26 bodies, and HRW calls it a "genocide"??? Where'd the other 99,974 go?

[LynnTheDem]

Ignoring all the documentary and expert testimony to the contrary; the CIA reports, DIA report, US Marine Corps report, Pentagon report etc; taking ONLY the Human Rights Watch report of "genocide" of the Kurds in the alleged 1988 Anfal campaign, I'm still just not convinced.

Human Rights Watch is the group that claims Iraq committed "genocide" against the Kurds in 1988. According to HRW, 50,000-100,000 Kurds were killed by Hussein under his "cleansing" or Anfal.

--HRW: "By our estimate, in Anfal at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 persons, many of them women and children, were killed out of hand between February and September 1988."

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/ANFALPRE.htm

By 2003, that number became "100,000". And only men and boys;

"Some 100,000 Kurdish men and boys were then rounded up, trucked to remote areas and machine-gunned to death, their bodies bulldozed into mass graves.

HANNY MEGALLY
New York, Aug. 12, 2002
The writer is executive director, Middle East and North Africa Division, Human Rights Watch.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/13/opinion/L13IRAQ.html

Thing is, HRW's "evidence" has me a bit puzzled. In their "A Note on Methodology", HRW cite's 3 forms of evidence they used to conclude Hussein had committed genocide in his "Anfal" against the Kurds; (1) eyewitness testimony, (2)Iraqi government documents, and (3) forensic evidence (or what bushCartel call "mass graves").

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/METHOD.htm

(1)Interviews of 350 Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan in 1992 and 1993, four and five years after the events, with US government assistance. As criminal experts and lovers of murder myteries and L&O fans know, eyewitness testimony is the least credible form of proof. To add to the problem, HRW mentions the "considerable difficulty" encountered:

--HRW: "Due to the high incidence of illiteracy in rural Kurdistan, as well as the local population's particular way of marking time, the team encountered considerable difficulty in its attempts to establish exact dates for specific events, or particular chronologies, on the basis of interviews with individual villagers."

The US government involvement doesn't reassure me, either; US interviewers with representatives of the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. That the US officials involved had an agenda is beyond doubt; they stated it themselves often enough. But I'll leave that for interested persons to research for themselves.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/ANFALPRE.htm

(2) Examination of documents taken by Kurdish rebels from captured Iraqi government offices. These documents, most of which the public still haven't been shown, were reviewed, researched, edited and reported on by...the Kurds.

But read through the documents that are in the public view; let me know if you come across any proof of genociding the Kurds. I've gone through them several times and had no luck, but it could be I require glasses.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/iraq/APPENDIX.htm#TopOfPage

(3)exhumations of 3 grave sites

Of course, forensic evidence is considered the best form of proof, and usually you can't convict without having at least some direct "hard" evidence. HRW exhumed bodies in 3 grave sites of 3 villages;

1. 26 bodies of men and boys executed by firing squad.

Definitely an atrocity; but "genocide"? No.

2. 3 children's graves near the village of Erbil; "within the graveyard of a complex where survivors of the Anfal were taken,"

-Children who weren't killed in the alleged Anfal campaign, but later died of other causes. And this proves Kurds died AFTER the alleged Anfal. Ok. I don't have any problem believing that. In fact, I bet Kurds still die to this day.

3. 2 bodies near the village of Birjinni, who COULD have died from a chemical attack, as alleged, because there was no forensic proof that showed they DIDN'T die from a chemical attack. There was also no proof that showed they did.

--HRW: The forensic team was told that these two skeletons were those of the grandfather and the small boy who had died in the (chemical) attack. Forensic examination of the two skeletons was limited to determining whether there was any sign of trauma or perimortem violence that might contradict the account of the villagers that the two decedents were overcome by chemical weapons. No indications contrary to death by chemical agents were found.

So because there was no evidence saying it could NOT have been chemicals which caused the deaths, it must have been chemicals that caused the deaths? So if we dig up skeletons that died from heart attacks, we can claim they could have died from chemical attacks, because "no indications contrary to death by chemical agents were found"? Hmmm...I sure hope that doesn't become a standard measure here.

That's it. 31 remains. 26 of whom definitely were murdered, although why and by whom we don't know. But murdered they were.

(32 remains in another HRW report; 27 men & boys instead of 26)
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1992/iraqkor/

Where did the other 99,974 bodies go?

We killed an estimated 100,000 Iraqis because Hussein was a "murderous monster worse than Hitler" who committed "genocide" by killing "100,000 Kurds"...and we have 31 bodies, 2 of whom by HRW's own report died after the alleged Anfal campaign, and 2 of whom we have no idea how or why?

Human Rights Watch has an explanation for those missing 99,974 bodies;

The other 99,974 people were "trucked to remote areas and machine-gunned to death, their bodies bulldozed into mass graves".

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/13/opinion/L13IRAQ.html?ex=1118116800&en=272457f4307c66a2&ei=5070

That have never been found.

Sorta like the "500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent." mentioned by George W. Bush in the State of the Union Address. 1/28/2003

http://www.americanprogress.org/AccountTempFiles/cf/%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/PRIRAQCLAIMFACT1029.HTM

"Remote areas". Such as the mountains? With bulldozers? And trucks full of 100,000 bodies? And no one knows a thing about where this massive mass grave is?

:wow:

"Mushroom cloud"..."there is no doubt"..."we were all wrong"..."genocide"...

There are others who make "genocide" claims;

-Such as Christine Gosden, a professor of medical genetics at the University of Liverpool medical school.

Ms. Gosden didn't care for HRW's "100,000" figure; she upped it to "200,000", as she told to Jeffrey Goldberg.

"Now, if you take out two hundred thousand men and boys from Kurdistan"—an estimate of the number of Kurds who were gassed or otherwise murdered in the campaign, most of whom were men and boys—"you've affected the population structure."

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?020325fa_FACT1

Sure just toss on another 100,000! Hey why not!

Notice all the quotes offered from our friend Ahmed Chalabi; now there's credibility.

And while Goldberg mentions Hussein's son-in-law Kamel who "had then spoken publicly about Iraq's offensive biological, chemical, and nuclear capabilities", Goldberg never mentioned one rather important fact; Kamel also testified that Hussein had, in 1991, ordered all of Iraq's WMD be destroyed.

Dr. Gordon Prather, a nuclear physicist who was assistant secretary of the U.S. Army for science and technology, doesn't quite agree with Ms. Gosden, either, and she apparently wasn't aware of this fact;

"Your lady doctor's assertion that Iraq bombed 280 villages with poison gas is a joke you should have seen without a fact-checker. There were hundreds of villages cleared by Baghdad on the Iraqi border, but the residents were moved to new villages built for them in the interior. Western journalists were invited in to observe the process, including Karen Eliot House of the Wall Street Journal, now the president of Dow Jones International."

http://www.polyconomics.com/showarticle.asp?articleid=2001

We should believe ANYTHING from these pro-war pro-regime change who-needs-proof-trust-us bunch? How many times do we accept being lied to? We're supposed to believe they were wrong about WMD, wrong about ties to 911, wrong about ties to al Qaeda, wrong about the flowers & confectionary tossing, wrong about Iraq oil paying for everything, wrong about the "dead-enders", wrong about "mission accomplished" (several times)...but hey they're right about the "genocide"? And they have 26 remains to prove it!

Call me a cynic but I ain't buying it at this time.

Forget about proving who shot the 26 men & boys; Hussein's good for that one, no one is going to demand any proof, he's surely illegally killed that many, so charge him with their murders.

And let's also charge George W. Bush with some of the deaths of the 108 detainees who died (so far) in US custody, "mostly from violent causes", in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/03/16/national/w111607S94.DTL

114 American POWs died from ALL causes during the entire Vietnam war.
http://vietnamresearch.com/history/stats.html

But "genocide" of 100,000 (or is it 200,000?) Kurds in 1988? Not until those 99,974 missing bodies are found. Or is it 199,974 missing bodies.

"Saddam Trial May Lack Evidence"

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/12/18/1071337066012.html?oneclick=true

Gee, ya think? Shouldn't that have been thought of BEFORE we pronounced guilt, and invaded, occupied and "shock & awe" bombed the crap out of a nation?

