Agent Pax

Speculations about the Iraqi blogger Salam Pax's authenticity have been around for a long time. Recently they've been resurgent, with several hawks advancing the notion that he's actually a Ba'athist disinformation project. This is not merely being offered as one idea at the far edge of possibility; it's being proposed as the most likely scenario. Charles Johnson of the Muslim-baiting site Little Green Footballs, for example, declares that this has been his "privately held belief for quite some time." And Ottawa Citizen columnist David Warren says "we cannot know yet" whether Salam is an agent, but "what we can know, just by reading his blog, is that this Salam is up to no good."

They offer a number of reasons for this thesis, but their case boils down to this: Salam Pax's posts do not reflect our worldview. To reassess our worldview would be a terrible hardship. Therefore, his posts are lies.

If Salam Pax is a Ba'athist agent, then an Iraqi propaganda apparatus not known for its subtlety would have created a character who mixes his criticisms of U.S. policy with even harsher criticisms of Saddam's regime. Furthermore, he would have preceded his political posts with a long period of strictly personal writing, and he would have kept up the act, funded by Lord-knows-who, after Hussein's regime was deposed. Not completely impossible, I suppose. But not the sort of hypothesis that you should declare the most likely, especially if you spend the rest of your time mocking your political foes as a bunch of nutty conspiracy theorists.

Update: In addition to its leaps in logic, Warren's article appears to include some severely dishonest reporting.

Comments

[JDM]

“They offer a number of reasons for this thesis, but their case boils down to this: Salam Pax’s posts do not reflect our worldview. To reassess our worldview would be a terrible hardship. Therefore, his posts are lies.”

What? Perhaps you should go re-read the articles you linked. The main thrust of Warren’s articles is that he’s a Baathist party member/organ/supporter, or whatever.

I’ll keep in mind your point about worldview altering perception of the facts, however, the next time someone on this site raves about the cell phone service in Mogadishu.

[Jesse Walker]

JDM: If you accept Warren’s biographical arguments, there’s at least two ways to interpret them:

1) Salam Pax comes from a privileged background, but was nonetheless opposed to the dictatorship that gave him those privileges. Despite that, he sometimes betrays a bias towards his class. He is not a guide to absolute truth.

2) Salam Pax is deliberately spreading disinformation.

The first interpretation is unexceptional, and probably reflects conventional wisdom among those who’ve thought hard about Pax’s posts. The second interpretation — the one Warren favors — requires a giant leap of faith. (Er … leap of doubt?) His only basis for this leap is the fact that Pax’s reports cast doubt on the wisdom of American policy in Iraq.

I stand by my post.

[Anonymous]

http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/04/WheresRaed.shtml

—
There are new posts on the blog, and they look genuine.

[JDM]

I haven’t followed the Salam Pax story, but I don’t see how you could claim that Warren’s arguments boil down to the quoute I referenced above.

His basis at least in this article, is that Pax is a supporter of the Baathists, who’s crimes Pax dismisses as “the work of a few bad apples” (according to Warren.) He also says that many of the stories started by Pax and his ilk have been frauds, and references the museum looting scandal.

Whether or not any of that is true is another matter. I still don’t see any reliance on “Salam Pax’s posts do not reflect our worldview.”

[Stretch Cannonbury]

I don’t have a dog in the Salam Pax fight, but Jesse, you have seriously, and I’d guess deliberately, misrepresented the couple of artices I’VE read.

Why?

I can only guess, but presumably because THEY don’t match YOUR worldview.

[Stretch]

I mean, just for one example, one of the stories speculated that the reason young Salam spent so much time hanging out in Vienna was that his pop was an Iraqi OPEC bigshot, and Iraqi OPEC bigshots are all Baath party members.

Maybe you disagree with this. Maybe it’s rank speculation. Fine – say so.

But just throwing mud around isn’t going to convince anybody of anything and adds nothing to the debate.

[Stretch]

JDM –

Come on, man. Making fun of libbies who rave about what a great place Somalia is, is MY schtick!

[Jesse Walker]

Like I said, Stretch, they offer “a number of reasons” for thinking Salam might be a Ba’athist agent. I did not attempt to list them.

