Economic Sanctions and the Death Toll – Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq

Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq
An analysis of the effect of economic sanctions on Iraq –
A film by John Pilger

A poll conducted by ComRes last year asked people in Britain how many Iraqis had been killed as a result of the 2003 invasion. A majority said that fewer than 10,000 had been killed: “a figure so shockingly low it was a profanity”, commented John Pilger, in an article in the Guardian this month.

John Pilger continued: “I compared this with scientific estimates of up to a million men, women and children who had died in the inferno lit by Britain and the US. In fact, academic estimates range from less than half a million to more than a million. John Tirman, the principal research scientist at the MIT Centre for International Studies, has examined all the credible estimates; he told me that an average figure suggests roughly 700,000. Tirman pointed out that this excluded deaths among the millions of displaced Iraqis, up to 20% of the population.

The VOAG reported in March 2010 on two studies exploring civilian deaths as a result of the invasion of Iraq. One study by Opinion Research Business, on behalf of  New Scientist estimated 1.2 million people had died. A second study conducted by Dr Burnham of Johns Hopkins University, on behalf of The Lancet, Organ of the British Medical Association, estimated that a million people had died as a result of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

These figures were complied in 2006, and updates in 2010 revised these figures to between 1.2 and 1.6 million deaths. With a pre-war population of 22.5 million, it means that as of 2010 one in nineteen Iraqis 1/19 has been murdered by the coalition. A further 20% of the population (One in five) have been made homeless. When General Franks, the US Comander of the Coalition was confronted with these figures he famously said: “We don’t do body counts”.

These death rates are based on statistical data. They are not confined to direct violent deaths, but all deaths; deaths through disease and loss of infrastructure for example. All ‘extra deaths’ over and above what the levels would have been, had there not been an invasion.

The “shock and awe” of 1993 and the subsequent occupation of Iraq was the extension of a murderous blockade imposed for 13 years by Britain and the US. Its results were suppressed by much of the mainstream media. Half a million Iraqi infants died as a result of sanctions, according to Unicef.; with children dying in hospitals, denied basic painkillers.

John Pilger’s article concluded: “Ten years later, in New York, I met the senior British official responsible for these “sanctions”. He is Carne Ross, once known in the UN as “Mr Iraq”. I read to him a statement he had made to a parliamentary select committee in 2007: “The weight of evidence clearly indicates that sanctions caused massive human suffering among ordinary Iraqis, particularly children. We, the US and UK governments, were the primary engineers and offenders of sanctions and were well aware of the evidence at the time but we largely ignored it and blamed it on the Saddam government, effectively denying the entire population the means to live.” I said to him: “That’s a shocking admission.”

“Yes, I agree,” he replied. “I feel ashamed about it …” He described how the Foreign Office manipulated a willing media. “We would control access to the foreign secretary as a form of reward to journalists. If they were critical, we would not give them the goodies of trips around the world. We would feed them factoids of sanitised intelligence, or we’d freeze them out.”

In the build-up to the 2003 invasion, according to studies by Cardiff University and Media Tenor, the BBC followed the Blair government’s line and lies, and restricted airtime to those opposing the invasion. When Andrew Gilligan famously presented a dissenting report on Today, he and the director general were crushed.

The truth about the criminal bloodbath in Iraq cannot be “countered” indefinitely. Neither can the truth about our support for the medievalists in Saudi Arabia, the nuclear-armed predators in Israel, the new military fascists in Egypt and the jihadist “liberators” of Syria, whose propaganda is now BBC news. There will be a reckoning – not just for the Blairs, Straws and Campbells, but for those paid to keep the record straight.

For More On Iraq:
Focus On Iraq: The War Continues (January 2011)
Latest On The Iraq Occupation (March 2010)
Civilian Death Toll In Iraq And Afghanistan (March 2010)

South West Surrey MP Jeremy Hunt Conspires with Murdoch’s Media Monopoly

Jeremy Hunt. Now what does that rhyme with?

Jeremy Hunt was appointed as a Privy Counsellor on 13 May 2010. Whilst, I don’t know what a privy counsellor is, this certainly stinks.

It’s been revealed by the BBC that Ofcom thinks there are big problems with Murdoch’s BSkyB power grab. Their report to Jeremy Hunt- Tory MP for South West Surrey and Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport- says the Competition Commission needs to be involved.

 The argument is over Murdoch’s News Corp’s attempt to buy the 60.9% of BSkyB shares it currently doesn’t own.  In the report that Jeremy Hunt is keeping secret, Ofcom argues that it may be against the public interest because it would reduce “diversity and quality in the UK media below an acceptable level”. Ofcom recommends that the move is referred to a full Competition Commission enquiry.

 But Jeremy Hunt is sitting on the report and refusing to make it public. Instead, he’s been locked in secret meetings with Murdoch’s representatives. It looks like he could be trying to cook up a way of giving Murdoch’s power grab the green light. These meetings were not minuted and didn’t have any civil servants present.

Things could move very quickly – if Jeremy Hunt thinks he can get away with it, he could give Rupert Murdoch the go-ahead in the next couple of days. This is highly dodgy behaviour. We, the public need access to Ofcom’s report and we need to speak up in favour of the independent inquiry which Ofcom says is necessary.

If we don’t want a fat cat monopoly on the media, we need to make a fuss. The more public awareness there is for this issue, the less room Jeremy Hunt has to stitch anything up. We need to flood our MPs with messages telling them to speak out against the secrecy. Jeremy Hunt needs to be hearing from MPs and the media that he has to follow Ofcom’s recommendation.

Please click here to send an urgent e-mail to your MP. Demand an end to the secret meetings and for Jeremy Hunt to conform to Ofcom’s wishes.
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/hunts-secret-meetings

The BBC’s Robert Peston sums up the suspicious behaviour of Jeremy Hunt: “What I don’t understand is why Jeremy Hunt, the Culture Secretary, has not simply published the report and announced that there will be a further Competition Commission enquiry. Why is he only showing the report to Murdoch’s lobbying team? There’s a real risk he’s working with them to find a way round the Ofcom report”.

Ofcom’s recommendation to refer the BSkyB deal to the Competition Commission was a response to pressure from the 38 Degrees group. Now it seems Jeremy Hunt is trying to dodge the report. We need to let Jeremy Hunt know we won’t stand for yet another conspiracy with Rupert Murdoch. 

Jeremy Hunt was appointed as a Privy Counsellor on 13 May 2010. Whilst, I don’t know what a privy counsellor is, this certainly stinks.

Now it happens that Jeremy Hunt was only given the power to rule on media mergers on 20^th December 2010. Business Secretary Vince Cable was stripped of those responsibilities after he told undercover Daily Telegraph reporters he had “declared war” on Rupert Murdoch.

Labour MP Tom Watson has written to the cabinet secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell, accusing the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, of being “knee deep in News Corp”. In the letter, the MP for West Bromwich East accused the government of misleading parliament by failing to disclose the meetings which were held on 28th June and 21st July. Watson said he had been told in replies to written parliamentary questions that no formal meetings had taken place between Hunt and News Corp executives.

Watson also highlighted other meetings, including one on 21st July between the culture secretary and Jeremy Darroch, the chief executive of BSkyB, which was also unminuted. Watson said Hunt should not be handed the power to rule on News Corp’s bid, and demanded to know if the Cabinet Secretary knew about these meetings when he took legal advice before authorising the transfer of powers from Vince Cable to Jeremy Hunt.

The Voice Of Anti-Capitalism – You read it here first (unless you read the papers)