And let's hope to hell our American justice system as applied to ourselves never becomes the same "justice" system the US applies to Iraq. There's a lot of cemeteries in the US that hold remains that would show "No indications contrary to death by chemical agents were found" and a whole lot of land where we could be accused of having "trucked" our victims "to remote areas and machine-gunned to death, their bodies bulldozed into mass graves"...and no actual bodies necessary.

[DrDebug]

1. Excellent summary again. Nominated

Well what can I say. It's just another trick to make people look the other way. The 100000 dead Iraqi from the current war is a fabrication and a big lie and the 100000 dead Kurds under Saddam is the truth.

I'm not saying that Saddam is a nice guy and he probably killed a lot more than those 32, but as far as scale goes he was pathetic loser and most likely wouldn't have passed a couple of 100.

[LynnTheDem]

3. Thanks, Dr.

I think the horrendous extent of what's been done to Iraq in our names is finally starting to hit me. "Numb" was good. "Dazed, stunned and numb" was ok.

I'm now entering the "incredibly bloody outraged and infuriated" stage; can I get a prescrip from you? Say two...make it 3 bottles of Laphroaig whisky? :grr:

[DrDebug]

4. Of course you can have some whisky

You've made a wonderful post again



:beer:

[LynnTheDem]

9. MINE MINE MINE!!!

HAPPY person!!! :) :) :party: :toast: :) :)

Thanks, Doc! :hug:

:D


*hic*

[Missy M]

2. Who is behind the HRW?

I wonder who runs the HRW. Also, for Chalabi to be used as a credible source is ridiculous. Even more ridiculous is using the US government as a source. It seems to me to kill and dispose of 100,000 to 200,000
bodies and no one knowing where this occurred is remarkable.

[Junkdrawer]

5. A Google turned this up...

Who is behind Human Rights Watch?

Under President Clinton, Human Rights Watch was the most influential pro-intervention lobby: its 'anti-atrocity crusade' helped drive the wars in ex-Yugoslavia. Under Bush it lost influence to the neoconservatives, who have their own crusades, and it is unlikely to regain that influence during his second term. But the 'two interventionisms' are not so different anyway: Human Rights Watch is founded on belief in the superiority of American values. It has close links to the US foreign policy elite, and to other interventionist and expansionist lobbies.

No US citizen, and no US organisation, has any right to impose US values on Europe. No concentration camps or mass graves can justify that imposition. But Human Rights Watch finds it self-evident, that the United States may legitimately restructure any society, where a mass grave is found. That is a dangerous belief for a superpower: European colonialism shows how easily a 'civilising mission' produces its own atrocities. The Belgian 'civilising mission' in the Congo, at the time promoted as a noble and unselfish enterprise, killed half the population. Sooner or later, more people will die in crusades to prevent a new Holocaust, than died in the Holocaust itself. And American soldiers will continue to kill, torture and rape, in order to prevent killings, torture and rape.

For a century there has been a strong interventionist belief in the United States - although it competes with widespread isolationism. In recent years attitudes hardened: human-rights interventionism became a consensus among the 'foreign policy elite' even before September 11. Human Rights Watch itself is part of that elite, which includes government departments, foundations, NGO's and academics. It is certainly not an association of 'concerned private citizens'. HRW board members include present and past government employees, and overlapping directorates link it to the major foreign policy lobbies in the US. Cynically summarised, Human Rights Watch arose as a joint venture of George Soros and the State Department. Nevertheless, it represents some fundamental characteristics of US-American culture.

....

http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/HRW.html

[Selatius]

7. Well, I didn't know George Soros was financing Human Rights Watch

I guess he is doing this for his own economic interests, while the neocons in the White House have their own economic interests to look after. Just another case of corporate cliques working for or against each other.

[struggle4progress]

38. Got evidence to support your claims that HRW supports Soros' economic ..

.. interests?

[Missy M]

8. Thank you for the answer...

I suspected the Human Rights Watch group would be for the interests of the US and in some way involve government departments and foundations, among others.

[struggle4progress]

37. War in Iraq: Not a Humanitarian Intervention (January 2004)

<snip> Human Rights Watch ordinarily takes no position on whether a state should go to war. The issues involved usually extend beyond our mandate, and a position of neutrality maximizes our ability to press all parties to a conflict to avoid harming noncombatants. The sole exception we make is in extreme situations requiring humanitarian intervention.

Because the Iraq war was not mainly about saving the Iraqi people from mass slaughter, and because no such slaughter was then ongoing or imminent, Human Rights Watch at the time took no position for or against the war. A humanitarian rationale was occasionally offered for the war, but it was so plainly subsidiary to other reasons that we felt no need to address it. Indeed, if Saddam Hussein had been overthrown and the issue of weapons of mass destruction reliably dealt with, there clearly would have been no war, even if the successor government were just as repressive. Some argued that Human Rights Watch should support a war launched on other grounds if it would arguably lead to significant human rights improvements. But the substantial risk that wars guided by non-humanitarian goals will endanger human rights keeps us from adopting that position.

Over time, the principal justifications originally given for the Iraq war lost much of their force. More than seven months after the declared end of major hostilities, weapons of mass destruction have not been found. No significant prewar link between Saddam Hussein and international terrorism has been discovered. The difficulty of establishing stable institutions in Iraq is making the country an increasingly unlikely staging ground for promoting democracy in the Middle East. As time elapses, the Bush administration’s dominant remaining justification for the war is that Saddam Hussein was a tyrant who deserved to be overthrown—an argument of humanitarian intervention. The administration is now citing this rationale not simply as a side benefit of the war but also as a prime justification for it. Other reasons are still regularly mentioned, but the humanitarian one has gained prominence. <snip>

In sum, the invasion of Iraq failed to meet the test for a humanitarian intervention. Most important, the killing in Iraq at the time was not of the exceptional nature that would justify such intervention. In addition, intervention was not the last reasonable option to stop Iraqi atrocities. Intervention was not motivated primarily by humanitarian concerns. It was not conducted in a way that maximized compliance with international humanitarian law. It was not approved by the Security Council. And while at the time it was launched it was reasonable to believe that the Iraqi people would be better off, it was not designed or carried out with the needs of Iraqis foremost in mind. <snip>

http://hrw.org/wr2k4/3.htm




http://hrw.org/wr2k4/3.htm#_Toc58744952

[struggle4progress]

39. Who is Paul Treanor, and who is behind him?

He believes the Holocaust should be publicly forgotten, multiculturalism is wrong, art should be destroyed or at least confined to the United States, Europe (or, as he calls it, "Europa") ought to declare war on the United States ...

A cyber-Dutch version of Rush Limbaugh ...

[lostnfound]

6. Thank you for reminder that hidden agendas can be hiding anywhere

I make no judgment on what is the truth here, nor a judgment on HRW (after all, it's possible for a good, well-intentioned group to be duped sometimes) -- but it's an important reminder that we are living in a propaganda world.

[lonestarnot]

10. Impeach him!

[ms. contrary]

11. ah, the tired old conspiracy theories about HRW

Anyone interested in actually evaluating HRW's work on Iraq---instead of falling prey to the distortions and recycled conspiracy theory in this thread---should take a look at HRW's page on Iraq: http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=mideast&c=iraq

Part of being a mature, reasoning adult is the ability to hold ambiguous and contradictory truths in your mind at the same time. Saddam could be a genocidal maniac, and the Iraq invasion would still be wrong. HRW could be funded by dirty capitalists, and still do crucial work to end human rights abuses.

[not systems]

13. These appear to be primary sources not "old conspiracy theories" ...

but I do like what they have done on balance.

However they appear to have provided much of the foundation
for the human rights case for invading Iraq so checking what
they said against the findings after the invasion seems to
be a good idea.

[ms. contrary]

18. Politicians distort information.

so the fact that the HRW reports were used to support the invasion does not mean that the reports themselves have lost credibility. What we *should* be analyzing here is how the Bush admin (and politicians in general) use and abuse information like the HRW reports in order to further political aims. We need to be very aware of how human rights claims can be manipulated for the wrong ends.

Also, just because someone posts an active link to something on the web does not mean that it is a new or primary source. You've got to pay more attention to the tone and the context and the general credibility of the sources; anything can be made to look persuasive.

As for the specifics of Kurdish genocide, I don't have the time now to make a full rebuttal. I think I'll just let Chemical Ali speak for himself:

"You must leave right now. Because I cannot tell you the same day that I am going to attack with chemical weapons. I will kill them all with chemical weapons! Who is going to say anything? The international community? Fuck them! The international community and those who listen to them."

