Iraqi death toll-- pls sign a petition

Source:
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html

Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered In America's War on Iraq 1,018,263


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America's War On Iraq 3,723


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cost of U.S. War and Occupation of Iraq

$454,541,542,411

Click to expand...

The number is shocking and sobering.


It is at least 10 times greater than most estimates cited in the US media, yet it is based on the only scientifically valid study of violent Iraqi deaths caused by the U.S.-led invasion of March 2003.

That study, published in prestigious medical journal The Lancet, estimated that over 600,000 Iraqis had been killed as a result of the invasion as of July 2006. Iraqis have continued to be killed since then. The graphic above provides a rough daily update of this number based on a rate of increase derived from the Iraq Body Count. (See the complete explanation.)

This devastating human toll demands greater recognition. It eclipses the Rwandan genocide and our leaders are directly responsible. Little wonder they do not publicly cite it. Here is simple HTML code to post the counter to your website and help spread the word.



Actions you can take right now
Sign the petition telling Congress that about a million Iraqis have likely been killed and urging them to end this war now. A large number of signatures on this and other petitions is a compelling way to keep pressure on Congress as there are more votes on the war. Add your name»

Write a letter to the Editor: Letters are one of the most frequently-read sections of a newspaper. Our tool makes it easy to craft one. Write a letter»

Tell your friends about this estimate of Iraqi deaths. Spread the word now»



Support this Campaign
With a tax-deductible contribution, you can help us continue this important work. Click to contribute.



Post the Iraqi Death Estimator on your website
Fight attempts to minimize Iraqi suffering and remind visitors to your site of the awful human costs of continued war.

Here is some simple code that you can cut and paste into the HTML of your website. The counter will automatically update over time.
(see website enclosed on top pls)

1,018,263 lives of muslim are not more precise than 1,018,263lt oil for usa...

You should read suret al-anfal.. there is a verse in there that brings me great joy and comfort of the end result of their war

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jqjjmRMku4[/media]


[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClVuPvdov_I&mode=related&search=[/media]

In order to help prevent panic I first have to post another link that tracks all deaths reported by the media. It is nowhere near the figure given above and unreported fatalities should not add that much more.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
I also want to see an end to the Iraq conflict. But how do you personally think that can be done without history repeating itself again and again? As you can see it's a region that has seen constant turmoil.

Republic of Iraq
The reinstated Hashemite monarchy lasted until 1958, when it was overthrown by a coup d'etat of the Iraqi Army, known as the 14 July Revolution. The coup brought Brigadier General Abdul Karim Qassim to power. He withdrew from the Baghdad Pact and established friendly relations with the Soviet Union, but his government lasted only until 1963, when it was overthrown by Colonel Abdul Salam Arif. Salam Arif died in 1966 and his brother, Abdul Rahman Arif, assumed the presidency. In 1968, Rahman Arif was overthrown by the Arab Socialist Baath Party. This movement gradually came under the control of Saddam Hussein al-Majid al Tikriti, who acceded to the presidency and control of the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC), then Iraq's supreme executive body, in July 1979, while killing many of his opponents.


Saddam Hussein
Main article: Saddam Hussein
Saddam's regime lasted throughout the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), during which Iraqi forces attacked Iranian soldiers and civilians with chemical weapons. The war ended in stalemate, largely due to American and Western support for Iraq. This was part of the US policy of "dual containment" of Iraq and Iran. This period is notorious for the Saddam regime's human rights abuses, for instance, during the Al-Anfal campaign.[6][7][8]

In 1977, the Iraqi government ordered the construction of Osirak (also spelled Osiraq) at the Al Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center, 18 km (11 miles) south-east of Baghdad. It was a 40 MW light-water nuclear materials testing reactor (MTR). In 1981, Israeli aircraft bombed the facility, in order to prevent the country from using the reactor for creation of nuclear weapons.

Main article: Gulf War
In 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait, resulting in the Gulf War and economic sanctions imposed by the United Nations at the behest of the U.S. The economic sanctions were intended to compel Saddam to dispose of weapons of mass destruction.[9] Critics estimate that more than 500,000 Iraqi children died as a result of the sanctions.[10] The U.S. and the UK declared no-fly zones over Kurdish northern and Shiite southern Iraq to oversee the Kurds and southern Shiites.

Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq

The only solution I know of that history has shown can work, is a strong government that represents all of the people who live there. That will take some more time. Might need another election cycle in a period of relative calm for more good leaders to be able to enter politics.

At the moment, Iraq is more tranquil than the news headlines would indicate. There are still conflicts, but it's not all out "war" across the entire country. We must not let panic consume us.

If the coalition forces now helping with security were to pull out now, then the country will be back to the same cycle of conflicts, another dictator can take over in which case the UN will vote the sanctions back in place that not even the USA can prevent on its own, and there will be an even greater atrocity.

