61,000 Baghdad residents 'executed'

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by jon_forward
no where did I state saddam was the #1 bad guy on the planet...

Than why did we attack him instead of the No #1 bad guy? If our motivation was humanitarian, than we should have attacked the biggest humanitarian offender. You seem to understand the administration on this point, when are we going to attack the No #1 humanitarian offender. If our commitment to human rights stops at the Iraqi boarder, was it really a commitment to "human" rights? Why aren't we "freeing" any other oppressed people?

that would be you putting words in my mouth.

No, I'm trying to get some understanding of what you originally said.

this is reason enough for the U.S.of A and the few other brave countrys to be in the middle east right now. we should of stopped the brutal reign of saddam and co long ago. shame on us

What other third world countries now qualify for invasion for the US to avoid further shame? Do you have a standard for qualifying a world leader for "regime change" or are we going to conduct world affairs based on how you "feel" about the world leaders, or perhaps the value of natural resources present in the target nations is a better yardstick for our humanitarian interest? You unequivocally supported the current administration rationale for the invasion of Iraq, the humanitarian argument (though in retrospect I doubt you realized that was what you were doing) and then seem shocked that someone might take issue with your reasoning. Hussein was a bad guy, no kidding. Want me to make a list of bad guys who run little countries? That's the weakness of your argument as well as the administrations current argument.

I dont know wether to feel sorry for you ...or laugh. actually both

I would suggest you spend your time figuring out how you’re going to defend your statements. Jon, you don't need to worry about me, wonder who my friends are, question my loyalty, etc. etc. etc. It does nothing to make your point and comes across as childish.

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
The "less than hospitable regimes" are the majority in the UN. Do you really think they care about helping out the downtrodden?

The UN delivers the most humanitarian aide worldwide. The member nations as individual governments are primarily following their own interests, that's very true. The fortunate coincidence is that for most 3rd world countries getting humanitarian help from the UN, debt releif from the WTO, etc, is in the interest of both the government and the downtrodden. Other than the UN, what other forum do the downtrodden have?

You can blame Yasser Arafat for that...they are to destroy Israel. Nothing short of that, or their utter destruciton, will stop their actions.

How can you utterly destroy Hamas? If you killed every Hamas member today, tommorrow their would be another group to take their place. You're statement is correct, Jeff, but mine is as well. Hamas will go away when the palestinians don't want them any more. They are a fixture like the IDF. Seems encouraging the Palestinain center would be a more productive excersize than beating on the fringes.

Russia is fighting their own war in Chechnya. They didn't invite us, and I'm not sure we really have a stake in that fight.

Events in Chechnya, while noteworthy constitute a domestic terrorist problem for the Russians at best, a smouldering insurrection at worst. Not surprisingly, Russias foriegn policy pretends Chechney is not happening at all.

 

[jon_forward]

the way you state this, the whole world should be made to fit 'our' standard. the UN is a paper lion, this has been proved by their inaction, sitting on their hands, of saddams thumbing his nose at the world. as for putting words... you state 'then why did we attack him instead of the #1.... once again I never said he was #1 you did...also you are the one looking for independent verification as to saddam standing on the bad guy list... you assume this , you assume that....its in black and white...the newspaper... in color live on TV... believe what you will.. links to terrorism,ubl, supporting suicide bombers... to hear you tell it, make no differance. even the killing of upto 61,000 of his own people???? the water is right in front of you....

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by jon_forward
the way you state this, the whole world should be made to fit 'our' standard.

I'm sorry, I probably wasn't clear. No, I think the world has to universaly come to a standard, and universaly be encouraged to adhere to it.

the UN is a paper lion, this has been proved by their inaction, sitting on their hands, of saddams thumbing his nose at the world.

You'd have a better argument if we'd found any of the WMD stockpiles we claimed they had. The plants that made them, the ordinance ready for use. That was the argument we put before the UN, and the reasons they refused to support the action turned out to be correct, Hussein had not re-armed. It is odd that they are still getting damned for it.

also you are the one looking for independent verification as to saddam standing on the bad guy list

jon, if we are on a crusade for human rights, I just want to know where the next regime is going to get changed, cause we haven't made a significant dent in human rights abuses with the fall of Hussein. If we aren't going to continue the crusade, then why did we go to Iraq?

... you assume this , you assume that....its in black and white.

