NationStates Jolt Archive

You asked for my evidence, Mr Ambassador. Here it is

In Iraq, the US does eliminate those who dare to count the dead

Naomi Klein

"The Guardian "

David T Johnson,
Acting ambassador,
US Embassy, London

Dear Mr Johnson, On November 26, your press counsellor sent a letter to the Guardian taking strong exception to a sentence in my column of the same day. The sentence read: "In Iraq, US forces and their Iraqi surrogates are no longer bothering to conceal attacks on civilian targets and are openly eliminating anyone - doctors, clerics, journalists - who dares to count the bodies." Of particular concern was the word "eliminating".

The letter suggested that my charge was "baseless" and asked the Guardian either to withdraw it, or provide "evidence of this extremely grave accusation". It is quite rare for US embassy officials to openly involve themselves in the free press of a foreign country, so I took the letter extremely seriously. But while I agree that the accusation is grave, I have no intention of withdrawing it. Here, instead, is the evidence you requested.

In April, US forces laid siege to Falluja in retaliation for the gruesome killings of four Blackwater employees. The operation was a failure, with US troops eventually handing the city back to resistance forces. The reason for the withdrawal was that the siege had sparked uprisings across the country, triggered by reports that hundreds of civilians had been killed. This information came from three main sources: 1) Doctors. USA Today reported on April 11 that "Statistics and names of the dead were gathered from four main clinics around the city and from Falluja general hospital". 2) Arab TV journalists. While doctors reported the numbers of dead, it was al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya that put a human face on those statistics. With unembedded camera crews in Falluja, both networks beamed footage of mutilated women and children throughout Iraq and the Arab-speaking world. 3) Clerics. The reports of high civilian casualties coming from journalists and doctors were seized upon by prominent clerics in Iraq. Many delivered fiery sermons condemning the attack, turning their congregants against US forces and igniting the uprising that forced US troops to withdraw.

US authorities have denied that hundreds of civilians were killed during last April's siege, and have lashed out at the sources of these reports. For instance, an unnamed "senior American officer", speaking to the New York Times last month, labelled Falluja general hospital "a centre of propaganda". But the strongest words were reserved for Arab TV networks. When asked about al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya's reports that hundreds of civilians had been killed in Falluja, Donald Rumsfeld, the US secretary of defence, replied that "what al-Jazeera is doing is vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable ... " Last month, US troops once again laid siege to Falluja - but this time the attack included a new tactic: eliminating the doctors, journalists and clerics who focused public attention on civilian casualties last time around.

Eliminating doctors
The first major operation by US marines and Iraqi soldiers was to storm Falluja general hospital, arresting doctors and placing the facility under military control. The New York Times reported that "the hospital was selected as an early target because the American military believed that it was the source of rumours about heavy casual ties", noting that "this time around, the American military intends to fight its own information war, countering or squelching what has been one of the insurgents' most potent weapons". The Los Angeles Times quoted a doctor as saying that the soldiers "stole the mobile phones" at the hospital - preventing doctors from communicating with the outside world.

But this was not the worst of the attacks on health workers. Two days earlier, a crucial emergency health clinic was bombed to rubble, as well as a medical supplies dispensary next door. Dr Sami al-Jumaili, who was working in the clinic, says the bombs took the lives of 15 medics, four nurses and 35 patients. The Los Angeles Times reported that the manager of Falluja general hospital "had told a US general the location of the downtown makeshift medical centre" before it was hit.

Whether the clinic was targeted or destroyed accidentally, the effect was the same: to eliminate many of Falluja's doctors from the war zone. As Dr Jumaili told the Independent on November 14: "There is not a single surgeon in Falluja." When fighting moved to Mosul, a similar tactic was used: on entering the city, US and Iraqi forces immediately seized control of the al-Zaharawi hospital.

Eliminating journalists
The images from last month's siege on Falluja came almost exclusively from reporters embedded with US troops. This is because Arab journalists who had covered April's siege from the civilian perspective had effectively been eliminated. Al-Jazeera had no cameras on the ground because it has been banned from reporting in Iraq indefinitely. Al-Arabiya did have an unembedded reporter, Abdel Kader Al-Saadi, in Falluja, but on November 11 US forces arrested him and held him for the length of the siege. Al-Saadi's detention has been condemned by Reporters Without Borders and the International Federation of Journalists. "We cannot ignore the possibility that he is being intimidated for just trying to do his job," the IFJ stated.

It's not the first time journalists in Iraq have faced this kind of intimidation. When US forces invaded Baghdad in April 2003, US Central Command urged all unembedded journalists to leave the city. Some insisted on staying and at least three paid with their lives. On April 8, a US aircraft bombed al-Jazeera's Baghdad offices, killing reporter Tareq Ayyoub. Al-Jazeera has documentation proving it gave the coordinates of its location to US forces.

On the same day, a US tank fired on the Palestine hotel, killing José Couso, of the Spanish network Telecinco, and Taras Protsiuk, of Reuters. Three US soldiers are facing a criminal lawsuit from Couso's family, which alleges that US forces were well aware that journalists were in the Palestine hotel and that they committed a war crime.

Eliminating clerics
Just as doctors and journalists have been targeted, so too have many of the clerics who have spoken out forcefully against the killings in Falluja. On November 11, Sheik Mahdi al-Sumaidaei, the head of the Supreme Association for Guidance and Daawa, was arrested. According to Associated Press, "Al-Sumaidaei has called on the country's Sunni minority to launch a civil disobedience campaign if the Iraqi government does not halt the attack on Falluja". On November 19, AP reported that US and Iraqi forces stormed a prominent Sunni mosque, the Abu Hanifa, in Aadhamiya, killing three people and arresting 40, including the chief cleric - another opponent of the Falluja siege. On the same day, Fox News reported that "US troops also raided a Sunni mosque in Qaim, near the Syrian border". The report described the arrests as "retaliation for opposing the Falluja offensive". Two Shia clerics associated with Moqtada al-Sadr have also been arrested in recent weeks; according to AP, "both had spoken out against the Falluja attack".

