Latest UN Data: 1.7 million Additional Deaths since 1991 Iraq/Gulf War!

[Up2Late]

These Numbers come from an Australian Scientist (PhD) using Numbers from the UN, UNICEF and WHO.

NOTE: this article is definitely written from a NON-American Point of View, no matter how much we would like to support
"Our President", :spray: and his endless "War on Terror," :sarcasm: their ARE several Billion people around the world who don't see the "War on Terror" as a Good thing.

Here's a brief Profile.

Dr Gideon Polya
Melbourne, Australia
e-mail: [e-mail]
website: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gpolya/links.html

Credentials: Dr Gideon Polya published some 130 works in a 4 decade scientific career, most recently a huge pharmacological reference text "Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds" (CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New York & London, 2003), and is currently writing a book on global mortality - numerous articles on this matter can be found by a simple Google search for "Gideon Polya" and on his website: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gpolya/links.html

Here are some clips from an article that was published May 29, 2005 in Al-Jazeerah.

BTW, Scott Ritter ALSO writes for Al-Jazeerah

Latest UN Data Reveal UK-US War on Muslim Women and Children

By Gideon Polya

Al-Jazeerah, May 29, 2005

(clip)

What has been the human cost of the "War on Terror"?

Unfortunately Anglo-American-dominated global mainstream media in general do NOT report the actual human consequences of the "War on Terror". Thus even the widely quoted estimate of 100,000 avoidable (excess) deaths in the 18 month period after the invasion of Iraq (Roberts et al., The Lancet, November 2004) is a MINIMUM estimate (obtained by leaving out data from the Fallujah area).

From the LATEST UN POPULATION DIVISION DATA (2005) (see: http://esa.un.org/unpp/index.asp?panel=1) it can be calculated that the post-invasion avoidable mortality and under-5 infant mortality have been about 370,000 and 260,000, respectively, in Iraq and 1.5 million and 1.2 million, respectively, in Afghanistan. Other estimates of under-5 infant mortality in Occupied Iraq and Afghanistan come from the LATEST UNICEF REPORT (2005) (see: http://www.unicef.org/) which states that in 2003 the under-5 infant mortality was 110,000 in Iraq and 292,000 in Afghanistan as compared to about 1,000 in the invading and occupying country Australia (noting that these countries have populations of about 25, 24 and 20 million, respectively).

(clip)

Web-accessible WHO (2005) and medical literature data indicate that the annual per capita medical expenditure in Occupied Iraq and Afghanistan in 2004 was US$37 and about US$10, respectively, as compared to US$7,000 in the US and US$3,100 in Australia. The Ruler is responsible for the Ruled and thus the horrendous post-invasion avoidable mortality in Occupied Iraq and Afghanistan constitutes PASSIVE GENOCIDE. The number of US-led Coalition military deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan has been about 2,000 (see: http://icasualties.org/oif/) as compared to the post-invasion under-5 year old infant deaths in the Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories that total 1.5 MILLION. Thus 750 Muslim infants have died in the post-invasion Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories for every Coalition military death - as compared to a ratio of 0.3 Jewish children killed during World War 2 for every Axis military death.

(clip)

Of course there is a BIGGER PICTURE of horrendous suffering for the women, children and men who are the victims of the State Terrorism of Anglo-American democratic imperialism (democratic Nazism). Thus according to the LATEST UN Population Division data the avoidable mortality (excess mortality) in Iraq in 15 years of Anglo-American-imposed war, sanctions and suffering since the start of the Gulf War in 1991 by Bush I has been 1.7 million - and the under-5 infant mortality has totaled 1.2 million. The latest UN Population Division data also show that the avoidable mortality (excess mortality) in Afghanistan in 25 years of Russo-Anglo-American-imposed war and suffering since the Soviet invasion in 1979 has been 8.0 million - and the under-5 infant mortality has totaled 6.1 million.

