FULL TEXT: New Lancet Report, Iraq 2003-2006

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 13:19

Mortality rates in Governorates with fewer than three clusters were confirmed with 2004 survey data; estimates for provinces with fewer than three clusters that could not be confirmed are potentially uncertain due to the small sample size.

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 13:32

According to Woodward, insurgent attacks against coalition troops occur, on average, every 15 minutes, a shocking fact the administration has kept secret. “It’s getting to the point now where there are eight-, nine-hundred attacks a week. That’s more than 100 a day. That is four an hour attacking our forces,” says Woodward.

[....]

Woodward also reports that the president and vice president often meet with Henry Kissinger, who was President Richard Nixon’s secretary of state, as an adviser. Says Woodward, “Now what’s Kissinger’s advice? In Iraq, he declared very simply, ‘Victory is the only meaningful exit strategy.’” Woodward adds. “This is so fascinating. Kissinger’s fighting the Vietnam War again because, in his view, the problem in Vietnam was we lost our will.”

More info at:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/28/woodward-book/

the other 14 minutes

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 13:42

The same team from Johns Hopkins University worked with Iraqi doctors to visit over 1,800 homes in Iraq, selected randomly to make sure that no bias could creep in to their calculations.

They identified more than 12,000 family members and tracked those who had died over an interval that spanned both pre- and post-invasion periods. The Iraqi interviewers spoke fluent English as well as Arabic, and they were well trained to collect the information they were seeking. They asked permission from every family to use the data they wanted. And they chased down death certificates in over four out of five cases to make sure that they had a double check on the numbers and causes of death given to them by family members.

All of these checks and balances mean that the 650,000 additional Iraqi casualties they report since the invasion is the most reliable estimate we have of civilian deaths. Most of these deaths have been of men aged 15 to 44.

[....]

The total figure of 650,000 is truly staggering. It represents 2.5% of the entire Iraqi population. In 2004 The Lancet was criticised for publishing a number that seemed to have a high degree of uncertainty. The best estimate then was 98,000 deaths. But the uncertainty meant that it could have been as low as 8,000 or as high as 194,000.

In the latest study there is also a large degree of uncertainty, but even the lowest possible figure it gives for the number of deaths - 400,000 - makes clear just how terrible our intervention in Iraq has been. The highest possible figure is more than 900,000.

Richard Horton
the editor of the Lancet

more at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1919977,00.html

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 13:49

Gunshots emerged as the leading cause of death, accounting for 56 percent of the total. Airstrikes, car bombs and other explosions each accounted for 13 percent to 14 percent. Almost 60 percent of the deaths were among males 15 to 44.

[....]

"To put these numbers in context, deaths are occurring in Iraq now at a rate more than three times that from before the invasion of March 2003," he said.

[....]

The researchers reasserted their earlier call for an independent body to assess deaths and monitor compliance with the Geneva Conventions.

More at the Baltimore Sun....
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1011-06.htm

photo: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/061012/photos_...4cc7f

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 13:56

The number of US troops being wounded in Iraq is now at its highest level for two years as American forces are confronted by increasing sectarian violence and a continuing insurgency.

Figures released by the Pentagon show that 776 soldiers were wounded in action in Iraq last month.

The September figure represents the fourth largest casualty rate since the US and UK invasion in the spring of 2003 and the largest since November 2004 when US forces were involved in a major offensive to clear the city of Fallujah. Some experts believe the number of wounded provides a better insight to the nature of the conflict in Iraq than the figure of 2,700 killed because - in relation to previous wars - many more wounded troops survive.

The ratio of wounded to killed is 8 to 1, compared with 3 to 1 during the Vietnam War.

More at
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1009-05.htm

photo: http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/coffin_photos/dover/

This photo was banned until not too long ago

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 14:08

REPORTER: A group of American and Iraqi health officials today released a report saying that 655,000 Iraqis have died since the Iraq war. That figure is 20 times the figure that you cited in December, at 30,000. Do you care to amend or update your figure, and do you consider this a credible report?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I don't consider it a credible report. Neither does General Casey and neither do Iraqi officials. I do know that a lot of innocent people have died, and that troubles me and it grieves me. 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 -- that there's a level of violence that they tolerate.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/2006101....html

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 14:18

Nearly one in five soldiers leaving the military after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan has been at least partly disabled as a result of service, according to documents of the Department of Veterans Affairs obtained by a Washington research group.