"We don't do body counts," said General Tommy Franks of US Central Command. The question is: what happens to the people who insist on counting the bodies - the doctors who must pronounce their patients dead, the journalists who document these losses, the clerics who denounce them? In Iraq, evidence is mounting that these voices are being systematically silenced through a variety of means, from mass arrests, to raids on hospitals, media bans, and overt and unexplained physical attacks.

Mr Ambassador, I believe that your government and its Iraqi surrogates are waging two wars in Iraq. One war is against the Iraqi people, and it has claimed an estimated 100,000 lives. The other is a war on witnesses.

Additional research by Aaron Maté
www.nologo.org

*Bullshit alarm goes off*

Also, who cares if 100,000 Iraqi civilians died? I sure as hell do not. Why do you people make a huge deal over it?

It happens. Live with it.

Too late!

Should have done that before that Marine shot the unarmed insurgent!

*Bullshit alarm goes off*

Also, who cares if 100,000 Iraqi civilians died? I sure as hell do not. Why do you people make a huge deal over it?

It happens. Live with it.

Oh, the irony is killing me.

Disturbing and expected all at once...

I remember reading the NY Times article that is cited. And there were reasons besides the ones cited for hitting the place. Including the fact that there were insurgents in the building who were denying medical care to the wounded.

And the fact that the doctor was able to tell the reporter that the cell phones were taken actually proves the concept that the phones were taken to prevent the doctors from talking to reporters wrong. In fact, if you think strategically, the reason the phones were taken was to deny the insurgents a potential manner of communication.

The reporters in Fallujah were told to evacuate because the US knew they might get killed. They might just have been looking out for their best interests, but since everything the US has to do clearly has an ulterior motive...

When the reporters in the Palistine hotel were killed, it is a fairly well known fact that the US tank crew had good reason to suspect that there were snipers in the building.

The clerics arrested more than likely had suspected ties to some insurgent organization. Espescially the ones who are linked to al Sadr.

*refined bullshit alarm goes off* Firstly the article quotes a statistic that is complete anti-american propaganda, secondly I'm betting just a little bit that the "emergency clinic" was for the terrorists exclusively and wa storing a weapons cache. I don't actually know this but considering almost every other location they controlled and every site where it was a war crime for them to keep weapons they kept weapons. For that matter if that was the hospital that was captured at the start of the fighting then it is certain that the doctors were actively working with the insurgents. We bombed Al Jazeera because they were airing shit like the stiff coming out of that stupi propaganda minister's mouth, we certainly didn't single it out to kill a lonely reporter. As for the clerics, civil disobedience indeed. If by civil disobedience you mean taking arms against the Iraqi govt. and US forces than yes, then yes they did advocate civil disobedience.

Also, who cares if 100,000 Iraqi civilians died? I sure as hell do not. Why do you people make a huge deal over it?

It happens. Live with it.

would you care if, for example, 100,000 californian civilians died? or perhaps if 2,750 people in new york died?

would you care if, for example, 100,000 californian civilians died? or perhaps if 2,750 people in new york died?

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, a 9-11 burn, i bet he feels stupid now.... or strangly patriotic

You asked for my evidence, Mr Ambassador. Here it is

In Iraq, the US does eliminate those who dare to count the dead

Naomi Klein

"The Guardian "

David T Johnson,
Acting ambassador,
US Embassy, London

Dear Mr Johnson, On November 26, your press counsellor sent a letter to the Guardian taking strong exception to a sentence in my column of the same day. The sentence read: "In Iraq, US forces and their Iraqi surrogates are no longer bothering to conceal attacks on civilian targets and are openly eliminating anyone - doctors, clerics, journalists - who dares to count the bodies." Of particular concern was the word "eliminating".

The letter suggested that my charge was "baseless" and asked the Guardian either to withdraw it, or provide "evidence of this extremely grave accusation". It is quite rare for US embassy officials to openly involve themselves in the free press of a foreign country, so I took the letter extremely seriously. But while I agree that the accusation is grave, I have no intention of withdrawing it. Here, instead, is the evidence you requested.

In April, US forces laid siege to Falluja in retaliation for the gruesome killings of four Blackwater employees. The operation was a failure, with US troops eventually handing the city back to resistance forces. The reason for the withdrawal was that the siege had sparked uprisings across the country, triggered by reports that hundreds of civilians had been killed. This information came from three main sources: 1) Doctors. USA Today reported on April 11 that "Statistics and names of the dead were gathered from four main clinics around the city and from Falluja general hospital". 2) Arab TV journalists. While doctors reported the numbers of dead, it was al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya that put a human face on those statistics. With unembedded camera crews in Falluja, both networks beamed footage of mutilated women and children throughout Iraq and the Arab-speaking world. 3) Clerics. The reports of high civilian casualties coming from journalists and doctors were seized upon by prominent clerics in Iraq. Many delivered fiery sermons condemning the attack, turning their congregants against US forces and igniting the uprising that forced US troops to withdraw.

US authorities have denied that hundreds of civilians were killed during last April's siege, and have lashed out at the sources of these reports. For instance, an unnamed "senior American officer", speaking to the New York Times last month, labelled Falluja general hospital "a centre of propaganda". But the strongest words were reserved for Arab TV networks. When asked about al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya's reports that hundreds of civilians had been killed in Falluja, Donald Rumsfeld, the US secretary of defence, replied that "what al-Jazeera is doing is vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable ... " Last month, US troops once again laid siege to Falluja - but this time the attack included a new tactic: eliminating the doctors, journalists and clerics who focused public attention on civilian casualties last time around.

Eliminating doctors
The first major operation by US marines and Iraqi soldiers was to storm Falluja general hospital, arresting doctors and placing the facility under military control. The New York Times reported that "the hospital was selected as an early target because the American military believed that it was the source of rumours about heavy casual ties", noting that "this time around, the American military intends to fight its own information war, countering or squelching what has been one of the insurgents' most potent weapons". The Los Angeles Times quoted a doctor as saying that the soldiers "stole the mobile phones" at the hospital - preventing doctors from communicating with the outside world.