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/chemicalali.htm

[Spazito]

19. The HRW itself had backed off, backed WAY off their initial claims

as proven in this article by quotes from one of the HRW researchers:

It is an issue that Human Rights Watch was acutely aware of when it compiled its own pre-invasion research - admitting that it had to reduce estimates for the al-Anfal campaign produced by Kurds by over a third, as they believed the numbers they had been given were inflated.

snip

Hania Mufti, one of the researchers that produced that estimate, said: 'Our estimates were based on estimates. The eventual figure was based in part on circumstantial information gathered over the years.'

A further difficulty, according to Inforce, a group of British forensic experts in mass grave sites based at Bournemouth University who visited Iraq last year, was in the constant over-estimation of site sizes by Iraqis they met. 'Witnesses were often likely to have unrealistic ideas of the numbers of people in grave areas that they knew about,' said Jonathan Forrest.

'Local people would tell us of 10,000s of people buried at single grave sites and when we would get there they would be in multiple hundreds.'

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1263901,00.html

[ms. contrary]

20. the fact that they're willing to reassess their work

increases HRW's credibility. And any way you cut it, hundreds slaughtered rather than thousands is bad too.

[Spazito]

22. I never questioned their credibility, only their numbers and the

claim that those numbers were what what they used to declare genocide. It seems I was correct in being skeptical on their numbers as they have since reassessed them.

As to hundreds slaughtered versus a hundred thousand or more as has been put forward in 'anecdotal estimates', both are bad but one's argument against Saddam is not bolstered by using inflated numbers but by using the most factual numbers one can credibly post especially when it goes from 100,000 to much less.

[LynnTheDem]

48. Bingo.

"I never questioned their credibility, only their numbers and the claim that those numbers were what what they used to declare genocide. It seems I was correct in being skeptical on their numbers as they have since reassessed them."

Gee, that's what my entire OP was trying to say. You said it much better in one sentence. :P

:hug:

[Sushi-Lover]

35. Anyone know the current estimate?

I'll go looking, but if hrw has changed their numbers does anyone know what the new estimate is?

[Spazito]

I haven't been able to find any numbers that reflect the changes

only that they reduced their numbers by over 1/3rd but from what exactly it doesn't say either. I hope you are more successful than I as it is a very good question and would help in the search for factual data.

[LynnTheDem]

49. So far I haven't seen anything other than "revised downwards by 1/3" and

HRW admitting their figures had been "vastly overinflated".

But reduced by 1/3 on their original number of 50,000? Or their 2003 figure of 100,000?

Either way, bush & Cartel & the bushbots chanting "genocide" and "he murdered "300,000...400,000...500,000...1,000,000" seems to be "vastly overinflated" bullshit. But then, how does one rally support against a genocidal monster "worse than Hitler" who over 30 years killed 33,000? Or 66,000?

Just doesn't have quite the impact of "300,000".

Now that would obviously be grounds for the World Court to investigate and charge Hussein...but no frigging way is it grounds for invasion, occupation and "shock & awe" bombing the f*ck out of Iraq.

[LynnTheDem]

47. HRW = "SADDAM FAN CLUB!"

How DARE they question methodology!

How DARE they question their facts!

Holocaust deniers!

:sarcasm:

[geek tragedy]

15. Shhhh! Didn't you get the memo?

Saddam opposed Bush, therefore we DU'ers must support him.

To hell with what human rights organizations, the actual victims, and virtually EVERY progressive voice under the sun had to say at the time.

If Bush made strong claims about the Holocaust, some people here would be posting articles "debunking" claims of gas chambers.

[Zuni]

42. I have found HRW to be very unbiased

this loony ass "reasearch" by the OP proves nothing

[LynnTheDem]

46. Part of being a mature, reasoning adult is the ability to allow people to

hold their own opinions without making snarky remarks such as ""ah, the tired old conspiracy theories" about other peoples' opinions, denigrating those opinions.

Amazing, huh.

[ms. contrary]

51. giving you the benefit of the doubt

Maybe you didn't realize they were old conspiracy theories. That doesn't change the nature of your sources.

[ms. contrary]

55. apologies

I just looked back at the thread and realized that you weren't the one who first brought up Paul Treanor.

[LynnTheDem]

59. I wondered if that had happened, lol!

I couldn't figure out what "conspiracy theories" you meant in my original post. :D

:hug:

[LynnTheDem]

56. And the fact that HRW themselves has backed down from their

original "vastly overinflated number" means they're indulging in "old conspiracy theories"? What are you talking about?

Certainly not my original post, because I'm not talking about any "conspiracy theories".

[Spazito]

12. Excellent work, again!

Thanks for all your work on this!

[LynnTheDem]

52. Thanks, Spazito!

If you happen upon any info regarding what figure HRW downwards adjusted by 1/3, would you be so kind as to let me know?

I suspect it's on the original number of 50,000, which would put their figure in line with what the CIA has always claimed, at 20,000.

Definitely grounds for a criminal investigation by the Hague; definitely not "genocide" or grounds for "shock & awe'ing".

[Spazito]

61. I sure will, Lynn, but I think we will have to wait until the trial of

Saddam to see if actual numbers are introduced as hard evidence within the 12 charges he faces. I have to assume they must have to provide some factual numbers then.

[LynnTheDem]

64. Thanks.

I have my doubts about any actual numbers or hard evidence being produced at any trial; the Iraq's new PM's spokesman saying "the judges are confidant he will be convicted" doesn't fill me with hope for hard facts, lol!

I'm sure HRW will at some point speak on their revised numbers; could be they're just waiting at this time until more facts come in as the forensic groups carry on in Iraq, rather than changing it weekly or monthly on moving estimates.

[Spazito]

65. Very true, re being cautious about constant revisions, it would be

a wise decision on their part. Re the trial, I have this hope, faint and flickering, that there will be an effort put forward by other nations INCLUDING the US, to insist that the trial be based on the precepts of the International Criminal Court processes and procedures being used currently at the Hague to ensure the world sees justice being done not just mouthed. I know it is probably a forlorn hope but it exists none the less, lol.

Edited to add Court which I left out.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sushi-Lover]

27. I agree.

This is insanity. HRW is not a tool of government propaganda. Period. End of story.

I don't think such groups should be beyond scrutiny as to methods and accuracy, but to suggest that any mistakes or errors are purposeful is crazy (not to mention that these particular findings are backed up by other sources .. did physicians for human rights and amnesty get it wrong too?). Take a look at their Iraq page. There is no way you could conclude from that they are somehow actively biased toward US policy in Iraq (top article is about an Iranian exile group, the second one is about killings at US checkpoints, and the third down is about Abu Ghraib). They go after abuses wherever they find them, as far as I can tell, and have done so throughout our change in policy toward Iraq.

On edit: I post too slow :) Struggle4progress already posted a couple of the hrw articles I mentioned.

[Zuni]

43. I cannot believe there are so few DUers who

actually pointed out what a load of horseshit this is

This is no different than Holocaust Denial or the attempts to "prove" Stalin wasn't killing millions during the 1930s.

I am fucking disgusted by DU today. This is a disgrace

[Zuni]

41. I never thought I would see this day on DU

when this utterly grotesque stalinist bullshit would get 9 nominations.

You know, left wingers "debunked" the stories of Stalin's purges and the Ukrainian famines in the 1930s and 1940s---the same famines my grandmother almost starved in in Rostov on Don were lies!

This is beyond batshit crazy---it is gross, disgusting and insulting

[geek tragedy]

17. Hey, check out what Amnesty International has to say!

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE140051997?open&of=ENG-IRQ

<snip>In April 1997 the UN Commission on Human Rights in its fifty-third session passed a resolution condemning: "... the massive and extremely grave violations of human rights and of international humanitarian law by the Government of Iraq..." <1>. A month earlier, the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances submitted its report to the UN Commission on Human Rights. Among the countries where "disappearances" remain a major concern, Iraq topped the list with more than 16,000 submitted cases still unresolved.

