Skip to content or view screen version

Hidden Article

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Iraq Body Count openly lies about major cause of deaths in Iraq

Brian | 11.05.2006 03:02

HOLMES: And who's doing the killing, John?

SLOBODA: Well, currently, the vast majority of killing is being done by anti-occupation insurgents, criminals and unknown agents. We just don't know who a lot of them are.
.....
Mr. Sloboda's words are in total contradiction with the findings of the "Lancet study":


Iraq Body Count - NOT JUST NUMBERS!
On 8 May 2006 on Channel 4 documentary, 'Iraq - The Hidden Story' - Channel 4's journalist Jon Snow said:

"According to the most authoritative source, something like 35,000 lives have been lost in the last 3 years." (With the caption: Source - Iraq Body Count - www.iraqbodycount.net)

Jon Snow is talking over the images of a car bombing. So, who's responsible for the "lives [that] have been lost in the last 3 years." ?

Iraq Body Count Co-Founder and Oxford Research Group's Executive Director John Sloboda was on CNN on July 19, 2005:

Joining us now from London is IraqBodyCount.net co-founder, John Sloboda. He is also co-author of a new book, "A Dossier of Civilian Casualties in Iraq 2003-2005."

Certainly, the research is there, John. I don't think anyone doubts that. What's the most surprising thing from your latest compilation?

JOHN SLOBODA, AUTHOR, "DOSSIER OF CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN IRAQ": Well, one of the things which has really, I think, shocked a lot of us is the fact that since the end of the invasion back in May 2003, there has been a steady, month-on-month increase in the number of civilians killed by anti-occupation forces, insurgents and crime. So that there were double the numbers kill in the second year of the occupation than there were in the first.

HOLMES: And who's doing the killing, John?

SLOBODA: Well, currently, the vast majority of killing is being done by anti-occupation insurgents, criminals and unknown agents. We just don't know who a lot of them are.

That is a complete reversal from the situation in the beginning of the conflict, when, of course, in the first six-week phase of the war, the vast majority of deaths were caused by U.S. bombs and aerial raids.

Mr. Sloboda's words are in total contradiction with the findings of the "Lancet study":

On 29 October 2004, the British medical journal The Lancet published ‘Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey’:

Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100000 excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Violence accounted for most of the excess deaths and air strikes from coalition forces accounted for most violent deaths. (Interpretation)

Most individuals reportedly killed by coalition forces were women and children. (Findings)

Source: Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey, The Lancet, Published online October 29,2004

This study reads:

"The researchers found that the majority of deaths were attributed to violence, which were primarily the result of military actions by Coalition forces. Most of those killed by Coalition forces were women and children... Eighty-four percent of the deaths were reported to be caused by the actions of Coalition forces and 95 percent of those deaths were due to air strikes and artillery." ('Iraqi Civilian Deaths Increase Dramatically After Invasion', October 28, 2004)

As if this contradiction were not disturbing enough, "John Sloboda took up his appointment as Executive Director of Oxford Research Group in January 2004."

On December 2005 Oxford Research Group published "Iraqi Liberation? Towards an Integrated Strategy"

Because of this Oxford Research Group's study, Iraq Body Count Co-Founder and Oxford Research Group's Executive Director John Sloboda, who co-authored this study was expelled by the international anti-war network BRussells Tribunal.

Dear friends,
John Sloboda has been excluded from the BRussells Tribunal. Not because of the conflict about IBC, but because he's apparently heading the Oxford Research Group, a think tank. They published this report recently:  http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/publications/books/iraqiliberation.htm .
Because of this report, that is in total opposition with everything the BT stands for, he really cannot be a part of our network.
Thought I'd let you know.
Dirk.

A few days ago, independent journalist Dahr Jamail wrote:

By far and away the survey that comes closest to the true number of dead in Iraq to date was the one conducted for the Lancet. Yet even Les Roberts, the lead author of that report and one of the world's top epidemiologists with the Center for International Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said this February that there might be as many as 300,000 Iraqi civilian deaths generated by the US invasion and occupation. So as not to skew the results, it is important to note that the survey did not include areas where major combat had occurred such as Fallujah, Najaf, and Sadr City - home to roughly three million Iraqis.

etc
 http://www.thecatsdream.com/blog/2006/05/iraq-body-count-not-just-numbers.htm

Brian

Comments

Hide the following 2 comments

ITN merely shovels the bull**** of Blair and MI6, via IBC, HRW, and AI

11.05.2006 14:27

Calculating the deaths using statistical methods proven accurate during other occupations/invasions, and the figure is now considered 500,000+. Jon Snow, who is a senior figure working for MI5/MI6, is in the job of holocaust denial, as are the majority of staff working for ITN. Worse, they are in the job of holocaust creation, as they push anti-Iran propaganda in the same way as they pushed anti-Iraq propaganda for YEARS before Blair's WAR OF AGGRESSION against that nation.

Iraq Body Count, like Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty, are state-controlled operations responsible for producing propaganda used to justify invasions, or protect the forces responsible for the invasions, when they represent Western or Israeli interests. You will frequently see New Reich goons on this site and others quote from information produced by all three.

Only today, you can read how the NSA proudly BOASTS of having the biggest database by monitoring ALL internal US phone calls.

The security services of the West, especially the UK and US, are tasked with running circles around us, and this includes full and realtime control of the propaganda in the Mass Media. Recent events show that in the run up to the Third World War, all subtlety in these operations is rapidly vanishing, and that a blatant approach is now considered more useful.