But this was not the worst of the attacks on health workers. Two days earlier, a crucial emergency health clinic was bombed to rubble, as well as a medical supplies dispensary next door. Dr Sami al-Jumaili, who was working in the clinic, says the bombs took the lives of 15 medics, four nurses and 35 patients. The Los Angeles Times reported that the manager of Falluja general hospital "had told a US general the location of the downtown makeshift medical centre" before it was hit.

Whether the clinic was targeted or destroyed accidentally, the effect was the same: to eliminate many of Falluja's doctors from the war zone. As Dr Jumaili told the Independent on November 14: "There is not a single surgeon in Falluja." When fighting moved to Mosul, a similar tactic was used: on entering the city, US and Iraqi forces immediately seized control of the al-Zaharawi hospital.

Eliminating journalists
The images from last month's siege on Falluja came almost exclusively from reporters embedded with US troops. This is because Arab journalists who had covered April's siege from the civilian perspective had effectively been eliminated. Al-Jazeera had no cameras on the ground because it has been banned from reporting in Iraq indefinitely. Al-Arabiya did have an unembedded reporter, Abdel Kader Al-Saadi, in Falluja, but on November 11 US forces arrested him and held him for the length of the siege. Al-Saadi's detention has been condemned by Reporters Without Borders and the International Federation of Journalists. "We cannot ignore the possibility that he is being intimidated for just trying to do his job," the IFJ stated.

It's not the first time journalists in Iraq have faced this kind of intimidation. When US forces invaded Baghdad in April 2003, US Central Command urged all unembedded journalists to leave the city. Some insisted on staying and at least three paid with their lives. On April 8, a US aircraft bombed al-Jazeera's Baghdad offices, killing reporter Tareq Ayyoub. Al-Jazeera has documentation proving it gave the coordinates of its location to US forces.

On the same day, a US tank fired on the Palestine hotel, killing José Couso, of the Spanish network Telecinco, and Taras Protsiuk, of Reuters. Three US soldiers are facing a criminal lawsuit from Couso's family, which alleges that US forces were well aware that journalists were in the Palestine hotel and that they committed a war crime.

Eliminating clerics
Just as doctors and journalists have been targeted, so too have many of the clerics who have spoken out forcefully against the killings in Falluja. On November 11, Sheik Mahdi al-Sumaidaei, the head of the Supreme Association for Guidance and Daawa, was arrested. According to Associated Press, "Al-Sumaidaei has called on the country's Sunni minority to launch a civil disobedience campaign if the Iraqi government does not halt the attack on Falluja". On November 19, AP reported that US and Iraqi forces stormed a prominent Sunni mosque, the Abu Hanifa, in Aadhamiya, killing three people and arresting 40, including the chief cleric - another opponent of the Falluja siege. On the same day, Fox News reported that "US troops also raided a Sunni mosque in Qaim, near the Syrian border". The report described the arrests as "retaliation for opposing the Falluja offensive". Two Shia clerics associated with Moqtada al-Sadr have also been arrested in recent weeks; according to AP, "both had spoken out against the Falluja attack".

"We don't do body counts," said General Tommy Franks of US Central Command. The question is: what happens to the people who insist on counting the bodies - the doctors who must pronounce their patients dead, the journalists who document these losses, the clerics who denounce them? In Iraq, evidence is mounting that these voices are being systematically silenced through a variety of means, from mass arrests, to raids on hospitals, media bans, and overt and unexplained physical attacks.

Mr Ambassador, I believe that your government and its Iraqi surrogates are waging two wars in Iraq. One war is against the Iraqi people, and it has claimed an estimated 100,000 lives. The other is a war on witnesses.

Additional research by Aaron Maté
www.nologo.org



good..............

*Bullshit alarm goes off*

Also, who cares if 100,000 Iraqi civilians died? I sure as hell do not. Why do you people make a huge deal over it?

It happens. Live with it.
But you do care if a mere 3000 die? 3000 Americans at that. Why would anyone make a big fuzz over 3000 lousy Yanks?

If that doesn't get modded, I will raise hell. I say "Shut up traitor" and a Mod gets on my ass. This guy says "Lousy Yanks" nothing happens. Bullshit.

Fucking biased mods.

People die in war, live with it people. This is a war, 9/11 was a terrorist attack. See the difference?

see, to them, they have been at war with you for over.... 10 years now is it?

If that doesn't get modded, I will raise hell. I say "Shut up traitor" and a Mod gets on my ass. This guy says "Lousy Yanks" nothing happens. Bullshit.

Fucking biased mods.

People die in war, live with it people. This is a war, 9/11 was a terrorist attack. See the difference?
How am I a traitor? I'm, thank god, not a lousy Yank!!!
And the Iraq war was a terrorist attack. While 911 was a blow for freedom against the tyrant. Which later got out of hand once the tyrant mobilized it's barbarian hordes.

And what are you, Von Witzleben?

And what are you, Von Witzleben?
I'm a German!! Living in the Netherlands!!! An all alround European.

...and a prejudice (Must not flame)

Way to go, champ

...and a racist.

Way to go, champ
Your confusing me with yourself. Yanks are not a race.
100,000 Iraqis for only 3000 yanks.

But you do care if a mere 3000 die? 3000 Americans at that. Why would anyone make a big fuzz over 3000 lousy Yanks?


It's all perspective.


Iraqi deaths are important to Europe because it in their eyes it lowers America's standing in the world. Otherwise they wouldn't give a shit like they didn't when saddam was in power.


Thats the way things are.

Which is why I edited my mistake around the same time you pointed it out.

It's all perspective.


Iraqi deaths are important to Europe because it in their eyes it lowers America's standing in the world. Otherwise they wouldn't give a shit like they didn't when saddam was in power.


Thats the way things are.
It's not like the Americans gave a shit when Saddam was in power either.

I'm begining to vote for "nuke the site from orbit -- it's the only way to be sure". But then, why stop at Iraq? Let's hit the rest of the middle east, western and eastern Europe, the orient, central and south America, Africa and the mediteranean. Shit, why not take out either US coast while we're at it. Then all the problems will go away. And so what if it's just a few hundred billion people, right? They're the wrong kind of people anyhow.

