It looks like reports of the looting of the Baghdad Museum were overblown to a phenomenal degree. Original reports were that 170,000 objects were looted. But, only 29 have been confirmed, and four of them have been recovered.
[ol][]Is is really true that so few pieces were taken?[]If so, how did the exaggerated story get started?[]What does it say about those who made such a fuss over the looting?[]Will they apologize?[/ol]
A single list given to a single marine? Hmmm.
The Guardian reports that
The 170,000 figure, inflated as is might well be, perhaps refers to teh number of items (not necessarily “artefacts” but computers, chairs and the like) in the entire country. This article says 14,000 artefacts, again in Iraq as a whole. The picture accompanying it clearly shows many more than 25 artefacts smashed up and left.
Might I label the NY Times article “Anasthetic for Middle America”?
Dunno. What do you think?
Anti-American, European Socialists who work for the BBC exaggerated the story. Luckily, their lies have been uncovered.
That they probably hate America, loathe Israel and support Saddam, Islamic terrorism and the killing of small puppies.
What for?
[ol][]You expect someone here to know this?[]Someone in the museum took a guess?[]That they value the items in the museum and were commenting on the information they were given as fact? Rather like you are.[]Who to?[/ol]
That was pretty good, Kal. 
>> But, only 29 have been confirmed, and four of them have been recovered.
Gimme a break. We saw way more than that being taken just in the live footage we saw on TV. We saw room after room after room being looted and now it turns out it wasn’t really happening? Hell, I am just so glad to hear that. Maybe now they’ll also tell us the invasion never took place and it was just a staged prank to annoy people like me who believe in international law and the UN. Well, it was a tasteless prank but I’m glad it was only that. That’s what happens when you have frat boys in the White House. First uncontrolled sex and now tasteless pranks. When are the responsible adults coming back?
Doggone those anti-'merricans, why they’d do just about anything to discredit His Majesty, King George the Third.
Why, I am so angry I can hardly speak – faking the looting of a museum! What will they think of next?! Those liberals…can trust them as far as you can throw them! It’s an outrage! I say you put them all in jail and throw away the key!
Cripes, and they have the gumption to claim they no longer control the press. I tell you, if it wasn’t for Fox and their honest reporting, that great nation of yours would be going down the drain.
I feel your pain, december, I really do. Hang in there bud, I am sure there are better times ahead, when us conservatives will really be in power.
Must be a Friday; december’s latest bash-the-anti-American-liberals screed masquerading as an OP is rather limp compared to his usual fare.
Did you read past the third paragraph?
Even if the “170,000 items” is exaggerated, it seems to me the OP is similarly exaggerated “to a phenomenal degree” when it suggests that so few items were stolen, particularly when its cite explicitly states otherwise.
Does the concept of ‘hypocrisy’ mean anything to you?
6097 posts is not the same as one single honest OP
Huh. December, your next step after this should be to demand correction of the erroneous history books’ reportage of the Burning of the Library at Alexandria.
After all, we only know of two books that we’re certain were preserved there that are no longer extant. So it couldn’t have been much of a loss!
Finally, we need to commend the generosity of the Iraqi people – even after the excesses of Saddam’s regime and invasion by America, they cared enough about their museum to contribute “several hundred small pieces” and “a steel case containing 465 objects” when only 29 pieces were confirmed as removed.
After thinking over this and other comments, I agree that the OP was exaggerted. My bad.
Nevertheless, it does seem to be the case that some media and some others exaggerated the degree of looting and minimized the uncertainty of the accusation.
december-Nevertheless, it does seem to be the case that some media and some others exaggerated the degree of looting and minimized the uncertainty of the accusation.
You seem very selective about when this bothers you as this minor flip-flop attests. 
This just in… media blows initial reports out of proportion. Film at 11.
Just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean they are not out to get you.
Keep the guard up, december, I hear those damn liberals want a democratically elected Government in 2004. There’s even been some rumblings about having impartial UN observers at the voting booths!
First, they make up an invasion to tarnish your Great Leader, now this. What insolence.
December, I think the first sentence contains a word that settles this: CONFIRMED. 29 pieces are CONFIRMED missing. Not “we turned the lights on and it turns out the other 169,971 pieces were there the whole time;” they’ve only figured out a few of what is missing. The museum is a complete wreck. Things are missing, things are destroyed. The place, like the country, is totally discombobulated. It’s going to take a long time to figure out what happened, and the article says this. If 170,000 is too high, that doesn’t mean the real total is 29. Do you think they don’t know how to count?
Great, this dumbass thinks he’s Don Rumsfeld. None of this answers the question of why so little was done to prevent the looting, either.
december, have you ever worked in a museum?
There were a lot of extreme headline reports and coverage. A quick google search gave 4490 hits, including**[ul][]Coalition blamed for failing to protect priceless artefacts in Iraq[]US Culture Advisers Resign Over Iraq Museum Looting[]Iraqis say US ignored pleas to halt museum looting[]US art advisers quit to protest Baghdad museum looting[]Permitting museum looting reveals intentions of US[]Museum looting a catastrophe[*]Museum looting just the beginning**[/ul]It was a perverse press pile-on.
>> It was a perverse press pile-on.
Yeah, they did the same to me. Just because I killed one baby they called me baby killer.
Hmmm…and exactly which of those headlines are you having problems with? Because the only debatable one I see there is the one that reads: “Permitting museum looting reveals intentions of US”
The rest are pretty factual. Not that I’d want to assuage your fears of those damn liberals. No Sir. That just wouldn’t be right. You might lose your will to live and I wouldn’t want to be held responsible.
Hey, no biggie, as long as you recognize it. Better yet, learn from it.
It may be presumative of me, and this may be the wrong forum for a comment such as this, but doing a whole pit thread over this just to make this simple, hopefully non-confrontational point seems like overkill… I hope you’ll excuse.
It is possible (indeed likely) that some specific claims were exaggerated. However, if you wish to show it in this instance, it would be advisable to cite a specific example of exaggeration, while at the same time making reasonable allowances for human error. Surely if you are allowed to make mistakes, your debate opponents should be allowed as well, yes?
How does the quote go? Never attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance? Well, maybe the actual quote was “stupidity”, but there’s no need to be harsh… and as any long time poster here should know, there’s lots of things one can lack knowledge of. I’m still trying to figure out those Diplomacy threads without having ever played the game. 
There are malicious people from all realms of the political spectrum, true, but it does not generally help to become sloppy, dismissive, or equally malicious in response. I think there are a lot of knee-jerk reactions here in GD. It occurs from both sides, and this just happens to be one. Do these debates intend to really provide anything constructive, or are they simply just extra noise in a game where whoever scores the most points “wins”?
It seems to me that this for forum would be far more valuable if viewed as a place of exchange, rather than as a podium.
The rest of you, while perhaps understandably annoyed by the pattern of his posting, would do well to lay off (at least a little) after the admission of error.
But I cannot dictate your debate styles. Nor will I presume to do so; I only make a suggestion. Do as you will.