Search This Blog

11 October 2006

the unasked question, the ghastly answer: 601,027


Click. Buy some Paint. And brushes.
Spraypaint.
Make stencils.
Go out at night. What do you want

to say to your neighbors before
Election Day
Tuesday 7 November?
You can do it. Girls and Boys.
Men, women, old people. Do you
want your town pretty and clean?
Or do you want
to stop
killing human beings?


The IRAQ BODY COUNT Project Team are:

SCOTT LIPSCOMB
(Assistant researcher) is a co-founder of Musicians Opposing War, a collective of Northwestern University [Chicago Illinois USA] faculty, staff, & students in the United States who came together for the purpose of expressing opposition to the War on Iraq, who believe that U.S. military aggression is likely to increase - not deter - terrorism on American shores, and who advocate seeking non-violent solutions to the world's problems through a consensus of peace-minded nations. Scott is an Associate Professor in the School of Music at Northwestern, where he teaches in the Music Education and Music Cognition programs and carries out research related to the processes involved in music listening and their affect upon the listener. He is also co-author of "Rock and Roll: Its History and Stylistic Development" (2003, 4th edition, Prentice-Hall) and has been extremely concerned about the lack of response to this issue from the musical community. The recent appearance of organizations like Musicians United to Win Without War (Russell Simmons, Rosanne Cash, Michael Stipe, Dave Matthews, Peter Gabriel, Suzanne Vega, and others) is a welcome occurrence and hopefully only the first of many more that will follow.

=================

The Wall Street Journal
Page A4
Wednesday 11 October 2006


Iraqi Death Toll
Exceeds 600,000,
Study Estimates


by NEIL KING JR.

WASHINGTON -- A new study asserts that roughly 600,000 Iraqis have died from violence since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, a figure many times higher than any previous estimate.

The study, to be published Saturday in the British medical journal the Lancet, was conducted by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health by sending teams of Iraqi doctors across Iraq from May through July. The findings are sure to draw fire from skeptics and could color the debate over the war ahead of congressional elections next month.

The Defense Department until 2004 eschewed any effort to compute the number of Iraqi dead but this summer released a study putting the civilian casualty rate between May and August at 117 people a day. Other tabulations using different methodologies put the range of total civilian fatalities so far from about 50,000 to more than 150,000. President Bush in December said "30,000, more or less" had died in Iraq during the invasion and in the violence since.

The Johns Hopkins team conducted its study using a methodology known as "cluster sampling." That involved randomly picking 47 clusters of households for a total 1,849 households, scattered across Iraq. Team members interviewed each household about any deaths in the family during the 40 months since the invasion, as well as in the year before the invasion. The team says it reviewed death certificates for 92% of all deaths reported. Based on those figures, it tabulated national mortality rates for various periods before and after the start of the war. The mortality rate last year was nearly four times the preinvasion rate, the study found.

"Since March 2003, an additional 2.5% of Iraq's population has died above what would have occurred without conflict," the report said. The country's population is roughly 24 million people.

Human Rights Watch has estimated Saddam Hussein's regime killed 250,000 to 290,000 people over 20 years.

The Lancet study, funded largely by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Center for International Studies, said while the percentage of deaths attributed to the U.S.-led coalition has decreased over the past year, coalition forces were involved in 31% of all violent deaths since March 2003. Most of the deaths in Iraq, particularly in the past two years, have been caused by insurgent, terrorist and sectarian violence.

Overall, the study found 55% of deaths since March 2003 were due to violence. Of that subset, 56% resulted from gunshots; car bombs and other explosives accounted for 27%, and airstrikes caused 13%. The rest were due to other factors.

Paul Bolton, a public-health researcher at Boston University who has reviewed the study, called the methodology "excellent" and said it was standard procedure in a wide range of studies he has worked on. "You can't be sure of the exact number, but you can be quite sure that you are in the right ballpark," he said.

A similar, smaller study by the same team in 2004 put the number of deaths at the time at 9,000 to 194,000. That report drew fire for the breadth of its estimate. In part to offset such criticism, the researchers said they picked the largest sample possible for this survey, after considering the high level of danger involved in sending teams door-to-door in Iraq.

The study's lead researchers, Gilbert Burnham and Les Roberts of Johns Hopkins, have done studies in the Congo, Rwanda and other war zones. "This is a standard methodology that the U.S. government and others have encouraged groups to use in developing countries," said Mr. Burnham, who defended the study as "a scientifically extremely strong paper."

This study, "The Human Cost of the War in Iraq," puts civilian fatalities at 426,369 to 793,663 but gives a 95% certainty to the figure of 601,027.

Hamit Dardagan, co-founder of Iraq Body Count, a London-based human-rights group, called the Lancet study's figures "pretty shockingly high." His group tabulates the civilian death toll based on media reports augmented by local hospital and morgue records. His group says it has accumulated reports of as many as 48,693 civilian deaths caused by the U.S. intervention.

Mr. Burnham said the disparity between his survey and tabulations like Iraq Body Count are largely because of the heavy media and government focus on Baghdad and a few other cities. "What our data show is that the level of violence is going on throughout the country," he said.