Amnesty International has on numerous occasions over the years expressed its concern at the practice of "disappearances" by the Iraqi authorities. Cases have been documented in several reports <2>. The organization has obtained and continues to receive the names of thousands of victims whose fate and whereabouts remain unknown. As an example, according to some estimates over 100,000 Kurdish civilians "disappeared" in 1988 alone, in a space of three to four months, in the so-called Operation Anfal when the Iraqi Government implemented a program of destruction of villages and towns all over Iraqi Kurdistan, ostensibly in order to resettle the inhabitants in areas which offered improved conditions. An estimated 4,000 villages and towns were destroyed and razed to the ground and decrees were issued giving military and security personnel the authority to execute any persons attempting to return to their homes. Some Kurdish estimates put the figure at 150,000 to 180,000 "disappeared" victims. Amnesty International has the names of about 17,000 people who "disappeared" during that time.

About five years earlier, in August 1983, Iraqi forces arrested some 8,000 men and boys, aged between 8 and 70, from the Barzani clan near Arbil. A group of 315 children and young people, aged between eight and 17 at the time of their arrest, were among those arrested. They were first taken to Baghdad and then transferred to unknown places. All have "disappeared". The operation was believed to have been carried out as retaliation for alleged Kurdish support for the Iranian armed forces during the Iran-Iraq war. On 12 September 1983, President Saddam Hussain said in a speech: "We will punish those who co-operate with Barzani’s sons, just as we punished the Barzani sons themselves and those who co-operated with them in the past. Those people were severely punished and went to Hell...".

Ever since the 1960s and 1970s entire families have been deported to Iran by the Iraqi authorities. With the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq war in September 1980, the practice became widespread and thousands of families were forcibly sent to Iran. They included Arab Shi‘a Muslim families who were declared by the authorities to be "of Iranian descent", taba‘iyya, and Feily Kurds who, unlike the majority of Kurds, are Shi‘a Muslims <3>. However, thousands of male members, including minors, of those families who were deported to Iran, were arrested and detained. Although the majority were kept in acknowledged places of detention and had access to relatives, thousands were later transferred to unknown places and "disappeared".
<snip>

J'accuse, phoney progressives.

[Zuni]

44. I join you

any "progressive" that posts something like this is like the Stalinists who tried to say there was no famine, no killings, no purges, no torture, no oppression in the USSR.

J'accuse

[struggle4progress]

21. Iraq: U.S. Checkpoints Continue to Kill (May 5, 2005)

(Washington D.C., May 5, 2005) -- The failure of U.S. forces in Iraq to implement basic precautions at checkpoints has led to unnecessary deaths of civilians two years after these inadequacies were identified, Human Rights Watch said today.

The March 4 killing of an Italian intelligence officer, Nicola Calipari, at a checkpoint in Baghdad highlighted this failure. <snip>

Again, in its October 2003 report, “Hearts and Minds,” Human Rights Watch urged the U.S. military in Iraq to take further steps to better mark checkpoints with lights and large signs in Arabic, initiate a public-service campaign to inform Iraqis of proper checkpoint behavior, and make available interpreters and soldiers with Arabic skills at all times.

“The military should immediately take the basic steps to ensure that Iraqi civilians, as well as U.S. soldiers, are safe at checkpoints,” said Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch. “The fact that soldiers who man checkpoints are at real risk is not an excuse for complacency. These risks should not be transferred to civilians.” <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/05/04/iraq10578.htm

[struggle4progress]

23. U.S.: Abu Ghraib Only the “Tip of the Iceberg” (April 27, 2005)

(New York, April 27, 2005)— The crimes at Abu Ghraib are part of a larger pattern of abuses against Muslim detainees around the world, Human Rights Watch said on the eve of the April 28 anniversary of the first pictures of U.S. soldiers brutalizing prisoners at the Iraqi jail.

Human Rights Watch released a summary (below) of evidence of U.S. abuse of detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as well as of the programs of secret CIA detention, “extraordinary renditions,” and “reverse renditions.”

“Abu Ghraib was only the tip of the iceberg,” said Reed Brody, special counsel for Human Rights Watch. “It’s now clear that abuse of detainees has happened all over—from Afghanistan to Guantánamo Bay to a lot of third-country dungeons where the United States has sent prisoners. And probably quite a few other places we don’t even know about.” <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/04/27/usint10545.htm

[struggle4progress]

24. Command Responsibility for the U.S. Abuse of Detainees (April 2005)

<snip> To date, however, the only wrongdoers being brought to justice are those at the bottom of the chain-of-command. The evidence demands more. Yet a wall of impunity surrounds the architects of the policies responsible for the larger pattern of abuses.

Evidence is mounting that high-ranking U.S. civilian and military leaders — including Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, former CIA Director George Tenet, Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, formerly the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Major General Geoffrey Miller, the former commander of the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba — made decisions and issued policies that facilitated serious and widespread violations of the law. The circumstances strongly suggest that they either knew or should have known that such violations took place as a result of their actions. There is also mounting data that, when presented with evidence that abuse was in fact taking place, they failed to act to stem the abuse.

The coercive methods approved by senior U.S. officials and widely employed over the last three years include tactics that the United States has repeatedly condemned as barbarity and torture when practiced by others. Even the U.S. Army field manual condemns some of these methods as torture. <snip>

http://hrw.org/photos/2005/torture/

[struggle4progress]

25. Briefing Paper: The Iraqi Special Tribunal (April 2005)

Rules of Procedure and Evidence Missing Key Protections
The newly adopted Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Iraqi Special Tribunal are lacking several important fair trial protections. Human Rights Watch wants to see officials of the former Iraqi government responsible for serious human rights crimes brought to justice. We anticipate such officials will be charged with committing horrific crimes, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. (Many of these crimes have been documented by Human Rights Watch in its reports “Bureaucracy of Repression: The Iraqi Government in Its Own Words” and “Genocide in Iraq: The Anfal Campaign Against the Kurds.”) However, for justice to be done, the trials must be fair. Only through fair trials: can the Iraqi people as well as people worldwide know the true nature of those crimes; can there be justice for the victims and their families; and can Iraq help to ensure that the brutal crimes of the past regime are never repeated. If Iraq is to lay a foundation as a country committed to the rule of law and make a break from the abusive practices of the past regime, it is crucial that trials before the Iraqi Special Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) adhere to internationally recognized fair trial standards. <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/04/22/iraq10533.htm

[struggle4progress]

26. Civilian War Victims Advocate Marla Ruzicka Mourned (April 18, 2005)

(New York, April 18, 2005) -- Human Rights Watch mourns the death of Marla Ruzicka, a tireless human rights activist working to provide compensation for civilian victims of war in Afghanistan and Iraq. The 28-year-old Ruzicka, founder of the non-governmental Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict (CIVIC), was killed by a suicide bomber while traveling on the Baghdad Airport road on Saturday.

Ruzicka’s colleague, Faiz Ali Salim, 43, also died in the explosion. Five others were injured in the attack, which seemed aimed at a security convoy driving ahead of Ruzicka’s car. Human Rights Watch extended its condolence to the families of Ruzicka and Salim.

Ruzicka had worked extensively in Iraq and in Afghanistan to document the exact number of civilians killed or injured by U.S. forces, and helped victims receive compensation from the U.S. government.

During her last trip to Iraq, Ruzicka managed to obtain information from the U.S. military about the number of civilians killed during hostilities after the end of major combat operations. The information she received related only to a brief period in the Baghdad area, but was important in establishing that the U.S. did in fact record civilian injuries. She was trying to get the U.S. government to publicly release these statistics about all areas of Iraq. <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/04/18/iraq10504.htm

[struggle4progress]

28. Human Rights Concerns for the 61st Session of the U.N. Commission

<snip> Violations under the Iraqi Interim Government. Human Rights Watch’s latest report on torture in Iraq highlights the systematic use of arbitrary arrest, prolonged pre-trial detention without judicial review, torture and ill-treatment of detainees, denial of access by families and lawyers to detainees, improper treatment of detained children, and abysmal conditions in pre-trial detention facilities. Persons tortured or mistreated have inadequate access to health care and no realistic avenue for legal redress. With rare exception, Iraqi authorities have failed to investigate and punish officials responsible for violations. The Iraqi Interim Government led by Prime Minister Ayad ‘Allawi and presented to the international community as a sign that the violence and abuses of the Saddam Hussein government was a thing of the past, appeared to be actively taking part, or was at least complicit, in these grave violations of fundamental human rights.

