6 thoughts on “Iraq: electricity worse than ever

  1. How to Make Hundreds of Thousands of Dead Iraqis Disappear
    Posted by: “Compañero” companyero@mindspring.com chocoano05
    Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:02 pm (PST)
    http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/43224/

    How to Make Hundreds of Thousands of Dead Iraqis Disappear

    By Eric Alterman, HuffingtonPost.com. Posted October 20,
    2006.

    The Lancet study that estimated 655,000 Iraqis killed
    since the US invasion of 2003 was based on some of the
    most solid research methods possible, but that didn’t stop
    the American press from trying to say it wasn’t so.

    According to the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public
    Health, George Bush’s lies have killed not 30,000 innocent
    Iraqis, as the president not long ago estimated, but
    nearly 22 times that amount, or 655,000. Neither the
    Pentagon, nor much of the mainstream media have made much
    attempt to make their own counts — it’s just not that
    important to anyone. So how has the U.S. media reported on
    these shocking-albeit-necessarily-imprecise findings,
    based on door-to-door surveys in 18 provinces, by the
    experts trained in this kind of thing? The actual methods
    included obtaining data by eight Iraqi physicians during a
    survey of 1,849 Iraqi families — 12,801 people — in 47
    neighborhoods of 18 regions across the country. The
    researchers based the selection of geographical areas on
    population size, not on the level of violence. How strict
    were their standards? They asked for death certificates to
    prove claims — and got them in 92 percent of the cases.
    Even so, the authors say that the number could be anywhere
    from 426,000 to 800,000.

    Well, Greg Mitchell has written two columns on the topic
    for Editor & Publisher and he finds, here
    http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003251404 and here
    http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003255073 , that:

    * The Associated Press casts a very skeptical eye on
    the study,
    emphasizing the views of one “expert” Anthony Cordesman,
    (as the AP describes him) who charges that it is nothing
    but “politics,” with the November election approaching.

    * The Washington Post, meanwhile, interviewed Ronald
    Waldman, an
    epidemiologist at Columbia University who worked at the
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for many years.
    He called the Johns Hopkins survey method “tried and true”
    and added that “this is the best estimate of mortality we
    have.”

    * Sarah Leah Whitson, an official of Human Rights
    Watch in New
    York, told the Post, “We have no reason to question the
    findings or the accuracy” of the survey.

    * Frank Harrell Jr., chairman of the biostatistics
    department at
    Vanderbilt University, told the Associated Press the study
    incorporated “rigorous, well-justified analysis” of the
    data.

    * Richard Garfield, a public health professor at
    Columbia
    University who works closely with a number of the authors
    of the report, told The Christian Science Monitor: “That’s
    exactly wrong. There is no discrediting of this
    methodology. I don’t think there’s anyone who’s been
    involved in mortality research who thinks there’s a better
    way to do it in unsecured areas. I have never heard of any
    argument in this field that says there’s a better way to
    do it.”

    * The sampling “is solid. The methodology is as good
    as it gets,”
    said John Zogby, whose polling agency, Zogby
    International, has done several surveys in Iraq since the
    war began. “It is what people in the statistics business
    do.” Zogby said similar survey methods have been used to
    estimate casualty figures in other conflicts, such as
    Darfur and the Congo.

    I recall seeing on The Daily Show that when
    Bush got done
    playing around
    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-banter12oct12,1,436045.story?coll=la-headlines-nation with
    Suzanne Malveaux and her fashion statement that day, she
    asked him about the study. He replied that “their
    methodology has been pretty well discredited.” This is a
    bald-faced lie, of course. But here’s my question. Were
    there any follow-ups? Or was the purpose of the question
    merely to get the president on the record without holding
    him responsible for anything at all, even the unnecessary
    murder of hundreds of thousands of people? What the hell
    kind of society kills all these people and cannot be
    bothered to care? Cannot be bothered to count them and
    when someone does, risking their lives in the process,
    lies to discredit them — and no one cares about that
    either?