Of course, anti-war people seem to waste a near infinite amount of time by constantly re-iterating "oh my gosh, The Guardian and Channel 4 News got it wrong again, what can this mean". It MEANS, gentle people, that you went to the poisoned well for the MILLIONTH TIME, and for the MILLIONTH TIME you were poisoned by what you drank there. Ever consider learning from experience?

Wars like the coming one against Iran, are not started casually. They require full spectrum dominance of EVERY area of society, so that ordinary people are bound tightly with regard to their responses. This is self-evident if you think about it, since the obvious likely outcome of a person like Blair declaring War on Iran would be the people of the UK declaring War on Blair, and this cannot be allowed to happen.

The government relies on people like Jon Snow to do a first class job for them. Blair's needs are clearly defined, both by any ration analysis of current events, and by historical analysis of the actions of similar monsters in recent history. Why then do the vast majority of Blair's opponents so clearly misunderstand the mechanisms by which he operates?

Rational thinking reveals Blair to have unbelievable power. His people control the Media, Civil Service, Police, Military, Church, and evey other major body in the UK. His financial resources dwarf that of any potential opponent. His security services are funded, manned, and equiped to a level beyond anything every seen in Europe. He has been DIRECTLY responsible for the wars in Serbia, Chechnya, Afghanistan, and Iraq (none of these events would have happened if Blair had not been in power).

Now Blair is poised to trigger his World War (culminating in War with China). The consequences of war with Iran are almost impossible to hide, and mean that US military planners pose the biggest obstacle, requiring as they do a logical explanation of the handling of the aftermath of such an event (since Blair obviously cannot say that chaos and full blown global nuclear war is his goal). Well above the 'logical' thinking military planners ARE US allies of Blair who are just as enthusiastic to start World War 3, but they have to be cautious too at this stage.

Blair is using the impossible to defeat tactic of building momentum. No matter how strong the dam, if one keeps increasing the water pressure, it WILL burst at some point. Hitler used the same method to overcome common sense amongst his generals, and so did the leaders of wartime Japan (who all KNEW they had lost the conflict with the US as soon as they began it).

I found it amusing that Snow's crude propaganda piece for Dispatches ran into their dagger piece against the Animal Rights movement the next episode. Animal Rights is currently under co-ordinated attack by Blair as the recent arrests and publicity show. Blair's biggest fear is that the anti-war movement will reject state-controlled bodies like Respect etc., and make a concerted effort to be truly effective over the coming war on Iran. Animal Rights forms the MOST DANGEROUS model for protest and action, and Blair does NOT want anti-war activists learning from them.

Real war is the worst thing in the world, like getting a call that your children have all been killed in a car accident. If individuals actually gave time to think about what real war involves, Blair's support would vanish in an instant. People, however, have the greatest aversion to contemplating the worst aspects of life, even when not thinking may guarantee that the worst WILL happen.

Long before Hitler enacted his murderous policies, individuals predicted with startling accuracy the horrors to come. How did they achieve this? They looked closely at every word and action by Hitler. The followed his accumulation of power. They extrapolated current events, untainted by nazi propaganda from Germany and the presses of the West, into the future that Hitler clearly claimed ownership of. The were realists when it came to a true assessment of Hitler's power and prospects.

Today, the same is all to easy to do with Blair. Most people, even those that think themselves opposed in every way, choose to swim in Blair's OWN propaganda. They read HIS newspapers, and listen to HIS TV reports. They do this because they have been conditioned since birth (and particularly at school) to NOT think for themselves, and to put their trust in arbitary outside bodies (like the Church and the Mass Media), despite the clearest of historical evidence that these bodies are ruthlessly controlled by the state.

The obsessive compulsion to swallow every aspect of Blair's media merely reflects similar compulsion to do the same with entertainment like 'Doctor Who' or 'Big Brother'. The need to watch, and the need to chat becomes the same, regardless of whether it's entertainment or news on TV, or gossip or news in the newspapers. Treating news in the same way as an engineer uses calculations, or a scientist uses facts, or a mathematician uses proofs, is beyond 99.999999% of all people.

Because of this, Blair doesn't so much manipulate facts as he manipulates the 'entertainment value' of facts. He is engaged in a battle of wits with people that have long ago chosen to lay down their weapons.

Blair's war with Iran is unstoppable. It is obvious that he still has problems, and obstacles to overcome, but WE are NOT in any real way one of these obstacles. That doesn't mean that we don't require further conditioning, but it does mean that Blair is convinced that we will respond PERFECTLY to any conditioning he deems necessary.

BY THE WAY, Blair must be above criticism come party conference time. This MAY be achievable using the usual machinations within the New Reich party (ably assisted by Blair's people within the leadership of the Conservative and Liberal parties). However, Blair may conclude that OTHER means will be required. I think you all know what these other means will be. Of course, Blair would prefer the Iran War to be greenlit before then, but his army, the US army, is controlled by his thoughts and actions, rather than by direct order, and such manipulations have a somewhat fuzzy period of effectiveness, as discussed above.

twilight


The radiation poisoning from the uranium will add many, many, many more!

13.05.2006 01:09

The Uranium weapons being used have a half-life of 4.5 BILLION years........and that's not a typo! It is the worst part of the whole rotten mess. Experts tell us that a stay of two weeks in bombed out Baghdad will expose you to enough radiation to kill you. It is absolutely horrible......and it simply must be stopped if we cannot stop the occupation.

messenger