From Michael Fumento, writing for the Scripps-Howard News Service (with thanks to Jeffrey Imm), some important information about the propaganda jihad:
The Bush campaign survived three October Surprise attacks from abroad. The alleged missing munitions allegation has deservedly died, and The Osama bin Laden Show probably actually helped the President. But the third attack, malicious and false though it be, may survive to be used by both Iraqi rebels and war opponents. That's the report in the British medical journal The Lancet claiming the U.S. has killed 100,000 Iraqi civilians since the invasion.To come up with that figure, lead author Les Roberts of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore and fellow researchers sent Iraqis to interview 998 families in 33 neighborhoods across the country. They asked how many people in each household had died and of what, then extrapolated to Iraq as a whole. Thence the 100,000 figure, which they said came mostly from airstrikes and insisted was "conservative." But try "worthless."
Consider just this: Because the sample size was so small, the range for deaths was wider than Mick Jagger's mouth: 8,000 to 194,000. So Roberts and company just split the difference. They said the tiny sample size was necessary because the interviewers were in constant danger. No doubt they meant being caught in the crosshairs of an F-16, rather than any possible threat from those jolly terrorists who routinely kidnap civilians and slowly saw off their heads.
Further, the researchers didn't feel bound by anything official like death certificates. Interviews were fine. "In the Iraqi culture it was unlikely for respondents to fabricate deaths," they wrote.
Such faith in the honesty of Iraqis is touching. But these are the people who gave us "Baghdad Bob" and are quoted daily saying U.S. airstrikes killed only innocents. It's as if we had developed a chip that makes our weapons zero in on civilians.
Read it all.
'extrapolated to Iraq as a whole.'
Eeeeeyeah.
Some dusty little town in the far eastern part of the country probably got counted for more people than live in it, in such an extrapolation. I wonder if the people in that town have even so much as heard an American jet in the distance...
Just woke up again, sorry...
Western. Not awake.
A Warning to all JWers
I'm astonished that, after all this time, my fellow JWers are still so susceptible to taqiyya and kitman. Anyone even CONSIDERING engaging the "hatshepsut" troll when it appears today should go back and read all of the threads from Nov. 6 & 7 JW articles and examine some of the egregious comments it made.
Now you are being targeted as potential da'wa subjects (Nov. 8 "Holland: mosques . . ." comments thread), and yet you simply accept the goodwill of this troll at face value. I recommend that you first examine its now-discredited comments on other threads (specifically the observations made by JTF), Spencer's warnings against addressing it or answering it in any way, and remember the familiar patterns exhibited by other muslim trolls. First they will "clear up our misconceptions", and if they fail to accomplish that, they finally resort to threats about eternal hellfire if they don't manage to cut off our heads first.
This troll has tried to hijack multiple threads on this site for its own agenda over the course of three days. It has been unmasked, and is a poser, [not what it claims to be, especially by way of profession and probably claiming convert status falsely as we see here frequently - some sort of da'wa tool; remember the "converts" who suddenly "saw the light" after September 11?] as most of them usually are. Please don't allow that to keep happening. You all know how to deal with muslim trolls. You should know the drill by now.
Lancet editor Richard Horton:
"Democratic imperialism has led to more deaths not fewer," in Iraq, and that he proclaimed coalition efforts "a failure."
Surely such impartiality can be relied upon.
That garbage reminds me of the work of a certain Johns Hopkins professor of emergency medicine who has repeatedly authored ridiculous "studies" regarding "gun violence." The fact that these works of fiction are published by the Journal of the American Medical Association is taken as some sort of "proof" of their accuracy. To those who actually have a background in social science research, however, the fact that they appear in JAMA instead of a social science journal immediately raises a red flag.
OT but important -
Last Wednesday while being inteviewed on BBC2's 'Newsnight', influential political writer Christopher Hitchens used the word 'Islamofascistic'.
First time I've heard 'Islamofascism' described as such on TV.
An important barrier has been broken.
We must do all we can to make sure words such as Islamofascist and dhimmi become as common in the mainstream media as they already are on the net.
By such small victories does awareness spread and grow.
Benelux-
I'm not suprised Chris Hitchens would be one to broach this term on TV - he has been one of the most articulate defenders of Operation Iraqi Freedom around. This, in my opinion, is his chef d'oeuvre on Iraq ("Fallujah", April 2004):
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004903
Not having at hand "How to Lie with Statistics," nor having the journal in question, one simply wishes to note that in its April 13 issue, The Lancet published an absurd anti-Israel piece, that was quickly noted and demolished. But they do not give up -- or someone high up in The Lancet is not giving up.