(more at the link above)

[Up2Late]

1. Orwellian Anglo-American War on Muslim Women and Children (NCA)

This is another article by the same author

<http://www.newscentralasia.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1299>

From: News Central Asia

Orwellian Anglo-American War on Muslim Women and Children

ArticlesandReports: Dr. Gideon Polya

In George Orwell's novel "1984" there was an endless global war against a shifting set of enemies that represented an end in itself but required continual "re-writing" of history. The Orwellian re-writing of history was effected QUALITATIVELY (the actual facts of history were changed, necessitating the continual shredding of books and newspapers) and QUANTITATIVELY (by altering statistics, most famously by Big Brother's assertion that "2 plus 2 does not equal 4").

In the Anglo-American-led "War on Terror" we see the same Orwellian elements. Thus the Americans gave immense support over many years to Saddam Hussein in Iraq and to jihadists in Afghanistan but then changed their allegiances for economic, geo-political and strategic reasons . The killing of Western civilians by jihadists and Arab insurgents was used as an hysterical, populist "excuse" for massive US military invasion of the Middle East and Central Asia.

However in true Orwellian style there has been an extraordinary QUALITATIVE dishonesty in the re-writing by the US-led Coalition of the "publicly perceived history" of Anglo-American involvements in the Middle East and Central Asia in the 20th and 21st centuries.

There has also been an extraordinary QUANTITATIVE perversion by the UK-US Coalition and their pliant media of the horrendous human consequences of the "endless" "War on Terror". 5,000 Western civilians were killed by jihadists and Arab insurgents over the last 20 years and the ostensibly retaliatory consequence, namely the US-led "War on Terror", has so far been associated with 1.9 million avoidable deaths* in the Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories - but these enormously discrepant quantitative realities are resolutely ignored by Anglo-American mainstream media.

(more at link above)

*refers to an article I just posted at this link: <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1842872&mesg_id=1842872>

About the author: Dr Gideon Polya published some 130 works in a 4 decade scientific career, most recently a huge pharmacological reference text "Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds" (CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New York & London, 2003), and is currently writing a book on global mortality - numerous articles on this matter can be found by a simple Google search for "Gideon Polya" and on his website: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gpolya/links.html

Contact information: Dr Gideon Polya, 29 Dwyer Street, Macleod, Melbourne, Victoria, 3085, Australia
E-mail: [e-mail]
Website: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gpolya/links.html
Day & night telephone: [phone]

[Frederik]

4. A small error

I mostly agree with him, but Gulf War one and the ensuing sanctions was not a "retaliatory consequence of Westerners being killed by Jihadists" or a part of the "War on Terror", as Dr. Polya seems to imply.

[Spectral]

2. Scott Ritter writes for Al Jazeera? (Sorry to get stuck on a detail, but)

How interesting.

Great articles. I like reading European papers (in English) on the net because they give more info.

[Up2Late]

5. I don't know how often, but here is an article I remembered reading there

<http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ADCA48CC-9307-466B-BA18-82724CAA7484.htm>

The Salvador option
By Scott Ritter

Tuesday 25 January 2005, 11:49 Makka Time, 8:49 GMT

By any standard, the ongoing American occupation of Iraq is a disaster.

The highly vaunted US military machine, laurelled and praised for its historic march on Baghdad in March and April of 2003, today finds itself a broken force, on the defensive in a land that it may occupy in part, but does not control.

The all-out offensive to break the back of the resistance in Falluja has failed, leaving a city destroyed by American firepower, and still very much in the grips of the anti-American fighters.

The same is true of Mosul, Samarra, or any other location where the US military has undertaken "decisive" action against the fighters, only to find that, within days, the fighting has returned, stronger than ever.

And yet, it now appears as if the United States, in an effort to take the offensive against the fighters in Iraq, is prepared to compound its past mistakes in Iraq by embarking on a new course of action derived from some of the darkest, and most embarrassing moments of America's modern history.

