Mr. barnes does this include you? I THOUGHT IT WAS BEING REALLY CIVILIZED
MYSELF.THIS IS A VERY HOT DISCUSSION TOPIC ALL THE TIME, BUT PAST HISTORY
SHOWS THE CULPABILITY OF HUMANS TO ERR. i DO BELIEVE WE ALL HOPE THE CASE
DOESNT COME DOWN TO THIS BUT....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Barnes" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: Iraq donation


> Will you please SHUT UP!! You pompous overblown jackass!  This is a museum
> site where someone has asked a legitimate question and too many people
have
> turned it into their bully pulpit.  People are assuming that these things
> are going to occur even before they have happened.  So PLEASE, stick to
> answering the questions in a museum professional manner and leave your
> typical academia answers to your peace activism group.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Phil Barnes
> American Airpower Heritage Museum
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
> > Behalf Of Nicholas Burlakoff
> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 1:52 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Iraq donation
> >
> >
> > The facts given out by Iraq Bodycount are pretty well supported.
> > The figures
> > are considered pretty solid by folks involved in statistical
> > studies. I take
> > the liberty of posting the basic methodology:
> > Methodology:
> >
> > 1. Overview
> > Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media
> > reports and eyewitness accounts. Where these sources report differing
> > figures, the range (a minimum and a maximum) are given. All results are
> > independently reviewed and error-checked by at least two members
> > of the Iraq
> > Body Count project team in addition to the original compiler before
> > publication.
> > 2. Sources
> > Our sources include public domain newsgathering agencies with web
> > access. A
> > list of some core sources is given below. Further sources will be added
> > provided they meet acceptable project standards (see below).
> > ABC - ABC News (USA)
> > AFP - Agence France-Presse
> > AP - Associated Press
> > AWST - Aviation Week and Space Technology
> > Al Jaz - Al Jazeera network
> > BBC - British Broadcasting Corporation
> > BG - Boston Globe
> > Balt. Sun - The Baltimore Sun
> > CT - Chicago Tribune
> > CO - Commondreams.org
> > CSM - Christian Science Monitor
> > DPA - Deutsche Presse-Agentur
> > FOX - Fox News
> > GUA - The Guardian (London)
> > HRW - Human Rights Watch
> > HT - Hindustan Times
> > ICRC - International Committ of the Red Cross
> > IND - The Independent (London)
> > IO - Intellnet.org
> > JT - Jordan Times
> > LAT - Los Angeles Times
> > MEN - Middle East Newsline
> > MEO - Middle East Online
> > MER - Middle East Report
> > MH - Miami Herald
> > NT - Nando Times
> > NYT - New York Times
> > Reuters - (includes Reuters Alertnet)
> > SABC - South African Broadcasting Corporation
> > SMH - Sydney Morning Herald
> > Sg.News - The Singapore News
> > Tel- The Telegraph (London)
> > Times - The Times (London)
> > TOI - Times of India
> > TS - Toronto Star
> > UPI - United Press International
> > WNN - World News Network
> > WP - Washington Post
> > For a source to be considered acceptable to this project it must
> > comply with
> > the following standards: (1) site updated at least daily; (2) all
stories
> > separately archived on the site, with a unique url (see Note 1 below);
(3)
> > source widely cited or referenced by other sources; (4) English Language
> > site; (5) fully public (preferably free) web-access.
> > The project relies on the professional rigour of the approved reporting
> > agencies. It is assumed that any agency that has attained a respected
> > international status operates its own rigorous checks before publishing
> > items (including, where possible, eye-witness and confidential
> > sources). By
> > requiring that two independent agencies publish a report before we are
> > willing to add it to the count, we are premising our own count on the
> > self-correcting nature of the increasingly inter-connected international
> > media network.
> > Note 1. Some sites remove items after a given time period, change their
> > urls, or place them in archives with inadequate search engines. For this
> > reason it is project policy that urls of sources are NOT published on
the
> > iraqbodycount site.
> > 3. Data extraction
> > Data extraction policy is based on 3 criteria, some of which work in
> > opposite directions.
> > a. Sufficient information must be extracted to ensure that each
> > incident is
> > differentiated from proximate incidents with which it could be
potentially
> > confused.
> > b. Economy of data extraction is required, for efficiency of both
> > production
> > and public scrutiny.
> > c. Data extraction should be uniform, so that the same information is
> > available for the vast majority of incidents. This is best guaranteed by
> > restricting the number of items of information per incident to the core
> > facts that most news reports tend to include.
> > The pragmatic tensions in the above have led to the decision to
> > extract the
> > following information only for each incident:
> > * Date of incident
> > * Time of incident
> > * Location of incident
> > * Target as stated by military sources
> > * Weapon (munitions or delivery vehicle)
> > * Minimum civilian deaths (see Note 2)
> > * Maximum civilian deaths (see Note 2)
> > * Sources (at least two sources from the list in section 2 above)
> > Reliability of data extraction will be increased by ensuring that
> > each data
> > extraction is checked and signed off by two further independent
> > scrutineers
> > prior to publication, and all data entries will be kept under
> > review should
> > further details become available at a later date.