Human Rights Law in Post-War Iraq. Human Rights law recognizes that respect for rights and the rule of law cannot be built on fresh abuses. A new Iraqi government requires more than a change of leadership; it requires a change of attitude about basic human dignity. The new authorities must state unequivocally and publicly that torture and ill-treatment of detainees will not be tolerated. Equally, it must be made clear to law-enforcement personnel that such abuses are no longer acceptable and will not go unpunished. The current Iraqi government has failed to deliver this message, as have their international advisers in assisting them to assume that responsibility. In allowing such abuses to go unchecked while continuing to give absolute priority to bringing the security under control, it may prove very difficult further down the line to deliver a police force that the Iraqi people can have confidence in, threatening the ultimate aim of lasting security where basic human rights are respected.

Iraq’s new government must adopt legislation that will bring its law in line with international human rights standards. As it currently stands, Iraq’s Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) falls short of these standards in a number of significant ways, failing to address fundamental rights, such as the right of criminal suspects to remain silent, the right to be represented by legal counsel at all stages of the proceedings, the right not to have coerced confessions used in evidence against them in court, and the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty before a court of law. <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/10/iraq10309.htm

[struggle4progress]

29. Iraq: Shooting of Italian Civilians by U.S. Forces

<snip> “The Italian incident is generating attention, as it should, but Iraqi civilians are also frequently subjected to this type of deadly violence,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch.

In an October 2003 report on civilian casualties in Iraq, Human Rights Watch documented in detail 18 cases of civilian deaths by U.S. soldiers between May and September 2003. Eleven of the victims were killed at checkpoints. In total, Human Rights Watch collected credible reports of 94 civilian deaths in Baghdad alone during that time, involving questionable legal circumstances that warrant investigation.

Iraq is clearly a hostile environment for U.S. troops, with daily attacks by insurgent groups. But that does not absolve the military from its legal obligations to use force in a restrained, discriminate and proportionate manner and only when necessary, Human Rights Watch said. Improper uses of force must be investigated in a prompt and thorough way.

http://hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/shooting/

[struggle4progress]

30. Torture Continues at Hands of New Government (January 25, 2005)

Police Systematically Abusing Detainees

(Baghdad, January 25, 2005) -- Iraqi security forces are committing systematic torture and other abuses against people in detention, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today.

The 94-page report, The New Iraq? Torture and Ill-treatment of Detainees in Iraqi Custody, documents how unlawful arrest, long-term incommunicado detention, torture and other ill-treatment of detainees (including children) by Iraqi authorities have become routine and commonplace. Human Rights Watch conducted interviews in Iraq with 90 detainees, 72 of whom alleged having been tortured or ill-treated, particularly under interrogation.

While insurgent forces have committed numerous unlawful attacks against the Iraqi police, this does not justify the abuses committed by Iraqi authorities, Human Rights Watch said.

“The people of Iraq were promised something better than this after the government of Saddam Hussein fell,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division. “The Iraqi Interim Government is not keeping its promises to honor and respect basic human rights. Sadly, the Iraqi people continue to suffer from a government that acts with impunity in its treatment of detainees.” <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/26/iraq10053.htm

[struggle4progress]

31. Justice for Abu Ghraib (January 2005)

By Reed Brody
Published in International Herald Tribune

The conviction of Specialist Charles Graner for atrocities committed at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq is a first step toward accountability for the detainee abuse scandal, but it must not be the end of the process.

Each passing day brings new evidence that the mistreatment of Muslim prisoners - far from being an isolated incident at Abu Ghraib - was widespread in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Detainees in Afghanistan were frequently beaten, held naked and deprived of sleep for long periods. Guantánamo inmates have been regularly shackled into painful positions in freezing rooms. Documents released in December describe chained Guantánamo detainees forced to sit in their own excrement, and a "competition" among army dog handlers at Abu Ghraib to "see who could make Iraqi detainees urinate themselves the fastest."

This pattern of abuse across three countries did not result from the acts of individual soldiers such as Graner who broke the rules. It resulted from decisions made by the Bush administration to bend, ignore or cast rules aside. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, for instance, publicly questioned the relevance of the Geneva conventions, hid detainees from the International Committee of the Red Cross and put into play illegal interrogation methods - such as the use of guard dogs to terrorize detainees - that have turned up again and again in abuse reports. The CIA has been authorized to hold detainees incommunicado in "secret locations" where they have reportedly been subject to even worse methods such as feigned drowning.

The Bush administration has been aware of allegations of serious abuse in Afghanistan since at least 2002, and later in Iraq. Yet the newly-released documents are as telling for what is missing as for the new indignities they narrate: At no time did Rumsfeld or any other senior leader put his foot down and warn that the mistreatment of prisoners must stop. Instead, investigations of deaths in custody languished. Soldiers and intelligence personnel accused of crimes, including all cases involving the killing of detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq, escaped judicial punishment until the Abu Ghraib pictures were revealed last April. One recently revealed report to Robert Mueller 3rd, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, complained of a "cover-up" of abuses. <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/19/usint10040.htm

[struggle4progress]

32. U.S./Iraq: Reject Use of “Death Squads” (January 10, 2005)

(New York, January 10, 2005) – Washington’s creation of “death squads” to fight the insurgency in Iraq would represent a shocking new low in a campaign that has already flouted the Geneva Conventions too many times, Human Rights Watch said today.

Newsweek reported Saturday that the U.S. Department of Defense is debating the establishment of Iraqi squads to assassinate Sunni insurgents and their sympathizers, or bring them to secret facilities for interrogation.

Experience from countries such as Colombia, Sudan and Russia (in Chechnya) shows that “death squads” and paramilitary groups created to combat insurgencies take on a life of their own and are often difficult to rein in. Once established, it is difficult to prevent them from killing whomever they want for whatever reasons they want, opening up the possibility that civilians will be targeted because of personal or political vendettas in violation of the Geneva Conventions. <snip>

According to Newsweek, the Pentagon is referring to the plan as the “Salvador option,” a reference to the death squads supported by the United States during the civil wars in El Salvador and Guatemala in the 1980s which became notorious for killing unarmed supporters of the opposition. It also harkens back to Operation Phoenix, a 1969 CIA program of targeted assassinations against the civilian infrastructure that supported the insurgency in South Vietnam, which resulted in widespread atrocities as well. <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/10/usint9972.htm

[struggle4progress]

33. .S.: Released Documents on Torture Not Sufficient (June 23, 2004)

Commission Needed to Probe Treatment of Detainees

(New York, June 23, 2004) — Documents released Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Defense on interrogation procedures at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, raise more questions than they answer, Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch called for a 9/11-style independent commission to probe the issue of detainee abuse.

The released documents stop in April 2003 and do not cover practices at Abu Ghraib and other military prisons in Iraq, Human Rights Watch said. Even so, they show that in December, 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld approved the use of techniques, such as the use of guard dogs to instill fear in detainees, stripping detainees nude, and the use of painful stress positions, that violate the law. Rumsfeld later rescinded his approval of these techniques on Guantanamo detainees, yet they later featured prominently in the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

“This selective release of documents raises more questions than it answers,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “We need an independent investigation, not a selective self-investigation.”

Human Rights Watch said that the released documents show the beginning of the story, how illegal tactics were approved in Guantanamo, but they do not show how these tactics, or even more abusive methods, were later approved and applied in Afghanistan and Iraq and resulted in the torture and other mistreatment of detainees in those places. <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/06/23/usint8937.htm

[struggle4progress]

34. US: Investigate Civilian Deaths in Iraq Military Operations (June 18, 20)

(Washington D.C., June 18, 2004) – The U.S. government needs to conduct independent and impartial investigations into possible unlawful killings of civilians and use of excessive force by U.S. military during operations in Iraq, Human Rights Watch said today.

In a letter to U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Human Rights Watch said that it was unaware of any Pentagon investigations—at least above the level of the unit commander—into numerous cases of excessive and indiscriminate use of force that Human Rights Watch last year documented in Falluja and Baghdad and presented to the Pentagon.

“The military’s failure to investigate possible unlawful use of force creates a climate of impunity that ultimately undermines security,” said Joe Stork, Washington director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa division. “Serious violations that we’ve documented have been swept under the rug. It’s time for the United States to account for these civilian casualties.”