Seriously though,

Also, who cares if 100,000 Iraqi civilians died? I sure as hell do not. Why do you people make a huge deal over it?

It happens. Live with it.

WTF? I just don't get this kind of thinking. Doesn't he get that this kind of thing happening only strengthens the resolve of the very people who so fervently hate the West that they are willing to fly planes into buildings? Yes, the mullahs will say whatever they want to make it happen. But the mistakes we are making in Iraq are only going to give their diatribe that much more weight and validity and breed that many more martyrs.

...and a prejudice (Must not flame)

Way to go, champ

insults aside, how can you justify 3000 americans to 100 000 iraqis?

none were combatants

then again, look at the way americans still look at peral harbour. THE defining moment of ww2. fuck, like genocide wasnt enough.

People die in war, live with it people. This is a war, 9/11 was a terrorist attack. See the difference?

No, I don't see the difference, please explain

(I am not saying that I think 9-11 was ok)

People die in war, live with it people. This is a war, 9/11 was a terrorist attack. See the difference?

... because we all know "war" magically justifies any actions. It's not like the people responsible for it could stop at anytime.

*Launches Modnukes and kills 1.2bn people*

All you have done in the General Forum is troll, flamebait, insult people...next nation you create, try to show respect to all parties in a debate. It is a reasonable request, you should have no problems in complying, nor any reason to complain about it being made.

Tactical Grace
Game Moderator

Whatever the fuck, I would have only been deleted within 2 weeks anyways.

And yes, I am Sythia. Match my IP.

If you're going to attempt to enforce a Delete on Sight order, make sure you actually try to enforce it, Jackass.

...

And the Iraq war was a terrorist attack. While 911 was a blow for freedom against the tyrant. Which later got out of hand once the tyrant mobilized it's barbarian hordes.


Hold up there, skippy! 9/11 was a blow for freedom against the tyrant? Again I ask WTF! Make no mistake that those planes that slammed into the WTC's was obviously a terrorist attack. The Pentagon could be considered a valid military target, but NOT what happened in NYC.

The strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan were, valid or not, retalliation and vengence for the TERRORIST attack by Al-qeada (or however it's being spelled this week), and the war in Iraq has a two-fold purpose. A)Securing a source for oil for American military operations into the 21st century, and B) the chance to take out a HVT that had pissed of the neo-cons one time too many. WMD and, now, Democarcay were just good spin to get the herd to go along with the mission.


Flame away!

Whatever the fuck, I would have only been deleted within 2 weeks anyways.

And yes, I am Sythia. Match my IP.

If you're going to attempt to enforce a Delete on Sight order, make sure you actually try to enforce it, Jackass.
Whatever. You really think I give a f---? You're not that important, LOL.

the war in Iraq has a two-fold purpose. A)Securing a source for oil for American military operations into the 21st century, and B) the chance to take out a HVT that had pissed of the neo-cons one time too many. WMD and, now, Democarcay were just good spin to get the herd to go along with the mission.

No argument there.

Doctors(from what I've seen) are people who charge too much for something you have to get, go to school for a long time so they think they're better than you, and make sure that they get at least $250 every time you come in, even if it turns out the thing was nothing. That, or they prescribe something you don't need. Journalists? Well I can't really say anything about them. And no offense to any doctors or journalists reading this. I'm quite certain that my generalization comes from a past of having bad doctors, and that you don't fit the stereotype. That, and I'm trying to justify the secretary of defense's actions. Although you'd think if Rumsfeld and the military were doing this sort of thing, it would fit under the "breaking news: special report" category. Maybe I should have read the entire first post, and not just based this off of the title of the topic...nevermind this.

No argument there.

Hey Von witzleben, You also saw the new images of those cowards called "Seals" torturing bounded muslims? What is the world waiting for to ask for some respect for humanity to the US? Hell if this (or less) was done by Russia in the 80ties, the free (now without the US,= under a regime) world then would have its say.

Europe and Russia are as coward as those fag seals, by condamning nothing.

Hey Von witzleben, You also saw the new images of those cowards called "Seals" torturing bounded muslims?
Nope. Haven't seen them yet.
What is the world waiting for to ask for some respect for humanity to the US?
Perhaps because they know by now that that would be asking for to much.

Everyone else, let us have a bit of calm here.

Tactical Grace
Game Moderator

Everyone else, let us have a bit of calm here.

Tactical Grace
Game Moderator
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMM......I am one with the universe.

Everyone else, let us have a bit of calm here.

Tactical Grace
Game Moderator


Calm? On NS? Wouldn't that be kinda dull. :D

It's all so sad to me. I don't have a clue what's going on in Iraq. Not a damn clue.

The news in the US says this:north pole

The news in Iraq says this:south pole

How the hell is anyone supposed to really know what's really happening? Put them both together and say, "well if the new york times says north pole and al-jazeera says south pole, than what's really going on is the equator.."?

bleh, i just want to know wtf is really going on.

Lousy YanksLousy YanksLousy YanksLousy YanksLousy YanksLousy YanksLousy YanksLousy Yanks etc....
How am I a traitor? I'm, thank god, not a lousy Yank!!!
And the Iraq war was a terrorist attack. While 911 was a blow for freedom against the tyrant. Which later got out of hand once the tyrant mobilized it's barbarian hordes.
Please refrain from flamebaiting.

Tactical Grace
Game Moderator

Please refrain from flamebaiting.

Tactical Grace
Game Moderator
Sorry bout that.

Everyone else, let us have a bit of calm here.

Tactical Grace
Game Moderator

As an escarpment class GCU you are the last mind to be asking for calm.

Get yourself a GSV.

*Bullshit alarm goes off*

Also, who cares if 100,000 Iraqi civilians died? I sure as hell do not. Why do you people make a huge deal over it?

It happens. Live with it.


Ya their lives aren't worth anything, they are just there for decoration. But if 100 000 Americans died, you wouldn't say that. They are all human beings. I could say something about who cares if over a thousand US troops died in Iraq, I mean it's no big deal but that is a cheap shot, just like yours.