Lt. Col. Mark Ballesteros, a Defense Department spokesman, said the Pentagon doesn't comment on reports that haven't been publicly released. Nonetheless, he said, "the coalition takes enormous precautions to prevent civilian deaths and injuries," adding that "the Iraqi ministry of health would be in a better position, with all of its records, to provide more accurate information on deaths in Iraq."

Since 2004, the Pentagon has collected data on civilian deaths in incidents where coalition forces were involved. According to its August civilian-casualty report, those figures show that the daily civilian death rate has increased nearly sixfold, to almost 120 this summer from about 20 in early 2004. The Lancet study cites the Pentagon's numbers to back its own findings, saying the mortality-rate increases in both tabulations closely parallel one another.

Write to Neil King Jr. at neil.king@wsj.com

3 comments:

James J. Olson said...

This is why President Bush should be arrested, charged with war crimes, found guilty, and locked in a prison cell for the rest of his life. Perhaps they can include his cell as part of his Presidential Library, so people can go and gawk at this utter failure of a leader. He can be a shining example of the worst way to govern in a democracy. I just pray that it is not too late at the next election to have a President that can fix all that Bush and his cabal have broken.

Vleeptron Dude said...

Negativenelly Left A Comment (possibly to Make Bob Happy, I don't know:
=============
most disappointing list yet.

http://iraqbodycount.org/names.php

Posted by negativenelly to Vleeptron_Z at 10/11/2006 04:08:40 AM
==============

and then thought better of it and removed it. Down that path I found a mention of Musicians Opposing War, and have re-pasted Some Stuff.

It would seem to me that if you Make (or just obsessively love) Music, you're not likely to approve of mass state violence to resolve global economic/religious/political disputes.

Or not. I can think of Sgt. Barry Sandler, whose "Ballad of the Green Berets" was a huge socko-boffo smash (with a bullet) during the Vietnam War.

That rocker from Michigan is one of the world's leading advocates of blasting the crap out of animals and birds with firearms. I'm having trouble remembering his name right now.

Violence and Music? Who else? (A few posts back we said a bit about Prussian Blue, the adorable little singing duet twin sisters (fraternal) from The USA Far West who sing Happy Aryan Music and wear Smiley-Adolf t-shirts. (Their website store doesn't sell them.) They call everyone who isn't a pretty or handsome Aryan a "mud."

Vleeptron Dude said...

yo Jim

Nostrabobus sprache:

I'm guessing that no matter how badly the Republicans do on 7 November, even if the impeachment committee (I think that's the House Judiciary Committee) flips to a Democrat chair, George W. Bush Jr. will serve out his eight years.

Much the way Clinton left the White House with a swarm of unresolved civil litigation (I think they took away his Arkansas lawyer license), Bush can be expected to be pestered with lawsuits over this and that -- he pulled a lot of This and he pulled a lot of That.

One of the keys to his future Quality Of Life will be how effectively his (many) lawyers can keep him from actually having to drive to federal courthouses in his limo or SVO or drive to a lawyer's office for sworn videotaped depositions.

I don't think an ex-president has ever been compelled to testify under oath before a Congressional or Senate Committee. That would be a ferocious Constitutional train wreck, and an enormous amount of Fun & Publicke Entertainment.

He's young as ex-presidents go and barring a relapse into his younger habits, should live for many decades. Usually news magazines charitably (and neutrally) describe such ex-presidents as "controversial."

But if nobody can ever toss this freakazoid into a jail cell or federal detention facility even for 6 months -- some sort of Constitutional Misdemeanor, like Jaywalking Through or Publicly Urinating On The Bill of Rights -- his Legacy is already chiseled deep into granite. He is as close as any president ever got to seizing anti- and extra-Constitutional and unaccountable police and military powers.

In my lifetime only Nixon ever tried to pull that kind of crap, and he had to leave. A little birdy keeps whispering in this loony's ear: Don't tape your own phone calls, leave no provable links to burglaries, wiretappings, torture or assassination.

In five years, most of his defenders will have grown tired of making the same speeches in front of the Kiwanis Club breakfast providing excuses for his stunts. They'll have New Players to defend.

Every year after that, Bush's Legacy will solidify and change complexion to Darker and Darker.

In 20 years, public school history textbooks will describe him as a presidential Person Of Interest.

Who didn't even make the USA safer. Less safe is much more like it, the historians will tell high school kids.

What authentic controversy will enshroud him will be of this sort: Was he insane, or incredibly stupid, or was he ingesting strange (or familiar) things?

In Tempus Veritas ... as each decade passes, more and more about Bush and his presidency will be revealed and made public.

(Watch, when he does leave the White House, for a Real Big, Bitter Squabble over the administration's records between the Bush Library and the National Archives.)

So Nostrabobus predicts: Bush is going to eclipse Nixon in Entertaining & Sordid & Shameful Revelations. He's going to be The Nixon Of The Hi-Def Age.

But he's getting his Early Phase Punishment right now. Watch for a Real Bad Night on 7-8 November when there's a TV on in the next room with the election results.