(more at link above)

Note: I did have a little server trouble getting this, don't know why

[Karenina]

3. Charlie Rangel nailed it!

:kick:

[Up2Late]

6. What do you mean?

I like Charley, but I'm not sure what you are talking about.:shrug:

[Karenina]

7. G-E-N-O-C-I-D-E.

[The Magistrate]

8. This Fellow, Sir, Makes Figures Dance Most Un-Wholesomely

He seems to be under the impression all mortality under five, for instance, is owing to U.S. military activity or presence. That is nonesense; it could only be even suggested by comparing figures year to year, and noting what increase from the normal base level in those years U.S. military forces operated there. To take simply the figures available readily at the source he cites for Afghanistan: the figures for 2003 are much lower than those from 1960, which establishes at the very least that infant mortality has always been very high there, and certainly was extraordinarily high even before the Soviet invasion and civil war subsequent. This sort of thing is the mark of the deliberate deceiver....

"Figures lie, and liars figure."

[Up2Late]

9. Your take, "...under the impression all mortality under five...,

...for instance, is owing to U.S. military activity or presence..." I don't read it that way at all. Maybe I assuming too much, or you not enough, so I should get more information before responding.

The authors numbers aside, what years, in the recent past, do you feel the U.S. was NOT heavily influencing the Government of Iraq? I just want to be clear about what your thinking is before I respond.

If you'd like, you can answer the same question regarding Afghanistan separately, but for now, let's try to keep it simple, I often have trouble understanding you arguments and criticisms.

[The Magistrate]

10. It Is Quite Clear From The Article, Sir

That this fellow is simply adding total deaths in these countries, and claiming all are the result of a Western "War on Islam". It is a nonesensical method, that cannot even produce a persuasive or useful propaganda line, let alone provide an accurate picture of the situation.

There is no question that there has been a good deal of death in Iraq owing to the U.S. invasion and occupation of the place. The Lancet figure of numbers on the order of one hundred thousands seems reasonable: though the demographic method of extrapolation is subject to some possible error, it is certainly sufficient to establish it is a very large number, approximating one half of one percent of the population. As the definition is deaths that would not be expected to have occured absent the invasion and occupation, it does not matter what proportion are attributable to direct action of U.S. forces, or what proportion of those so attributable involve combatants.

It is also true there were many deaths in Iraq during the sanctions period in excess of normal rates. Many of the figures tossed about have long struck me as exaggerations, and the responsibilities are somewhat blurred as well. Hussein had, during that period, the option of collaborating fully with the U. N. directives, which he did not do, and this certainly provided an unassailable pretext for the continuation of the sanctions regime. There is also no doubt whatever, for it has been reported since his fall by humanitarian workers present at the time, that in that period Hussein did withhold some stocks of medicines from hospitals to score propaganda points by the sufferings of patients there. My own inclination is against sanctions regimes, because they are generally ineffective against despotic rulers, and simply increase the sufferings of the populace: they are generally mere devices for diplomats to pretend they are doing something when they really are not doing a damned thing of use in a situation.

[Up2Late]

11. I am sorry Sir, but I do not think that was the technique of this...

...author, nor did he intend his readers to reach that conclusion. Fortunately, I have discovered what I believe will clear things up a bit.

I have just done further research on this, and followed some of the links given, and have found the original source material which better explains the authors methods. It will also make obvious, that this article is an extremely edited version of what the author wrote, for length, but most likely to further the point of view of the editor. I also think some of the language used (when directly compared with the original) has changed, but could be due to this article being translated into Arabic and then retranslated into English.

This article appears to be a "cut and paste" of Dr. Polya's article at the link below called:

Global mortality, Iraq and the Muslim Holocaust
by Gideon Polya
(Friday July 23 2004)

This is a more complete explanation of the Dr.Polya's methods, though I am not including the entire explanation, because that would use up the all 4 paragraphs under the 4 paragraph copy rule:

This the 6th paragraph, just above the sub-headline:

Calculating and analysing 'excess mortality'"

One major approach has been to examine "excess mortality" for every country in the world since 1950. "Excess mortality" in a country for a given period is defined as the difference between the actual mortality and the mortality expected for a decently-run country with the same demographics. Thus "excess mortality" essentially amounts to "avoidable mortality" and demands honest scrutiny in the interests of humanity.