There’s a big leap between speculating and declaring your speculations the most likely scenario. There’s a whopping huge subtext beneath that leap, and that’s what I was summarizing in my snide syllogism.

[geophile]

I think I’m with conventional wisdom on this. He is a spoiled brat, has his priorities royally screwed up, and whines a lot. He is flawed, in the way one would expect a person in his apparent position to be flawed. If he is a hoax he is a fine one indeed.

BTW, Jesse, I though “Raed,” his gay lover, was supposed to be missing. In the recent posts, he seems to have reappeared sans explanation. Do you have any of the backstory on this?

[PLC]

Jesse Walker’s case boils down to this:

Salam Pax’s posts reflect my worldview. To reassess my worldview would be a terrible hardship. Therefore, his posts are truth.

I forget – are you the pot or the kettle?

[Jesse Walker]

PLC: Actually, my “case” said absolutely nothing about whether Salam’s posts “reflect my worldview,” and I as much as said a few comments ago that he “is not a guide to absolute truth.”

Geophile: I’ve wondered about that too. Maybe you and I both missed an important post?

Richard: You used to say people like me were “objectively pro-Saddam” because, whatever our feelings about Hussein, our opposition to the war was helping keep him in power. The war’s over, more or less. So how can I be “objectively pro-Saddam” now that he’s dead or in hiding? Unless you want to argue that I’m covertly trying to put him or his corpse back on the throne.

[david f]

hey richard b!

which austrian paper?

cheers,
drf

[Sara]

Jesse, geophile, Raed is not his missing gay lover. He’s a friend.

[Jesse Walker]

But wasn’t he missing?

[Sara]

Raed? No. He’s been in Jordan. Maybe I’m remembering incorrectly, but I thought that the blog name was just a way of teasing his friend. Hmmmm…now I’m starting to second guess myself.

[JDM]

Jesse,

Your argument seems to be that Warren must choose 2) above because the implications of 1) would challenge his worldview.

I don’t see how choosing 1) would cause any such crisis. I’d be willing to bet that his worldview takes into account people who spout anti-American views without being on the Baath party payroll. He’s probably even written about some of them.

[tim]

Geophile:

“BTW, Jesse, I though “Raed,” his gay lover, was supposed to be missing. In the recent posts, he seems to have reappeared sans explanation. Do you have any of the backstory on this?”

I have been wondering the same thing for weeks, but was embarrassed to bring it up for fear of being exposed as less than a “hardcore” Salam reader. (Where is Raed and American Idol are two entertainments I just haven’t been able to get into, despite numerous attempts.) As it happens, Salam refers to his missing lover as “H.” I haven’t seen any updates about H.’s fate, but I haven’t really been looking. And he didn’t make things any clearer by calling the whole site “Where Is Raed?” His storytelling is almost as fractured as his English. (Speaking of which, Warren lost me when he described Salam’s English as “excellent” and “colloquial.”)

[Jesse Walker]

JDM: Warren’s piece has a subhead declaring Salam “part of an anti-Western conspiracy,” and it strongly suggests that the pseudonymous blogger has been working for Saddam’s propaganda apparatus. Johnson declares outright that Salam is a Ba’athist agent. Look at the commenters on Johnson’s site, and you’ll see even more firm proclamations that Salam simply has to be an arm of The Enemy.

I agree that choosing (1) *shouldn’t* cause such a crisis. It’s the fact that it apparently *would*, for these people, that interests me — it suggests that a serious ideological rigidity is in play, not unlike what you see in people who can’t oppose U.S. foreign policy without convincing themselves 9/11 was a Republican plot. (Yeah, that’s a more severe example, but it’s the same sort of mentality.)

[Jesse Walker]

Wow. Do I get any discounts with that?

[rover]

Saying Pax is a Bathist party member.
Saying he is a bored American teenager.
Saying he is an idiot.
Saying he’s making stuff up.
Saying he’s out of touch with the “Iraqi people”.

Those are all reasonable hypothesis based on
the presented evidence.

