The media are minimising US and British war crimes in Iraq, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times
Topic started on 9-11-2005 @ 05:01 AM by Souljah
The reporting of the Iraqi death toll - both in its scale and account of who is doing the killing - is profoundly dishonest


We were told that the Iraqis don't count. Before the invasion began, the head of US central command, General Thomas Franks, boasted that "we don't do body counts". His claim was repeated by Donald Rumsfeld in November 2003 ("We don't do body counts on other people") and the Pentagon last January ("The only thing we keep track of is casualties for US troops and civilians").

But it's not true. Almost every week the Pentagon claims to have killed 50 or 70 or 100 insurgents in its latest assault on the latest stronghold of the ubiquitous monster Zarqawi. In May the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said that his soldiers had killed 250 of Zarqawi's "closest lieutenants" (or so 500 of his best friends had told him). But last week, the Pentagon did something new. Buried in its latest security report to Congress is a bar chart labelled "average daily casualties - Iraqi and coalition. 1 Jan 04-16 Sep 05". The claim that it kept no track of Iraqi deaths was false.

It was a household survey - of 988 homes in 33 randomly selected districts - and it suggested, on the basis of the mortality those households reported before and after the invasion, that the risk of death in Iraq had risen by a factor of 1.5; somewhere between 8,000 and 194,000 extra people had died, with the most probable figure being 98,000. Around half the deaths, if Falluja was included, or 15% if it was not, were caused by violence, and the majority of those by attacks on the part of US forces.

In the US and the UK, the study was either ignored or torn to bits. The media described it as "inflated", "overstated", "politicised" and "out of proportion". Just about every possible misunderstanding and distortion of its statistics was published, of which the most remarkable was the Observer's claim that: "The report's authors admit it drew heavily on the rebel stronghold of Falluja, which has been plagued by fierce fighting. Strip out Falluja, as the study itself acknowledged, and the mortality rate is reduced dramatically." In fact, as they made clear on page one, the authors had stripped out Falluja; their estimate of 98,000 deaths would otherwise have been much higher.

And what of the idea that most of the violent deaths in Iraq are caused by coalition troops? Well according to the Houston Chronicle, even Blair's favourite data source, the Iraqi health ministry, reports that twice as many Iraqis - and most of them civilians - are being killed by US and UK forces as by insurgents. When the Pentagon claims that it has just killed 50 or 70 or 100 rebel fighters, we have no means of knowing who those people really were. Everyone it blows to pieces becomes a terrorist. In July Jack Keane, the former vice chief of staff of the US army, claimed that coalition troops had killed or captured more than 50,000 "insurgents" since the start of the rebellion. Perhaps they were all Zarqawi's closest lieutenants.

Source:
Guardian Unlimited

Interesting Article.

It is so Easy for the US and UK forces to "maintain" this Bodycount:

Everyone that they kill is an Insurgent or Terrorist, so that makes them enemy combatants immediatly. If there were any Civilans among them is not relevant. They just blow-up the House, and then when everybody inside is Dead, they leave them there.

Explains why the US Marines stormed the Hospital in Fallujah, when they attacked it one Year Ago. The Bodycount must be Controlled!

And MUST IMPORTANT - US and UK tropps DO NOT Kill Civilans.

When they are killed by Coalition fire, they immediatly become Terrorists.


reply posted on 11-11-2005 @ 05:29 AM by trodas
So, you say that the damn insurgents use civilians as living shields?
Hmmm, I beg to say that this is the Israeli way of doing fight, as you can recently hear about it, that even their court forbiden them such practic to use anymore

So, the Izraelis feel no shame too?
(
www.timesonline.co.uk... )

And US army feel no shame too?
No shame for shooting civilians? No shame from occupating a country?
No shame for not even counting the deaths of civilians?!

I quess the US army is overrated...

...besides, even the official US army soldiers death tool is sort-of bogus. There are 3 or four stations to process the personall belongins of the dead soldiers and send them to their families. Even one of these stations major who dare to speak out say, about 4 months ago, that only his unit alone processed a little over 3 000 of these personal belongings. Now match this up with the rest of the units and the (ATM about 1 600 dead US soldiers) official death tool...

The war reports must be optimistis, is not it?
So, no photos of coffins, let's better not count the causualites of covilians and let's fake the death tool of ours guys a little...

