Counting Sheep
When the legal system in a nation attempts to block the disclosure of war crimes for fear of ‘adverse publicity’, you have to wonder just how much we, as the public, don’t know with regards to abuse in war zones, or with regards to detainees in The War On Terror.
Most of us enjoy clinging to conservative reports of wrong doing, of civilian casualty levels, in the hopes that what we don’t know is therefore not the truth, nor ever could be. For example, despite a report some weeks ago that claimed between 100,000 and 150,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since the 2003 invasion, ORB recently released a comprehensive report that, after conducting interviews with almost 2,500 Iraqi adults…
“…found that 20 percent of people had had at least one death in their household as a result of the conflict, rather than natural causes.
The last complete census in Iraq conducted in 1997 found 4.05 million households in the country, a figure ORB used to calculate that approximately 1.03 million people had died as a result of the war, the researchers found.
The margin of error in the survey, conducted in August and September 2007, was 1.7 percent, giving a range of deaths of 946,258 to 1.12 million.
ORB originally found that 1.2 million people had died, but decided to go back and conduct more research in rural areas to make the survey as comprehensive as possible and then came up with the revised figure.
The research covered 15 of Iraq’s 18 provinces. Those that not covered included two of Iraq’s more volatile regions — Kerbala and Anbar — and the northern province of Arbil, where local authorities refused them a permit to work.”
Of course, that can be written off as false, especially given the number of contradictory figures floating around out there. Thus, it can’t be taken as gospel, which is fantastic with regards to the ability of millions to sleep at night with untroubled consciences.
There’s also sectarian violence to take into consideration, a point that is often deferred to by many that still seem unable to come to terms with the fact that without the occupation such violence would never have become prevalent. Sure, Saddam Hussein would still be in power, but it should also be pointed out that during his regime the only time when civilian deaths were of such outrageous proportions was when international sanctions were imposed in the 90’s.
Of course, it’s easy to argue the realities of the loss of innocent lives from thousands of miles away. Being entirely unaffected by the war, the responsibility for such deaths can be picked apart and convoluted and shuffled around until it appears as though hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have simply been hit by lightning since 2003.
Anyway, back to covering our tracks…
“An Astonishing attempt to keep secret very serious allegations of torture levelled against British soldiers in Iraq was finally thrown out by two High Court judges yesterday. Lord Justice Moses and Mr Justice Silber overruled a previous decision that a forthcoming case in which survivors and relatives are to sue the Ministry of Defence over the alleged torture should not be reported in full. They prevented the press from reporting what the allegations of torture were, who is claiming compensation and the names of the regiments said to be involved.
The judge at the original ruling granted the order, saying that the “adverse publicity” the case would generate would be “highly undesirable”.
That perverse decision was finally overturned yesterday on the basis that the very serious allegations should be in the public domain.
The allegations surround a battle in May 2004, after which 31 Iraqis were taken into custody by British armed forces. More than 20 of those held died subsequently, their corpses showing signs of mutilation, and the nine survivors claim they were tortured and abused.
There are often very good reasons for restrictions on the reporting of court cases. Sparing the blushes of the Ministry of Defence is not among them.”
No, you didn’t read that wrong.
When it comes to abuse, how many more ‘isolated incidents’ have to come to light before we acknowledge a pattern? When it comes to the deaths of innocents, does it ultimately matter if the figure is 150,000 or 900,000? What in God’s name can we look to that could even begin to justify such deaths given the circumstances and the blatant propaganda used to justify the war?
September 11th? Does that sound like a decent trade?
Some 3,000 innocent people for somewhere between 100,000 and 1 million Iraqi lives, millions more displaced, and the world’s worst child mortality rate? And that’s not even taking into consideration that over 4,000 American Soldiers, and others besides, have died as well.
September 11th? I thought that’s why Afghanistan was invaded.
This whole post-9/11 fantasyland has become nothing more than a golden ticket for wholesale slaughter. The irony, of course, is that those responsible will never be held accountable for their actions. The only people that will ever be held accountable for the actions of those that are guilty are the innocents that have lost their lives because of them.