The number of veterans granted disability compensation, more than 100,000 to date, suggests that taxpayers have only begun to pay the long-term financial cost of the two conflicts. About 567,000 of the 1.5 million American troops who have served so far have been discharged.

more at
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/washington/11veterans...c=rss

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 17:49

10. At least when we kill civilians, it is an accident. Saddam intentionally killed civilians.

9. No one could have predicted there would be civilian casualties.

8. We tried to come up with a plan to win this war without killing civilians, but obstructionist Democrats made it too hard.

7. How many innocent civilians did FDR and Truman kill? (Excuse used partially used with a reference to Nagasaki and Hiroshima.)

6. Why all the fuss? The Iraqi people can ‘tolerate’ a few dead. (Excuse actually used by Bush in his presser.)

5. Freedom isn’t Free. Freedom is messy.

4. Better to have collateral damage over there than to have it over here.

3. The terrorists don’t care if they kill innocent civilians.

2. Brian Ross and the media have known people are dying in Iraq for a long while. Why did they wait until right before an election to tell us? (Excuse actually used here at Red State)

1. Epidemiologists?!? What the hell do skin doctors know about waging war?

more info (and with important links) at
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=7448

by redjade Thu Oct 12, 2006 18:40

The Washington Post
put the story on Page 12

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20....html

by redjade Fri Oct 13, 2006 00:21

redjade note: sorry for ALL-CAPS, but it is exactly as posted at DailyKos.com - there is a growing rage in america that gains strength every day as the november elections approach.... perhaps nothing that electronic voting cannot fix.

TO THINK THAT WE TRUSTED THESE DISGUSTING NO GOOD
LEADERS TO TAKE OUR KIDS TO SOME FAR AWAY LAND
WITHOUT THE PROPER EQUIPMENT AND TOOLS DISGUSTS
US BOTH.

BUSH AND HIS GANG OF THIEVES HAVE DECIEVED US
AND SENT OUR TROOPS INTO A WAR WE COULD NEVER
WIN. IT HAS FINALLY TAKEN HIS FATHER'S SECRETARY
OF STATE TO TELL LITTLE GEORGE THAT THIS WAR
IS UNWINNABLE.

STAY THE COURSE...STAY THE COURSE...LETS KEEP TRYING
TO DO THE SAME THINGS WITH THE SAME MISTAKES...
FUKC YOU GEORE BUSH...I GAVE YOU MY SON'S LIFE
AND HIS RIGHT LEG...YOU DESERVE NO MORE KIDS TO
GET GROUND UP IN YOUR PERSONAL WAR...
FOR THAT WE MUST TAKE BACK THIS COUNTRY...
IT IS OUR MISSION...IT IS OUR FIGHT...AND IT
IS OUR GOAL...AND WE WILL NEVER EVER LET ANYONE
LIKE YOU TAKE IT FROM US AGAIN...GOD BLESS AMERICA.

more at
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/12/153643/63

by redjade Sat Oct 14, 2006 15:26

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, I’m sure you have heard by now the responses of President Bush and military leaders about this. What is your response to their saying that this is not credible?

LES ROBERTS: You know, I don't want to sort of stoop to that level and start saying general slurs, but I just want to say that what we did, 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.

So, I think we used a very standard method. I think our results are couched appropriately in the relative imprecision of [inaudible]. It could conceivably be as few as 400,000 deaths. So we’re upfront about that. We don’t know the exact number. We just know the range, and we’re very, very confident about both the method and the results.

[....]

AMY GOODMAN: Les Roberts, there are some, like a very much quoted analyst, Anthony Cordesman, who are saying this is just a matter of politics. You released this study right before the election. This isn’t science. It’s politics.

LES ROBERTS: Well, if I’m not mistaken, Anthony Cordesman was formerly a Pentagon official, and, you know, I think he probably has a political lens in what he says. But this study has been underway for most of a year, in terms of organizing and getting it all together. It was done in June through July. It took some time to get the data out of Iraq, because of the logistical troubles of moving people in and out. We analyzed it carefully. We submitted it to The Lancet quite a while ago, and The Lancet had control over when this came out.

