Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month

Subject: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 04:15 PM

One of the major factors in turning the American public against the Vietnam War was the mounting body count. Questions like "What are we doing there?" and "Whatever it is, is it worth this?" So if you want to conduct a war without the American public asking such questions, you'd better put a lid on this kind of information.

But sometimes that kind of lid blows off.

One should have suspected something like this when Bush had a hissy-fit over a photographer taking a photo of some flag-draped coffins containing American troops that were being flown home, and the photo subsequently being published. And then, one heard reports that there were around 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed in the continuing hostilities. The Bush League denied this, saying that it was more like 30,000. Only 30,000!

I first heard of the Johns Hopkins survey on NPR this morning shortly after the clock radio came on.   After the general lack of information on this in the "main stream" media, I decided to google a bit and see what I come up with.

HERE and HERE.

There were lots more links to the same information, along with many editorial comments. Just put "Johns Hopkins Iraqi civilian casualties" or some similar combination into the google search box and you'll have lots to read.

This is too big a story for the main stream media not to report. But it will be interesting (and perhaps enlightening) to see how it develops and how they handle it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 04:18 PM

I've been reading reports of this on google news, today. My Rog ahd top security clearance during Viet Nam. They were sworn to secrecy as to how many body bags they unloaded, usually in the middle of the night, whilst he was stationed in the Phillipines.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: ard mhacha
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:21 PM

This was headlined in the 10pm BBC News to-night, of course Bush was on denying the figures, many more thousands now dead than were killed under Saddam.
What a mess, surely it`s time to go, think back, the world was certainly a much safer place before Bush and his string-pullers arrived on the scene.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:29 PM

Soon be nowhere to run for the pro war apologists

Latest figures state 650,000 Iraqis killed since the start of the invasion. This figure equates to 2 percent of the population and its getting worse.

The criminals who involved us in this mess still sit in Westminster and Washington, lecturing us on how to run our lives.

Heads must roll......Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:32 PM

"Official" figure 30,000 . John Hopkins estimate 600,000 (perhaps as high as 800,000).

Interseting that quote from Bush in that article Don Firth linked to:

"I am, you know, 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."

Which reads for all the world precisely like the kind of thing that a spin doctor for the Iraqi "resistance" might have said.

I suppose they would both agree on the expression "A price worth paying."

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: GUEST,Norman Winstanley
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:39 PM

come on all of you big strong men
Uncle Sam needs your help again
got himself in a terrible jam
way out yonder in the land of saddam
put down your books and pick up a gun we're
gonna have a whole lotta fun


And it's one, two, three, what are we fighting for
don't ask me I don't give a damn, next stop is the land of saddam
And it's five, six, seven, open up the pearly gates
ain't no time to wonder why, whoopee we're all gonna die.

come on generals, let's move fast
your big chance has come at last
now you can go out and get those Muslims,
cos the only good raggy is the one that's dead and
you know that peace can only be won when we've
blown 'em all to kingdom come

come on wall street don't be slow
why man this war is a go-go
there's plenty good money to be made by
supplying the army with the tools of its trade
let's hope and pray that if they drop the bomb,
they drop it on the Viet Cong

come on mothers throughout the land
pack your boys off to the land of saddam
come on fathers don't hesitate
send your sons off before it's too late
and you can be the first ones on your block
to have your boy come home in a box

Subject: BS: 2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September
From: GUEST,2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September (AP
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:47 PM

2,660 (2,667) civilians in one month vs. 2,751 U.S. Military in 3 years 7 months.


A total of 2,667 civilians in Baghdad died violent deaths during September, two senior Health Ministry officials told The Associated Press this week, based on an official monthly report from the ministry to the Cabinet

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061011/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Peace
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:52 PM

The figures are horrible. But not quite as horrible as those from the Sudan.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:58 PM

As always peace the voice of reason and wisdom. When you think of the number of men, women and children dying daily in this part of the world. If only it could of been an oil rich region.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 06:07 PM

On Newsnight spokesman for Bush administration says, "Most of the killing is being done by the Iraquis themselves, not the co-alition soldiers."

Its called abdication of responsibility.

AS Don says, the question is why are we there? What are we achieving?
And have we the balls to admit to the World that our leaders are guilty of waging blatant war of aggression for dubious motives.

