[Media-watch] Panaroma Programme

[jane herbstritt]

I sent this to the comments page on the Panarama website, but does anyone 
have the email of anyone involved in the making of this programme, so that I 
can send it direct to them?  I would like a reply from someone if possible.


Dear Sir/Madam,


I watched your programme on the British occupation in Basra with interest.  
I gained some interesting insights into what it must be like for the Iraqi 
people living under British occupation, and the programme had some objective 
moments, but on the whole I found it both biased and racist.

Throughout the programme, the Iraqi people were portrayed as children 
'leaderless and afraid' and powerless to help themselves.  The film showed 
the British soldiers treating the Iraqis like children: 'naughty children' 
caught looting and pillaging, or 'good' children who proclaimed that they 
wanted the soldiers to stay because the 'old leaders' were no good and they 
were afraid of them.  As far as I could see, the soldiers did not have any 
translators, and were relying on the Iraqis to fumble along in basic English 
in order to make their needs clear.  The film did not challenge the 
soldier's attitude, they only re-affirmed it.  Only 2 Iraqis were portrayed 
in a good light.  The first was a rich, white man who had lost 10 of his 
relatives in a missile attack meant for Ba'ath party members in the house 
next door.  Despite losing many of his family, the man was portrayed as 
wanting to make the best out of a bad situation.  The letter he had sent 
demanding compensation from Tony Blair was mentioned only in passing.

The second example was an Iraqi man who spoke towards the end of the film.  
He was the first to express the ambivalence that I think it is likely many 
Iraqis feel about the occupation: that they are glad Saddam has gone, but 
they are unhappy about the British troops being there especially as they are 
not adaquately filling the power vacuum, and as Basra continues to be 
without water or electricity.  However, this man was the exception in an 
hour-long documentary.  Those involved in writing this documentary did not 
question why so many Iraqis appeared to be so grateful that the British had 
come in and occupied their city (if you were asked these things by a man 
pointing a gun at you, how would you respond?)...and the journalist asked no 
hard questions to the generals responsible for 'keeping order' in Basra.

I also object to the use of the nickname 'Chemical Ali'.  I do not dispute 
that this man gave orders to gas thousands of Kurds in the eighties, or that 
he is/was a despicable man.  But to give the man a name like a character out 
of a comic book, is to degrade the Iraqi people and to make this war against 
REAL people, seem less real.  Besides, if we are trying to be 'objective' 
about this, should we not always refer to Tony Blair as 'Blair the Bomber' 
or refer to George Bush as Bush a.k.a 'Petrolhead' ?

Finally, I would like to complain about the journalists' comparison of Iraq 
under Saddam Hussein as equivalent to Germany under the Nazis.  Yes, Saddam 
and Hitler were both hideous dictators.  Yes, they both killed thousands of 
their own people.  However, the allied troops fought against Hitler because 
he was invading other countries and was a real threat to many European 
nations.  The INVASION of Iraq took place after 11 years of sanctions had 
decimated a country, starved its people, destroyed its infrastructure, and 
after weapons inspectors had removed most of the regime's weapons.  Britain 
and America INVADED Iraq.  100 British and American soldiers have been 
killed total.  Thousands of Iraqis have been killed.  In the Second World 
War thousands were killed on both sides.  To compare Saddam's Regime to 
Hitler's is to make war propaganda!







_________________________________________________________________
On the move? Get Hotmail on your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/mobile