And I think this is just a lose-lose situation. You know, if this had come out two weeks ago, people would be saying the same thing. If this came out in the months after or the two months after the next election, people in Iraq would see this as very political in timing. So, you know, any time within a several month window here, we were going to get this accusation, and I just think it’s bunk.

more at
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/12/145222

by redjade Mon Oct 16, 2006 20:38

redjade note: I missed this quote but was alerted to it from this artcle: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressin...55073 - it is a very simple and clear challenge to the mainstream media to either put up the evidence that The Lancet is wrong or tell the truth, no matter how uncomfortable it is.

LES ROBERTS: And more importantly, is it true? It is easy -- it’s going to be very easy for a couple of reporters to go out and verify our findings, because what we’ve said is the death rate is four times higher. And a reporter will only have to go to four or five different villages, go visit the person who takes care of the graveyard and say, “Back in 2002, before the war, how many bodies typically came in here per week? And now, how many bodies come in here?” And actually, most graveyard attendants keep records. And if the number is four times higher, on average, you’ll know we’re right. If the numbers are the same, you’ll know we’re wrong. It is going to be very easy for people to verify this and get all of this talk about whether it’s political out of the way, because the fundamental issue is, a certain number of Iraqis have died, and if our leaders are saying it’s ten times lower than it really is, we are driving a wedge between us and the Middle East.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/12/145222

'Everybody knows the boat is sinking, everybody knows the captain lied' - Leonard Cohen

by redjade Thu Oct 19, 2006 15:45

The women and children who formed a line at [Marine Corps Base] Camp Pendleton last week could have been waiting for a child-care center to open or Disney on Ice tickets to go on sale.

Instead, they were waiting for day-old bread and frozen dinners packaged in slightly damaged boxes. These families are among a growing number of military households in San Diego County that regularly rely on donated food.

[....]

“Here they are defending the country. . . . It is heartbreaking to see,” said Hunter, manager of the on-base Abby Reinke Community Center. “If we could find more sources of food, we would open the program up to more people. We believe anyone who stands in a line for food needs it and deserves it.”

[....]

At least 2,000 financially strapped people in North County qualify for food and other items given out at the center and a Camp Pendleton warehouse run by the Military Outreach Ministry.

[....]

Also present were food-line veterans trying to make ends meet. Michelle Rankins counts herself as a reluctant regular.

“I do this for the kids,” said Rankins, whose husband is a corporal deployed in Iraq. “They need the protein from the bread. For me and my family – for a lot of the families at Camp Pendleton – this (program) is a necessity. I come every week.”

more at
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20061013/news_7....html

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Pendleton

kind of like 'Bread Not Bombs', but not

by Shipsea Thu Oct 19, 2006 18:17

It 's upsetting to see the naked contempt with which US soldiers are really regarded - that their families are reduced to this while they risk or lose their lives to secure billions of dollars worth of profit for the US oil baron 'government'. How long will Americans tolerate this?

More interesting discussion on the Media Lens website of the media reception to the Lancet figures - you have to register to be able to use it but it doesnt cost anything. Register and go to the 'Messageboard' to view:

http://www.medialens.org/

by redjade Sat Oct 21, 2006 22:16

34,000 The number of Iraqi physicians registered before the 2003 war.

18,000 The estimated number of Iraqi physicians who have left since the 2003 invasion.

2,000 The estimated number of Iraqi physicians murdered since 2003.

250 The number of Iraqi physicians kidnapped.

34 The number of reconstructive surgeons in Iraq before the 2003 invasion.

20 The number who have either been murdered of fled. 72 per cent of Iraqis needing reconstructive surgery are suffering from gunshot or blast wounds.

164 The number of nurses murdered - 77 wounded.

Medact also said "easily treatable conditions such as diarrhoea and respiratory illness caused 70 per cent of all child deaths", and that " of the 180 health clinics the US hoped to build by the end of 2005, only four have been completed and none opened".