    A Republican political consultant seeks to
    discredit the
    survey in The Wall Street Journal today, here
    http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009108 , and the madman, Hitchens, writes in Slate
    http://www.slate.com/id/2151607/ : “The Lancet figures are
    almost certainly inflated, not least because they were
    taken from selective war-torn provinces. But there is no
    reason why they may not come to reflect reality more
    closely. It is a reminder of the nature of the enemy we
    face, and not only in Iraq, and a very clear picture of
    the sort of people who would have a free hand in Iraq if
    the coalition were to depart.” In fact, the first claim is
    flat-out false.

    The study specifically did not pick
    particularly violent
    provinces, as Hitchens could have discovered if he looked
    at the study, not that he gives any impression of having
    any experience with this type of statistical sampling. But
    even so, the sanctions were a social, moral, and
    epidemiological catastrophe as well. I never supported
    them either. The sad fact is that Hussein could have been
    contained militarily without all of these people dying
    unnecessarily. Easily. But our leaders couldn’t prove
    themselves sufficiently macho for chickenhawk neocons to
    take the necessary steps, and so we have all this blood on
    our collective hands, to say nothing of our own soldiers’
    deaths, an increased terrorist threat, a trillion dollars
    wasted, and the hatred of the world toward our citizens.

    Back to top
    Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
    Messages in this topic (1)

    7.
    Rumsfeld Takes Orders from God?
    Posted by: “Compañero” companyero@mindspring.com chocoano05
    Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:06 pm (PST)
    Rumsfeld Takes Orders from God?

    Category:

    This. Is. Unreal. Try and wrap your mind around these
    statements
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061019/pl_afp/usmilitarypolitics_061019193550 :

    The top US general defended the leadership of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, saying it is inspired by God.

    “He leads in a way that the good Lord tells him is best for our country,” said Marine General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    Mind boggling, isn’t it? Every single thing Rumsfeld predicted before the war has turned out to be false. What he claimed would be a quick, easy, $50 billion war has turned into a trillion dollar boondoggle that has made us less safe, nor more safe. Anyone who claims he’s doing what God tells him to do is insulting God.

    Posted by Ed Brayton at 09:24 AM

    Back to top
    Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
    Messages in this topic (1)

    8.
    New improved war slogans
    Posted by: “Compañero” companyero@mindspring.com chocoano05
    Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:08 pm (PST)
    http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/sloganvoting.cfm

    ONLINE CONTEST
    What’s the President’s Plan for Iraq?
    It’s Time to Reframe “Cut and Run”

    And The Winners AreS

    1. “The Rapture is Not an Exit Strategy”
    — submitted by Brent C. of Kirkland, Washington.
    $5,000 donation directed to the Western
    Washington Fellowship of Reconciliation, for the
    “Sound Nonviolent Opponents of War” coalition
    project.

    2. “Bush’s Plan? Our GIs are dying to know.”
    — submitted by Gregg G. of Austin, TX. $1,000
    donation directed to Veterans for Peace.

    3. “Custer Stayed the Course”
    — submitted by Melanie R. of San Diego, CA. $500
    donation directed to Iraq Veterans Against the
    War.

    We’ll have links posted soon for bumper stickers
    and t-shirts with all three winning slogans.

    Working Assets wishes to thank everyone who
    submitted a slogan, or voted in the contest. For
    your reference, the rest of the finalist and
    “honorable mention” entries are listed below.

    * Quagmire Accomplished

    * Divide & Quagmire

    * Stay the Curse

    * Deny and Occupy

    * Any kid but mine

    * Cut and Ruin

    * Duck and Cover-up

    * Operation: Quagmire

    * Occupy and Die

    * Bush’s Plan? Only God Knows

    * It is Futile, It is Fatal, It has Failed

    * Saddam’s Gone. Why aren’t we?

    * Bomb First, Osama Later

    * Deny and Lie

    * Wrong Reasons, Wrong Plan, Wrong War

    * Are We Done Yet?

    * In it for the wrong haul

    Like

  2. Pingback: 90% of Iraqis say things were better before US invasion | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  3. Pingback: No electricity in Greece, caused by troika austerity | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  4. Pingback: War for oil in Iraq again | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  5. Pingback: Iraq: protest on water, electricity: dead, wounded | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  6. Pingback: Re-starting Iraq war, immoral and stupid | Dear Kitty. Some blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.