Will someone well-versed in numbers, and statistics, and sampling (for obvious reasons one would not recommend the Zogby Poll -- there's just something about their results, and the kinds of questions they ask -- don't you think?), please puncture this viciously anti-American furuncle, lance this boil, boil this Lancet.
Wouldn’t there be some kind of evidence to support there bad math?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3962969.stm
Civilian toll estimates at 10/04
Iraq Body Count: 14-16,000
Brookings Inst: 10-27,000
UK foreign secretary: >10,000
People's Kifah >37,000
Lancet: >100,000
Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq
14,284 Min 16,419 Max
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
Hugh:
Will someone well-versed in numbers, and statistics, and sampling (for obvious reasons one would not recommend the Zogby Poll -- there's just something about their results, and the kinds of questions they ask -- don't you think?), please puncture this viciously anti-American furuncle, lance this boil, boil this Lancet.
I would, but I don't have access to any academic databases at my current location (a warehouse at a former Air Force base in Louisiana). I'm lucky I have working e-mail here.
If someone can dig up the article in question and send it to me, I'd be happy to take a look at it.
From the description, it sounds like the most obvious flaw is the lack of anything approaching a scientific sample. It sounds like they went to a few neighborhods and set up a table with a sign inviting people to come and tell their tales of woe at the hands of the evil Crusaders.
The lack of independent verification of their claims is also troublesome, to put it mildly. I'm afraid I don't share the authors' belief that Iraqis wouldn't lie to them.
Having looked at the Fumento article a little more closely, I see that it has a link to a PDF copy of the Lancet study. I'll take a look at it this evening and see what I can come up with.
Question an article printed in the great Lancet. O my, how can this be? The higly accurate extrapolation is the result of a thouroghly exhaustive statistical analysis, don't you know. All bias in the report has been eliminated using mutually exclusive sampling techniques carried out by this top notch team of crack researchers. Spledidly compiled including the use of visual charts and graphs. Well done students.
All kidding aside for the moment, what is the purpose of this data? What is the final summation, the "bottom line" for number of 100,000?
The liberal left has a thing for milestone numbers. They gleefully reported the US soldiers deaths in Iraq when the number was 1000. Could'nt wait for the big 1 0 0 0. Similiary, they could'nt print a measly 99,999 why that would make their study seem somewhat unimportant. No, the number must be big, big like the egos of the researchers. Big like the hatred they have for G.W. Bush and the majority of the world.
Thanks, Mike - good article.
I read elsewhere that some of his former friends have rounded on him for his pro-Bush stance.
It looks like Michael Fumento has not read the Lancet study on deaths in Iraq that he is criticising. He claims that the researchers did not check death certificates when in fact they did. Furthermore, he attempts to discredit the estimate of the pre-war Iraqi death rate by comparing it with the United States. But neighbouring Syria has a lower death rate than the pre-war rate that the study found. The US only has a higher rate because it has more elderly people. More details here and here.
The left lost the election. It's over but they still can't help themselves. This left wing propaganda is now so predicable and transparent. Why bother writing it, no one cares except some other idiot anti-bush asswipe. They should have been more environmentally conscience and saved some trees by not printing this ridiculous unverifiable and unscientific survey. This would have been the best real contributuion these liberal naysayers could have made.This false report cannot be substantiated or repeated, therefore it's unscientific and invaild. A fictional piece of literature based on inaccuate data and biased reporting. It's nothing more than anti-war anti-republican fingerpointing than does absolutely nothing to prevent any further casualties. It's so amaturish it should have been printed in the comic section of the newspaper and not in a medical publication. What a joke.
as a person who was against the iraq war from the get go i also believe the 100,000 figure is BS! my own feelings are the number is more in the 10,000-20,000 range. the only way i think the 100,000 number might be accurate is if it included people who have died of disease especially in some of the poorer neighborhoods and sadr city where there is very bad garbage and running sewage problem but even then the 100,000 number just seems a bit high. what shocked me though was my fellow members in the liberal scene started qouting that 100,000 figure like the gospel in tons of op-eds and messege board disscusions...
OT, but:
Ashcroft just tendered his resignation.
I'm sure kj is knocking back a latte in celebration as I write this. However let it be known that a Lot of conservative thinkers out there were not entirely pleased with Ashcroft in the first place- because he wasn't doing enough.