Saying he was a long term *deliberate* plant of
Saddam’s regime and *continues* the charade
after it fell REALLY requires a stretch.

Hey maybe you’re right. I don’t think so.

[JDM]

Jesse,

I thought headlines and subheads were chosen by editors, and not the authors.

You’re not making any kind of argument. You’re simply ignoring the arguments Warren makes (Pax is a Baathist apologist, he has lied before) and speculating about why he chooses to believe as he does.

As for commentors on Taylor’s site, I don’t think it would be good for anyone if everyone who supported an idea was judged by the rationales given by the people who support them on internet message boards.

The fact that Warren has accepted anti-Americanism without relying on it being the work of enemy secret agents shows that it would not be hard for him to fit that into his worldview again.

[Anonymous]

Where does Warren demonstrate that Pax has lied? Not gotten his facts wrong, but lied?

[JDM]

anon,

I’m not saying Warren is making compelling arguments, just that Jesse’s assertion that Warren believes Pax is an Iraqi agent because his worldview melts down otherwise is unsupportable.

[Stretch]

I guess it was Warren – the guy in Canada – whose piece I read. Yes, I agree that it was not conclusive or waterproof. I don’t think it was intended to be.

Anyway, that’s not the point. Jesse’s argument, if you can call it that, could be applied by anybody taking any position on any issue.

“I disagree with you. But I don’t really feel like refuting you. So I will simply, flatly state that you’re wrong because you can’t face reality.”

I mean, *everybody* secretly feels that way when they argue, don’t they? Every time I hear Rick Barton blather on about what a bright, cheery place Somalia is, I think to myself, “Oh, come on. You cannot really believe that. You know you’re just ignoring reality because it doesn’t fit your anti-American worldview.” But I don’t say that, because it’s USELESS.

Jesse, the hard thing about debate is finding and offering up facts. Just saying “you’re wrong because you’re afraid of reality” is like…I don’t know…saying “Everything you say bounces of me and sticks to you.” It doesn’t really mean anything except “I disagree.”

[Jesse Walker]

I think this debate has reached the point of diminishing returns. I suggest you take a look at the LGF comments, which are a lot more egregious than the Warren column, if you want to see what cheesed me off to the point that I thought my post was worth writing. I grant that Warren offers more in the way of argument and is more cautious in drawing conclusions; I persist in noting that he makes an enormous leap in logic, and that the basis of this leap is the fact that he doesn’t like what Salam has to say. To repeat the one bit of Warren’s article that I actually cited in the post: “What we can know, just by reading his blog, is that this Salam is up to no good.”

[Stretch]

Oh…well, yes, that’s a pretty specious statement. I hadn’t read that article.

Next topic: Shooting looters on sight. Pro or con?

😉

[Stretch]

(because, you know, in Somalia, they just give you a stern talking-to for looting)

[Evan McElravy]

To repeat someone’s cliche from above, I have no particular dog in this fight, though my first inclination — on no particular evidence — is to lean towards Jesse’s view. However, I do have to wonder why he’s bothered at all; the pinheads who lurk at LGF aren’t worth getting “cheesed off” about. I used to occasionally follow links to his posts, but the blathering hatred of the commenters rarely made it an edifying experience. After reading a post on an anti-war protest gone bad here in Montreal — which I condemned on my own site, I hasten to add — that included in the comments the unsatisfactory suggestion that “we” nuke the city, I’ve sworn if off entirely. The bulk of those folk are simply ignorant assholes, and I’m rather surprised that Jesse found their arguments worth bothering to note.

[Kevin Carson]

“Objectively pro-Saddam”? Boy, that phrase sure rings some bells. But perhaps “it is not by accident.”

By that line of reasoning, opposition to a proposed invasion of Country X, Country Y, or any other country in the world, qualifies you as “objectively” pro- the ruler of that country.

Hmmm… Just speculating off the top of my head, I would oppose invading most if not all of the countries in the world. And yet, somehow I’ve never thought of myself as enamored of the political status quo in most of the world. But “objectively,” I guess my opposition to a war for regime change of the whole world makes me some kind of law ‘n’ order conservative.