For the last FUCKING time, that stat is complete and utter shit. All the real thing says is that there is a 95% chance that the amount of deaths lies between 8,000 and 194,000. It was a survey, which is another major blow to it's validity, and it wasn't properly randomized but instead was biased toward major cities. It does not differentiate between civilian or insurgent casualties. It counts the civilians killed by the insrgents as well.

For the last FUCKING time, that stat is complete and utter shit. All the real thing says is that there is a 95% chance that the amount of deaths lies between 8,000 and 194,000. It was a survey, which is another major blow to it's validity, and it wasn't properly randomized but instead was biased toward major cities. It does not differentiate between civilian or insurgent casualties. It counts the civilians killed by the insrgents as well.
The "insurgents" are also civilians. Who take up arms against a ruthless invader. Surely Americans can appreciate that.

For the last FUCKING time, that stat is complete and utter shit. All the real thing says is that there is a 95% chance that the amount of deaths lies between 8,000 and 194,000. It was a survey, which is another major blow to it's validity, and it wasn't properly randomized but instead was biased toward major cities. It does not differentiate between civilian or insurgent casualties. It counts the civilians killed by the insrgents as well.




Good clarification, even if a bit profane. But I understand your frustration.

Regardless, North Pole, South Pole, it is a messed up situation. Then again, welcome to the real world, no?

One more time to any of our space brothers that might be listening --

GET ME OFF THIS F**KING ROCK!!!

The "insurgents" are also civilians. Who take up arms against a ruthless invader. Surely Americans can appreciate that.
It's true, the foreign fighters aside, the Iraqi insurgents are basically nationalists, patriots, who do not feel they owe the US anything for their liberation. "Thanks, now go home." If the US really was motivated by its democratic ideals, it would have vacated the country by now. But no, it's a resource war, and dissent must be suppressed.

It's true, the foreign fighters aside, the Iraqi insurgents are basically nationalists, patriots, who do not feel they owe the US anything for their liberation. "Thanks, now go home." If the US really was motivated by its democratic ideals, it would have vacated the country by now. But no, it's a resource war, and dissent must be suppressed.


"Help, help! I'm being oppressed!"

"Bloody insurgent!"

"Ooo, what a give away!"

It's true, the foreign fighters aside, the Iraqi insurgents are basically nationalists, patriots, who do not feel they owe the US anything for their liberation. "Thanks, now go home." If the US really was motivated by its democratic ideals, it would have vacated the country by now. But no, it's a resource war, and dissent must be suppressed.

what's a real shame is that the longer they have to fight, the more inclined they will be to linking up with the well armed and funded islamic fundies as a matter of sheer necessity.

The "insurgents" are also civilians. Who take up arms against a ruthless invader. Surely Americans can appreciate that.
Actually about half are outsiders. Who the hell do you think Zarqawi is? That and last time I checked children weren't invaders.

It's true, the foreign fighters aside, the Iraqi insurgents are basically nationalists, patriots, who do not feel they owe the US anything for their liberation. "Thanks, now go home." If the US really was motivated by its democratic ideals, it would have vacated the country by now. But no, it's a resource war, and dissent must be suppressed.
That was true until Sadr's faction, composed completely of Iraqis with litlle real civilian deaths, called it quits.

The "insurgents" are also civilians. Who take up arms against a ruthless invader. Surely Americans can appreciate that.

And if they would kindly stop fighting, we'd not have to be so ruthless and we'd be able to leave by March.

If that doesn't get modded, I will raise hell. I say "Shut up traitor" and a Mod gets on my ass. This guy says "Lousy Yanks" nothing happens. Bullshit.

Fucking biased mods.

People die in war, live with it people. This is a war, 9/11 was a terrorist attack. See the difference?

This is a war that has nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. This is a war that your people started. This is a war that has seen 100,000 of the people your government claims it wanted to be free from tyranny, killed by your government's hand.

You are the traitor here. A traitor to humanity and decency.

Do YOU see the difference, or are your blinders on too tight?

This is a war that has nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. This is a war that your people started. This is a war that has seen 100,000 of the people your government claims it wanted to be free from tyranny, killed by your government's hand.

You are the traitor here. A traitor to humanity and decency.

Do YOU see the difference, or are your blinders on too tight?
For the last FUCKING time, that stat is complete and utter shit. All the real thing says is that there is a 95% chance that the amount of deaths lies between 8,000 and 194,000. It was a survey, which is another major blow to it's validity, and it wasn't properly randomized but instead was biased toward major cities. It does not differentiate between civilian or insurgent casualties. It counts the civilians killed by the insrgents as well.

Learn to read the whole thread and take your own damned blinders off.

This is a war that has nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. This is a war that your people started. This is a war that has seen 100,000 of the people your government claims it wanted to be free from tyranny, killed by your government's hand.

You are the traitor here. A traitor to humanity and decency.

Do YOU see the difference, or are your blinders on too tight?
And it's a war we're going to finish, lest Iran comes in and makes Iraq even worse when we leave.

Learn to read the whole thread and take your own damned blinders off.

I don't believe I was speaking with you. Thanks for your advice, but I have no need to follow your imperative. It's willful naivete like this that will allow a shadow to fall over us all.

I have nothing further to say.

I don't believe I was speaking with you. Thanks for your advice, but I have no need to follow your imperative. It's willful naivete like this that will allow a shadow to fall over us all.

I have nothing further to say.
If I understood what was said correctly by whichever mod, Imp. Puerto Rico is gone, so you were talking to thin air, or AB, and would you rather be talking to youself or AB?

Or you could be talking to me, which is the most dreadful opportunity of all! :)

Ah, Puerto Rico is gone. Well, that's satisfaction for you. I was not yet aware of his departure.

It's difficult for me to be on these threads over weekends, something must have come up while I was offline.

Thanks for the update.

Ah, Puerto Rico is gone. Well, that's satisfaction for you. I was not yet aware of his departure.

It's difficult for me to be on these threads over weekends, something must have come up while I was offline.

Thanks for the update.
Fear not, I typically find that I have a near monopoly on the obliviousness market.