'We Need a War Cabinet'
http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200411090750.asp
hopefully bush will make good on his "uniter not a devider" crap and appoint someone that liberals and theocons can embrace
Ashcroft was a little passive but effective in helping the fight against islams warpigs. Let's hope his replacement will be even more vigilant and aggresive. Liberals are the dividers, they don't want any unity, they are an impediment to sound thinking. Just do your liberal thing, have fun, get high, have fun sex, be creative, whatever you think makes you better than anyone else etc etc etc go ahead and do it. But, no you don't get free gov't stuff by taxing everyone else,no you don't have any moral or some enlightened way of looking at the world, no you are not more environmental than anyone else, liberals are the biggest hypocrits around. Liberals unwittingly help the terrorists. Do whatever you want but keep your stupid noses out of politics. Democrats and liberals are now the party of opposition. Why waste time trying to "unite" with them when all they do is whine and complain and be sore losers.
Wow, I've really got a bug up my ass now don't I. I do have a little smile on my face though. haha
Anyone else experiencing strange change in type size when you scroll down the page?
wow you dont get high,have sex,and be creative? man your life must be pretty worthless then.
Did'nt say I did'nt and I do. Riboflavin, I like you as a fellow JW and will contine to be united with you in the common goal of this noble cause which is to stamp out the big lie of isalm.
Breifly, I will explain my view on liberals.
Liberals want to get laws passed that would allow them to practice any type of deviant behavior they want to while thumbing their nose at everyone else.
Now here's the real hooker in the deal. They expect all the people that they are thumbing their noses at to PAY for it all!
Liberals are by and large younger and have'nt lived long enough to see how devoid of long term societal stabilty this political philosophy is. Mark my words, liberalism will continue to grow smaller not larger. It's a non-productive, defensive mindset. Hence your reply to me.
I'm cool and harbor no grudges.
Thx
Carolyn2,
It's working great for me, no changes in type.
Found this heinous rubbish,...looks like a site for Tarwid e jihad still being built...moderator konw anyone who can close it???
http://hackjaponaise.cosm.co.jp/terror/qjr/index.html
Check out www.neildoyle.com ..riveting site and an impressive bloke..
Excuse me for being so blatantly off topic.
As a graduate student finishing up the last few weeks of my doctoral studies in the life sciences, I would have a hard time trusting at face value the analysis of the cited source since he has no stated credentials in a scientific discipline, statistical or otherwise. His website only says he has a law degree but it doesn't mention what discipline his undergraduate degree was earned in.
I'm honestly not a big student of epidemiological statistics so I can't say that his analysis is wrong, but I would exercise a great deal of caution in citing this. I'll have to read the Lancet article to see what the real deal is.
Hoping someone can help me out here...
I agree that the 100,000 figure is a load of crap. However, does anyone know where we can find the "real" numbers?
Specifically:
- How many Iraqis have died since the start of Op Iraqi Freedom?
- Of these, how many have been killed by Coalition Forces, as opposed to "insurgents" (i.e. terrorists)?
- Of these (killed by the good guys), how many were bad guys, and how many were innocents?
I'm sure that when you break it down, the number of innocent people killed by Coalition Forces is quite small, but I'd love to have the stats to back up this point when talking to my misguided (liberal) friends.
I remember the claims of all the children
that died from sanction on Iraq,but shortly after the invasion a foreign(foreign to Iraq) Doctor
finally came forward and told the media that he was allowed to work in Iraq only if he kept quiet about the dead children that were held in hospital coolers,these kids were paraded out as propaganda for the Western media and no doubt if you viewed all the photos the same kids will appear in them dressed in different clothes.
I didn't here much about it in the local news but I did report to the authorities that a immigrant welcoming centre had anti-USA literature in the window stating that America was responsible for over 500,000 child deaths in Iraq from sanctions. This promotion of hate was forced to be taken down once the truth came out and a charity based group was engaging in political
activity.
The Palestinians pad the death numbers by including the militants dressed as civilians and any deaths by suicide bombers in Israel if they happen to be on the bus or in the Cafe.
Children shot by Hamas as martyrs and even female militia get included,the numbers game is so flawed the only truth is that it's misleading.
Lancet was used for political purposes,
whatever the figure is for Iraqi dead.
Or rather, Lancet used itself, and loses
credibility thereby.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1096433,00410008.htm
Islimic fundamentalism in Sri Lanka.
More comments on statistics:
Anyone here remember a few years ago "one million children missing a year"? This lasted 4 or 5 years. Based on demographics, even including teenaged runaways and children taken by noncustodial parents, this doesn't pass the "Does this make sense" test.
