the Iraqi people are suffering, of course they need to be liberated, as do we all, the Iraqi regime makes this harder but I believe the mass upsurge of the people against a political system and the gradual creation of a new system is better and more desirable than the miliary action followed by imposition of another equally outdated political system as we are about to see in Iraq. This is my opinion, I do not intend to patronise or preach, that is what the mass media is currently trying to do by telling the anti-war protesters that they are wrong, that they some how lack the ability or right to make their own decisions.

Ps. I also know a few Iraqi's and Kurds, although they are resident in the UK, they do have family in Iraq, whilst bitterly opposing Saddam they in no means support this US/UK war.

ben


MORE DISINFORMATION part 2

23.03.2003 17:18

"I became increasingly concerned about the way the Iraqi regime was restricting the movement of the shields, so a few days later I left Baghdad for Jordan by taxi with five others."

Actually there haven't been any resrictions on choice of the shields locations.
 http://homepage.mac.com/christiaanbriggs/humanshields/news/deportation.htm

Brian B
mail e-mail: brian@brianb.u-net.com