Now, remind me. Who has that oh so glorious monopoly on civility again?
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Saturday, February 2nd, 2008 at 12:03 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 2nd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
I believe that would be all the other mammals on the planet.
February 2nd, 2008 at 12:32 pm
“The whole post-9/11 fantasyland has become nothing more than a golden ticket for wholesale slaughter”
I couldn’t have said it any better…
Crime for crime.
Only because 9/11 occurred on US soil has it gotten so much spotlight, how could anything like that happen to such a great and powerful country!? People were devasted because it was so close to home… But when I read the figures “3,000 people for the lives of between 100,000 and 1 million” :S Ummmm, ok. That makes a lot of sense.
First off 9/11 was no random act. There was no decsion to wake up and cause havok in a country with no reason at all. It was revenge, and the US were so embarrased with the fact that they has been caught off guard, that they played it out to be the most devastating disaster to ever occur in the history of the world (I’m not saying it wasn’t horrible, because innocent people did loose their lives because of resentment caused by factors they cannot personally countrol) But things like this happen all the time around the world. US took advantage of the opportunity, making it seem reasonable and acceptable to do what they are to the Iraqi’s… but where did it all begin?
We are so oblivious to what actually occurrs because we are so easy to convince. The news and facts are manipulated and we can’t catch it… The difference between 100,000 people and 1,000,000 people is a lot. But it seems like nothing to us. They are just numbers. When we look at them we don’t think about our friends, our family, our neighbours, we don’t even think of living beings. We are too far away from the victims to associate and feel a connection with them… we are unattached. Which is why we can go on unaffected… What we don’t know can’t hurt us…
But I’d rather know the truth than be oblivious to the innocent lives that deserve our grieving and respect…
February 2nd, 2008 at 1:47 pm
September 11 was and still is Bush’s excuse to finish what his father started in Iraq. I bet he made daddy real proud when he ousted Sadam Hussein.
February 2nd, 2008 at 2:26 pm
“September 11th? Does that sound like a decent trade?
Some 3,000 innocent people for somewhere between 100,000 and 1 million Iraqi lives, millions more displaced, and the world’s worst child mortality rate? And that’s not even taking into consideration that over 4,000 American Soldiers, and others besides, have died as well. ”
This is what I always argue with my friends… and they never see my point. It’s a really sad situation.
February 2nd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
It’s all absolutely disgusting.
What irks me the most is that any dictator, or head of government in a third world nation would never get away with half the turmoil this ‘war’ has caused.
Like there’s some profound difference between what Saddam Hussein has done and what George Bush has done.
The only difference I see is that Bush waters down his crimes through chain of command.
Silly us to imagine a world where men in suits who drive around in armored limos are held just as accountable as those who slap on a military uniform and ride past their picture painted on a building. They run the same game just with a different label, a stricter set of rules, and fewer middle men.
Bush and his henchmen have all of these soldiers and officials doing the dirty work for them, and when it’s time to pay the piper they’ll all sing. One can only hope that there will be a large enough group of individuals willing to step up, and provide all the information needed to finally hold these guys responsible for what they have done.
I hope.
February 2nd, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Any loss of life from violence, is the silencing of a voice that could have been the one to change our world. No matter whom kills whom.. no matter where the death occured.. Violence begets violence. As Matt so wonderfully put : Only Killers Call Killing Progress. Got a shirt made with that..gets a lot of attention.
February 2nd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Great post, and yes, the body count is ALL wrong. We are not the point. They are the point, but what point is that? Between 100,000 and 1 million dead Iraqi civilians? Should we stay? Should we go? And, whatever we do, shouldn’t the question be whether staying or leaving is best for the Iraqis?