When we are able to do that, there may be one small glimmer of hope for the future.....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 06:09 PM

Not in my name!!!

Makes me think of the days when I was sayin' that upwards of 100,000 Iraqis had died and the Bushites here in Mudville jumped all over me... Yup, they were right in sayin' I was mistaken 'cause it looks as if the 100,000 at that time was probably well under the actual numbers...

And, for the record: George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Paul Wofowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Pearle will rot in Hell for what they have done... Guarenteed...

Like I said, not in my name...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 06:12 PM

I'm not so certain about "Divine judgement" Bobert.

"Might as well just do while we're here"

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 07:32 PM

Well, Peace, the figures from the Sudan are pretty horrible all right. What twists my tail is that if we had an administration that gave a damn about people instead of power and profits, if we were active militarily anywhere in the world, it wouldn't be in Iraq, it would be in the Sudan, putting a stop to the slaughter.

I really hate to think what history is going to have to say about this country.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 07:45 PM

Oh...they'll say something similar to what was said about Imperial Rome, I imagine. Something like, "A once progressive democracy with representation for the common people slowly devolved into a corrupt militaristic empire under the rule of autocratic egomaniacs and despots who lived in unheard of luxury while conducting themselves as if they were gods on Earth, until they destroyed all remaining vestiges of moral decency and responsibility. At last the empire fell, gradually, under the weight of its own iniquity, decadence, and loss of belief in its original founding principles."

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 08:13 PM

And there'll be people who'll say it's wrong to blame anyone, because everything was done in accordance with "the standards of the time"...

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 08:36 PM

Yeah, Little Hawk, that's pretty much the way I read it.

A book I read some time ago that still impresses me as I watch world events unfold is the late Barbara Tuchman's The March of Folly : From Troy to Vietnam. She details several instances illustrating how power not only corrupts, but seems to endow the powerful with an often self-destructive combination of arrogance and stupidity.

And on we march.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 12:51 AM

It is interesting to note that most of those who do not believe the report say that they think it's wrong because they have not seen any numbers even close to that before. On the other hand, those that agree with the report do so because the calculation is based on sound statistical principles.

Who do you think is right?

Bev and Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Hrothgar
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 05:44 AM

I can't help suspecting that these figures might be only slightly more credible than those used to justify the invasion of Iraq in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: TIA
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 09:46 AM

Bobert-

I remember distinctly the derision you were dealt PRE-INVASION! (and later).

Now let's see...I don't have time to look up the posts, but I've got a very good memory.

DougR claimed you were chicken little, and that there really would not be an invasion because the drum beating was all part of diplomacy

Teribus said there would be no protracted urban guerilla warfare (and tried a few "I told ya so's" after Baghdad "fell")

MANY others claimed you were wildly exaggerating with the 100,000 dead prediction. Well shit, they were right after all...you were off by a factor of about 7!

Where are they now?

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 11:08 AM

Sitting with their heads up their arses just as they were before.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 11:20 AM

One thing they are probably NOT doing is reviewing with humility to learn from mistakes.

Almost gayranteed.

It would be interesting to go back -- if one had the time -- and review those "Road to War" threads. I remember when it became obviosu to me that Bush was lying about not having decided anything when he clearly was going to war, reason or no reason. I wrote a song in a thread about it. You could look it up.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: TIA
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 11:25 AM

I wish I had the time and stomach to go back to those threads also. It would make verrrrry interesting reading, and one could play a monstrous game of gotcha with a few folks (some of whom have not appeared for quite a while). But however vindictively satisfying it would be, it doesn't help get us out of the shit we in now.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 11:26 AM

A couple of cute quotes from before the invasion:

Summary: Neither Amos, or, McGoH have come anywhere close to answering two, very basic, questions I have asked, specifically, regarding the contention by the afore-mentioned, and many others contributing to this thread, and other related threads, that President George W Bush and his administration are hell bent on attacking Iraq, even if that means doing so without the full backing of the United Nations. In attempting to answer my question - Kevin (McGoH) actually supports my contention. Great Britain...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0.7742 - Thread - Message - RE: BS: Bush, Iraq,War Part 7 - Sep 25 2002 2:59AM -   Teribus
Summary: Just what words am I putting in your mouth Amos? To yourself, Amos, Bobert, McGoH and to many others, I would like to remind you of one thing - It has always been my contention that without the full backing of the United Nations, there will not be a war. You mean to tell us that you were only kidding when you posted the "He's Gonna Go to War" song.

