Overly graphic post: where did it go?

January 29, 2005 7:23 PM

I read a post the other day (maybe two?) that included a link to gruesome pics of Iraqis killed in the Fallujah siege and ensuing massacre. I added a comment to the post, asking whether anyone with any forensic expertise might be able to reveal how the dead had been killed, because it looked as though they were not victims of conventional firepower (could it have been gas?). When I went back to see if anyone had responded to the original post had been deleted alongwith its accompanying commentary. Does anyone here know why the post was removed and based on what policy? Thanks in advance.
posted by Azaadistani to Etiquette/Policy at 7:23 PM (19 comments total)

Dad won't let us kids look at that sort of stuff.
posted by xmutex at 7:33 PM on January 29, 2005

Yeah, won't you think of the children?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:01 PM on January 29, 2005

I am not a coroner, but to satisfy your curiosity, I think much of what you were seeing was caused by gunfire (along with some centralized explosions,) but the victims look unusually damaged because of the stages of decomposition presented. If you'd like to know more, feel free to e-mail me.
posted by headspace at 8:02 PM on January 29, 2005

228 posts over in that other thread. Don't need any more rehashing the same thing here.
posted by smackfu at 8:40 PM on January 29, 2005

To find deleted posts, check LoFi. The deleted posts always have a reason, although they are sometimes vague, and the threads can't be commented on further.

And to answer your question, we put a boot in their ass, it's the Ameican way. That and machine gun fire, small explosions, targeted bombing and helicopter gunfire.
posted by Arch Stanton at 9:01 PM on January 29, 2005

posted by Ufez Jones at 9:22 PM on January 29, 2005

Ufez Jones - No snark, just genuine curiosity. Why did you link that picture in this thread?
posted by arse_hat at 9:35 PM on January 29, 2005

posted by dhoyt at 9:43 PM on January 29, 2005

Clever.
posted by AlexReynolds at 9:45 PM on January 29, 2005

OK. Color me clueless. dhoyt - ???
posted by arse_hat at 9:50 PM on January 29, 2005

e-mail sent to you, arse, since bringing the same discussion up in this thread probably isn't appropriate.
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:38 PM on January 29, 2005

Ufez Jones - thanks
posted by arse_hat at 10:53 PM on January 29, 2005

i have nothing to add to this conversation either.


posted by Dean Keaton at 2:49 AM on January 30, 2005

Azaadistani, I saw your question and went to look at the images because you asked. Like headspace said most of them looked like that due to various stages of decomposition, and had nothing to do with gas. However I did find one that threw me, the mans face was missing lips and most skin around that area but was not visably damaged anywhere else in the face or bonestructure, and I don't know what shoots bits (lips) off faces off like that (without shattering the teeth).
posted by dabitch at 3:08 AM on January 30, 2005

could a dog have eaten the lips (tasty soft tissue)? sorry, not a nice idea, but i know dogs were eating corpses in fallujah.
posted by andrew cooke at 4:23 AM on January 30, 2005

correction: no i don't. i know dogs were allegedly eating corpses, and think it probably true.
posted by andrew cooke at 4:24 AM on January 30, 2005

ugh, that is possible I guess. The particular corpse hadn't been dead for very long, it didn't look as decomposed as the others, quite the opposite rather 'fresh'.
posted by dabitch at 4:43 AM on January 30, 2005

dabitch- that one was probably caused by actors in decomposition- ie, necrophage beetles. Large actors (like dogs) tend to start on the outside and work their way in.
posted by headspace at 5:26 AM on January 30, 2005

Rats don't even wait for death to eat lips.
posted by TimeFactor at 8:31 AM on January 30, 2005