More at
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article...2.ece


also see: http://www.medact.org/

by redjade Sun Oct 22, 2006 23:56

'Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's office has instructed the country's health ministry to stop providing mortality figures to the United Nations, jeopardizing a key source of information on the number of civilian war dead in Iraq, according to a U.N. document.'

more at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20....html

by redjade Mon Oct 23, 2006 06:58

1. British out now. This is possible, but as the events in Amara on Friday show, will be attended by instability.

2. US and Coalition troops out now: ' "We could pull out now and leave them to their fate," a [British] Foreign Office official said. "But the place could implode." '

3. Phased withdrawal. (Can be easily derailed by events.)

4. Talk to Iran and Syria.

5. Remove Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in favor of a strongman. (Iyad Allawi, the CIA asset and former Baathist thug has been mentioned.)

6. Break-up of Iraq

7. A US retreat to super-bases.

8. One last push.

more at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1928058,00.html

Juan Cole comments....
'The most promising thing on the list is talking to Syria and Iran, but apparently even that would be done not by the US but indirectly. I'm not sure indirect contacts are enough. I'm sorry that a continuous and inexorable phased withdrawal of US troops is not on the list. It could be done by making a rule that once the US force level falls to level X, it cannot again exceed that number no matter what. Otherwise, I don't see anything on this list that will help the situation much less resolve it. No. 8, "one last push" is the stupidest and most dangerous tactic of all.'

http://www.juancole.com/2006/10/break-up-of-iraq-threat....html

by redjade - 655k dead is, like, sooooooo yesterday Tue Oct 24, 2006 16:09

The Bush way of war
Sidney Blumenthal

The former United States president, George HW Bush, waged a secret campaign over several months early in 2006 to remove secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld. The elder Bush went so far as to recruit Rumsfeld's potential replacement, personally asking a retired four-star general if he would accept the position, a reliable source close to the general told me. But the former president's effort failed, apparently rebuffed by the current president.

When seven retired generals who had been commanders in Iraq demanded Rumsfeld’s resignation in April, the younger Bush leapt to his defence. "I'm the decider and I decide what's best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain", he said. His endorsement of Rumsfeld was a rebuke not only to the generals but also to his father.

The elder Bush's intervention was an extraordinary attempt to rescue simultaneously his son, the family legacy and the country. The current president had previously rejected entreaties from party establishment figures to revamp his administration with new appointments. There was no one left to approach him except his father.

read more at
http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy/bush_war_3641.jsp

——————

Oedipus complex
'....defined as a male child's unconscious desire for the exclusive love of his mother. This desire includes jealousy towards the father and the unconscious wish for that parent's death....'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex

by R. Isible Wed Oct 25, 2006 03:54

Oct 17th: Nature publishes an opinion piece saying the Lancet report holds up
http://www.nature.com/news/2006/061016/full/443728a.html

Oct 20th: U. of London statisticians say Lancet report suffers from a bias in only considering main streets and that Science (journal of the AAAS and rival of Nature) journalist will be publishing on this:

by redjade Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:08

redjade note: Thanks R. Isible, yeah, the only serious criticisms that I can find of the study are that it doesn't include other potential deaths. For example there are hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees in Syria, Jordan and Iran - they didn't leave Iraq because they were not threatened or did not have family members killed. But Lancet didn't or couldn't interview them for the study.


Iraq and Your Wallet
By Nicholas D. Kristof
October 24, 2006
New York Times


....now several careful studies have attempted to tote up various costs, and they suggest that the tab will be more than $1 trillion -- perhaps more than $2 trillion. The higher sum would amount to $6,600 per American man, woman and child.

"The total costs of the war, including the budgetary, social and macroeconomic costs, are likely to exceed $2 trillion," Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel-winning economist at Columbia
[....]

Of course, many of the costs are hidden and haven't even been spent yet. For example, more than 3,000 American veterans have suffered severe head injuries in Iraq, and the U.S. government will have to pay for round-the-clock care for many of them for decades. The cost ranges from $600,000 to $5 million per person.

Then there are disability payments that will continue for a half-century. Among veterans of the first gulf war -- in which ground combat lasted only 100 hours -- 40 percent ended up receiving disability payments, still costing us $2 billion each year. We don't know how many of today's veterans will claim such benefits, but in the first quarter of this year more people sought care through the Department of Veterans Affairs than the Bush administration had budgeted for the entire year.

[....]