---

The song in question:

Subject: RE: BS: Bush,,Iraq,War Part 7
From: Amos - PM
Date: 23 Sep 02 - 02:37 PM


He's Gonna Go to War

(Tune: He's In the Jailhouse Now; J. Rogers)



I knew a guy named Dithering George
He used to weasel, lie and forge
Until he got elected Prezzy-dent.
Now he's actin' quite the boy
He got himself a bran' new toy
He thinks the US war machine was simply heaven-sent!

He's gonna go to war!
He's gonna go to war!
Doesn't matter where or when
He wants carte blanche for killing men,
He wants to go to wa-a-ar!

Now ole George is kinda slimy
He talks tough, dumb and old-timey
And he never says just what he's shootin' for.
But you can bet your bottom dollar
He'll pout and rave and holler
If we don't let him take his toys, and start another war!

He's gonna go to war!
He's gonna go to war!
Doesn't matter where or when
He wants carte blanche for killing men,
He wants to go to wa-a-ar!

Ya know ole Georgy ain't no fairy
Why he bought the Judiciary
And he knows just how to bully, push and scare
An' he's done some fancy stepping
'Bout the threat of Nukyular Weapons,
And he'd sure be quite embarrassed, if them weapons wasn't there!

He's gonna go to war!
He's gonna go to war!
Doesn't matter where or when
He wants carte blanche for killing men,
He wants to go to wa-a-ar!

---

Those were the Good Old Days....yuck!


A

Subject: RE: BS: 2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 11:35 AM

Isn't it curious how an American occupation almost always manages to kill about 10 of the local people for every American that dies? I bet it was like that with the Romans too, and the Nazis, and the British in their empire period.

Subject: RE: BS: 2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September
From: SINSULL
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 11:38 AM

Meantime, back at the ranch, the bush slaughter continues. Anyone know the actual figures for Iraqi casualties. I have read as high as 800,00. But according to our government that's because they keep killing each other and has nothing to do with the fact that we invaded their country.

Now...if Korea invads the US to protect us from our power crazy leader, how many of us will join the street fighting?

Subject: RE: BS: 2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 12:07 PM

It seems logical that deaths in any invaded country should far outnumber deaths of the invaders. The invaders would probably not have invaded had they not had superior weaponry and training.

In the present case, what is intolerable imo is that all these deaths and injuries and losses are happening in the name of freedom.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Wolfgang
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 12:10 PM

Bev and Jerry,

I wonder if you have actually read the Lancet article. If you have you should have noticed that their sampling in "clusters" (instead of random sampling) which was done quite understandably for safety reasons is a statistical problem they have not addressed in a satisfactory way in the article.

The 95% CI they have given in the article only addresses the sampling procedure and not possible systematic biases. They have hardly even discussed (or tried to asses or even control) the biases.

The other hard date we have (Iraq Body count) is now in the 40,000s (close to fiftythousand). This is definitely an underestimation of the real figures.

Bush's 30,000 is of course a figure that cannot be taken serious. I wonder if he believes it.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 12:16 PM

Freedom indeed. God will sort them out because God will know his own.

Subject: RE: BS: 2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September
From: Wolfgang
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 12:22 PM

Has anyone noticed how wdistorting the reporting by Yahoo was?

"Civilians" is what they write. "Persons not wearing uniforms" is all they can know. In a conflict in which only one side wears uniforms to call all other people "civilians" is not the correct way of reporting.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 12:46 PM

At least we know these figures.

We have no way of knowing how many people may have been killed in Iraq since the end of first Gulf War and start of the Second.

All this death and misery is regretable but this period should be remembered when we are commenting on the deaths in Iraq since the American and British occupation.