So how do we end this conflict without making matters worse? Or should we just give the country to Al-Qaeda who has been trying to take over since the 1990's or earlier? Anyone?

wikipedia isn't a reputable source, in fact I just posted an article just a couple of weeks ago about how it is being tampered with by congress!
I am sure they wouldn't tamper with the death toll because they are so honest--

dying by the one or the million ISN'T justifiable no matter what you think the alternative is.. I am rather amused by your logic...
Al Qaeda, easter bunny, santi clause, it doesn't really matter at this point just get colonial settlers out! if you don't want to sign the petition THEN DON'T.. it is that simple, it isn't really a topic for debate!
peace!

Wikipedia 'shows CIA page edits'
By Jonathan Fildes
Science and technology reporter, BBC News

An online tool that claims to reveal the identity of organisations that edit Wikipedia pages has revealed that the CIA was involved in editing entries.
Wikipedia Scanner allegedly shows that workers on the agency's computers made edits to the page of Iran's president.

It also purportedly shows that the Vatican has edited entries about Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams.

The tool, developed by US researchers, trawls a list of 5.3m edits and matches them to the net address of the editor.

Wikipedia is a free online encyclopaedia that can be created and edited by anyone.

Most of the edits detected by the scanner correct spelling mistakes or factual inaccuracies in profiles. However, others have been used to remove potentially damaging material or to deface sites.

Mistaken identity

On the profile of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the tool indicates that a worker on the CIA network reportedly added the exclamation "Wahhhhhh!" before a section on the leader's plans for his presidency.

A warning on the profile of the anonymous editor reads: "You have recently vandalised a Wikipedia article, and you are now being asked to stop this type of behaviour."


Other changes that have been made are more innocuous, and include tweaks to the profile of former CIA chief Porter Goss and celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey.

When asked whether it could confirm whether the changes had been made by a person using a CIA computer, an agency spokesperson responded: "I cannot confirm that the traffic you cite came from agency computers.

"I'd like in any case to underscore a far larger and more significant point that no one should doubt or forget: The CIA has a vital mission in protecting the United States, and the focus of this agency is there, on that decisive work."

Radio change

The site also indicates that a computer owned by the US Democratic Party was used to make changes to the site of right-wing talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

The changes brand Mr Limbaugh as "idiotic," a "racist", and a "bigot". An entry about his audience now reads: "Most of them are legally retarded."


We really value transparency and the scanner really takes this to another level
Wikipedia spokesperson

The IP address is registered in the name of the Democratic National Headquarters.

A spokesperson for the Democratic Party said that the changes had not been made on its computers. Instead, they said that the "IP address is the same as the DCCC".

The DCCC, or Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, is the "official campaign arm of the Democrats" in the House of Representatives and shares a building with the party.

"We don't condone these sorts of activities and we take every precaution to ensure that our network is used in a responsible manner," Doug Thornell of the DCCC told the BBC News website.

Mr Thornell pointed out that the edit had been made "close to two years ago" and it was "impossible to know" who had done it.

Voting issue

The site also indicates that Vatican computers were used to remove content from a page about the leader of the Irish republican party Sinn Fein, Gerry Adams.


The edit removed links to newspaper stories written in 2006 that alleged that Mr Adams' fingerprints and handprints were found on a car used during a double murder in 1971.

The section, titled "Fresh murder question raised" is no longer part of the main online encyclopaedia entries.

Wikipedia Scanner also points the finger at commercial organisations that have modified entries about the pages.

One in particular is Diebold, a company which supplies electronic voting machines in the US.

In October 2005, a person using a Diebold computer removed paragraphs about Walden O'Dell, chief executive of the company, which revealed that he had been "a top fund-raiser" for George Bush.

A month later, other paragraphs and links to stories about the alleged rigging of the 2000 election were also removed.

The paragraphs and links have since been reinstated.

Diebold officials have not responded to requests by the BBC for information about the changes.

Web history

The Wikipedia Scanner results are not the first time that people have been uncovered editing their own Wikipedia entries.


Wikipedia Scanner may prevent an organisation or individuals from editing articles that they're really not supposed to
Wikipedia spokesperson

Earlier this year, Microsoft was revealed to have offered money to trawl through entries about document standards it and other companies employ.

Staff at the US Congress have also previously been exposed for editing and removing sensitive information about politicians.

An inquiry was launched after staff for Democratic representative Marty Meehan admitted polishing his biography

The new tool was built by Virgil Griffith of the California Institute of Technology.

It exploits the open nature of Wikipedia, which already collects the net address or username of editors and tracks all changes to a page. The information can be accessed in the "history" tab at the top of a Wikipedia page.

By merging this information with a database of IP address owners, Wikipedia Scanner is able to put a name to the organisation and firms from which edits are made.


THE EDITORS' BLOG
When BBC staff edit Wikipedia, they should not bring the BBC into disrepute
Pete Clifton,
BBC head of interactive news


The scanner cannot identify the individuals editing articles, admits Mr Griffith.

"Technically, we don't know whether it came from an agent of that company, however, we do know that edit came from someone with access to their network," he wrote on the Wikipedia Scanner site.

A spokesperson for Wikipedia said the tool helped prevent conflicts of interest.

"We really value transparency and the scanner really takes this to another level," they said.

