truth that angers
Now this I think is a rare treat for the common citizen. We all recall how the US attempted to have the female Italian reporter killed while on her hopeful 5 mile drive to safety and freedom. We all should recall the whitewasing report that was issued, with lots of details blanked out by the Pentagon. Through some novice's little mistake, the entire report was placed on their internet website. But what happened apparently is that their report on the website had the black marker blanking out much of the report but for some reason people were still able to read the report if they had the insight to highlight and/orpick all the text and paste it on their own word program. Here's the report with the yellow highlighting which is what the US had blacked out for censorship and damage control reasons. Some of the report is mundane and predictable, but other parts show good reason as to why the American command in Iraq has to constantly lie and belittle the casualty statistics.
Some excerpts:
"The week of the (Italian reporter shooting) incident (there were) 166 IED incidents, with 131 detonations and 35 IED's rendered safe. There were 82 casualties from those incidents."
"From 12 August to 11 March, 2/10 MTN Soldiers conducted approximately 50,000 patrols and 5,237 Traffic Control Points (TCP's) during that period." <----wow. That's a lot of patrols. Gotta admire that.
The most striking for me is the "Route Irish" reality. Think about it people. The US has about 150,000 troops in Iraq. Other countries raise the toll a meagre amount higher. The road from the Baghdad International Airport to the so-called 'Green Zone' is about 12 kilometers or something. It's not at all secured. And they will never be able to secure it without more reinforcements to the tune of a hundred thousand more GI's. And before you dismiss this reality as fear-mongering or over-indulgence of negativity, consider the fact that this unsecured route is the same route all Americans coming to Iraq have to take. Every American who comes to Baghdad has to run this indian-country gauntlet of small arms fire and rocket propelled grenades, two munitions stored in abundance in weapons caches' all through Iraq.
"From 1 November 2004 to 12 March 2005 there were a total of 3306 attacks IN THE BAGHDAD AREA alone".
That's a lot more attacks than we've been privvy to unfortunately. And some "liberal haters" here say the media only focuses on the bad news coming out of Iraq. Well I'd say they haven't been telling us enough about what's really going on in there. Check the whole report out. I read most of it and no matter what your political stripes may be it's still an education in all things military.


Comments
on May 05, 2005
Wow, this must be like, Christmas, Your Birthday, Mardi Gras & Cinco De Mayo all rolled up into one just for little old you!!

It must be so heart warming to see your freedom hating heroes targeting civilian Iraqis, while accidentally killing a few Coalition troops. Their blood must be a strong afrodesiac for you. Seeing photos and news footage of dead Iraqis and Coalition troops being your porn of choice must make your late nights so exciting.

Does your hate filled existence keep you warm at night?
on May 05, 2005
I dunno, I'd have to weigh playing down a few attacks in Iraq against PLAYING DOWN THE HOLOCAUST...