Subject: RE: BS: 2,660 Iraq civilians killed in September
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 12:57 PM

Some interesting public comments in response to Bush's rather callous press conference can be found on this page.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 01:03 PM

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/11/bush-iraq-tolerate-violence/ offers some interesting public remarks.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 01:45 PM

It was many months back that people were saying that the Iraqi civilian casualties numbered in excess of 100,000, and Bush claimed that this was a gross exaggeration, that it was more like 30,000. Even if either of those figures were close to reality, there has been a whole lot of killing since then. According to a number of reports (few of which have made the main-stream media) from people who have been there, the violence has accelerated hugely within recent months and there is a full-blown civil war going on. Last I heard (within the last day or two), Bush is still holding to the 30,000 figure.

Although it wasn't about casualties specifically, I recently heard an interview with Rajiv Chandrasekaran that was most revealing and informative. Rajiv Chandrasekaran is an assistant managing editor of The Washington Post, and he served terms as the Post's bureau chief in Baghdad, Cairo, and Southeast Asia, and as a correspondent covering the war in Afghanistan. He recently completed a term as journalist-in-residence at the International Reporting Project at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies. The interview touched on the matter of casualties, but it mostly centered around the subject of his book, which has recently been released:   Imperial Life in the Emerald City : Inside Iraq's Green Zone. He saw first hand and close up the incredible, mind-boggling, forehead-smacking ineptitude of the people Bush has sent to Iraq to "liberate" the country and teach them "democracy." If you check the link, then scroll down to the Editorial Reviews, you'll get a pretty good idea of the thrust of the book, and what Chandrasekaran talked about in the interview.

No, indeed! Not in my name!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 03:03 PM

Just heard. Bush intends to maintain current troop levels in Iraq until at least 2010.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 03:15 PM

Maybe he doesn't dare bring them home because of what they might do to him.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 03:44 PM

Judging from some of the things that Rajiv Chandrasekaran said, that could very well be true.

Of course, if the Republicans lose control of Congress (mid-term elections about a month away, and things look pretty precarious for the Republicans), things could change drastically. And, of course, Bush will definitely be out in 2008.

(Unless he tries to stage a coup, but I don't think even he could be that stupid.)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 04:04 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: The Badger
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 07:43 PM

It was pointed out to me the other day that a large number of the casualties in the past few monthe - if not the majority - were non-violent muslims killing other non-violent muslims of a different sect. I'm still pondering on this.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 07:51 PM

God will recognize His own.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 08:25 PM

"It was pointed out to me the other day that a large number of the casualties in the past few monthe - if not the majority - were non-violent muslims killing other non-violent muslims of a different sect. I'm still pondering on this."

This outcome was one of the main planks in the case against invasion long before the war started.
There were many other anti-war arguments put forward, all equally valid, but Blair and Bush chose to ignore them, making every one of us who gave Blair and Bush extended mandates complicit in the horrific body count.

Ponder on!!.............Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 09:40 PM

Wolfgang:

We did not read the report in the Lancet but we did read an interviewe with Les Roberts, one of the main researchers of the study in which he says:

"...this cluster survey approach, is the standard way of measuring mortality in very poor countries where the government isn't very functional or in times of war. And when UNICEF goes out and measures mortality in any developing country, this is what they do. When the U.S. government went at the end of the war in Kosovo or went at the end of the war in Afghanistan and the U.S. government measured the death rate, this is how they did it. And most ironically, the U.S. government has been spending millions of dollars per year, through something called the Smart Initiative, to train NGOs and UN workers to do cluster surveys to measure mortality in times of wars and disasters."


He went on to say:

"In Iraq, there is a huge difference in death rates between, for example, the Kurdish north, which is relatively safe, and the Sunni Triangle, where the death rates are extremely high. And what we did was we got a population estimate of every government, from the Iraqi government, and we randomly allocated these 50 clusters that we were to go visit proportional to the population in each of those governments, so that, if in the Kurdish north there is only 20% of the population living in the couple safest provinces, we would naturally end up with a sample that's 20% or so from that zone.

And then, once we had picked that we were going to visit two or three neighborhoods in a certain governance or province, we would then make a list of all the villages and towns and cities, and again randomly pick one of those to visit, so that big places had a larger chance of being visited than smaller places. And then, finally, when we got down to the village level or to the section of a city, we would pick a house at random, visit it and the other 39 houses closest to it to grab a cluster of 40 houses..."


On the other hand, Bush was quoted as saying, "the methodology is pretty well discredited..."