> > Note 2. Definitions of minimum and maximum
> > Reports of numbers dead vary across sources. On-the-ground
> > uncertainties and
> > potential political bias can result in a range of figures reported for
the
> > same incident. To reflect this variation, each incident will be
associated
> > with a minimum and maximum reported number of deaths. No number will be
> > entered into the count unless it meets the criteria in the following
> > paragraphs. This conservative approach allows relative certainty about
the
> > minimum.
> > Maximum deaths. This is the highest number of civilian deaths published
by
> > at least two of our approved list of news media sources.
> > Minimum deaths. This is the same as the maximum, unless at least
> > two of the
> > listed news media sources publish a lower number. In this case, the
lower
> > number is entered as the minimum. The minimum can be zero if there is a
> > report of "zero deaths" from two of our sources. "Unable to confirm any
> > deaths" or similar wording (as in an official statement) does NOT
> > amount to
> > a report of zero, and will NOT lead to an entry of "0" in the minimum
> > column.
> > As a further conservative measure, when the wording used in both reports
> > refers to "people" instead of civilians, we will include the
> > total figure as
> > a maximum but enter "0" into the minimum column unless details are
present
> > clearly identifying some or all of the dead as civilian - in this case
the
> > number of identifiable civilians will be entered into the minimum column
> > instead of "0". The word "family" will be interpreted in this context as
> > meaning 3 civilians. [Average Iraqi non-extended family size: 6. -CIA
> > Factbook 2002.]
> >
> > If one visits the Bodycount website more facts can be easily
established,
> > and in any case, that listing is far superior than relying on an
anecdotal
> > representations made by one soldier. The fact simply is, that Bodycount
> > figures are the best data that we have, and it is solidly based on
> > ascertainable reports so quoting them is perfectly acceptable on
> > this or any
> > other page. We simply cannot personally verify every fact that we use,
and
> > faith in the accuracy of a reporting agency is always a question. In
this
> > case they meet standards for and accuracy.
> > The question of the degree of support of soldiers for this war is best
> > answered by the DoD (Department of Defense) study that reports over 70%
of
> > soldiers in Iraq as having low morale. Another DoD study shows that the
> > suicide rate among US soldiers in Iraq is double the normal rate in the
> > Armed Forces.
> >
> > The statement that US military's strict regulations will prevent the
> > unauthorized importation of artifacts is just silly. We have many laws
> > against drunk driving and tens of thousands of folks drive drunk every
> > weekend, we have draconian laws against drug use and over 40% of folks
in
> > this country have used or are using illegal drugs. Anyone, who has been
in
> > the military knows that many regulations serve more as a challenge to be
> > overcome than a deterrent.
> >
> > Last point. All of our soldiers are trained to kill. They are therefore
> > either actual or potential killers. That is how they are making their
> > living. In fact, because of the type of warfare currently in Iraq
> > additional
> > training in killing is given drivers, mechanics and other non-combat
> > personnel. All our soldiers are volunteers who have acquired the skill
of
> > destroying human life. They may be our sisters, brothers, sons
> > and fathers,
> > but they are also trained to kill and should be considered dangerous.
> > The core question that we should not forget on this list is:
> > Should a museum
> > accept war booty? In my opinion, under no circumstances should a
civilian
> > museum do so, on moral grounds alone, leaving aside legal and policy
> > questions. The facts above help contribute to the moral dimension of
this
> > problem.
> > PeaceNick
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Museum discussion list
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf
> > Of Tracie Evans
> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 10:38 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Iraq donation
> >
> > Idewey-
> > I wonder if perhaps we could keep the unsupported "facts" about
> > the war off
> > this list because if you have not been in Iraq and seen the
> > pre-war as well
> > as war time conditions, it might be important to not believe
> > everything you
> > read!  Body counts have a way of being manipulated so I would caution
you
> > about believing an "on-line" site with the counts (who is doing these
> > estimates?) and how was it determined that "the overwhelming majority of
> > those people have been killed by the US military and its government."
> >
> > I have spoken to one of the men who served on the front lines
> > over there and
> > he indicated that he saw killing happening by their own army.  Also, we
> > spoke about several of the historic locations that they saw and he
talked
> > about how they positioned themselves to protect these locations,
> > not destroy
> > them.  He told me about one museum that the Iraqi people had looted and
> > destroyed and about the curator who stayed to protect what he could all
by
> > himself.  He also talked about the terrible conditions of the country
that
> > we there before they arrived and the anti-tank and air-craft guns
> > that were
> > placed in playgrounds and school yards. (I even saw photographs)  Iraq
is
> > not like the US, do not apply your standards to their culture or
political
> > activities.  Saddam Hussein was not a nice guy and he regularly shielded
> > himself and his government with his own people which placed them
> > in danger.