The bottom line is that not only have we squandered 2,800 American lives and considerable American prestige in Iraq, but we're also paying $18,000 per household to do so.

Full text at
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iraq/browse_...b954/

by redjade Mon Oct 30, 2006 19:54

'....a first-of-its-kind event, a sizable number of Iraqi bloggers sat down together and discussed the recent Lancet study, which states that more than 650,000 Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S. invasion and its ensuing chaos....'

Iraqi Bloggers Discuss Lancet Study
http://ejectiraqikkk.blogspot.com/2006/10/iraqi-blogger....html

Blog: Iraqi Konfused Kid

by redjade Wed Nov 01, 2006 15:30

New York Times
WASHINGTON, Oct. 30 -- A classified briefing prepared two weeks ago by the United States Central Command portrays Iraq as edging toward chaos, in a chart that the military is using as a barometer of civil conflict.

A one-page slide shown at the Oct. 18 briefing provides a rare glimpse into how the military command that oversees the war is trying to track its trajectory, particularly in terms of sectarian fighting.

The slide includes a color-coded bar chart that is used to illustrate an "Index of Civil Conflict." It shows a sharp escalation in sectarian violence since the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra in February, and tracks a further worsening this month despite a concerted American push to tamp down the violence in Baghdad.

In fashioning the index, the military is weighing factors like the ineffectual Iraqi police and the dwindling influence of moderate religious and political figures, rather than more traditional military measures such as the enemy's fighting strength and the control of territory.

Full Article at
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/world/middleeast/01mi...c=rss
and also archived at
http://groups.google.com/group/miscrandometc/browse_thr...0ee35

Click Image to see it full sized

by redjade Wed Mar 28, 2007 21:59

....the Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser said the survey's methods were "close to best practice" and the study design was "robust".

Another expert agreed the method was "tried and tested".

[....]

...a memo by the MoD's Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir Roy Anderson, on 13 October, states: "The study design is robust and employs methods that are regarded as close to "best practice" in this area, given the difficulties of data collection and verification in the present circumstances in Iraq."

[....]

If the Lancet survey is right, then 2.5% of the Iraqi population - an average of more than 500 people a day - have been killed since the start of the war.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6495753.stm

by redjade Sat Apr 21, 2007 16:19

An Iraqi scientist who co-authored the famous Lancet study excess civilian deaths following the invasion of Iraq was denied a visa to come to the United States to collaborate with colleagues, as well as a temporary transit visa through Britain in order to speak in Canada.

Dr. Riyadh Lafta and his colleagues had been working for months to get a visa for Lafta to give a talk at the University of Washington. The U.S. refused to grant him the visa. Some of Lafta's Canadian colleagues arranged for him to speak at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, B.C., with a simulcast to Seattle. Unfortunately, the British government thwarted that plan....

read the rest at
http://majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/2007/04/iraqi....html

redjade note: Dr. Riyadh Lafta and his colleagues made the mistake of studying the wrong terrorists - if they recieved a research grant from the American Enterprise Institute on Al-Qaeda's Iranian sponsorship, a Visa would have been rubber stamped.

In academia they say 'Publish or Perish' - obviously the Neo-Cons would be happy to send Dr. Riyadh Lafta home to do the latter.

by Aragon Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:18

True Iraq numbers

"Susan Welles's pseudo-scholarship (Letters, 16 July) is typical of those who claim to oppose the war in Iraq while playing a semantic game that minimises the horrific human carnage caused by the Anglo-American invasion. Arguing that "Pilger was wrong to say of [the Lancet] study that British government scientists secretly praised it as 'tried and tested' and an 'underestimation of mortality'", she claims that "the government scientists were referring to the type of methodology utilised . . . not to the results of its application in Iraq".

In a memo dated 13 October 2006, the Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser, Sir Roy Anderson, wrote: "The [Lancet] study design is robust and employs methods that are regarded as close to 'best practice' in this area, given the difficulties of data collection and verification in the present circumstances in Iraq." This praises the methodology as applied to Iraq, not merely in general terms, and which produced a finding that 655,000 Iraqis had been killed. When these observations and those of other experts were sent to Downing Street, the response was panic.