Years ago, I took a required General Statistics course. Part way through the course, I made the observation that "37% of all statistics are made up on the spot". About a third - the slow third - of the class looked thoughtful, nodded and said that sounds about right.
Hi. First of all I'll like to thank Mr Spencer and Hugh for doing such a wonderful job with this site. The knowledge herein is ammo in the fight to convert passive westerners to what is happening within their world. I say convert passive westerners because I don't have any success in explaining my point of view to muslim friends anymore. I have for example two very good Iranian friends who came over as refugees in 1979. One of them has 2 children to whom he even gave western sounding names. While to this intelligent kind individual I can patiently explain in respectful terms some well thought out point I will subsequently hear that 911 was caused by, or allowed to happen by the USA. (Despite Oussama admitting he was the one what done it) And Anyway Oussama was trained by the CIA right?
Religion in any case is a an emotional state and can probably not be dissipated by logic. And thinking about it while writing, even emotional stimuli such as pain and suffering for 1400 years doesn't seem to shift them either. Its probably for the best just to view them as a lost cause and start looking after ourselves. It seems to be a particulary western trait to want to bring order to chaos and it pretty much always turns around and bites us on the ass anyway.
I was at a children's birthday party the other day, and, this being Paris, in Montparnasse on the Left Bank, of course there was someone to bring up the subject of the sinister Bush. This wealthy 60 ish aged lady's face twisted into something resembling the witch's reflection in the Disney Snow White, as her arguments raged from the poor arab people to the evil of the existence of Israel. I remind you that this was the birthday party of a 4 year old girl. This lady was rather outnumbered by russians as it was a party full of russian parents and kids. Russians tend to call a spade a spade but were kind enough to smile at her like one does at a crazy person. I avoided any contact with her until the last moment when she realized that I was one person in the room that hadn't yet been prozletized. She brought up the subject of Bush's christianity and how extremists of all religions are dangerous. I then pulled out my JihadWatch weaponry from a post I read a few days ago 'Madame,' I said 'I invite you to go into a Mosque and say out loud that "Mohammed was a Paedophile, robber and serial killer, then go to a church and say out loud that "Jesus was a bisexual who enjoyed Mary Magdalen when Judas wasn't looking", Then come back to us and say if you still feel muslim extremists are the same as christian extremists'
Well the reaction was something close to nirvana for me. Silence, muted laughter from the other guests and later, discretely she comes towards me and says 'I'm so sorry if I upset you, I don't want you thinking I'm anti semetic' As it happens I'm not Jewish but if she wished to think this then so be it.
I guess by this story I have shown that maybe ideas can be changed, (if only a little) but only through a quietly loaded emotional attack which short circuits your wiring.
I don't see how much longer lefty literary types, (part of a world I admire in most ways (except politics) as it is artists who have left the greatest legacies to the world), can continue swallowing Islamic apologies. Some can be changed, even in France.
Right now to this article. Michael Fumento is a name well known to those who have been questioning AIDS scaremongering for the last 15 years. AIDS is more than anything a politcal disease with scary statistics which struggle very hard to look realistic once scrutinized closely. For some strange reason, questioning facts and analysing them closely is considered right wing. Shouting down those who question them is left wing. These 100,000 dead were displayed in left Wing papers in Britain and France and of course this is what people will remember. The subsequent revision of these statistics in the cold light of day, will warrant an errata on page 13.
Oh, well. We are used to this now, but I do feel attitudes having become more realistic in the past few years. An anti-racism demo in Paris last Sunday (anti racism in France means anti America, anti Israel) raised the interest of less than 3000 marchers. And the marchers of the UOIF and MRAP (Both organizations well known for their extreme anti semitism) had to suffer the overpowering smells of grilled merguez during their ramadam defilé.
If we read the civilian casualty reports correctly then wedding parties are the single most frequent activity in the Near East, and apparently automatic bomb magnets as well.
What a crock! 100,000 casualties? Isn't that like 150 or more a day? You don't think Al Jihadi Jazeera would be all over that if it were really happening? Is not knowing how to add or divide a requirement for journalists?
hopefully bush will make good on his "uniter not a devider" crap and appoint someone that liberals and theocons can embrace
Posted by: riboflavin at November 9, 2004 06:55 PM
Ribo,
What you mean like one of the america-hate-spewing cretins and sore losers who run "the left coaster", and other such left-wing cobra pits.
Most of the posters on those kind of BS blogs openly admit they'll never see eye to eye with the right. Thats a exclusively right-wing virtue.
