A very good question.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2005/130105nofundraisers.htm


"Why are there no fundraisers for the Iraqi dead?

Terry Jones | January 13 2005

I am bewildered by the world reaction to the tsunami tragedy. Why are newspapers, television and politicians making such a fuss? Why has the British public forked out more than £100m to help the survivors, and why is Tony Blair now promising "hundreds of millions of pounds"? Why has Australia pledged £435m and Germany £360m? And why has Mr Bush pledged £187m? Of course it's wonderful to see the human race rallying to the aid of disaster victims, but it's the inconsistency that has me foxed. Nobody is making this sort of fuss about all the people killed in Iraq, and yet it's a human catastrophe of comparable dimensions.

According to the only scientific estimate attempted, Iraqi deaths since the war began number more than 100,000. The tsunami death toll is in the region of 150,000. Yet in the case of Iraq, the media seems reluctant to impress on the public the scale of the carnage.

I haven't seen many TV reporters standing in the ruins of Falluja, breathlessly describing how, in 30 years of reporting, they've never seen a human tragedy on this scale. The Pope hasn't appealed for everyone to remember the Iraqi dead in their prayers, and MTV hasn't gone silent in their memory.

Nor are Blair and Bush falling over each other to show they recognise the scale of the disaster in Iraq. On the contrary, they have been doing their best to conceal the numbers killed.

When the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health estimated the figure of 100,000 killed in Iraq and published their findings in one of the world's leading scientific journals, the Lancet, Downing Street questioned their methodology, saying "the researchers used an extrapolation technique, which they considered inappropriate, rather than a detailed body count". Of course "a detailed body count" is the one thing the US military will not allow anyone to do.

What is so odd is the way in which so much of the media has fallen into line, downplaying the only authoritative estimate of casualties in Iraq with the same unanimity with which they have impressed upon us the death toll of the tsunami.

One of the authors of the forenamed report, Dr Gilbert Burnham, said: "Our data have been back and forth between many reviewers at the Lancet and here in the school, so we have the scientific strength to say what we have said with great certainty."

So, are deaths caused by bombs and gunfire less worthy of our pity than deaths caused by a giant wave? Or are Iraqi lives less worth counting than Indonesian, Thai, Indian and Swedish?

Why aren't our TV companies and newspapers running fundraisers to help Iraqis whose lives have been wrecked by the invasion? Why aren't they screaming with outrage at the man-made tsunami that we have created in the Middle East? It truly is baffling."

 

Because there is no political or financial gain for America. This country and it's press where hijacked by Bushy and his interest are the only concern. Praise the lord andBushy.. fuk everybody else

 

oops....duh I fuked up..scuz me

 

I agree, and I think about that a lot. It's funny how the human mind can work so easily in adopting whatever reality is the most comfortable for one to imagine and embrace. There is so much irony in questions like this, and it speaks volumes.

We see dead, bloated, rotten bodies and displaced children from the Asian-Pacific tsunami every night on the CBS World News. This has been almost nightly for the past three weeks now. Yet, our troops have been in Iraq for almost two years and we have not once seen a single dead Iraqi child with its brain sucked out from a missile. Or how about the US soldier that just had his leg blown off and is bleeding profusely?

How about deformed babies who were exposed to the depleted uranium that both Iraqis and US troops are being exposed to on a daily basis?

The reason for the mentality described in your article is built around ignorance and xenophobia. Most people who are consumed by the material world don't know what they don't see on the propaganda box known as the television. If they're not shown the immense suffering taking place in Iraq on the mainstream news, how will they ever know about it? Most Americans, unfortunately, care more about shopping and pampering themselves, instead of enlightening themselves to how the world works and why it works the way that it does.

I think it's great that people donated to the victims of the tsunami -- as did I. But I am sure there are a lot of people who were more concerned about being a good American and donating money for the sake of ther own self-gratification and patriotic complex.

"George Bush told me to donate money, so I did."

It's the same story with these people and their magnetic "support the troops" ribbons on their cars. These people are going right along with the BS in their quest to be "good Americans," yet they don't have a fucking clue what this war is really about and what it has entailed. Nor do they care, despite their efforts to pretend that they do. They show their blind support and hollow, patriotic glitter, which somehow mentally justifies them not having to think and ask the real questions that need to be asked.

Also....

Drew - I'm not trying to be a dick, and please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't you once get after me about posting links from Prison Planet?

 

You must be mistaken on that, If I remember right that was one of the times we agreed on something. Then I think we went on to talk about how alex jones acctually backs up his documentation. If I did say that it wasn't a reputable source it was my mistake. But I don't think I would discredit you for his site. Ive follwed alex jones since ive heard him on coast to coast. Hes a good source because hes impartial, and factual.