It's true, the foreign fighters aside, the Iraqi insurgents are basically nationalists, patriots, who do not feel they owe the US anything for their liberation. "Thanks, now go home." If the US really was motivated by its democratic ideals, it would have vacated the country by now. But no, it's a resource war, and dissent must be suppressed.


They are religious fanatics, who are doing nothing more than dragging out the war and preventing the US from leaving.

Strange how those who criticize the US as being overly religious adamantly defend these radical Muslims.

You can see why the insergants fight can't you. I mean first the lections where in Octerober then they where delayed again and again and again.

You can see why the insergants fight can't you. I mean first the lections where in Octerober then they where delayed again and again and again.


They are the ones causing the delays. If they could just keep their hands to themselves the US could get out of there.

I'm a German!! Living in the Netherlands!!! An all alround European.
why arent you in the cafe smoking hash?

people just wanna be free

why arent you in the cafe smoking hash?
I was. But I've got some herbs at home as well.

*Fires his I.G.N.O.R.E. GunCannon at MKULTRA*

And it's a war we're going to finish, lest Iran comes in and makes Iraq even worse when we leave.
Finish? How would you define 'finish' in this case? The most often repeated goal of regime change was accomplished a long time ago.

They are religious fanatics, who are doing nothing more than dragging out the war and preventing the US from leaving.

Strange how those who criticize the US as being overly religious adamantly defend these radical Muslims.

Bingo.

I see people talking about how the US is too religious and even lets religion decide their leaders. Sound familiar? The reason the US is still in Iraq is because these boneheads won't shut up and admit they lost. No...it's more like, they know they lost, and now they're throwing a temper tantrum.

EDIT: And no offense to any radical muslim fundamentalists reading this. I'm sure the generalization I have drawn comes from a past full of bad radical muslim fundamentalists, and you do not fit the stereotype.

Just covering all the bases.

*Bullshit alarm goes off*

Also, who cares if 100,000 Iraqi civilians died? I sure as hell do not. Why do you people make a huge deal over it?

It happens. Live with it.

Once again, you prove yourself to be a fucking jerkoff. Well done.

Bingo.

I see people talking about how the US is too religious and even lets religion decide their leaders. Sound familiar? The reason the US is still in Iraq is because these boneheads won't shut up and admit they lost. No...it's more like, they know they lost, and now they're throwing a temper tantrum.

EDIT: And no offense to any radical muslim fundamentalists reading this. I'm sure the generalization I have drawn comes from a past full of bad radical muslim fundamentalists, and you do not fit the stereotype.

Just covering all the bases.

Wow. You are really missing the point. Yes it is bad that religion decides leaders either here or elsewhere. But that does not justify military invasion or continued military presence.

Saying, oh, it is okay for the U.S. to keep bombing the fuck out of Iraq because religious fundamentalists will determine their leaders is like saying that it is okay for Europe to come bomb the U.S. because the religious freaks elected our president.

Finish? How would you define 'finish' in this case? The most often repeated goal of regime change was accomplished a long time ago.
We are going to install a stable, mostly democratic government in Iraq, and we are going to leave them a strong army and police force to finish off the few surviving insurgent die-hards.

Once again, you prove yourself to be a fucking jerkoff. Well done.
He got ModNuked off last night, I think...

He got ModNuked off last night, I think...

Oh? Well, that just makes my day. :D

We are going to install a stable, mostly democratic government in Iraq, and we are going to leave them a strong army and police force to finish off the few surviving insurgent die-hards.

Right. Whether they like it or not, we will bomb them into democracy.

You asked for my evidence, Mr Ambassador. Here it is

In Iraq, the US does eliminate those who dare to count the dead

Naomi Klein

"The Guardian "

David T Johnson,
Acting ambassador,
US Embassy, London

Dear Mr Johnson, On November 26, your press counsellor sent a letter to the Guardian taking strong exception to a sentence in my column of the same day. The sentence read: "In Iraq, US forces and their Iraqi surrogates are no longer bothering to conceal attacks on civilian targets and are openly eliminating anyone - doctors, clerics, journalists - who dares to count the bodies." Of particular concern was the word "eliminating".

The letter suggested that my charge was "baseless" and asked the Guardian either to withdraw it, or provide "evidence of this extremely grave accusation". It is quite rare for US embassy officials to openly involve themselves in the free press of a foreign country, so I took the letter extremely seriously. But while I agree that the accusation is grave, I have no intention of withdrawing it. Here, instead, is the evidence you requested.

In April, US forces laid siege to Falluja in retaliation for the gruesome killings of four Blackwater employees. The operation was a failure, with US troops eventually handing the city back to resistance forces. The reason for the withdrawal was that the siege had sparked uprisings across the country, triggered by reports that hundreds of civilians had been killed. This information came from three main sources: 1) Doctors. USA Today reported on April 11 that "Statistics and names of the dead were gathered from four main clinics around the city and from Falluja general hospital". 2) Arab TV journalists. While doctors reported the numbers of dead, it was al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya that put a human face on those statistics. With unembedded camera crews in Falluja, both networks beamed footage of mutilated women and children throughout Iraq and the Arab-speaking world. 3) Clerics. The reports of high civilian casualties coming from journalists and doctors were seized upon by prominent clerics in Iraq. Many delivered fiery sermons condemning the attack, turning their congregants against US forces and igniting the uprising that forced US troops to withdraw.

US authorities have denied that hundreds of civilians were killed during last April's siege, and have lashed out at the sources of these reports. For instance, an unnamed "senior American officer", speaking to the New York Times last month, labelled Falluja general hospital "a centre of propaganda". But the strongest words were reserved for Arab TV networks. When asked about al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya's reports that hundreds of civilians had been killed in Falluja, Donald Rumsfeld, the US secretary of defence, replied that "what al-Jazeera is doing is vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable ... " Last month, US troops once again laid siege to Falluja - but this time the attack included a new tactic: eliminating the doctors, journalists and clerics who focused public attention on civilian casualties last time around.