Onec again we must ask, "Who do you believe?"

Bev and Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 10:52 PM

Let me get this straight, If Bush had, instead of invading Iraq on false grounds, hhad the Special Forces round up 3,000 or 30,000 individual citizens, women and chiildren included, and had the Marines machine gun them to death, does he imagine this would have been an OK thing to do??? The nerve of this guy!!!!!!!

Jaysus wept.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Bev and Jerry
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 11:50 PM

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.

Bev and Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 06 - 11:54 PM

Someone brave ought to point out that there is NO evidence they are tolerating the violence, and that a good part of the violence is in fact the result of them NOT tolerating it.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures
From: ard mhacha
Date: 13 Oct 06 - 04:18 AM

General Sir Richard Dannatt the head of the British forces in Iraq has said that it is time to get out, the Generals impression of the present situation in Iraq was ine of a lost cause, among many criticisms of the invasion, he pointed out that there was no post war planning, also the present state of Muslim extremism in Britain was due to the unlawful occupation.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures - 2,660 civilians
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 13 Oct 06 - 08:35 AM

Shia leaders, including even radical cleric Muqtada al Sadr, are coming to believe their militias must be reined in if there is to be any chance of establishing a Shia-dominated regime in Iraq. Apparently they have begun to see that Shia death-squads have been radicalizing Sunni groups that were at least willing to acquiesce to Shia rule, thus feeding the violence in the country. How this will play with the more violent elements in the Shia militia remains to be seen. Even Sadr has reportedly been having trouble keeping control over the more hot-headed among his followers.

The basic problem is that, while there are still thousands of Sunni Arabs who believe they can use terrorist attacks to regain control of the country, the Kurds and Shia Arabs now have an overwhelming advantage in the firepower department. There is no terrorism to speak of in the northern Kurdish provinces. Kurdish border guards and police see to that. In most southern Shia Arab towns, it's the same. Strangers, especially if they look to be Sunni Arabs, are definitely not welcome down there. But in central Iraq, where Shia and Sunni Arabs live mixed together (with a few Kurds), it's easier for Sunni terrorists to get around. Well, it used to be easier. Now it's getting harder. More road blocks, and cops who are better at spotting terrorists, have brought down the number of terror attacks. Meanwhile, the Shia Arab death squads are increasing their operations. Death squads don't just kill, they also deliver letters to Sunni families living in Shia areas, telling the Sunnis to get out or die. As a result, there are fewer Sunni Arabs living among Shia. In the last three years, over a third of the Sunni Arab population has moved, either within Iraq, or fleeing the country altogether.

Many of the killers on the Shia death squads want all Sunni Arabs out of Iraq, dead or alive. It's largely a matter of revenge. For decades, Saddam had his own death squads working in Kurdish and Shia Arab areas. Over half a million were killed, and all of them had kin. There are plenty of avengers out there. There are three times as many Shia as there are Kurds, and for the Shia, the revenge is religion based (al Qaeda terrorists kill Shia partly for religious reasons), as well as political and personal. The violence in Iraq is all about power (the Sunni Arab minority thinks they can bully their way back in) and revenge (the Shia Arabs and Kurds want Sunni Arabs brought to justice, with or without a trial).

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures - 2,660 civilian
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Oct 06 - 09:04 AM

Lets see how many different threads Dave can post the same three paragraphs of surmise on....

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures - up to 900,000
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Oct 06 - 05:34 PM

"Iraq War Casualty Figures - 2,660 civilians" What's with the modified heading? "2,660" is even lower than Bush's made up estimate.

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures - 2,660 civilians
From: GUEST, Ebbie
Date: 13 Oct 06 - 07:10 PM

His remarkable insight into this kind of thing was previously displayed. Remember when he applauded as "uniquely American" a single-parent woman who told him that she was working three jobs?

Subject: RE: BS: Iraq War Casualty Figures - 2,660 civilians
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Oct 06 - 07:12 PM

Yeah, I was wondering about that. That isn't what I typed when I started this thread, and it makes it more than just a bit misleading to the casual browser. The John's Hopkins report said around 650,000 civilian casualties.

Surely Karl Rove doesn't have clone status! What's going on?

Don Firth