John Pilger
London SW4"

Link: http://www.newstatesman.com/letters

by Aragon Fri Jul 20, 2007 15:38

Letter sent by Dr Gideon Polya to the Guardian following two recent article one of which relied on the the grossly underestimated IBC mortality figures for Iraq of 70K deaths and the other of which was an attack on Cindy Sheehan - anti-war campaigner and mother of a soldier killed in Iraq.

"Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to protest (A) a GROSS under-estimate by the UK Guardian of post-invasion Iraqi excess deaths and the cost of the Iraq War (B) clear evidence of sustained CENSORSHIP by Guardian Comment is Free of people trying to tell the truth about the actual shocking cost of the Bush War on Terror. A highly published scientific researcher over 4 decades, after 3 years of intensive research I have published a book on the matter entitled “Body count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950 (G.M. Polya. Melbourne, 2007: http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com/ ) and accordingly have some credentials for informed comment.

(A) Cost of the War

The Guardian (13 July 2007) (see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2125601,00.html...ed=12 ) stated: “A 25-page administration report was issued in the fifth year of the war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,600 US troops and is costing US taxpayers an estimated $10bn (£5bn) a month. There have also been around 70,000 Iraqi civilian deaths as a result of the military action by the US and its allies, according to the Iraq Body Count website.”

This is palpably false on 2 counts and I refer you to a recent article entitled “The Cost of War” (9 March 2007; see:: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/13099/26/ ) in the highly ethical, humanitarian, Canada-based MWC News which quotes top expert advice of an accrual cost of the War on Terror of $2.5 trillion and 1 million post-invasion excess deaths in Occupied Iraq.

Thus it states: “A recent article in the highly respected humanitarian UK journal The New Statesman quoted an estimate of the accrual cost (i.e. the long-term committed cost) of the Bush War on Terror at $2.5 TRILLION – and the estimate came from 2001 Economics Nobel Laureate US Professor Stiglitz (Columbia) and Professor Linda Bilmes (Harvard)”

AND
“As of March 2007, after 4 years of war, the post-invasion Iraqi excess deaths (avoidable deaths, deaths that did not have to happen) now total ONE MILLION as estimated from data from a top US medical epidemiology group in the World’s top Public Health School (the Nobel Laureate-containing Bloomberg School of Public Health) at the top US Johns Hopkins University, published peer-reviewed in the top UK medical journal The Lancet and endorsed by 27 top Australian medical experts.
The latest 2006 Johns Hopkins data ( indicating 13.3 deaths annually per 1,000 people and an annual Iraqi pre-invasion death rate of 5.5 deaths per 1,000) yields an annual excess death rate of 7.8 per 1,000 i.e. 7,800 per million. Assuming an average population of 27 million this yields post-invasion excess deaths = 7,800 x 27 x 4 = 842,000 i.e. 0.8 million.

However taking the 2006 Johns Hopkins data but using a Jordan/Syria comparative baseline of 4 deaths per 1,000 per year (as opposed to a baseline of 5.5 deaths per 1,000 per year for pre-invasion Iraq after 12 years of crippling Sanctions) gives an annual excess death rate of 9.3 per 1,000 i.e. 9,300 per million and post-invasion excess deaths totalling 9,300 x 27 x 4 = 1,004,400 i.e. 1.0 million as of March 2007.”

Using the same assumptions it can be estimated that the post-invasion excess deaths in Iraq as of July 2007 (4 months on from the 4th anniversary of the invasion) now total 1,004.400 x 52/48 = 1,088,100 = 1.1 million.

(B) Holocaust-denying secret censorship on Guardian Comment is Free

The Guardian’s Comment is Free has gone one stage further, compounding the Guardian’s holocaust-ignoring and holocaust-minimizing by repeatedly SECRETLY CENSORING those trying to alert their fellow citizens of the world to the carnage in the Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories.

Thus a recent quite DISGUSTING article on the Guardian Comment is Free attacked bereaved mother and anti-war campaigner CINDY SHEEHAN (see: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/niall_stanage/2007/....html ) . Many commentators were just as disgusted with the article and the Guardian as I was. However repeated attempts to post the following sensible, humanitarian comment were unsuccessful and I have discovered that past comments about the carnage in the Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories that slipped through the Guardian Wall of Silence have been subsequently deleted. This is the comment that the Guardian Comment is Free repeatedly and secretly blocked:

“What an utterly disgusting article. Cindy Sheehan no doubt has deficiencies like the rest of us but is motivated by (a) the death of her son (b) the evil carnage of war. This revolting and callous article obfuscates both issues.