Human Rights Watch investigated several incidents in Falluja in April 2003 in which U.S. forces killed some 20 Iraqi civilians and wounded scores more. The report, “Violent Response: The U.S. Army in al- Falluja,” concluded that U.S. troops used automatic weapons fire in an indiscriminate and excessive manner. <snip>

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/06/18/iraq8872.htm

[Jack Rabbit]

36. Wikipedia: Halabja poison gas attack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Halabja poison gas attack

The Halabja poison gas attack was an incident on 15 March-19 March 1988 during a major battle in the Iran-Iraq war when chemical weapons were used, allegedly by Iraqi government forces, to kill a number of people in the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja (population 80,000). Estimates of casualties range from several hundred to 5,000 people. Halabja is located about 150 miles northeast of Baghdad and 8-10 miles from the Iranian border.

Most current accounts of the incident regard Iraq as the party responsible for the gas attack, which occurred during the Iran-Iraq War. The war between Iran and Iraq was in its eighth year when, on March 16 and 17, 1988, Iraq dropped poison gas on the Kurdish city of Halabja, then held by Iranian troops and Iraqi Kurdish guerrillas allied with Tehran; throughout the war, Iran had supplied the Iraqi Kurdish rebels with safe haven and other military support. For example, the TerrorismCentral (http://www.terrorismcentral.com) web site states, "The poison gas attack on the Iraqi town of Halabja was the largest-scale chemical weapons (CW) attack against a civilian population in modern times. ...The CW attack began early in the evening of March 16th, when a group of eight aircraft began dropping chemical bombs, and the chemical bombardment continued all night. ... The Halabja attack involved multiple chemical agents, including mustard gas, and the nerve agents sarin, tabun and VX." Some sources have also pointed to the blood agent Hydrogen Cyanide.

The massacre at Halabja did not raise protests by the international community in March 1988. At the time, it was admitted that the civilians had been killed "collaterally" due to an error in handling the combat gas. Two years later, when the Iran-Iraq War was finished and the Western powers stopped supporting Saddam Hussein, the massacre of Halabja was attributed to the Iraqis.

Some debate continues, however, over the question of whether Iraq was really the responsible party, stemming from the fact that the United States supplied chemical weapons which may have been responsible for Halabja to Iraq. The matter is further complicated by the fact that the U.S. State Department, in the immediate aftermath of the incident, instructed its diplomats to say that Iran was partly to blame.

Read more.

As I recall, initial news reports at the time left little doubt that the gassing was an Iraqi operation that was carried out because Saddam and his people suspected the residents of Halabja were aiding the Iranians.

A US government denial of involvement by a US ally, which Saddam was at the time, is not terribly convincing.

[kentuck]

40. And this is really different from the WACO massacre ?

Men, women and children...Oh, I forgot, they did it to themselves...

[bicentennial_baby]

45. You do know that genocide involves more than murder

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm

[ms. contrary]

50. yes, and "genocide" is not defined by the numbers killed either.

There is good evidence of Saddam's genocidal intent. What's your point?

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/iraq/

[bicentennial_baby]

53. Huh?

My point is that HRW may be calling it a genocide b/c of the overall situation, which may have included the other criteria for genocide (not just murder). I think you misunderstood my post. One massacre does not a genocide make, but the relatively low number of persons killed in a massacre does not mean that an attempted genocide was not indeed taking place.

[ms. contrary]

57. I see...

I thought you were implying that there was no genocidal intent at all. Sorry.

[bicentennial_baby]

62. Not at all

Genocide is one of my issues (hoping to get a Doctorate in Genocide Studies one day!), and I'm not jumping on this bandwagon. It really is a shame though, that so many people don't realize genocide, as it is defined by the UN, almost always involves much more than just killing lots of people all at one time.

[Spazito]

54. Welcome back, ms. contrary!

I am so glad you changed your mind and didn't leave DU as you posted earlier on another thread!!

(I hope you know now I am not 'Chemical Ali's lawyer' as you earlier thought!)

[ms. contrary]

60. I thought it would be polite

to respond to direct responses to me. I am still wondering, however, what is generating all this recent scrutiny of the case.

[Spazito]

63. Actually, it is not recent in terms of the interest, only in the thread

being started. Once a member donates, they can use the search capabilites of DU and see that this is not the first time the question of numbers have been raised. In doing a search I found 'mass Iraqi graves' being discussed 321 times. The Guardian article I had posted earlier, for example, was discussed at the time of it's origin.

I do, however, believe with the news that Saddam's trial being within a few months it has renewed the question of numbers.

[wookie294]

58. The CIA concluded that IRAN, not Iraq, had gassed the Kurds

The CIA officer in charge of watching the Iran-Iraq war said "accusing him (Saddam) of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct."

He also said "immediately after the battle the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need-to-know basis. That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas."

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/a_war_crime_or_an_act_of_war.htm

More info here….

http://www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=24480

[geek tragedy]

66. Now THERE is a credible source--Reagan-era CIA flunkies.

They said that because, at the time, Saddam was a US ally.

[geek tragedy]

67. Let me guess, you didn't see this report, did you?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=717402

Let me guess: It's all an invention of our corporate neocon media, right?

[LynnTheDem]

68. Error

Thought gt was replying to wookie.

[geek tragedy]

69. Oh, now you're talking about gassing instead of mass murder.

So you concede that there was an organized campaign of mass murder directed against the Kurds by Saddam?

As far as the gassing is concerned, it is only maintained by Reagan-era rightwingers and leftwing nutjobs that the Iranians did it.

It was common knowledge at the time--especially amongst progressives and human right activists--that Saddam gassed the Kurds. I've posted links on this dozens of times.

[Spazito]

70. This report is generated from...

"the U.S. government's Regime Crimes Liaison Office."

"International forensic experts this week examined the mass grave site in Samawa, on the Euphrates River, about 230 miles southeast of Baghdad. Many of those buried in the 18 trenches were believed to be Kurds killed in 1987 and 1988 during a scorched-earth campaign, said Gregg Nivala, from the U.S. government's Regime Crimes Liaison Office."

I don't know why but the title "US Regime Crimes Liaison Office" raises a teeny, weenie, bit of skepticism in me, go figure.

I will wait for an independent corroboration of the facts surrounding the bodies found.

[LynnTheDem]

71. LOL! But Spazito, "up to 1500 remains" PROVES that "100,000" figure!

:D

[geek tragedy]

72. Check out the picture at the link.

This was an AP story from the site.

[Spazito]

73. The photo has the identifier 'pool' in it...

does that mean the photo was provided to a 'pool' of reporters like when certain events have a 'pool' reporter who represents all the other reporters or only one photographer was allowed to take the photo and it was circulated to the others? I am genuinely curious as to how the word 'pool' relates to this, I don't recall seeing that identifier on a photo before but, then again, I don't think I had checked that closely before either.

I am not negating the grave itself, only the fact that it is being put forward by the US Regime Crimes Liaison Office which, as I said previously, makes me somewhat suspicious and would very much like to see an independent report not using the US Regime Crimes Liaison Office as it's source.

[geek tragedy]

74. Overall, is it really possible that the huge pile of evidence--documentary

eyewitness, tens of thousands having disappeared, the mass grave(s)--collected mostly by progressive, anti-Reagan human rights activists--is all just a big hoax?

Come on.

[Spazito]

75. Please point out where I used the word 'hoax' anywhere in ANY

of the threads pertaining to this issue. You will find I did NOT! If wanting independent corroboration on the graves they have found, the cause of their deaths and the total numbers equates to saying it is a hoax I would suggest a visit to the dictionary is in order...no...wait..let me help you:


Entry: 2hoax
Function: noun
Date: 1808
1 : an act intended to trick or dupe : IMPOSTURE
2 : something accepted or established by fraud or fabrication

From Merriam-Webster

Nowhere in that definition does it say asking for corroboration defines a hoax.

[geek tragedy]

76. Corroboration?

Documentary evidence
eyewitness accounts
at least one mass grave recently, and others in the past
field investigations
forensic examinations

That's an awful lot of corroboration.

All that really contradicts this is a report generated by the rightwing US government when Saddam was our ally.

[Spazito]

77. No, that doesn't qualify as corroboration unless you can

itemize each and provide multiple sources backed up by facts for each of the claims. To simply state the above and say stating them equates to corroboration again calls for the need to define corroboration:

Main Entry: cor·rob·o·rate
Pronunciation: k&-'rä-b&-"rAt
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -rat·ed; -rat·ing
Etymology: Latin corroboratus, past participle of corroborare, from com- + robor-, robur strength
Date: 1530
: to support with evidence or authority : make more certain
synonym see CONFIRM

From the Merriam Webster Dictionary

[LynnTheDem]

83. "tens of thousands having disappeared". Well that's strange...