Hey, you never know, maybe next week someone will blow up some Jews, and YOU can deny that happened too!! I wonder whose little fantasy world is more hateful...
on May 05, 2005
Good Lord you guys are hopefully under 20 years old right now. Your comments have the hallmark copyright of the trolling corporation. You're using unwitty sarcasm over things apparently beyond your mind's scope. Playing down the holocaust. What does that mean exactly? You're taking one observation and lumping it in with nazi skinheads who spraypaint swastikas in Jewish graveyards. And that's the trolling mentality I mentioned. Your rude gloating behavior and ignorant comments to what I was conveying make it hardly worth trying explaining to spoon feeding it all to you again. But for the sake of those here who have the contradictory habit of taking what I say seriously, I will go through this again. I don't and have never stated the Holocaust and persecution of the European Jews never happened. I've never said and don't think atrocities were committed by Germans against the Jews of occupied Europe. The landscape is littered with lots of irrefutable evidence. This JoeUserMan is (reverse-case) slandering me by saying I am personally a Holocaust Revisionist. You say I am. And that's because you have the mindset which gives lawmakers wet dreams. You take one single thing, one grain of data from a large open beach, and lump it (the wet dream part) with a particular faction, which of course creates sides which of course gives people the illusion of choice which of course (the wet dream part again) creates an atmosphere of bickering and partisan politics which allow the real truth behind events slip by people's comatosed choice-making radar. The ignorant are the ones who fall into that trap. I admit it's very very easy for individual citizens to fall prey to the sensual depravities flooding your society. In it's most simplistic form, it's the tabloid society America has come to depend on for intellectual relief. Say what you wish about the goofy Weekly World News and National Enquirer news stories. Give them their due laughter. But consider they have a huge huge reader circulation. When news is taken to such entertaining extremes, eventually (it's already happened) news becomes a satire all to itself, where you see prominent editorial men and women seriously speaking about the implications and dangerous scenarios which would evolve if a tiny 3rd world nation like Iraq were to use all the high tech scary WMD they were saying they already had ready for deployment and use. Judith Miller may be the posterwoman of immoral use of journalistic powers, but she's the tip of the proverbial iceberg so to speak. So you have ill-informed news flooding your senses to the point where you think "if only 50% of the things they claim about Iraq's scary WMD situation is true, it's still reason to go in"...The problem is how none of the US claims have turned out to be true. None. And where is the honest journalistic behavior of correction and/or retraction? It's lost between all the articles about Iran and Syria's 'dangerous weapons systems' and more of the same all-around lies. Anyways sorry to go off on a tangent like that but they are valid points. Your cslandering me as a revisionist is based on my desire for answers on some fundamental flaws in the science behind it all. Instead of telling me why the gas chamber walls show no sign of blue staining from Zyklon B when the admitted delousing facility was awash in blue staining from repeated delousing, you decide to not answer the difficult question and slander me as a revisionist. Again I understand it's easier to insult than to answer that question. So you choose the easy route and choose pack-mentality to insult and abuse. And that's fine too. The difference is you won't see me insulting you over your politics. Someone said because nature somehow eroded the inside of the gas chamber in some different quicker way or something (I admit I don't recall the arguments exactly). And I recall the argument was sound and even had the science to back it up. But that didn't explain for me why the outside walls of the delousing facility in Auchwitz still have the blue staining on the walls from where the deloused matresses were stacked to get them aired out. He could provide no answer. So again unfortunately (because he really did his homework on it in his overall-good rebuttal) he ended up calling me something to the tune of anti-semite which is the choice of words for real backed against the wall losers. And the other comments I made were all taken from the Auchwitz historical curator himself. He says only 1.1 million Jews died at Auchwitz, not the 4 Russia was promoting. He says the reason the chambers lacked zyklon-B residue on the chamber walls was because the chamber was used only 1/2 hour during every 24 hour period. He said that. The Auchwitz curator said that. So do a numbers crunch and see if you can make that square into the circle slot. The tour operator says the room is in its original condition. She took a class to prep her for the tour guide position. So she says what she was taught to teach to others. The curator says it was rebuilt by the Russians after the war. That's a contradiction. In an American court of law it would be a mistrial leading to a dismissal. Remember it's not ReikiHouse who is or was saying the Russians rebuilt the gas chamber and knocked out walls to create a larger open room. It's the Historical Curator of the Auchwitz Museum located at Auchwitz who said it. It wasn't ReikiHouse who in 1944 took Allied recon images of Auchwitz which shows no 4 vents on the gas chamber roof. And it certainly won't be ReikiHouse to try explain why there would be no roof vents on the gas chamber roof in 1944 when the mass gassings were said to be going on in earnest. Blame the Allied pilot who took the forgotten-historically contradictive image.
Finally let me say I was not gloating about civilians dying or GI's dying or anyone dying by posting this unique unedited report you were never supposed to be allowed to read. It's simply a unique chance to educate yourself on two fronts. First about the reality of the amount of violence the Americans are enduring in Iraq. There's just no way to convey how much real carnage is bypassing the American consciousness so liberally. Secondly, it shows in plain sight how military and media censorship and mass media sterilization can make it easy for serious politically-motivated military actions to by pass the level of rational debate and for those events to simply happen. In the future I'd appreciate it if you would cease the slander against me and understand I am in not here to fuck around and flame and troll anyone, but to simply talk truth. Nothing more. Ok? Thanks.
on May 05, 2005
HEy did you know all this information is actually already been released? On April 21st,2005 Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita Stated "The number of attacks per day is in the 50 to 60 range. This is well down from the period just before Iraqi elections in January. However, theterrorist seem to be targeting innocent Iraqis rather than trying to go against coalition targets. Roughly half of all attacks inflict no or minimal damage."
Math let me see....4 months at 50 a day, hmmm 350 a week, 1400 a month, 5600 in 4 months. Don't think they have been unreporting anything.

Oh and we have 140,000 in Iraq, its the Iraqi's who now have 155,000 troops (not including police).

Also the "but other parts show good reason as to why the American command in Iraq has to constantly lie and belittle the casualty statistics" is an outright lie. Here are all the statistics in black and white. http://web1.whs.osd.mil/mmid/casualty/OIF-Total.pdf

BTW notice the 1500+ total you here so much about is actually misleading. Hostile fire accounts for only 1170, 373 were from accident and non-hostile actions. But thats not what you have been told by the mainstream media. Wonder who lies??
on May 05, 2005
Nice try, but no dice.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on May 05, 2005
Drink whale puke, you maggot infested rotting corpse.
on May 05, 2005
You know, if you picture R.H. with a little square moustache, barking her replies with a thick German accent while waving her arms a lot, you can almost read them, paragraphs or not.

