BBC admits Iraqi deaths error

[rodeodance]

um... not much info in this story.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,12096511%255E1702,00.html

BBC admits Iraqi deaths error
From correspondents in London
30jan05

THE BBC apologised today for erroneously reporting that US-led and Iraqi forces might be responsible for the deaths of 60 per cent of Iraqi civilians killed in conflict over the past six months.

The British broadcaster said in broadcasts and a news release that its Panorama investigative show would air a report citing "confidential" records from Iraq's health ministry to support the contention.

Iraq's health minister said the BBC misinterpreted the statistics it had received and had ignored statements from the ministry clarifying the figures.

"Today, the Iraqi Ministry of Health has issued a statement clarifying matters that were the subject of several conversations with the BBC before the report was published, and denying that this conclusion can be drawn from the figures relating to 'military operations'," the BBC said in a news statement today.........

[Rockerdem]

1. Wingnuts are going to jump all over this

You can forget about debating this in the future. This is all that youre gonna hear on the media from now on.

[rodeodance]

2. yes, I think you are right-sadly

[candle_bright]

5. Isn't this good?

The fewer innocent Iraqis killed by our troops the better, right? :shrug:

[geomon666]

7. No, it's not good.

Yes fewer innocents killed by Americans would be nice but...that's not the truth. We know they are responsible for the majority of civilian deaths over there but now the US media can just deny that whenever they want.

[ZR2]

9. How exactly

do we know this ?

[NYC]

19. Historically, in all wars,

60% of the casualties are civilians. In this war, there are no American civilians around (mercenaries don't count as civilians).

[Just Me]

20. Believe it or not, there is still NO ACCURATE ACCOUNTING,...

,...of lives lost, crippled and/or damaged due to the US aggressive, politico/power-mongering war in Vietnam.

Of course, the numbers of damaged human lives are still COUNTING and dying.

Same profitteering elist shit,...different decade. The "remanant" of good ole' enemies of human worth are making their final fascist stand. ASSHOLES!!!!

But for the fact that these human scum are waging a psy-ops WAR against their own people, their evil would not have TEMPORARILY gained an advantage.

I can NOT wait until these soul-less people face a judgment they never anticipated (being the spoiled spots on humanity). They will be shocked that their arrogance will be both their demise and humanity's advance in conquering the likes of them.

[uppityperson]

3. BBC link here

Sat 20:48 GMT
Iraq data 'includes rebel deaths'
Hospital figures of deaths and injuries in violence across Iraq cannot differentiate between those killed by government-backed forces and insurgents, officials say
<clip>
Some 2,041 of those were categorised as the result of "military operations" while 1,233 were blamed on "terrorist operations".

But the health ministry says those recorded as dying in military action included people killed by insurgents, not just those killed by troops from the multinational force or Iraqi security bodies.
<more clipping>
The statistics also showed that 12,657 people were injured by the continuing violence in the same six months

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4219451.stm

---------------------
Sat 11:19 GMT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/4217413.stm
Iraq Health Ministry Figures
On Thursday, January 27 2005, the Iraqi Ministry of Health released to the BBC's Panorama programme statistics which stated that for the six-month period from 1 July 2004 to 1 January 2005:


3,274 people in Iraq were killed and 12, 657 injured in conflict related violence
2,041 of these deaths were the result of "military operations", in which 8,542 people were injured
1,233 deaths were the result of "terrorist
<clip clip clip>

[mordarlar]

11. Regardless of who did the killing these deaths ARE a result of Bush's WAR

[bahrbearian]

13. Bush broke it ,We bought it.

That might be my next bumper sticker.

[TexasLawyer]

18. Right

These deaths are a result of Bush's war, and I would say that the "coalition of the willing" is responsible for 100% of the deaths. There wouldn't be any combat deaths or collateral damage if we hadn't attacked Iraq to begin with.

[twaddler01]

21. okay, steal my words

why don't you?

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. Here's the 'clarification'

but I'm still not sure I understand it.

# 3,274 people in Iraq were killed and 12,657 injured in conflict related violence
# 2,041 of these deaths were the result of "military operations", in which 8,542 people were injured
# 1,233 deaths were the result of "terrorist operations"

The BBC reported these figures as meaning that the deaths and injuries resulting from "military operations" were the result of actions by the Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces.

Today, the Iraqi Ministry of Health has issued a statement clarifying matters that were the subject of several conversations with the BBC before the report was published, and denying that this conclusion can be drawn from the figures relating to military operations. It states that those recorded as killed in military action included Iraqis killed by terrorists, not only those killed by Coalition forces or Iraqi security forces; and that those recorded as killed in military action included terrorists themselves, and Iraqi security forces.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/4217413.stm

My guess is that "military actions" means that coalition fighters were involved in the fighting (eg any firefight, or action just by the US military); and "terrorist operations" means that just insurgents were fighting (eg a bomb killing the public). And they haven't bothered to record who actually did the killing in the first category.

But there may be another interpretation. Anybody?

[rodeodance]

6. Who is in charge of "Health Mininistry"--the US instaled gov??

......Some 2,041 of those were categorised as the result of "military operations" while 1,233 were blamed on "terrorist operations".

But the health ministry says those recorded as dying in military action included people killed by insurgents, not just those killed by troops from the multinational force or Iraqi security bodies.......

[daleo]

12. That would be my take on it too

But common sense says that the vast majority of innocent bystanders killed in "military operations" as defined above would have been killed by the U.S. military, simply by virtue of the great advantage in firepower that they possess.

One could make the same claim of the "terrorist" caused deaths - it is a commonplace that many of the deaths attributed to car bombs by occupation forces have been attributed to U.S. missiles by opponents of the occupation.

Naturally, without the all seeing eye of God nobody can be sure of the source of every bullet or piece of shrapnel. The best one can do is apply some common sense filters to the claims, I suppose.

I don't think this means the BBC has apologized, it has just given the Iraqi puppet government a chance to "explain their numbers".

On edit - They use the phrase "regrets mistakes", so I suppose that constitutes an apology in most people's books. I don't see what they did wrong - the occupation authority is just splitting hairs.

[noamnety]

8. So why don't they just release the numbers?

If these aren't the numbers killed by the puppet government vs. killed by the opposition, what are those numbers? There seems to be some interest, why not just release the data?

[rodeodance]

10. seems to me the bbc said sorry real quick-must not wanted to have

a "rathergate" scenenio take place.

[Moderator]

14. kick

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. BBC apologises over Iraqi figures

The BBC has apologised for incorrectly broadcasting figures which suggested more Iraqi civilians had been killed by coalition and Iraqi forces than by insurgents.
The information was based on figures given by the Iraqi Ministry of Health to the BBC's Panorama programme. The statistics concerned the number of people killed in conflict-related violence in the second half of 2004.

The figures said that 3,274 civilians had died in that period, 2,041 of them as the result of "military operations".

The rest were attributed to "terrorist operations".

more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_4220000/newsid_4222300/4222353.stm

[leesa]

16. Ooopsie doodle...did a little truth escape. I'm absolutely certain

more civilians were killed with AK-47s and suicide bombers than 500 ton bombs, white phosphorus, and napalm bombs in major civilian centers.

It just makes sense, don't it?

[DulceDecorum]

17. Bombs are benign

that is why we spend so much money on them.