Human Rights Watch says 16,000 disappeared over the past 20 years.

Amnesty International says 17,000 disappeared over the past 20 years.

[struggle4progress]

78. Letter on securing Iraqi Archives (April 9, 2003)

Dear Sirs,
Human Rights Watch is deeply concerned about reports that Iraqi civilians in some cities have ransacked Iraqi government offices and removed important documents relating to the government's security apparatus and past human rights crimes. Human Rights Watch has also received reports that Iraqi civilians or Iraqi government agents have burned the archives at some security offices. In Basra, for example, British officials have publicly stated that they allowed the looting of Ba'ath party buildings, which house important archives, as a means of showing the population that the party had lost control of the city.

In addition to urging the U.S., the U.K., and other coalition forces to take all possible steps to prevent looting and the emergence of a security vacuum that could endanger civilian populations, we call upon the coalition to establish a coordinated effort to secure and preserve all documents and archives relating to the Iraqi state and its security forces. The coalition should hold the archives in secure custody until they can be returned to a stable post-conflict Iraqi government. We believe such an effort will assist in the future prosecutions of Iraqi officials suspected of crimes against humanity, war crimes, or genocide, and the effort to redress the crimes of the past.

Following the 1991 uprisings, Kurdish officials secured an estimated 18 tons of Iraqi state documents, which were transferred to the United States and analyzed by Human Rights Watch. These captured documents clearly established Iraqi government responsibility for the genocidal Anfal campaign against the Kurds, and helped Human Rights Watch identify the responsible Iraqi officials. The documents also provided important evidence of other repressive actions by the Iraqi government, including its campaign against the southern Marsh Arab population.

Human Rights Watch estimates that some 250,000 to 290,000 Iraqis have "disappeared" during the rule of the Ba'ath Party-taken away from their homes by the Iraqi security forces, and never heard from again. The archives of the Iraqi security services could finally allow the families of those "disappeared" to find out what has happened to their long-lost relatives. <snip>

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/iraq040903ltr.htm

[struggle4progress]

79. Iraq: Protect Government Archives from Looting (April 10, 2003)

New York, April 10, 2003) U.S. and allied forces should prevent Iraqi government offices from being ransacked because government documents will undoubtedly be key evidence in future war crimes trials, Human Rights Watch urged in a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld today.

Families who have been expelled from their homes, particularly from the areas around Kirkuk in northern Iraq, will also need to rely on government records to establish their property claims, ethnic identities and place of origin.

Failing to protect Iraqi security archives could contribute to retaliatory violence and vengeance killings, since the archives could identify tens of thousands of security agents and collaborators by name, Human Rights Watch said.

Looting has been reported in many Iraqi cities as the government collapses, and U.S. and coalition forces have done little to stop it. In Basra, British officials have publicly stated that they allowed the looting of Ba'ath party buildings, which house important archives, as a means of showing the population that the party had lost control of the city. <snip>

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/iraq041003.htm

[struggle4progress]

80. Liberation and Looting in Iraq (14 April 2003)

By Joanne Mariner
14 April 2003
FindLaw

While Baghdad burned, Donald Rumsfeld fiddled. Questioned about the orgy of looting and pillaging taking place under the gaze of U.S. forces, Rumsfeld criticized the media for exaggerating the extent of the damage.

"The images you are seeing on television, you are seeing over and over and over," he complained. "It's the same picture of some person walking out of some building with a vase and you see it twenty times. And you think, my goodness, were there that many vases?"

After pausing for laughter, Rumsfeld delivered the punch line: "Is it possible that there were that many vases in the whole country?" <snip>

The pillage of the National Museum of Iraq should have come as no surprise. And if the risks were obvious, the legal responsibilities were equally clear. <snip>

http://www.hrw.org/editorials/2003/iraq041403.htm

[struggle4progress]

81. Mass Graves Hide Horror of Iraqi Past

By Saman Zia-Zarifi and Olivier Bercault (*)
Published in the LA Times
27 April 2003

BASRA, Iraq — "This is a good place for a mass grave," remarked Jawad Kadhim Ali, a 54-year-old Iraqi in search of his "disappeared" teenage son.

We were 25 miles west of Basra, looking out over a barren landscape where the earth was heaped into several mounds. Ali had come to dig for his son Mustafa's remains. Our Human Rights Watch team had come with him to begin assessing the mammoth task of coping with Iraq's brutal past.

But Ali couldn't even approach the site, much less dig. The mounds were strewn with live mortar shells and other unexploded ordnance. Whoever dug those graves, if they are indeed graves, intended that the task of uncovering them would be as difficult as possible.

And so it will be. More than 250,000 people were detained or murdered by the government of Saddam Hussein, and almost all of them have relatives who now want justice, or physical remains, or at the very least information about what happened to their loved ones. In the looting that followed the U.S.-led invasion, countless documents about arrests and executions were pilfered or destroyed. <snip>

http://hrw.org/editorials/2003/iraqmassgraves.htm

[struggle4progress]

82. Iraq: Protect and preserve mass grave sites (April 30, 2003)

(New York, April 30, 2003) U.S.-led coalition forces, working with local religious and secular leaders, should urgently protect and preserve mass grave sites, Human Rights Watch said today. They should also establish formal bodies and procedures to investigate, exhume and accurately identify the dead so that remains can be returned to families, deaths can be legally certified, and important evidence of atrocities can be preserved.

In the past weeks there have been many reports of families attempting to unearth the remains of their relatives in recently discovered gravesites throughout Iraq.

"These efforts, born of sorrow and a desire to restore dignity to the dead, may actually destroy any chance of identifying victims or determining how they died," said Dinah PoKempner, general counsel of Human Rights Watch. "The tragedy is that almost no one's interest will be served by the natural impulse to recover a loved one's remains, rather than wait for expert assistance in exhuming and reburying the dead." <snip>

"Mass graves are often crime scenes, and the coalition forces, as the occupying power in Iraq, have a duty to secure the evidence that can bring the perpetrators of such atrocities to justice," said PoKempner. <snip>

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/iraq043003.htm

[struggle4progress]

84. Iraq: Mass Graves Still Unprotected (May 11, 2003)

Sites Near Basra Being Tampered With

(Basra, May 11, 2003) Coalition forces must immediately secure sites of potential mass graves in order to preserve the evidence necessary for identifying the remains and initiating prosecutions against human rights violators, Human Rights Watch urged today.

Over the last two weeks, several mass grave sites near Basra have been excavated without prior forensic analysis, making it may make it more difficult or even impossible to accurately identify the remains and to begin proper criminal investigations. Human Rights Watch has directly identified several mass grave sites where bodies have been removed for reburial without any forensic analysis.

“People are excavating mass graves around Basra at an increasing pace,” said Sam Zia-Zarifi, researcher for Human Rights Watch. “They’re desperate for information about their lost relatives. Unless coalition forces secure these sites and show people that they will initiate a process to answer their questions, a tremendous amount of evidence about Iraq’s bloody past will be destroyed.”

On April 20, Human Rights Watch requested assistance from coalition forces in securing one such site west of al-Zubayr near Basra. Despite promises from the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA), which is responsible for such activity, Human Rights Watch has not seen any signs of the site being properly secured or prepared for investigation as of May 6. <snip>

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/05/iraq051103.htm

[struggle4progress]

85. Iraq: U.S. Unresponsive on Mass Graves (May 14, 2003)

New Information on Site North of Baghdad

(Baghdad, May 14, 2003) - The U.S. government has known since May 3 about the existence of a mass grave in Hilla but has not taken action to protect the site, Human Rights Watch charged today.

On May 3, the mayor of Hilla requested assistance from U.S. marines to guard the site. On May 5, investigators for the Pentagon’s Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Aid (ORHA) reported to authorities in Washington that the grave had been inadequately protected, and recommended the creation of mobile forensic teams that could visit the site. On May 7, ORHA reported to Washington that the mass grave might contain several thousand bodies.

“The U.S. government has not acted on important information about mass graves in Iraq,” said Peter Bouckaert, senior emergencies researcher for Human Rights Watch. “The result is desperate families trying to dig up the site themselves - disturbing the evidence for forensic experts who could professionally establish the identities of the victims.”

