Iraq: “Why is the Left Understating the Carnage?”
Dear friends of Mountain View Voices for Peace,
Dear friends of United for Peace and Justice,
Dear Danny [Danny Schechter, MediaChannel]
Dear Leslie, [Leslie Cagan, United for Peace and Justice]
In the Mountain View Voices for Peace poster for the March 2006 third anniversary of the invasion of Iraq there is written 30,000 Iraqis
I found the same poster in United for Peace and Justice’s website and in Media Channel’s website
According to Les Roberts (Center for International Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, one of the world’s top epidemiologists and lead author of the Lancet report) there might be as many as 300,000 Iraqi civilian deaths (Do Iraqi Civilian Casualties Matter?, By Les Roberts, AlterNet, February 8, 2006)
You may also be interested in reading the last Media Lens Alert - MEDIA ALERT UPDATE: IRAQ BODY COUNT REFUSES TO RESPOND and a recent email I sent to the Independent
A few days ago, the Independent wrote: “But IBC admits that with the increasing inability of journalists to move around and report freely, its method of monitoring civilian deaths is becoming increasingly inaccurate. What evidence has emerged indicates that a widely ridiculed study published in The Lancet in autumn 2004, estimating that at least 100,000 civilians had died violently since the war began, might not be so inaccurate.” (“Iraq: The reckoning” , Patrick Cockburn and Raymond Whitaker , The Independent, 12 March 2006)
In CounterPunch yesterday, Todd Chretien asked “Why is the Left Understating the Carnage?” (Counting the Dead in Iraq, TODD CHRETIEN, CounterPunch)
In peace, struggle and friendship, I urge you to consider the message that that wrong number (30,000) is sending, to abandon any further reference to the Iraq Body Count’s numbers and to take seriously in consideration the Lancet study and more recent comments and updates by the Lancet study’s Les Roberts.
I urge you therefore to reconsider the use of that poster. The difference between 30,000 and 300,000 can no longer be ignored. Using that poster as well as keep referring to the IBC’s numbers, would be a betrayal of our share ideals and values of peace and justice.
In solidarity,
Gabriele Zamparini
REPLY FROM: Lenny Siegel, Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
Gabriele,
I've seen the higher estimates, and they're plausible. We decided to go with the lower number because that was (at the time of the design) what http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ had on its web site. We link to that number on our home page.
We didn't want to get into an argument about the real number. We just
wanted to remind people that Americans are a small fraction of the
casualties, and that many more have died from the war than from 9/11 and
all the other terrorist attacks.
Lenny
MY REPLY TO: Lenny Siegel
Dear Lenny,
Thank you for your email.
Forgive me, do you write for UFPJ or for Mountain View Voices for Peace?
You write: "We didn't want to get into an argument about the real number"
I don't understand what you mean, to be honest. The difference between 30,000 and 300,000 is not "an argument". Shouldn't you take the time to review your earlier assumption and refer to the "plausible higher estimates" in your work?
Please, this is a very important issue I am following for a long time now and I would be very grateful if you could write back to me with your thoughts and comments.
Best wishes,
Gabriele Zamparini
REPLY FROM: Lenny Siegel, Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
Gabriele,
We (Mountain View Voices for Peace) chose to conservative with all of
our claims on our T-shirt. We didn't want anyone to challenge our
credibility, because we are reaching out to people who are not
necessarily committed to opposing the war. We wanted to get people to
think about the Third Anniversary of the War.
If I were writing an article on the costs of the war, I would discuss
the Lancet article and other sources.
Remember, when the first person died, the war was wrong.
Lenny
MY REPLY TO: Lenny Siegel
Dear Lenny,
Thank you for your email.
Let me be frank, please.
With all the respect, what you write doesn't make any sense.
We are talking about hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians slaughtered. It's not about being conservative and challenge your credibility.