 

He is impartial ? Factual ? Which dictionary definition do you use ?

Impartial : to take only one side of a story, or to see some thing from one perspective ?

Factual : To only print things you know are wrong, or mislead intentional to achieve confusion ?

Alex Jones is not impartial and that's a fact ! ( The correct definition of "fact" applies ...)

 

Is anybody with an opinion impartial? I don't think so.

When it comes to politics, as far as I am concerned, anybody who does not align themselves with the Democratic or Republican Party is impartial, which is more than can be said for people like Rush Limbaugh and Al Franken, who only spout the rhetoric that conforms to their party.

 

This tsunami disaster happened in a relatively short period of time, therefore it seems more tragic.
I agree with most of what people have already said. Also I think that war is seen as an "OK" way for people to die or kill. If you kill someone in war, you are a hero or just doing you're job. If you die, you are a hero who sacrificed your life for your country, not seen as a victim so much.
In my mind, people who are against this war, yet insist they "support our troops" are hypocrites. This just leads to this type of media coverage and rationale.
I haven't yet had anyone explain to me what "Support our troops" even means. Every time I see a magnet like that I'm disgusted. To me it is nothing more than a symbol of conformity. It says "Lemming".

 

Ever notice how many are turned sideways and oddly enough resemble the Jesus fish?

 

yeah that is rather "fishy":H I see enough of those Jesus fish too. I cheer to myself when I see the Darwin fish.

 

Awesome. couldn't have said it any better.

 

Sad but true I think...

Well for me, and a lot of my new friends (wives, husbands, etc. of military members), this doesn't mean that we think this war is right. The thing is, whether or not they joined up intending to kill, or joined up for quick college money hoping they wouldn't get pulled into the war (which some of them really do have nothing to do with any wars that may happen during their time in...if they're lucky), many of them deserve our support merely because we worry about them when they are over there, simply because they are human beings, simply because the majority of them are NOT assholes out to kill all the "ragheads" (as my ex so often put it...and that was his nice way of saying it ) simply because they have loved ones back home who wish so much they hadn't gone over (some wish so much they hadn't even joined), children who don't even know where they are or understand what's going on...we support them morally, try to keep them sane, protest or fight or what-have-you to get them out of that country, out of that stupid war, so that they can come home to us in one piece, and get back to a normal, peaceful workday. I certainly don't go sporting a "support our troops" ribbon magnet on my car. There are far better and more substantial ways to do that...of course the best will be when we can get our stupid fucking administration to stop going into these dumbass wars in the first place. That would be the ultimate support for our troops. Keep 'em home for when we really need 'em to REALLY protect us and not just send 'em fighting for some unsubstantiated reason.

 

Well said !!!!!!!!!!!!! That goes for me three !!!!!!

 

We can't do that. Nothing was going to stop our government from going to war and nothing has made them end it.
We have to start protesting where it might actually count. I'm not going to support the agents of this carnage. Let's face it, Bush is not going to go over there and kill people, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. are not going over there. Why don't we look at who's dropping the bombs, who's pulling the triggers. Stop defending these people, they are to blame and there is no justification to a rationale mind that will excuse it.

 

Shes saying support the people in the war. Not the cause they are being forced to fight. People who are in iraq don't want to be there. They want to leave just as bad as you want them to leave. It isnt their choice. Grow up a bit and open your eyes.

 

I know what she was saying! She can speak for herself btw (much better than you can in fact).
She's saying support the people in the war, I'm saying we should not. They may be forced to fight, but NO ONE was forced to join. I can think for myself, I don't care if I'm the only one in the world holding a point of view, I stand by my principles. Killing is wrong. I think YOU need to grow up, look at you, trying to defend killers.

 

If ignorance was bliss you must have hit nirvana. Good luck in life living with your blind ignorance.

 

Right on and they still have power to go on STRIKE and baricade them selves in their base (Once they have secured it from those that refuse to partake in the strike). The US is already spread too thin so if enough bases went on strike there would be no replacement troops to smash the strike.

 

That's true but I don't see it happening due to the fact that most soldiers are incapable of thinking for themselves. Or they wouldn't be there in the first place.

 

The Nuremburg principles didnt absolve those who claimed they were "only follwing orders", andrew. I would think one who considers himself so informed of the lessons of history as yourself would understand that universal principle most clearly. Remember that it was we (the US) who were the central force behind the establishment of those very principles and their application upon not only the architects but the footsoldiers and indeed supporters of war of expansionistic aggression only a few generations ago.

How quickly we allow ourselves (leaders and lackies alike) to abandon those principles even as we point the finger at the violations of other nations in that regard.

Nuremburg Principles