I think you misunderstand my point Wolfgang - it was that what matters here aren't the detailed numbers. The range of estimates given by this research is extremely wide, and even if the kind of criticisms of methodology made by those critics were accepted the figures arrived at would be far higher than the "official" estimates.

If people were arguing that the estimates were too low it would equally well be looking in the wrong direction. Or if it were a dispute as to whether 3,000 people were killed on September 11th or 4,000, that would equally irrelevant to the real issues. The same would apply if there was some argument as to whether David Irving's estimates of the number killed in the Dresden bombing was set too high.

I honestly don't think I have "an obvious double standard... when any estimate is questioned."
.........
"the argumentation above by Bev and Jerry is demonstrably wrong"

I can't actually see where Bev and Jerry's only post in this thread really comes into it:

Bush said, "And I applaud the Iraqis for their courage in the face of violence. I am amazed that this is a society which so wants to be free that they're willing to -- you know, that there's a level of violence that they tolerate."

Like they had a choice.

What's that got to do with disputes about estimates concerning the number killed?