It isn't black and white, John. It is shades of grey. If your talking about stories in print, there have been thousands, spanning the spectrum from the GWB is in league with OBL to the Angel Gabriel is going to protect us from OBL as long as GWB is president. They can't all be right, can they? Many are nothing more than delusion or spin.

to hear you tell it, make no differance. even the killing of upto 61,000 of his own people???? the water is right in front of you....

Jon, your looking at data from a telephone poll. It would be funny but your taking it seriously. I'm sure a survey will be done where they ask for things like the names of the victims, location of the remains, etc.etc. as well. Until they complete something like that, this article provides one, very high, estimate.

 

[jon_forward]

I agree with you that we as a world need to come to a standard and be encouraged to adhere to it. man dont that open up a can a worms though. looking back on the events that led to the freeing of the iraqi people, one has to ask, why didnt saddam do as the UN asked? had he done as asked, demanded ,whatever by the humanitarian org known as the UN, would we have done what we have up to this point? did we over react to 9/11? the jury is still out on that. we did use sanctions but what with france,germany and others going around them what use are they? as for the # of people killed by saddam.. do they have to be all lined up in a row with name tags? no one believed what was happening in germany during the 30s or 40s until it was to late to help those already killed. and I will agree with you that there is a grey area. only not as grey or large as you would like for me to believe. just the same, common ground.

 

[Annie]

But Will The Media REPORT?

This guy is phenomenal, in Iraq, an Iraqi, and Muslim:

http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/

There will be a lot about this in next week's Weekly Standard:

More about the rallies
When we were marching on Dec 10 I told Omar that maybe we didn't need to cover the protests after all since it looked like reporters from all the major media agencies were doing so. As you can see in my pictures there were scores of reporters and cameras all over the place. And since the rallies ended in front of the Palestine hotel we thought that it would be impossible for the media to ignore this event. I felt a bit awkward walking along reporters carrying just a little digital camera while they had all the equipment.

The last thing we expected was to be the first to publish anything about the protests. It felt both good and awful at the same time. Good for scooping Reuters, AFP, AP, and other wire services and media stations. And awful for the people that depended on these services for their news. I'm telling you there were reporters from every station in the world at the demos that day and yet only a few mentioned them at all.

Al-Jazeera described the demonstrations as protests against "what is called terrorism" and estimated the number of protestors as 10,000. AFP estimated the number as 200 at first (which made us furious) then later they gave the count as 4,000. While it was very obvious that the protestors were much more than 10,000. The Anti-terrorism Popular Committee stated that there were more than 20,000 demonstrators marching. You can get an idea by this Reuters streaming clip

Imagine if half or even a quarter of that number were demonstrating against the war or against the occupation. What do you think would have happened? Would the media ignore it?
The voice of that old Iraqi Communist shouting to the Arab reporter "For once speak the truth" keeps resounding in my head.

What the media also didn't mention was that there were other similar protests all over Iraq in Najaf, Karbala, Nassiriya, Irbil, Suleimaniya, and even in Sunni cities such as Ramadi, Ba'quba, and Balad on the same day. And these won't be the last. There are many more larger protests planned for the near future.

If the exact date and location of the protests were not so shrouded in secrecy I believe they would have been even larger. But look at it this way, the first demonstration on Nov 28 was attended by several hundred people, on Dec 5 more than a thousand, this time they were between 10,000 to 20,000. Iraqis are getting bolder. And despite the risk of being targetted we felt more safe than ever marching with the others. The IP did a great job of providing protection, and the Americans had two helicopters circling the area.

It was wonderful watching Iraqis from different backgrounds, ethnicities, age groups, and political beliefs all marching for the same cause. Seeing Muslim clerics walking along Communists shouting "No to terrorism, Yes to peace and democracy" was priceless. And no one expected that political parties from the opposition would show up as well.

I'm glad that everyone liked the pictures I took. If my memory card was larger I could have taken many more. I tried hard to get an overhead view of the protestors but the IP didn't allow reporters to take photos from buildings for security considerations. Omar and I contemplated climbing a tree then we decided against it because we would look foolish like shuwadi (monkeys). A truck driver noticed our predicament and offered for us to climb over his truck where Omar took these pictures.

As a result of the exclusive coverage of the demonstrations I have been inundated with emails again, so please understand if I can't reply to all. I also got emails from people who were surprised that Baghdad looked so very much like Los Angeles or Miami. I tell them that you haven't seen anything yet, there are neighbourhoods in Baghdad that look even better than Beverly Hills. I will be publishing more pictures soon. And the reason the pics were so large was because I didn't have any time to compress them since power was out most of that day, so I had to upload them directly from the camera.