Eliminating doctors
The first major operation by US marines and Iraqi soldiers was to storm Falluja general hospital, arresting doctors and placing the facility under military control. The New York Times reported that "the hospital was selected as an early target because the American military believed that it was the source of rumours about heavy casual ties", noting that "this time around, the American military intends to fight its own information war, countering or squelching what has been one of the insurgents' most potent weapons". The Los Angeles Times quoted a doctor as saying that the soldiers "stole the mobile phones" at the hospital - preventing doctors from communicating with the outside world.

But this was not the worst of the attacks on health workers. Two days earlier, a crucial emergency health clinic was bombed to rubble, as well as a medical supplies dispensary next door. Dr Sami al-Jumaili, who was working in the clinic, says the bombs took the lives of 15 medics, four nurses and 35 patients. The Los Angeles Times reported that the manager of Falluja general hospital "had told a US general the location of the downtown makeshift medical centre" before it was hit.

Whether the clinic was targeted or destroyed accidentally, the effect was the same: to eliminate many of Falluja's doctors from the war zone. As Dr Jumaili told the Independent on November 14: "There is not a single surgeon in Falluja." When fighting moved to Mosul, a similar tactic was used: on entering the city, US and Iraqi forces immediately seized control of the al-Zaharawi hospital.

Eliminating journalists
The images from last month's siege on Falluja came almost exclusively from reporters embedded with US troops. This is because Arab journalists who had covered April's siege from the civilian perspective had effectively been eliminated. Al-Jazeera had no cameras on the ground because it has been banned from reporting in Iraq indefinitely. Al-Arabiya did have an unembedded reporter, Abdel Kader Al-Saadi, in Falluja, but on November 11 US forces arrested him and held him for the length of the siege. Al-Saadi's detention has been condemned by Reporters Without Borders and the International Federation of Journalists. "We cannot ignore the possibility that he is being intimidated for just trying to do his job," the IFJ stated.

It's not the first time journalists in Iraq have faced this kind of intimidation. When US forces invaded Baghdad in April 2003, US Central Command urged all unembedded journalists to leave the city. Some insisted on staying and at least three paid with their lives. On April 8, a US aircraft bombed al-Jazeera's Baghdad offices, killing reporter Tareq Ayyoub. Al-Jazeera has documentation proving it gave the coordinates of its location to US forces.

On the same day, a US tank fired on the Palestine hotel, killing José Couso, of the Spanish network Telecinco, and Taras Protsiuk, of Reuters. Three US soldiers are facing a criminal lawsuit from Couso's family, which alleges that US forces were well aware that journalists were in the Palestine hotel and that they committed a war crime.

Eliminating clerics
Just as doctors and journalists have been targeted, so too have many of the clerics who have spoken out forcefully against the killings in Falluja. On November 11, Sheik Mahdi al-Sumaidaei, the head of the Supreme Association for Guidance and Daawa, was arrested. According to Associated Press, "Al-Sumaidaei has called on the country's Sunni minority to launch a civil disobedience campaign if the Iraqi government does not halt the attack on Falluja". On November 19, AP reported that US and Iraqi forces stormed a prominent Sunni mosque, the Abu Hanifa, in Aadhamiya, killing three people and arresting 40, including the chief cleric - another opponent of the Falluja siege. On the same day, Fox News reported that "US troops also raided a Sunni mosque in Qaim, near the Syrian border". The report described the arrests as "retaliation for opposing the Falluja offensive". Two Shia clerics associated with Moqtada al-Sadr have also been arrested in recent weeks; according to AP, "both had spoken out against the Falluja attack".

"We don't do body counts," said General Tommy Franks of US Central Command. The question is: what happens to the people who insist on counting the bodies - the doctors who must pronounce their patients dead, the journalists who document these losses, the clerics who denounce them? In Iraq, evidence is mounting that these voices are being systematically silenced through a variety of means, from mass arrests, to raids on hospitals, media bans, and overt and unexplained physical attacks.

Mr Ambassador, I believe that your government and its Iraqi surrogates are waging two wars in Iraq. One war is against the Iraqi people, and it has claimed an estimated 100,000 lives. The other is a war on witnesses.

Additional research by Aaron Maté
www.nologo.org

I don't know, arab journalists and Clerics are going to want to skew things so they fit nicely into the al-jazera propaganda machine. If a doctor had gotten on CNN or somewhere else and proved it someone might listen, but that hasen't happenned. I mean C'mon. At the same time IslamOnline was saying that americans were so desperate in falluja that they resorted to gassing them they (the "insurgants") said they had killed scores of american troops, destroyed dozens of tanks and we were in retreat. Just like Saddam's information minister saying "the cowardly americans had been turned back and were leaving the country" as american tanks were rolling into baghdad

It's not like the Americans gave a shit when Saddam was in power either.


And your point?

We are going to install a stable, mostly democratic government in Iraq, and we are going to leave them a strong army and police force to finish off the few surviving insurgent die-hards.


Uhhh We aren't leaving anytime soon.

The Army is Considering making Iraq a Permanent Duty Station like S. Korea and Germany. I don't how much of a force will stay but there will be a force.

And your point?

Euh this was said by your oponent because you as assholeristic anti EU extremist were blaiming Europeans (or other centrist people) that they did not gave very much for the Iraqi citizens.

As answer to a extremist American, Von W. gave a very good one. 10-0

Hope this answer enleightens ya a bit. But a nice try and example of trolling, by only quoting this part of your and Von W's discussion you are deliberatly trolling and placing Von W in a position like he only said this without arguing.

Typical Rep/fascist CRWN trolling. For the people that want to see WCII( :) )Council 's point and Von's reply: see post 21 on page 2 here.

Euh this was said by your oponent because you or another anti EU extremist were blaiming Europeans (or other centrist people) that they did not gave very much for the Iraqi citizens.

As answer to a extremist American, Von W. gave a very good one. 10-0

Hope this answer enleightens ya a bit.

I just illustrating my earlier point


Europe only started caring about Iraqi Civilians when it made the US Look bad. They certanitly didn't care previously, He said the US didn't either. I'm trying to equalize the two and show that one is not better than the other. Just because they care now doesn't make it right.

I said what I said, because, well at first I was too Lazy. Now though that someone else has responded besides someone I discount as so anti-US that it has gotten beyond reason.

Oh and Nevermind your like that too.