We’re really fortunate that there are two excellent U.S. presidential candidates of three realistic presidents-elect. It is uncertain which Democrat will win the nomination to run for the U.S. presidency, at this point. But, for all the debate on Iraq Friday night in California, it would have been nice (and, indeed, it still would be nice) to see one of them have the political courage to say that if we’re going to set a timetable for troop withdrawal, it will be because that is what is best for the Iraqis. But, in reality, we’re withdrawing primarily because we can’t accept seeing our kids get killed. Who cares about their kids?
As for the other probable starter in the U.S. presidential election, if I hear that redundant fahkin’ Bushism “radical Islamic extremism” lisp forth from his 71-year old lips one more fahkin’ time (and, especially if it is right after that finger-shaking, shame-inducing phrase “waving the white flag of surrender”) . . . well, yeah, fuck, I’m gonna lose it. He may be a war hero, but that makes it just so much worse that he’s now Bush-whacking the American political discourse to realize his political ambitions. Come on, big boy, scare me into voting for you. I dare you. And wipe that ridiculous fahkin’ grin off your face. You look like a half-paralyzed crocodile.
February 2nd, 2008 at 5:30 pm
I am disappointed to hear about the British soldiers. I always thought the British were too proper to resort to acting like animals, unless of course there is a football match going on. But I guess there are certain individuals often just fresh out of highschool who are handed a gun and a slick sounding title ending in “specialist” or “expert” (after just a few months of training!?) and the power goes to their head. They are far too immature for the responsibility they are given, and as a result you get these cases of abuse.
February 2nd, 2008 at 5:30 pm
I couldn’t say more than anyone else here has, and this faux war on terror is just a blatant scheme of endangering “the good guys” and the “bad guys”. Many commenters respond to the killers that justify killing, and that as long as they hold our attention in doing so, there’s no reason not to stop.
Perhaps one could compare this situation of the fantastic American government to the governments of third world countries. Sure, America isn’t comprised of deep rain forests and jungles, or barren soiled lands where towns exist with starving Africans. But, in the 3rd world countries their governments that are supposedly there for them, jeopardize the humanity and safety of their people. Why? Religious reasons, political connections, and a little thing called the greed of those in power. Now, if we can compare that to the war in Iraq, the blatant marketing schemes surrounding it, I don’t think we can find too much of a difference between the two. The societies under those governments still deal with their own hardships that they could/could not have with the way things are.
Perhaps we’re promised so much as a society in our acceptance of what they tell us. It compromises our integrity to really do anything about it. We could read about body counts, take in the misconstrued evidence, and in the end, all we want is a peace of mind where we live. No matter if you’re an activist who acts out against the government, we all are looking for a way to sit quietly at home, and read about the horrible tragedies in the world.
I think we monopolize others by simply expecting too much of our own safety at home, to actually do something about the tragedies in the world.
Perhaps that’s not the conclusion you were looking for. But maybe it was.
February 2nd, 2008 at 6:01 pm
an eye for an eye will make us all blind ~ Ghandi
February 2nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
it hurts more cause its our humanity thats killing each other
February 2nd, 2008 at 8:34 pm
Can it get any worse than using children afflicted with Down’s Syndrome to blow up in the market places by adults using electrical detonation? That was Iraqi on Iraqi violence. There is a sadness there that is neigh on impossible to fathom.
February 3rd, 2008 at 1:59 am
i still believe in the possibility of an fair and equitable world, but none of this stuff surprises me. ‘humanity’ is a fairytale concept that fails to take into consideration thousands of years of conflict, trade, of basic human survival. we are (i believe) hardwired to ensure the survival of our own kind, which traditionally was that of our tribe. today is no different other than it involves countries and not the neighboring village, or nearby ’scouts.’ On second thought it does, we just didn’t have the propaganda machine running overtime back then…
now, even with this conclusion of human kind, i believe it is our responsibility as a people and as persons of a democratic country to give a damn and try to do something about it, but
[quote comment="40593"]I think we monopolize others by simply expecting too much of our own safety at home, to actually do something about the tragedies in the world.[/quote]
Now, the questions is, how do we actually do something about it?