I also got a terrible flu and I can't write more now though I have a lot to write about.

One more thing, feel free to distribute, share, and print these pictures as long as you credit me and give a link back to the blog. There is no copyright.


# posted by zeyad : 9:05 PM

 

[DKSuddeth]

Apathy, the chosen way to be.

Its sad that issues and events like this don't get better coverage.

 

[Annie]

Yes it is, to educate both the right and left; European and American.

There are about 10 very different and vital Iraqi bloggers, everyone should check them out.

 

[nbdysfu]

I had no idea that there would actually be protests in support of the occupation. It's great if that's happening.:clap1:

http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/21.jpg
happy kids
http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/27.JPG

His photos make it look like my hometown. Where's all the depression and blight? It's times like this I wish I had elected to take that arabic script class in college so I could know exactly what all those signs say.

 

[Annie]

I'll try to find you more. The great thing about blogs, you can get first hand accounts and from positions that aren't mainstream media regulars.

The Time reporter that threw a grenade out of the humvee is an example of the real dangers to reporters, I for one would never denigrate their risks. Yet it's been widely reported on the ground that many of the regular media await regular briefings or 'staged' events in front of where they're staying. I can buy that from what I see reported by military and aggressive reporters.

 

[Annie]

Here's a viable site, with links:

http://www.instapundit.com/archives/012972.php

There are more posted more recently, but I think you'll be able to find them easily enough:

ROGER SIMON:


I don't want to think that Noah Oppenheim is correct in writing that many in the media quite seriously don't want us to win, but tonight of all nights it seems more likely that could be so. As I type these words at ten p. m. PDT... maybe I missed something... maybe I didn't click far enough... but I see no reports of the large pro-democracy/anti-terror march of Iraqis in Baghdad today in tomorrow's New York Times or Washington Post or in the Los Angeles Times(at least on their websites). Or on the CNN site. Or on MSNBC.... Do you think for one moment that if thousands had been marching for Saddam... for the fascists... excuse me "insurgents"... it wouldn't have been front page news? I don't. What's going on?


(Emphasis in original.) I just searched "Iraq" on the NYT website. Not only did I find absolutely no reference to the anti-terror protests in Iraq, the search results brought home to me just how relentlessly negative the spin is on the stories that they do report. This is an absolute embarrassment to the American media -- even Reuters and Al Jazeera are doing a better job! -- but I don't know if they'll even notice.

But we're noticing. And while the story hasn't quite been blacked out, it's close. Readers report that CNN did run clips of the marches, as did Fox (see above). But the biggest story in the NYT on Iraq is that two GIs were killed during a robbery. Roger's basic point holds: Had these demonstrators been marching on the other side, this would have been a big story instead of the closest thing to a non-story. So why isn't it a big story when it's good news? Because they want us to lose? Or at least, because they are, as Noah Oppenheim suggests, consciously or unconsciously seeking "vindication" of their anti-war views?

When you compare what they do report with what they don't, it seems to me that they're either glorying in the bad news and ignoring the good for the reasons Oppenheim suggests, or just lousy at their jobs. Or, I suppose, both. Your call.

UPDATE: One of Roger's commenters points out that the Times did cover the march -- as a single paragraph buried in the story about the 2 GIs:


In contrast, a heavily policed march in central Baghdad on Wednesday, organized peacefully by the country's major political parties, drew thousands of Iraqis to protest attacks by guerrilla fighters, which have injured and killed Iraqi civilians as well as occupiers.


This kind of ass-covering ("See! We covered it!") is almost worse than not covering it at all. Pathetic.

Posted by Glenn Reynolds at December 11, 2003 04:53 AM

 

[nbdysfu]

Originally posted by Kathianne
The Time reporter that threw a grenade out of the humvee
__________________ _____________________

when did this happen?

Thanks for the clarification below. I misinterpreted from the context of your statement that the reporter simply threw a grenade out of a humvee.

 

[Annie]

My mistake, I assume that everyone is a news hound as I am.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58156-2003Dec11.html

2 American Journalists Wounded In Baghdad
Grenade Blast Injures Time's Michael Weisskopf, Photographer Nachtwey
By Paul Farhi
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 12, 2003; Page C01


Michael Weisskopf, a Washington-based senior correspondent for Time magazine, was seriously wounded in Baghdad late Wednesday when a grenade exploded in the U.S. Army Humvee in which he was a passenger. James Nachtwey, a Time contributing photographer, was also in the vehicle and was injured by the blast.