The medical journal The Lancet published its report on 29 October 2004:
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
A few days ago, the Independent wrote: “But IBC admits that with the increasing inability of journalists to move around and report freely, its method of monitoring civilian deaths is becoming increasingly inaccurate. What evidence has emerged indicates that a widely ridiculed study published in The Lancet in autumn 2004, estimating that at least 100,000 civilians had died violently since the war began, might not be so inaccurate.” (“Iraq: The reckoning” , Patrick Cockburn and Raymond Whitaker , The Independent, 12 March 2006)
According to Les Roberts (Center for International Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, one of the world’s top epidemiologists and lead author of the Lancet report) there might be as many as 300,000 Iraqi civilian deaths (Do Iraqi Civilian Casualties Matter?, By Les Roberts, AlterNet, February 8, 2006)
Justice means truth. The message you are conveying with your poster is a lie. If you really cared about peace and justice you would tell the truth. By using the number 30,000 - a number that doesn't make any sense whatsoever - you and your organization have lost any credibility.
What you write is simply outrageous. Shame!
Kind regards,
Gabriele Zamparini
REPLY FROM: Danny Schechter of MediaChannel.org
MEDIA CHANNEL TAKEN TO TASK FOR A GRAPHIC
And a graphic, not of our making, shown on our home page provided, I think by UFPJ. Gabriele of The Cats Dream blog apparently wrote to me earlier on this and I missed it. He is right and we will will fix it later but it speaks to a debate that is underway over the number of civilians dead in the war in Iraq. A group called Iraq Body Country has used a far lower number than appeared in the Lancet, the British Medical journal.
Here’s the core of a concern I share but hadn’t focused on. With our website under attack from spammers and hackers, I must have missed his first communication and didn’t focus on this because we joined a campaign that provided the graphic as their logo for the event. He writes:
I WROTE AGAIN TO LENNY SIEGEL OF Mountain View Voices for Peace
Dear Lenny,
A friend pointed me out that I came on a little strong with my last email. I apologize. I didn't want to move a personal attack.
I thought - and still very much think so - that you were completely missing the gravity of the situation. The Mountain View Voices for Peace poster is misleading: the number 30,000 is factually wrong.
I understand the difficulties to reaching out people, but telling the truth is the only way.
You may think that the Lancet study is controversial and scientifically uncertain.
Please, take the time to read a few important article:
Researchers Who Rushed Into Print a Study of Iraqi Civilian Deaths Now Wonder Why It Was Ignored, by LILA GUTERMAN, The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 27, 2005
When Promoting Truth Obscures the Truth: More on Iraqi Body Count and Iraqi Deaths, by Stephen Soldz, ZNet, February 05, 2006
BURYING THE LANCET - PART 1
BURYING THE LANCET - PART 2
BURYING THE LANCET – Update
Do Iraqi Civilian Casualties Matter?, By Les Roberts, AlterNet, February 8, 2006
The Mountain View Voices for Peace poster has been used by Media Channel and UFPJ in their websites and campaigns.
Danny Schechter of Media Channel agrees with my concern and promised to stop using that poster.
UFPJ has not replied yet.
Please, after reading the articles above, consider to take action.
Thank you.
In solidarity,
Gabriele Zamparini
Dear friends of United for Peace and Justice,
Dear Danny [Danny Schechter, MediaChannel]
Dear Leslie, [Leslie Cagan, United for Peace and Justice]
In the Mountain View Voices for Peace poster for the March 2006 third anniversary of the invasion of Iraq there is written 30,000 Iraqis
I found the same poster in United for Peace and Justice’s website and in Media Channel’s website
According to Les Roberts (Center for International Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, one of the world’s top epidemiologists and lead author of the Lancet report) there might be as many as 300,000 Iraqi civilian deaths (Do Iraqi Civilian Casualties Matter?, By Les Roberts, AlterNet, February 8, 2006)
You may also be interested in reading the last Media Lens Alert - MEDIA ALERT UPDATE: IRAQ BODY COUNT REFUSES TO RESPOND and a recent email I sent to the Independent
A few days ago, the Independent wrote: “But IBC admits that with the increasing inability of journalists to move around and report freely, its method of monitoring civilian deaths is becoming increasingly inaccurate. What evidence has emerged indicates that a widely ridiculed study published in The Lancet in autumn 2004, estimating that at least 100,000 civilians had died violently since the war began, might not be so inaccurate.” (“Iraq: The reckoning” , Patrick Cockburn and Raymond Whitaker , The Independent, 12 March 2006)
In CounterPunch yesterday, Todd Chretien asked “Why is the Left Understating the Carnage?” (Counting the Dead in Iraq, TODD CHRETIEN, CounterPunch)
In peace, struggle and friendship, I urge you to consider the message that that wrong number (30,000) is sending, to abandon any further reference to the Iraq Body Count’s numbers and to take seriously in consideration the Lancet study and more recent comments and updates by the Lancet study’s Les Roberts.