From UN Population Division and the latest medical literature data it can be estimated that the post-invasion excess deaths (avoidable deaths, deaths that did not have to happen) in the Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories now (as of March 2007) total 1.0 million and 2.4 million, respectively and the post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 0.5 million and 1.9 million, respectively (90% avoidable and due to gross US, UK and White Australian Occupier violation of Articles 38, 55 and 56 the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Civilian Persons in Time of War: http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/y4gcpcp.htm )(for details and documentation see “The Cost of War”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/13099/26/ and “Body Count”: http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com/ ).

Whatever her deficiencies Cindy Sheehan is a decent American who like all decent people around the world believes in the great words of the American Declaration of Independence: "All men are created equal and have an unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" - rights grossly violated by UK-US State Terrorism and its supporters and apologists.”

(C) Conclusions

Sensible, decent, anti-racists and humanitarians KNOW what they are getting when they read the typically extreme right-wing, racist, holocaust-ignoring Anglo-American Mainstream media. The Guardian’s continuing crime – well illustrated by these examples - is that it does the same kind of dishonest reporting while PRETENDING to have a humanitarian position. The Guardian is really the media equivalent of Tony Blair – pretending high principle while ignoring or minimizing horrendous atrocities by Anglo-American ”democratic imperialism” (democratic tyranny, democratic Nazism).

A conservative, professional English friend of mine coined the neologism “slie” (spin-based untruth and hence “slying sliars slie by telling slies”). I extended this to “blie” (oh-so-English blather-based untruth and hence “blying bliars blie by telling blies”). The Guardian is doing BOTH.

In 1945 the ex-Nazi Germans adopted a protocol that can be summarized by the acronym C4A (CAAAA) (e.g. see my Australian nation-wide broadcast on the subject, “Australian complicity in Iraq mass mortality” now being published in a book by Australia’s prestigious, publicly-owned ABC radio, TV and on-line media network: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s144596...0.htm ). C4A involved Cessation of the killing, Acknowledgement of the carnage, Apology, Amends and Assertion of “never again”.

Thanks to the reprehensible secret policies of ostensibly “liberal” media such as the Guardian, the UK has not even got to the C ( “Cessation”) in relation to its involvement in the Bush-Blair War on Terror that is in horrible reality a cowardly, racist, Anglo-American War on Women and Children (who represent most of the victims) and, more specifically, a War on Arab Women and Children, a War on Muslim Women and Children, a War on Asian Women and Children, a War on South Asian Women and Children and a War on Non-European Women and Children. One can understand why it took 150 years for Britain to finally Apologize for the Irish Famine (1 million dead, 1.5 million exiled refugees as compared to Iraq’s 1.0 million post-invasion excess deaths and 4 million refugees) and why it is STILL continuing the same vile, racist carnage around the world today.

My hero is the late Professor Jan Karski, a Polish war hero who resolutely attempted to tell a disbelieving world about the horror of the Jewish Holocaust as it was happening. Peace is the only way but silence kills and silence is complicity – we are obliged to inform others about horrendous abuses of humanity and major risks to humanity. I am inviting all pro-peace, anti-racist humanitarians to publish this letter around the world in the interests of humanity.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Gideon Polya.
Melbourne, Australia"

by redjade Tue May 06, 2008 13:20

Study: Iraqis May Experience Sadness When Friends, Relatives Die

CHAPEL HILL, NC—A field study released Monday by the University of North Carolina School of Public Health suggests that Iraqi citizens experience sadness and a sense of loss when relatives, spouses, and even friends perish, emotions that have until recently been identified almost exclusively with Westerners.

"We were struck by how an Iraqi reacts to the sight of the bloody or decapitated corpse of a family member in a not unlike an American, or at the very least a Canadian, would," said Dr. Jonathan Pryztal, chief author of the study. "In addition to the rage, bloodlust, and hatred we already know to dominate the Iraqi emotional spectrum, it appears that they may have some capacity, however limited, for sadness."

more dark sarcasm at...
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/64237