[Scott Harris]

I’ve read ‘Salam Pax’ for a long time. It’s easy enough to tell who hasn’t. It’s not as far-fetched someone’s maybe trying to climb up on his shoulders to get their head above the blogging crowd. Slick move since SP isn’t likely to be drawn out to answer the fabulous.

[Gerry]

I’ve read all of Salam Pax. He’s genuine. Get used to it. Gerry

[trevalyan]

Unless you think “Muslim” and “terrorist” are synonymous, your word choice is incorrect. Besides, almost ALL of Charles’ news is extremely compelling (just take a grain of salt when he refers to DEBKA, like most people do).

That said, let’s just play the waiting game on Salam. Perhaps he is a clueless, pampered scion of Baathism. Doesn’t make him an enemy agent.

[Anonymous]

Muslim-baiting in action:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=5832

[kid c]

I wouldn’t describe that as Muslim-baiting. The pictures are real and the descriptions of them come from a news wire.

[Anonymous]

The phrase “Cult of Blood and Death” came from a news wire?

[Phil]

Jesse Walker of the LGF supporter-baiting site Reason.com declares that the case against Salam Pax boils down to this: Salam Pax’s posts do not reflect our worldview. To reassess our worldview would be a terrible hardship. Therefore, his posts are lies.

I don’t about that, but I sure do find it interesting that this Salam fellow had internet access (in a country where most people seem to be lucky to have plumbing) and was able to continually post without detection. Whoever this Salam is, he’s either a fraud, or a very priviledged member of Iraqi society – not your average Joe-Iraqi, that’s for sure.

I remain suspicious.

[Phil]

>The phrase “Cult of Blood
>and Death” came from a
>news wire?

And what would you call the religious practise of slicing into your child’s head with a super huge machete? Just another innocent right of passage?

[CharlesWT]

The CIA’s The World Factbook 2002 reports that Iraq had 12,500 Internet users in 2001.

[Kathy K]

I have to agree with Warren on this. The ones who (in comments as well as articles) think Salam is a Ba’athist agent seem to be objecting to the fact that he is in no way pro-American. Despite the fact that I was pro-war with Iraq and am fairly patriotic, I never have seen any reason to expect someone who was brought up partly in the Middle East and partly in Europe to be pro-American.

At any rate, I’m another who has been reading him practically since day one. Oddly enough, my first suspicion was that he might be a US (or British) agent. I got over that pretty quickly.

Thank you for the quotes, CharlesWT, I couldn’t find that second one when I went looking yesterday, even though I remembered it. I’ve got a couple more on my blog, one about losing a family member, if anyone is interested (the second quote is the same as Charles’ third). They quotes are linked on my URL.

[Phil]

Charles,

That’s a mere 0.05% of the population. Those 12,500 most certainly belonged to the elite of Iraq – Ba’athist loyalists and their families.

[Jesse]

There’s some concrete evidence pointing out that Warren is blatently misrepresenting some of what Salam said over here.

[gerry borent]

does anybody know where I can read this austrian interview with salam Px

[CharlesWT]

Phil,

That 12,500 may have grown a bit by the middle of 2002 when SP started posting. Also, SP’s job (according to SP of course) involved using computers when he was working for a Lebanese company whose Baghdad offices had Internet access. That would provide additional cover.

[Jesse Walker]

Gerry: Here’s a translated excerpt from the interview.

Phil: Sounds to me like you’re not objecting to the description “Muslim-baiting” — you just don’t think Muslim-baiting is such a bad thing.

Jesse: Who are you and why have you stolen my name? :>

[j.c.]

I’ve never had a strong opinion one way or the other about ol’ Salam Pax, but always thought that if the blog was a hoax, it was done just for kicks, in the spirit of leaving bigfoot footprints or pretending to be a voluptuous blonde co-ed while online. I’m startled that anyone thinks there’s any real worldview behind it, whether it’s from one gay man in Baghdad or some youthful prankster.

Post-war, however, I made the same observation geophile did and noticed that the blog reappeared a surprising number of days after others in the war zone had been able to get word to friends and family and we had all heard dozens of reports containing day-to-day details about life in the city. But there are plenty of explanations.