I urge you therefore to reconsider the use of that poster. The difference between 30,000 and 300,000 can no longer be ignored. Using that poster as well as keep referring to the IBC’s numbers, would be a betrayal of our share ideals and values of peace and justice.
In solidarity,
Gabriele Zamparini
REPLY FROM: Lenny Siegel, Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
Gabriele,
I've seen the higher estimates, and they're plausible. We decided to go with the lower number because that was (at the time of the design) what http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ had on its web site. We link to that number on our home page.
We didn't want to get into an argument about the real number. We just
wanted to remind people that Americans are a small fraction of the
casualties, and that many more have died from the war than from 9/11 and
all the other terrorist attacks.
Lenny
MY REPLY TO: Lenny Siegel
Dear Lenny,
Thank you for your email.
Forgive me, do you write for UFPJ or for Mountain View Voices for Peace?
You write: "We didn't want to get into an argument about the real number"
I don't understand what you mean, to be honest. The difference between 30,000 and 300,000 is not "an argument". Shouldn't you take the time to review your earlier assumption and refer to the "plausible higher estimates" in your work?
Please, this is a very important issue I am following for a long time now and I would be very grateful if you could write back to me with your thoughts and comments.
Best wishes,
Gabriele Zamparini
REPLY FROM: Lenny Siegel, Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
Gabriele,
We (Mountain View Voices for Peace) chose to conservative with all of
our claims on our T-shirt. We didn't want anyone to challenge our
credibility, because we are reaching out to people who are not
necessarily committed to opposing the war. We wanted to get people to
think about the Third Anniversary of the War.
If I were writing an article on the costs of the war, I would discuss
the Lancet article and other sources.
Remember, when the first person died, the war was wrong.
Lenny
MY REPLY TO: Lenny Siegel
Dear Lenny,
Thank you for your email.
Let me be frank, please.
With all the respect, what you write doesn't make any sense.
We are talking about hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians slaughtered. It's not about being conservative and challenge your credibility.
The medical journal The Lancet published its report on 29 October 2004:
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
A few days ago, the Independent wrote: “But IBC admits that with the increasing inability of journalists to move around and report freely, its method of monitoring civilian deaths is becoming increasingly inaccurate. What evidence has emerged indicates that a widely ridiculed study published in The Lancet in autumn 2004, estimating that at least 100,000 civilians had died violently since the war began, might not be so inaccurate.” (“Iraq: The reckoning” , Patrick Cockburn and Raymond Whitaker , The Independent, 12 March 2006)
According to Les Roberts (Center for International Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, one of the world’s top epidemiologists and lead author of the Lancet report) there might be as many as 300,000 Iraqi civilian deaths (Do Iraqi Civilian Casualties Matter?, By Les Roberts, AlterNet, February 8, 2006)
Justice means truth. The message you are conveying with your poster is a lie. If you really cared about peace and justice you would tell the truth. By using the number 30,000 - a number that doesn't make any sense whatsoever - you and your organization have lost any credibility.
What you write is simply outrageous. Shame!