I agree to disagree with you from now on.

Hm I, was not done.

Oh and Nevermind your like that too.

I agree to disagree with you from now on.

Listen here, you arrogant twat, your only purpose here is troling and the spreding of fascisme and other way far to the right opinions that lack every decency.

I just made that clear with a example so everybody can see what a assholeristic arrogant CRWN ya are.

Listen here, you arrogant twat, your only purpose here is troling and the spreding of fascisme and other way far to the right opinions that lack every decency.

I just made that clear with a example so everybody can see what a assholeristic arrogant CRWN ya are.


Now that is what is known as Flaming

did I flame anyone?

At all

and what is CRWN


and just so you know, I voted for Kerry. and I'm a registered Democrat

I don't know, arab journalists and Clerics are going to want to skew things so they fit nicely into the al-jazera propaganda machine. If a doctor had gotten on CNN or somewhere else and proved it someone might listen, but that hasen't happenned. I mean C'mon. At the same time IslamOnline was saying that americans were so desperate in falluja that they resorted to gassing them they (the "insurgants") said they had killed scores of american troops, destroyed dozens of tanks and we were in retreat. Just like Saddam's information minister saying "the cowardly americans had been turned back and were leaving the country" as american tanks were rolling into baghdad

The former information minister was offered a job by Al-Jazera. Don't know if he took it or not. If the doctor had gotten on CNN it wouldn't be any different than his appearing on Al-Jazera as biased as CNN is.

Now that is what is known as Flamingand just so you know, I voted for Kerry. and I'm a registered Democrat

Hmm, calling somebody arrogant isn't, you're a troll.


and just so you know, I voted for Kerry. and I'm a registered Democrat

Most people with a extreme right agenda here say they are democrat (when they aren't and gave evidence by there anti this/that/EU in general-posts) with the purpose of being seen as "more neutral".




At all

and what is CRWN


and just so you know, I voted for Kerry. and I'm a registered Democrat[/QUOTE]

In case anyone didn’t notice, General Tommy Franks was quoted in the original post. General Franks retired long before the operation in Falluja. That throws some suspicion on the bias reporting in the article.

When hospitals, mosques, churches etc. are used by an enemy to store weapons and initiate attacks on the opposing forces they become legitimate military targets.

War is about killing. Unfortunately, there will always be collateral damage and civilians will unfortunately be killed. The allied forces try their best to keep the collateral damage to a minimum. Unfortunately, the gorillas, or whatever you want to name them do not. They have no problem blowing up innocent civilians in markets, churches, etc.

If you want to call the insurgents “freedom fighters” because they are trying to kick the allied forces out of their country, you must also call the IRA freedom fighters as they are trying to kick the British out of their country. Can’t have it both ways my friend.

Hmm, calling somebody arrogant isn't, you're a troll.



Most people with a extreme right agenda here say they are democrat (when they aren't and gave evidence by there anti this/that/EU in general-posts) with the purpose of being seen as "more neutral".




At all

and what is CRWN


and just so you know, I voted for Kerry. and I'm a registered Democrat[/QUOTE]


I do believe calling me a twat is Flaming


Yes I am registered Dem, Yes I voted for Kerry. Know why? George Bush Scares the crap out of me, I REJOICED when Ashcroft resigned and lamented when Powell did. I'm not as right wing as you think, especially on social issues where I am pretty far in the left of the Political Spectrum. But I am a Strong supporter of the US Military being a member of Said Institution. I'm not Anti-EU and I do believe that going into Iraq was a bad move especially with N. Korea on the Horizon. I'm scared Shitless that we will invade Iran and that I will have to take part in that invasion. But if I am ordered up I will go in and do my job to the best of my abilities. I'm actually fond of Europe just not their Foreign policy and someday I wish to travel there, especially in Germany and Britain. The EU is a good idea for Europe but I don't see it as the next great superpower considering how fragmented Europe is in Culture, language and Customs. I am also a Supporter of Guns, well because I enjoy firing them. But I'm always safe, making sure I know what is downrange, keep the safety on and only chamber a round when I'm ready to fire. As well as keeping the weapon pointed down range. I am more conservitive than some of my friends. But they are way out there on the left, And I went to one of the most Liberal Universities in the country. Kent State University in Kent, Ohio. The Only Reason I seem so right wing to you is the only issues about the united states that come up are the ones where I have a right wing stance. mainly foreign relations (yes i don't like world Government or the UN), US Military, Riots, and Guns. and only because my profession has a lot to do with the latter 3.

Believe me or not, I don't care, Arrogant or not, well I don't care. your not the most humble yourselves so I don't care.

and what in the hell is CRWN??

you still didn't answer that.

Hmm, calling somebody arrogant isn't, you're a troll.



Most people with a extreme right agenda here say they are democrat (when they aren't and gave evidence by there anti this/that/EU in general-posts) with the purpose of being seen as "more neutral".

I think the flame-baiting part comes from the fact that you called him a right-wing fascist.

I think the flame-baiting part comes from the fact that you called him a right-wing fascist.

Yes, that is more something that fits you then him, that is true.

Yes, that is more something that fits you then him, that is true.
I don't know many right-wing fascists who'd vote against Ohios gay marriage ban.

I don't know many right wing fascists who'd support greater political involvement for anyone and everyone regardless of their beliefs.

I don't know many right wing fascists who support separation of church and state.

I don't know any right wing fascists who believe that the Patriot act needs liberalization reforms.

I don't know any right wing fascists who despise Ashcroft.

I don't know any right-wing fascists who'd put a sign for Bush, Kerry and Nader on their dorm ceiling (and the only one still up is for Kerry)

I don't know many right wing fascists who are against the death penalty.

If you're gonna call me a fascist, back it up man.

Hmmm I guess we shut him up


And showed him maybe that you can't make broad generalizations and label someone based on just what is posted here.

Hmmm I guess we shut him up


And showed him maybe that you can't make broad generalizations and label someone based on just what is posted here.
Appears so...

Yes, that is more something that fits you then him, that is true.

Just because you want the people who disagree with you to be conservative extremists, doesn't necessarily make it true.