(my personall favorite is, that when the 17 soldiers and pilot was lost in the Afghanistan, when Chinook heli "found" one of the thousads Stingers US supply to the Freedom Fighters, the death tool was two or there soldiers this day :lol

Remember, guys, it is also a information war - eg. both sides trying to supply bogus informations as muc, as it's need.



reply posted on 11-11-2005 @ 10:13 AM by Seekerof
Originally posted by Souljah
Originally posted by jsobecky
Now that al Zarqawi has inflicted a fatal wound on his support base because of his murder of innocent Jordanians this past week, it won't be long before we see him hoisted by his own petard, swinging morosely in the wind.

I do not think that Zarqawi would do anything like that.
If you check the facts...


Perhaps in your quest to check facts, you happened to miss this?
Zarqawi justifies killing innocent Muslims.

Incidentally, I failed to see your response to the factoid topic linked?
Ironic?
A Paradox?
Or simply a selective hypocrite?

Oh wait, perhaps in the further pursuit to check facts, you failed to miss these, as well? One started by you.
The Logic of Suicide Terrorism: It’s the Occupation, not the Fundamentalism
Why It Makes “Sense” For the Resistance to Target Innocent Iraqis

Nothing more than 'a' typical Souljah selectiveness when it comes to minimizing insurgent and terrorist acts of war crimes and solely concentrating on the US and UK. Anti-war and pro-terrorism sentiments, nothing more, nothing less, Souljah. Your doing a fine job in staying in step...





seekerof

[edit on 11-11-2005 by Seekerof]



reply posted on 11-11-2005 @ 10:31 AM by Souljah
Originally posted by Seekerof
Perhaps in your quest to check facts, you happened to miss this?
Zarqawi justifies killing innocent Muslims.

Now, how do we Know these are FACTS?

BTW, the Link provided in that post is gone bye-bye.


Incidentally, I failed to see your response to the factoid topic linked?
Ironic?
A Paradox?
Or simply a selective hypocrite?

So, by not responding to each and every thread concerning this "terrorist leader" I am now a Hypocrite?

What about YOU not writing anything regarding my original topic of this post? About the SELECTIVE reports in the Media?

A Paradox?

Or Simpl Selective you-know-what...


Oh wait, perhaps in the further pursuit to check facts, you failed to miss these, as well? One started by you.
The Logic of Suicide Terrorism: It’s the Occupation, not the Fundamentalism
Why It Makes “Sense” For the Resistance to Target Innocent Iraqis

Whats FACTS is that?

That Al-Zarqawi was CREATED by CIA?

That Al-Qaeda is a CIA Operation from the START?

How come you never mention that?


Nothing more than 'a' typical Souljah selectiveness when it comes to minimizing insurgent and terrorist acts of war crimes and solely concentrating on the US and UK. Anti-war and pro-terrorism sentiments, nothing more, nothing less, Souljah. Your doing a fine job in staying in step...

I see you stay on your typical pro-war selectivness, minimizing US Acts of War crime and putting the Entire Blame on the Terrorists.

Pro-War, Anti-Terrorism Sentiments, Seekerof, nothing more, nothing less...


reply posted on 11-11-2005 @ 05:29 PM by Souljah
If you would know, how Easy it is to Anger you people, you would not ever bothered to answer to any of my posts at all.

Seriously - I think that the Media has done an Excellent Job and has Trained you people Very Well. You are beliving every story they sell to you without any doubts whatsoever. Now, that is hard to do, especially in this day and age, when the Information exchange is Fast, yet sometimes guarded like a priceless diamond.

But, you people - the Jihadist Haters - do not even know what JIHAD is, yet you are so Smart about it. Here, let Uncle Souljah Teach you all a LESSON:

JIHAD or arabic جهاد (jihād), means "to exert utmost effort, to strive, struggle" and has a Wide Range of Meanings. Jihad is MOST MISUNDERSTOOD aspect of Islamic Religion of the non-Muslims - they all belive, or KNOW, that Jihad is closely connected to Warfare. That could not be further from Truth about Jihad. It has several meanings, and two major forms:

- Greater Jihad; Jihad al-Akbar: internal struggle, struggle against ones soul
- Lesser Jihad; Jihad al-Asgar: external struggle, related to physical effort

There are also 5 Kinds of Jihad fi Sabilillah, struggle in the cause of God:

- Jihad of the Heart/Soul (jihad bin nafs/qalb)
- Jihad by the Tongue (jihad bil lisan)
- Jihad by the Pen/Knowledge (jihad bil qalam/ilm)
- Jihad by the Hand (jihad bil yad)
- Jihad by the Sword (jihad bis saif)

So, guess which one of these Five is related to Armed Fighting.

Anway, that was a Short Lesson, that I hope learned some of you, something.

Also you might want to read the
Rules of War in Islam

Thank You,
Class Dismissed!

[edit on 11/11/05 by Souljah]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^