Comments on: American Graft

By: Vulture Breath

Vulture Breath — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 04:59:37 +0000

It’s just a big tranny mess.

By: Diggitt

Diggitt — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:27:34 +0000

Saddam’s palaces have impressed me for their total lack of a unifying aesthetic. He (or his decorators) went for ostentation rather than splendor, opulence, elegance, or any number of more pleasing qualities.
Remove the American obtrusion from the pictured scene and what do you have? An echoing space far too expansive for its shallow height. Detail by detail, the place could have been lifted from a pricey store at a New Jersey mall. I wouldn’t want to live in Buckingham Palace either, but at least its use and design of space makes sense.
Which is one reason I can’t get carried away with concepts about, for instance, rape. It would be rape to do this at Monticello or Versailles or Angkor Wat — but here, it’s one bureaucracy on top of another.
In a sense, I rather like the message it sends: Americans have no emperors. Sometimes, logistically, there are good reasons for the victorious general to move into the digs of the defeated one. I would be really creeped out if Americans were using Saddam’s palaces exactly as they were, lounging at his desk, smoking his cigars, and so on. I am sure there were moments like that — if you were a conqueror, wouldn’t you do it for a while? — but the Americanness of this cheers me the more I think about it.
And note that at some future point the intrusive prefab can be removed and the Iraqi people will have their palace back relatively unchanged.

By: Michael Shaw (The BAG)

Michael Shaw (The BAG) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:10:35 +0000

Steve, I think I’ll offer it up as a “Your Turn.” Maybe it’s those chairs….

By: stevelaudig

stevelaudig — Sun, 31 May 2009 22:30:26 +0000

Graft as in “new growth” on old? or graft as in corruption? Or both I suppose. The corruption of the occupation is matched only by the incompetence of the occupiers which is matched only by the deceit of Bush and Company which is only exceeded by the human suffering inflicted upon an innocent population. Hilary voted for the war. I wonder if she ever looks back. I get the feeling that the Clintons have cars with no rear view mirrors. Aside William Jefferson Clinton, George Walker Bush. It’s the “Bill and George” Show. But it could be the W and “W” Show too. This is just the first episode. More will be inflicted upon us.

By: Wayne Dickson

Wayne Dickson — Sun, 31 May 2009 18:49:16 +0000

My immediate impression was the opposite of Margaret’s. I was thinking about how the wandering Germanic tribes used to build temporary shelters within Roman ruins.
And speaking of fortresses? U.S. Embassy in Baghdad?

By: Steve in Los Angeles

Steve in Los Angeles — Sun, 31 May 2009 18:29:01 +0000

Sorry this is a bit off topic, but I’m wondering if BAGnewNotes has any interest in this photo that was featured on the New York Times front page on Saturday, May 30, 2009?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/30/us/politics/30bush.html?scp=1&sq=bill%20clinton%20bush&st=cse
Two “opposition” presidents who really aren’t oppositional? Bush and Clinton apparently had a love feast as they relaxed in their overstuffed easy chairs and covered each other’s backs during their joint appearance (each paid $150,000).
Given the US power elite “clubiness” evident in this photograph, does anyone think there’s ANY chance that Bush will be even investigated about war crimes much less prosecuted? His best bud Bill would surely testify in Bush’s defense.

By: lytom

lytom — Sun, 31 May 2009 16:54:14 +0000

The contrast is clear, no matter how you want to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Empire’s art – vandalism is no match for Iraq culture! The arrogance is overwhelming and signifies there will come time to pay up.

By: ratfood

ratfood — Sun, 31 May 2009 16:38:50 +0000

Easy to understand why the occupying force set up headquarters in Saddam’s palaces. They were constructed as fortresses to protect tyrants from an oppressed and angry populace.

By: ggb

ggb — Sun, 31 May 2009 16:35:12 +0000

I get a very uneasy feeling looking at these pictures. Regardless of whether the soldiers need a place to make camp, I find the photos almost vulgar. As I looked at them, I could barely get the words Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, out of my mind. But for the lies of these men and lady, the real villains, these palaces would still be beautifying the country. Bush said in his visit here to Toronto, where he shared the stage in a “debate” (isn’t that rich?) with Clinton, that he felt he did the right thing in removing Saddam Hussein and the world was a safer place for it. I beg to differ. The world would be a safer place today if Bush had not stolen both elections. Who really is the criminal?

By: Thirdeye Pushpin

Thirdeye Pushpin — Sun, 31 May 2009 16:21:08 +0000

I can not help but see the picture’s point of view as that of a cultural vulva looking at the end station of rape.