Human Rights Watch today also confirmed the existence of a secret burial ground containing the numbered graves of more than 1,000 prisoners executed by the Iraqi government, located about 40 kilometers north of Baghdad in the village of Muhammad Sakran. <snip>

http://hrw.org/press/2003/05/iraq051303.htm

[struggle4progress]

86. Digging Up the Past in Iraq's Killing Fields (16 May 2003)

By Peter Bouckaert (*)
16 May 2003
The New York Times (Requires Free Registration)

(MAHAWIL, Iraq) -- <snip>

Around us was a scene of utter chaos and horror. Since early morning, a backhoe had been digging up the earth, often uncovering dozens of corpses in a single scoop. Bodies were piled everywhere. I noticed an artificial leg among the remains and, nearby, a corpse with crutches. Occasionally a piercing scream would rise above the crowd as a body was identified by relatives. <snip>

Similar scenes are playing out all over Iraq. Exhuming a mass grave with a backhoe is like hunting pigeons with a tank. Sadly, most of the desperate civilians who flock to places like Mahawil will leave with uncertainty, and may have unwittingly destroyed their last chance to emotionally reunite with their missing relatives. In addition, the absence of forensic expertise at the graves means that evidence needed to prosecute the murderers of Iraq may also be destroyed.

This is in sharp contrast to what happened in 1999 in Kosovo, when NATO forces worked with the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia to secure sites and enable exhumations almost as soon as Slobodan Milosevic's troops pulled out. As soon as possible, the international community must organize a similar process to aid Iraqi families, to allow at least a possibility for proper identification and preservation of evidence. In the meantime, coalition forces must protect the graves.

When I spoke to a Marine commander here, he said his orders were to "secure" and "assist" at scenes of war crimes. Apparently, this meant securing the sites where crimes were committed against American soldiers, and assisting when the graves held the remains of Iraqis. And what did he mean by assisting, I asked. He told me that the troops had brought water to the site that day. <snip>

http://hrw.org/editorials/2003/iraq051603.htm

[struggle4progress]

87. The Mass Graves of al-Mahawil (May 2003)

The Truth Uncovered http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/iraq0503/

V. Failure of the U.S. and Coalition Forces to Support Exhumations
Iskandar Jawad Witwit, who was appointed acting mayor of al-Hilla after the collapse of the Iraqi government, informed U.S. Marines based in the area of the existence of the mass grave containing between forty and fifty corpses just south of al-Hilla as early as May 3. U.S. Marine forces briefly secured the site, but then allowed civilians to begin exhuming the remains. On May 5, an assessment team from the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA) visited the mass grave site, and recommended that U.S. military forces should secure mass grave sites in the future in order to preserve evidence and that mobile forensic teams should be mobilized to assess the grave sites and exhume them in a professional manner.

The U.S. government soon became aware of the possible existence of much larger mass graves in the al-Hilla area. By May 7, intelligence information gathered by the U.S. concluded that mass graves containing perhaps tens of thousands of bodies existed in the greater al-Hilla area. Despite this information, the U.S. and coalition forces as of this writing failed to come up with a strategy to assist with the exhumations of the large mass graves. <snip>

The U.S. Marines at the site—who, it must be noted, do not have any forensic experience—provided water and shelter for the local authorities, and brought in some U.S. Marine counterintelligence officers to interview witnesses and gather testimonial evidence. With their limited resources, the U.S. forces on the ground mobilized military photographers to videotape and photograph the remains. The U.S. forces also brought in mechanical diggers after the exhumations were completed at the large al-Mahawil mass grave site to assist with the reburial efforts for the unidentified remains, and U.S. Marines helped provide security at the site. In all, the U.S. military forces at the location went to significant lengths to provide the assistance that was asked from them by the local authorities, and seemed dedicated to doing whatever they could on site.

However, the assistance provided at the site did not extend to bringing in professional forensic experts to assist with the exhumation. The U.S. military officials explained this failure by pointing out that they were simply respecting the wishes of the local population, who wanted to exhume the mass grave as quickly as possible. Equally likely, the failure to bring forensic experts to the scene of the mass grave was due to the fact that as far as Human Rights Watch has been able to learn as of this writing, the U.S. and coalition forces have yet to define a comprehensive strategy to assist with the exhumation of mass graves in Iraq—in sharp contrast with the international efforts made in the Balkans to assist with the exhumation and identification of remains. <snip>

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/iraq0503/6.htm

[struggle4progress]

88. Iraq: Witnesses Link Mass Graves to 1991 Repression (May 29, 2003)

U.S. Failure to Protect Sites, Establish Exhumation Process

(Washington D.C., May 29, 2003) A survivor who escaped after he was left for dead in a mass grave in March 1991 linked the thousands of victims unearthed earlier this month to systematic mass killings by Iraqi Special Republican Guards and Ba'th Party officials, Human Rights Watch said today. Farmers living near the sites also witnessed the killings and confirmed the survivor's account.

In a new 14-page report, "The Mass Graves of al-Mahawil: The Truth Uncovered," Human Rights Watch provided the first independent documentation of how the Iraqi government suppressed the Shi`a uprising after the 1991 Persian Gulf war.

Family members of victims have so far claimed nearly one thousand of the thousands of bodies uncovered at and near the al-Mahawil military base just north of the southern Iraqi city of al-Hilla. They told Human Rights Watch researchers that Iraqi security forces had "disappeared" the missing relatives after apprehending them at roadblocks or in house-to-house searches following the collapse of the popular uprising that swept the area as Iraqi forces retreated from Kuwait.

"These burial pits were unearthed in such a chaotic manner, it's going to be virtually impossible to identify many of the remains," said Peter Bouckaert, senior emergencies researcher for Human Rights Watch. "The United States should do much more to secure mass grave sites and help local community leaders set up a proper exhumation process." <snip>

http://hrw.org/press/2003/05/iraq052903.htm

[struggle4progress]

89. Iraqi Suspect in Mass Killings Released (May 30, 2003)

U.S. Fails to Address Past Crimes Systematically

(New York, May 30, 2003) The mistaken release of Sheikh Mohammad Jawad al-Naifus from custody in Iraq is a major setback in the effort to bring mass murderers to justice, Human Rights Watch said today.

According to a U.S. Central Command press release, U.S. military forces mistakenly released al-Naifus from the Bucca Internment Camp at Umm Qasr on May 18, 2003.

In a report released this week, Human Rights Watch identified Al-Naifus, the pro-Saddam Hussein head of the Albu Alwan tribe, as one of the key officials responsible for the executions of thousands of Shi'a civilians around al-Hilla in 1991. Eyewitnesses from the execution sites, as well as from the military base where Shi'a execution victims were detained prior to their death, told Human Rights Watch that al-Naifus and members of his tribe were directly involved in the executions.

"The United States still has no justice strategy in place in Iraq to deal with the crimes of the past," said Peter Bouckaert, senior emergencies researcher at Human Rights Watch. "If the United States can mistakenly release a man suspected of killing thousands of people, there is something seriously wrong with the system." <snip>

http://hrw.org/press/2003/05/iraq053003.htm

[struggle4progress]

90. Iraq: No Amnesty for Mass Murderers (July 3, 2003)

.S. and U.K. Should Not Offer Immunity for Information

(New York, July 3, 2003) U.S. and U.K. officials should not offer former senior Iraqi leaders amnesty or immunity from prosecution in exchange for providing information on Saddam Hussein or weapons of mass destruction, Human Rights Watch said today.

In letters to U.S. President George W. Bush and U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair, Human Rights Watch said that offering amnesty to those responsible for the worst crimes would be inconsistent with the United States' and United Kingdom's international legal obligations and could undermine efforts to promote the rule of law and stability in Iraq.

"Amnesty for those Iraqi leaders who committed genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity would be a devastating affront to the victims of the former Iraqi government," said Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch's international justice program. "Amnesty deals would signal that justice for the world's most heinous crimes can be brushed aside when it suits governments to do so."

In outlining the reasons why the United States and United Kingdom went to war in Iraq, both governments cited human rights abuses committed by Saddam Hussein's regime and the need to hold perpetrators accountable. Past experiences with transitional governments have shown that ensuring justice for past abuses is an important component in building respect for the rule of law and securing peace and stability. <snip>

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/07/iraq070303.htm