"Wikipedia Scanner may prevent an organisation or individuals from editing articles that they're really not supposed to."

BBC News website users contacted the corporation to point out that the tool also revealed that people inside the BBC had made edits to Wikipedia pages.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...gy/6947532.stm

Published: 2007/08/15 17:46:28 GMT

© BBC MMVII

By the way ask any true Muslim what govt they want, and they will tell you, they want back the mighty Muslim empire, the same like the Abbasid, the Fatimids, even the wickedest of the Ottoman Empire was much better than this... Peter the great with all his might had to retreat to the Ottomans.. Anyhow, I suppose none of this will happen until people uprise against all this injustice, including their own corrupt governments-- having the U.S there isn't helping.. they needed to get out yesterday...
They have left the country in ruins and actually fancy themselves fixing things...
really reminds me of this verse from the Quran

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ لاَ تُفْسِدُواْ فِي الأَرْضِ قَالُواْ إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ مُصْلِحُونَ {11}​

[Pickthal 2:11] And when it is said unto them: Make not mischief in the earth, they say: We are peacemakers only.

أَلا إِنَّهُمْ هُمُ الْمُفْسِدُونَ وَلَـكِن لاَّ يَشْعُرُونَ {12}​

[Pickthal 2:12] Are not they indeed the mischief-makers? But they perceive not.

Click to expand...

peace!

I personally have never been able to come to a conclusion of what would cost more lives.
Staying or leaving, a hell of a lot more people are going to die.

PS: Wikipedia 'shows CIA page edits'. So Wikikpedia revealing this information proves it is unreliable. :hiding:

depends on just what level of sophomoric you enjoy?.. if it suits you for info-- then by all means.. just don't quote it for me as a source if you expect the article to be taken seriousely...

peace!

p.s wilbur try Netflix-- might prove better use of your time.. stay away from charlotte's web when renting-- I never liked that pig!

just don't quote it for me as a source

Click to expand...

Your arrogance in never ending. A true reflection of many things.

Wikipedia is not being controlled by the CIA or US government. Anyone can edit it and it would be if someone was tampering with the history of Iraq. The history I posted is common knowledge.

The toll I provided in that link is not run by the CIA either, it is run by "anti-war activists" trying to get as high a toll as possible from the press. They are now at less than 71,000 which is nowhere near the million plus figure that you provided.

And I must mention that using the term "colonial settlers" is very biased and inaccurate. The coalition forces are not in Iraq building homes for themselves and their families. And you made statistics the topic, put them in giant purple type, so it's not fair to say to me that "I am rather amused by your logic..." just because I provided another source.

I would have signed the petition if there was a viable alternative plan, but there was no plan at all. In my opinion they are feeding off people's paranoia. Hard to miss their "Donate" button up top and another plea for money right below it.

Maybe you don't care what happens to Iraq, but I do, and the Iraqis sure do too and the consensus there is they want the coalition forces to remain for a little longer to help keep the, peace.

I'm happy seeing the US government doing what the majority of people in the middle of the conflict, the Iraqis, want. Besides, we both want an end to the conflict, as does most of the world. One more petition that says so is not going to change anything.

I'm also curious to know if you know what the petition says. They did not include the wording where they ask you to sign which is very unusual. The exact wording is supposed to be on top so there is no question what you are signing.

Wikipedia is not being controlled by the CIA or US government.

Click to expand...

Those that have obtained the ultimate in perfection know better. :skeleton:
Maybe those who have such great knowledge should make it suite there perfection. :-\

pls don't speak for the Iraqis, I don't think you even know one! if you do then my humble apologies..
What you deem 'care' or not on my part is inconsequential under any light and goes in the same bin what you deem biased or not.
As to what I am signing on.. well I trust the source implicitly, lots more than wiki which by a 'non-biased' news source BBC has CIA tampering, that is if you've bothered read the article at all?... pls step aside if you don't want to partake in this... I deliberately didn't put this on 'world affairs' as I don't enjoy the disceptations that go on, in there.. don't want to be active in this project, no one is holding a gun to your head..

have a really great day........
Peace!

wilberhum said:

Your arrogance in never ending. A true reflection of many things.

Click to expand...

why don't you go report the posts that don't suit you and scram?

Report, already did. Scram, never.

oh? why is that .. are you some sort of Germanic character of runic origin?

It is all quite simple. You must have missed it.

Your arrogance in never ending. A true reflection of many things.

Click to expand...

Just a few random thoughts.


Too many people have died.

It has to stop.

What is the best means to stop it with the fewest additional lives being lost.

Past history indicates that most casualties occur as withdrawal accelerates, but is there any other option?

wilberhum said:

It is all quite simple. You must have missed it.

Click to expand...

is this argot common to the effete self-professed 'intellectuals'? I don't understand what it is you are trying to say..
perhaps you should reassess your purpose here?.. you are rather ineffectual from my stand point..
Pls don't denigrate my threads with your rhetoric-- there is always tomorrow...that is if 3ithra'el doesn't pay you a visit tonight in your slumber...

peace!