> > Also, not all Iraqi want us there, but not all many this soldier
> > interacted
> > with were happy to have them there.  Use caution when drawing
conclusions
> > about what is happening in Iraqi based on news reports which have
various
> > biases themselves.
> >
> > The US military and the US now have very strict regulations about the
> > materials that people (military and non-military) are allowed to
> > bring back
> > with them.  Unfortunately, not everyone understands the importance of
> > historical materials and will try to smuggle illegal items back home as
> > souvenirs.  If those types of materials are offered, museums should
handle
> > them the same way we would illegally obtained materials from other
places.
> > Please be sure however that it is a looted item and illegal, the Middle
> > Eastern culture does produce many fake antiquities to sell to the
> > "tourist"
> > and these can be purchased, traded for by the soldiers and sometimes
even
> > found on the ground.
> >
> > I'm not giving you my political views about whether our soldiers should
or
> > should not be there, but I do believe that the majority of our
> > soldiers are
> > not killers or looters.  Remember that interpretation is just
> > that and your
> > "truth" may not always coincide with other peoples "truth."  It will be
> > interesting to relook at this war (as well as the earlier war
> > with Iraq) in
> > the future to see how our views of today's "truths" will change.
> >
> > Sincerely
> > Tracie Evans
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ldewey [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 8:42 AM
> > > To:   [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject:      Re: Iraq donation
> > >
> > > Was it Samuel Johnson who said 'patriotism is the last refuge of
> > > scoundrels'? I forget. It's not important.
> > >
> > > In any event, I support the GIs who question and dissent from their
own
> > > role in the occupation, and I assume many do. We have heard of a few
> > > who have refused to go along, there are probably many who we will not
> > > hear about.
> > >
> > > Still, most of the people who have been killed in Iraq are
> > > non-combatant Iraqi people. The current estimate is somewhere between
> > > 8,800 and 10,000, according to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ . And the
> > > overwhelming majority of those people have been killed by the US
> > > military and it's government. That is a simple fact.
> > >
> > > Audience research shows that uninterpreted object displays are not
very
> > > effective as self-directed communication. So if a museum intends to
> > > display 'war booty', it ought to include the context. Certainly that
> > > should include the conditions of the war; the aerial bombardments of
> > > urban residential areas, water supplies, and power plants (all
> > > proscribed as 'war crimes' by the Geneva Convention, btw), the cluster
> > > bombs and maimed children. Perhaps an autographed picture of
government
> > > emissary Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein (1983), or
a
> > > list of the US, British and German firms who supplied the chemicals
> > > used in the Iraq-Iran war. Perhaps an annotated map showing the
> > > international oil investments near Tirkut.
> > >
> > > -LD (aka person C)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Monday, April 5, 2004, at 12:04 AM, Automatic digest processor
wrote:
> > >
> > > > Date:    Sun, 4 Apr 2004 11:44:49 -0700
> > > > From:    Deb Fuller <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > Subject: Re: Iraq donations
> > > >
> > > > --- Indigo Nights <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> You have a history here of touting the soldiers and
> > > >> their beleagured families.  Your patriotism is
> > > >> admirable.  But this is a multinational list with
> > > >> folks who do not feel the same way, including some of
> > > >> your own countrypersons.
> > > >
> > > > I don't want to drag this out either but let me set the record
> > > > straight about
> > > > my attitude towards the whole situation. I don't consider myself
> > > > "patriotic"
> > > > but someone who genuinely cares about all people, regardless of
race,
> > > > religion,
> > > > occupation or nationality. I happen to believe that the average
person
> > > > out
> > > > there is trying to do the best they can with what they've got. So I
do
> > > > get
> > > > defensive of people who I think are trying to do their best and are
at
> > > > the
> > > > mercy of a usually one-sided media world.
> > > >
> > > > In any highly controversial political situation, I find that it's an
> > > > alarming
> > > > tendency to jump on the "little guy" like the soldiers instead of
the
> > > > people up
> > > > the chain of command who are calling the shots. Blame is usually put
> > > > on the
> > > > people who have the least control of the situation but happen to be
> > > > right in
> > > > the middle of it.
> > > >
> > >
> > > =========================================================
> > > Important Subscriber Information:
> > >
> > > The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
> > > http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
> > > information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
> > > message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message
should
> > > read "help" (without the quotes).
> > >
> > > If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail
> > message to
> > > [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read
> > > "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
> >
> > =========================================================
> > Important Subscriber Information:
> >
> > The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
> > http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
> > information about the listserv commands by sending a one line
> > e-mail message
> > to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
> > read "help"
> > (without the quotes).
> >
> > If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message
to
> > [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
> > read "Signoff
> > Museum-L" (without the quotes).
> >
> > =========================================================
> > Important Subscriber Information:
> >
> > The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
> > http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain
> > detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one
> > line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of
> > the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
> >
> > If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail
> > message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message
> > should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
> >
>
> =========================================================
> Important Subscriber Information:
>
> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message
to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help"
(without the quotes).
>
> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).
>

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).