Weisskopf, 57, a former Washington Post reporter, likely saved the lives of his companions, including two U.S. soldiers, by attempting to toss the grenade from the vehicle before it exploded, said several people familiar with the incident.

The blast blew off Weisskopf's right hand, according to one account. He was taken to a military aid station in Baghdad and later to a hospital in the city, where he underwent surgery. A statement released by Time said he was in stable condition yesterday.

Nachtwey, 55, an award-winning photographer known for his images of combat and poverty, was hit by shrapnel. He was also in stable condition.

The two soldiers, from the 1st Armored Division, were also injured, but their identities and the nature of their injuries were not released by military officials yesterday.

The explosion apparently occurred after an attacker lobbed a grenade into the Humvee, which was on routine patrol with a second Humvee. The journalists were accompanying the patrol, according to a military spokesman quoted by the Associated Press.

Weisskopf, who lives in Northwest Washington, has been reporting from Iraq for the past two weeks. He is a veteran national political reporter and an experienced foreign correspondent, having been stationed in China and Iran for The Post. He covered the end of U.S. combat operations in Iraq in the spring; he was on his second reporting trip to Iraq for Time this year when he was injured.

"He picked [the grenade] up not knowing exactly what it was, but he knew he had to get rid of it quickly," said Judith Katz, Weisskopf's wife, who spoke with her husband yesterday. "I don't know what went through into his mind, but that's what he was doing."

She added, "He saved his own life and three others as well. He saved four people's lives."

Katz said she and Weisskopf discussed the danger involved in covering the war and its uncertain aftermath, but Weisskopf was determined to go. "This is his love of reporting," she said. "You can't stop someone from their love and their passion. I would never stop him from doing that."

Weisskopf was wearing body armor, she said, which may have prevented even more extensive injuries. It wasn't clear whether Nachtwey was similarly protected, although his injuries -- including to the abdomen -- suggest he wasn't.

Time's deputy Washington bureau chief, Jay Carney, called Weisskopf "a wonderful presence in the bureau. He was caustic, funny and gruff. We're looking forward to having him back."

Of Nachtwey, Carney said: "He's such a pro and totally fearless, but very smart. This is obviously a very serious situation. We're glad he was able to get out."

Veteran Post reporter David Maraniss, a longtime friend of Weisskopf, called him "a great, fearless reporter with a wonderful, sarcastic sense of humor. He never met a person he didn't give a nickname to. He delights in characters."

After 20 years with The Post, Weisskopf joined Time in 1997.

Nachtwey is a famed combat photographer who has worked in many of the world's most troubled regions, including Rwanda, Somalia, Bosnia, Sudan, Chechnya and Kosovo.

As a result, he has been "in situations which are chaotic and unpredictable and incredibly violent, and I am with people who are much more experienced than I am and they get killed," he recounted in an interview with The Post three years ago. Sometimes, he said then, his survival is "sheer luck. And sometimes I think I have a guardian angel looking over me."

Nachtwey was the subject of a documentary in 2001 called "War Photographer" that was nominated for an Academy Award. Earlier this year, he was awarded a $1 million Dan David Prize for his work documenting "the apocalyptic events of our time."

Time said both journalists are to be transferred to a U.S. military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany, and then to Washington.

The Paris-based World Association of Newspapers said at least 16 journalists have been killed in Iraq this year, including at least three Americans, according to the Associated Press. Many others have been wounded.

 

[jimnyc]

I like this banner. This guy makes a good point in his first paragraph. How come the media isn't jumping all over these protests? Yet there are thousands upon thousands of articles on the news sites covering the slightest of negative things. Sure, there's no media bias!

"I don't want to think that Noah Oppenheim is correct in writing that many in the media quite seriously don't want us to win, but tonight of all nights it seems more likely that could be so. As I type these words at ten p. m. PDT... maybe I missed something... maybe I didn't click far enough... but I see no reports of the large pro-democracy/anti-terror march of Iraqis in Baghdad today in tomorrow's New York Times or Washington Post or in the Los Angeles Times(at least on their websites). Or on the CNN site. Or on MSNBC.... Do you think for one moment that if thousands had been marching for Saddam... for the fascists... excuse me "insurgents"... it wouldn't have been front page news? I don't. What's going on?"