Kind regards,
Gabriele Zamparini
REPLY FROM: Danny Schechter of MediaChannel.org
MEDIA CHANNEL TAKEN TO TASK FOR A GRAPHIC
And a graphic, not of our making, shown on our home page provided, I think by UFPJ. Gabriele of The Cats Dream blog apparently wrote to me earlier on this and I missed it. He is right and we will will fix it later but it speaks to a debate that is underway over the number of civilians dead in the war in Iraq. A group called Iraq Body Country has used a far lower number than appeared in the Lancet, the British Medical journal.
Here’s the core of a concern I share but hadn’t focused on. With our website under attack from spammers and hackers, I must have missed his first communication and didn’t focus on this because we joined a campaign that provided the graphic as their logo for the event. He writes:
”Forgive me if I write you again about the same subject. But I haven't got any reply about that poster on Media Channel website that reads "30000 Iraqis"You will note that this blog did report on new allegations that as many as 250,000 plus Iraqis were killed. We are not downplaying the issue. At the same time, alas, we do not have our own graphics team and in this case were tied into a larger initiative. Thanks for raising this.
www.mediachannel.org
“A few days ago, the Independent wrote: “But IBC admits that with the increasing inability of journalists to move around and report freely, its method of monitoring civilian deaths is becoming increasingly inaccurate. What evidence has emerged indicates that a widely ridiculed study published in The Lancet in autumn 2004, estimating that at least 100,000 civilians had died violently since the war began, might not be so inaccurate.” news.independent.co.uk
“The Financial Times, on November 19, 2004 wrote: “This survey technique has been criticised as flawed, but the sampling method has been used by the same team in Darfur in Sudan and in the eastern Congo and produced credible results. An official at the World Health Organisation said the Iraq study ‘is very much in the league that the other studies are in ... You can't rubbish (the team) by saying they are incompetent‘”. (Stephen Fidler, 'Lies, damned lies and statistics,' Financial Times, November 19, 2004)
“According to Les Roberts (Center for International Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, one of the world’s top epidemiologists and lead author of the Lancet report) there might be as many as 300,000 Iraqi civilian deaths (Do Iraqi Civilian Casualties Matter?, By Les Roberts, AlterNet, February 8, 2006 - www.alternet.org )
On Media Channel website homepage, the poster stands next to an article whose title is “ TAKE ACTION: Demand Better Iraq War Coverage”
So, I am again asking why Media Channel chose to use that poster. As a Media Channel associate, I’m demanding a better Iraq war coverage.
I WROTE AGAIN TO LENNY SIEGEL OF Mountain View Voices for Peace
Dear Lenny,
A friend pointed me out that I came on a little strong with my last email. I apologize. I didn't want to move a personal attack.
I thought - and still very much think so - that you were completely missing the gravity of the situation. The Mountain View Voices for Peace poster is misleading: the number 30,000 is factually wrong.
I understand the difficulties to reaching out people, but telling the truth is the only way.
You may think that the Lancet study is controversial and scientifically uncertain.
Please, take the time to read a few important article:
Researchers Who Rushed Into Print a Study of Iraqi Civilian Deaths Now Wonder Why It Was Ignored, by LILA GUTERMAN, The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 27, 2005
When Promoting Truth Obscures the Truth: More on Iraqi Body Count and Iraqi Deaths, by Stephen Soldz, ZNet, February 05, 2006
BURYING THE LANCET - PART 1
BURYING THE LANCET - PART 2
BURYING THE LANCET – Update
Do Iraqi Civilian Casualties Matter?, By Les Roberts, AlterNet, February 8, 2006
The Mountain View Voices for Peace poster has been used by Media Channel and UFPJ in their websites and campaigns.
Danny Schechter of Media Channel agrees with my concern and promised to stop using that poster.
UFPJ has not replied yet.
Please, after reading the articles above, consider to take action.
Thank you.
In solidarity,
Gabriele Zamparini
posted by The Cat's Dream at 12:42 PM
![[ACLU Execution Watch Counter]](https://www.aclu.org/graphics/dpcounter.gif)
<< Home