Richard, thanks for the heads up on the interview. This comment from the preview is very useful: “If you have been reading the blog for a while you will know that he is the person I have shared a flat with for 4 years in Vienna. He said he will call again today and we will have more time to talk about the blog and all.” Although it’s troubling that the Paxter is calling the journalist, rather than the other way around, if this is true, than PAX is probably someone who is at least from Iraq. It seems highly unlike that someone would go to the trouble of fraud on this level. (Because it has happened, ever, does not make it likely.)

Speaking of worldviews, my friends who are very much in the Salam Pax is really a gay Iraqi man in Iraq right now! camp are eager to see more proof that lone gunmen on the internet are the only useful source of information these days….

[Phil]

Jesse,

Actually, my intention was to write a sentence that was as ridiculous as the one you wrote.

What you see as “Muslim-baiting”, I see as the exposing of the ever-real global danger that is: militant, or radical Islam.

[et]

the Muslim-baiting site Little Green Footballs

Since when is keeping track of world terrorism muslim baiting?

[Andrew Lynch]

I was wondering when Mr. Walker’s update about Warren’s reporting would appear. Look, there it is.

Even in all its colorful multiplicity, the profusion of Agent Smiths looking to tear down Salam is as predictable as it is boring. Thanks, Mr. Walker, for pointing out one of the fabulist clones. I’m going back to my liquid plasma coma chamber, which is warm and free of fools.

[kid c]

There are lots of cogent arguments on the LGF comment board, it’s not all hateful blather. On the Salam thread comments, for example, there are forceful and well-reasoned arguments that Salam is not a hoax.

[CharlesWT]

It hit me like a six-wheeler at full speed, I was sitting in the car listening to stupid radio when I decided to listen to annie lennox instead. big mistake my Precious Little Angel is gone now for 3 weeks to the day. gone is the wrong word, taken is more like it. I have no idea where H. is he disappeard 3 weeks ago. No one knows where he is, he was supposed to take an exam at french cultural center but he never got there. he was TAKEN. Where Is Raed: :: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 ::

Raed I’m sorry but the song just got stuck in my head and I can’t think of anything else to write. actually……. there is a lot to write about but it doesn’t matter. H. is not home yet. from what I have heard today I should brace myself for bad news. political prisoners have been dealt with. light a candle for me will you raed? keeping myself together takes effort the last two days. Where Is Raed: :: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 ::

One more correction, neither I nor Raed are “regular joes”. Actually most regular joes would look at us suspiciously. I have spent half of my life out of this country and had to be taught how to re-grow my roots by someone who isn’t even Iraqi by nationality, he just loves the place (thank you Raed). We both have a distrust towards religion and have read the “Tao Te Ching” with more interest than the Quran. And we both have mouths which have gotten us into trouble. The regular joe would be more inclined to beat the shit out of us infidels, oh did I mention that I am a pervert as well?? The way I look at men makes them feel uncomfortable. Where Is Raed: :: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 ::

[Aakash]

I was just at the home page of the New York Times (nytimes.com), and I noticed this news item:

Iraq’s Slide Into Lawlessness Squanders Good Will for U.S.
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and SUSAN SACHS 9:32 PM ET
Awe at American power in war has been transformed into anger at American impotence in peace.

This is not good…

[Jon H]

Phil wrote :

” Those 12,500 most certainly belonged to the elite of Iraq – Ba’athist loyalists and their families. ”

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on how many of those were home users, and how many were office or internet cafe users.

Furthermore, it’s a bit funny to be demonizing Ba’athist loyalists and their families, when our very own President says that an *ex-KGB* man has a good heart. (That would be Pooty poot).

Anyway, even if Salam Pax’s parents have Ba’ath party ties, it doesn’t necessarily make him a full-on member. More likely the relationship between Salam Pax and the Ba’ath party is kind of like the relationship between Mary Cheney and her father’s party, the GOP.

[Ingle Abhi]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 82.146.43.155
URL:
DATE: 02/27/2004 01:51:42
A person never tells you anything until contradicted.