Not quite, but almost...
on May 06, 2005
More lame trolling and even after I requested you not to do so here on my thread. But again I say I guess you can go ahead and do it and ignore the issues altogether. Let me again educate you guys about some basic US military routines. Even the uncivil loser with the whale comment. That person has serious issues to get so mad like that. Probably has some woman abusing charges as his spare baggage. Discounted completely. For you others, think about the reality I'm going to be teaching you right now. When US military units are engaged in battle with the insurgents, an obviously dead GI (blown apart, serious trauma maybe including dismemberment) is immediately declared KIA; on site. If the medic believes there's the faintest hope the grievously-wounded-expiring-fast GI has the tiniest fathom of a chance of surviving, that obviously-soon-to-be-dead-GI is listed as wounded. If he dies 10 seconds after he's put on the bird bound for a field hospital, or if he dies after initial operations and while en-route to Germany, where almost all the US casualties end up for treatment before heading back for even more treatment in the US. That dead soldier is officially listed as wounded and the figure is never updated when the said GI ends up dying. And that's very clever of the American strategic planners and it ranks far more serious than the official ban (making it criminal to) taking pictures of the returning coffins with the honor guards and so forth. That's unprecedented and I have to wonder if even a totalitarian regime could get away with such an insane outrageous policy. Think people, think hard. You have America, your home of the free, the land of freedom, especially of the press (supposedly), and somehow in the democracy you call home it is made illegal to take pictures of loved ones returning to the land and country they went off and died for, and you all seem to do nothing about the real implications, of what it all really means. Instead some take the drink whale puke route which is again exactly what the planners wish you to do. They don't want you to ask serious questions. I have some serious questions to serious issues and I will make a new thread when I get it all together. And I can guarantee you all this: I highly doubt anyone will (be able to) give me any real answers. In fact, I assume no one will even comment on it al all. Facts laid bare, so obviously bare, and not a peep of rational thought is to be seen throughout the patriotic American landscape. I intend to produce more educational threads in the near future as well, using nothing more than truisms that cannot be denied. They can be brushed under the carpet, but not everywhere it can't. When one has a policy of something so self-serving, you can control things internally since it's to your benefit. Those outside your self serving policies have no need to censor facts and events and control the public's intellect. In closing here, I want to say all the things I've said or have said is already well-known in your own intellectual communities. Those in the halls of power know exactly what it is I'm telling you all now. This is really an opportunity to learn something and to think in a more world-view style. To learn about what events have taken place and what the real ultimate implications are. Finally again I ask you guys not to flame and be childish with your language. I'm asking in a nice manner and I'd ask that you respect that.
on May 06, 2005
Hey RH,

You say this -
Even the uncivil loser with the whale comment. That person has serious issues to get so mad like that. Probably has some woman abusing charges as his spare baggage.

Then you say this -
Hey
Finally again I ask you guys not to flame and be childish with your language. I'm asking in a nice manner and I'd ask that you respect that.

Which is it. Follow your own advice.

Back to the issues -


If the medic believes there's the faintest hope the grievously-wounded-expiring-fast GI has the tiniest fathom of a chance of surviving, that obviously-soon-to-be-dead-GI is listed as wounded. If he dies 10 seconds after he's put on the bird bound for a field hospital, or if he dies after initial operations and while en-route to Germany, where almost all the US casualties end up for treatment before heading back for even more treatment in the US. That dead soldier is officially listed as wounded and the figure is never updated when the said GI ends up dying.


Actually thats a lie. You see they list KIA (Killed in Action) WIA (Wounded in Action) and WIA/RTD (Wounded in Action/ Returned to duty). If a soldier dies after being evaced, he IS updated to a KIA. The same as they would have to update it when he returns to duty. That has to happen for the appropriate benefits to take place with his family. The reason the list RTD is some of the injuries and evacs are for minor/recoverable injuries. Not to say many are not severly injured. Go here for explination - http://web1.whs.osd.mil/mmid/casualty/castop.htm

RH how come you did not comment on the fact I showed your supposedly secret just revealed information is not so secret or just revealed?

And that's very clever of the American strategic planners and it ranks far more serious than the official ban (making it criminal to) taking pictures of the returning coffins with the honor guards and so forth.


Ahh where are you getting this? The Department of Defense just (04/05)released over 350 photos of the returning KIA coffins. Your again wrong and did not research your accusations well.

You make up these comments or ideas and they just are plain fabrication or lies. Please make sure you research what you are saying before you say it. You lose crediability when you do not research your comments first.


on May 06, 2005
You are again incorrect. You speak of death benefits and such. That's the thinking that makes you wrong. I am not talking about the US military's official casualty numbers. Why would I debate their numbers? They don't make those details public. But they give the numbers to the media who then report it to you. Of course the military will move a grievously wounded soon-to-be-dead GI from the wounded column to the dead column. But they don't sent an update memo to the folks at CNN. It's in that way the real death count is diluted. And this is something you can't debate. I've read reports from officials at the army hospital in Germany. When the doctors and nurses give their casualty numbers. They say they've seen thousands more wounded than the military has been disclosing through the media. And there lies the real fact from an overall viewpoint. In this mock legal trial, you're calling the mainstream media as your witness to the real casualty numbers. Me, I'm calling the men and women and their support staff from the Army hospital in Germany where all the US casualties in Iraq end up as my witness. Therein lies the reality.
on May 06, 2005
And ShadowWar thanks for posting. Since you still have no balls enough to allow me to visit your little bubble you seem to live in. You understand the number of attacks are only for the city of Baghdad right? By the way why are you not enlisted to support your country's policies?