I knew the 100,000 figure was a lie/exadgeration. It suddenly esculated from 30,000 to 100,000 in a matter of a couple of weeks.
I think what also needs to be taken into account is a number of factors in the actual battle-ground towns. For example if a terrorist hide-out is bombed by US troops in an area of Fallujah were many terrorists are holed up, it wouldn't be too difficult for allies of the dead to search thye rubble for corpses, removing any weapons they find, so to ambulances who turn up at the scene (who are perhaps just as hate-filled to westerners anyway, and would be happy to go along with any anti-coalition propaganda Al Jazeeras planning on serving up) it appears that only civilians have been killed ( a claim that is starting to look a little tired now, I mean every time there's an air strike, there are claims from people about as trust-worthy as Gollum, that civilians were killed.... come on).
Another possibility is that the corpses of enemies of insurgents who have been executed by them, may be dumped in the rubble for the same reason.
And then of course you've got to take into account that in these surveys that have come up with the daunting 100,000, despite the fact they are about as reliable as a flask made of ice, may have been done on families whose relatives were insurgents, in which case the line between civilian and insurgent becomes a little blurry.
Not to mention all of Saddams ex-butcher squad (who weren't caught or killed during the toppling of Saddam) are now also "civilians".
Until the war is over and a more accurate, and trust-worthy survey can be given, I don't think we should swallow much more death-toll,shock-horror bullshit.
Happy Birthday U.S.Marines!!!!!!!!
Guy caught on border trying to get back in selling vest and NVGs to Terrorist Waker somebody??
Pime Minsters Cousian and Wife and other Kidnapped our hearts are with them But we Must STAND Strong against this Evil
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom,Sight and Courage to Stay the course to Victory to Defeat ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Worlds Eyes to their Threat Amen
DC Watson,
I've just signed the petition ( mines number 2526, it's getting bigger!!!).
Rikki:
Until the war is over and a more accurate, and trust-worthy survey can be given, I don't think we should swallow much more death-toll,shock-horror bullshit.
I doubt that we'll ever see any sort of accurate numbers, because we're fighting an enemy who doesn't wear uniforms, carry ID cards, or have an identifiable command structure.
They're essentially ALL "civilians," for what it's worth.
regarding cross' statement: "The liberal left has a thing for milestone numbers. They gleefully reported the US soldiers deaths in Iraq when the number was 1000. Could'nt wait for the big 1 0 0 0. Similiary, they could'nt print a measly 99,999 why that would make their study seem somewhat unimportant."
i got a kick out of this. it reminds me of the throng on wall street that attach signicance to dow 10,000 & nasdaq 2000 & dow up over 100 points today & other such jargon that somehow is supposed to give insight into meaninful movements in the market. but isn't really the dow moving from 9500 to 9600 the same degree of movement for the portfolio of 30 stocks as a move from 10,500 to 10,610.53? such psychological milestones are indeed quite meaningless
i'm interested in lobo91's analysis. however, the implied rate of 182 killed/day is such an extravagant metric, it defies faith in human competence to believe that such discovery would have waited 1 1/2 years for lancet's study when so many thousands of journalists (antiwar for the most part) and hundreds of politicians (not to mention the various attaches & government workers) have been obsessing over this situation 24/7/365. yep, good thing those smug hyperintellects with m.d.'s to prove their intellectual superiority over the retarded everyone else finally discovered the truth -- i.e. that 182 people have been getting killed per day in iraq and nobody -- that would be not a single one of the non-m.d. cretins -- but nobody ever noticed. what a farce! karl popper would certain dress these embarrassing anti-empiricists down so that they could never show their face in the community of objectivists ever again
Ted:
The 100,000 figure obviously has no basis in reality, which anyone with any sense knows. Even the anti-war activists don't quote numbers that high.
10,000 or so might be within the realm of possibility, but that would have to include civilians killed by the enemy (either intentionally or otherwise). I can tell you with 100% certainty that our troops aren't that sloppy.
To put this story into yet a little more perspective, anyone care to recall how many people Saddam had put to death on a weekly basis in Abu Garaib? (I think the number was around 120, so the annual toll at AG alone would have been over 6,000.)
Then there's the number of infants who died due to malnutrition and/or poor sanitation -- not because of sanctions as the "anti-war" faction would argue -- but quite directly because of Saddam's skimming/diverting of revenues from the oil-for-food program to build more palaces, buy Mercedes for his Republican guardsmen, and refill his war chest so once the inspectors were gone he could restart his WMD program.