Here are some examples that can be directly compared to the Original article I posted. I don't know who edited this, but it looks like the same text, but with the 2003 numbers substitute for the 2001 numbers:

...with the return of Western armies in 1991, "excess mortality" increased enormously and with sanctions, invasion and occupation has remained high.

Some Iraq statistics: "excess mortality" in Iraq has totaled 5.2 million since 1950 and 1.5 million since 1991. Under-5 infant mortality has totaled 3.3 million since 1950 and 1.2 million since 1991 i.e. the under-5 infant mortality represents a very high proportion of "excess mortality". According to UNICEF, in 2001 the under-5 infant mortality was 109,000 in Iraq (score 20%) and 277,000 in Afghanistan (score 65%) - as compared to 1000 in Australia (score 3%). It can be estimated that under Anglo-American occupation the "excess mortality" and under-5 infant mortality in Iraq are both still of the order of 100,000 per year.

Turkey (score 15%), Iran (20%) and Afghanistan (65%) have fared poorly since 1950. Turkey has been intimately associated with US forward defence and has been continuing a genocidal campaign against Kurds and residual Christians <15, 16>. Iran, subject to US intervention, installation of the pro-US Shah, the Anglo-American-backed Iran-Iraq war and sustained US hostility to the post-Shah order, has done even worse than Turkey <17>. However Afghanistan, subject to Soviet invasion, US-backed Taliban takeover and now US removal of the Taliban <17>, has suffered horrendously with a total "excess mortality" of 16.2 million. The annual "excess mortality" was about 0.3 million under the Soviets and has been about 0.4 million under post-Soviet regimes.

"...death toll is about one hundred times that of the Jewish Holocaust (6 million victims) and of the "forgotten" World War 2 man-made famine in British-ruled Bengal (4 million Muslim and Hindu victims) <1-3>.

The Muslim Holocaust has many components - thus "excess mortality" has totalled 5.2 million for Iraq since 1950, 1.5 million for Iraq since 1991 and 340,000 for the Occupied Palestinian Territories since 1967. Since 1950 "excess mortality" has totalled about 49 million for the Turkish Near East and Central Asia and 70 million for the Arab Middle East and North Africa..."

Like I said, these are just clips for example of some of the cut and pasted data, it is still better to see these fully in context at the link above. That said, I still think the numbers ARE reasonable and consistent with what was being reported before the 2003 Iraq Invasion.

I also found that this website (Al Jazeerah .info) is not the same as Al Jazeerah .net and Al Jazeerah .com. I think this is a U.S. based website, I found this contact info at the bottom of their Home Page

2002-2005 Copyright © Amazone Press, aljazeerah.info & aljazeerah.us. All Rights Reserved.

Contact us at: [e-mail]

Aljazeerah Information Center, P. O. Box 724, Dalton, GA 30720, USA

In conclusion, I would have to say your instincts were correct regarding the intended deception, but I would be more inclined to blame the U.S. based website, not the author.

[The Magistrate]

12. Thank You For The Clarification, Sir

It is much appreciated, and it is certainly clear from it that the gentleman has been ill-used by the presentation of that particular website. He is referring really to something far beyond the particular matters occuring in the present day. He has certainly not been dishonest in his numbers, though to my view his ascription of cause for the disparities is in error. But that is not the same thing, by a long sight. We are probably in agreement that imperialism and economic exploitation have caused a good deal of mortality, in various ways that can certainly be traced, and of which military action is only a small part. But it does not seem to me it that is the only cause, or even the predominant one, for much of the disparate mortalities he cites.