02.05.09

It was nowhere near that many civilian casualties

Posted in Blogosphere at 8:52 pm by Administrator

The very public spanking of Gilbert Burnham, chief author of that Lancet study on Iraqi deaths. 

  • Share/Bookmark

10 Comments »

  1. MR. Dings said,

    February 5, 2009 at 9:10 pm

    Sorry I cited those sorry stats. Evidently it was only a quarter million or so then. Keep us posted on all lies and evasions.

  2. MR. Dings said,

    February 5, 2009 at 9:12 pm

    OK, less than a quarter of 600K is around less than 150K. Further revisionism may, in time reveal the presence of WMDs. Why’d Cheney and Co. have to lie?

  3. MR. Dings said,

    February 5, 2009 at 9:48 pm

    A lie is a lie. What to believe, oh what to believe. You tell me to read the National Review, but when WFB was alive, he opposed this war too. Still a man thinks what he wants to, even considering the source.

  4. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    February 6, 2009 at 1:18 pm

    What did Cheney and company have to lie about? I know what the warned about – the same thing John Kerry, Bill Clinton and Al Gore were warning about as far back as 1998: that Saddam Hussein posed a gathering threat to global security that would have to be dealt with one way or another. So what is different in kind about where Cheney & co. were coming from?

  5. kinsley said,

    February 6, 2009 at 1:41 pm

    Wow, J.K., B.C., & & A.G. are now truth tellers! All shills for empire and leviathan!

  6. MR. Dings said,

    February 6, 2009 at 2:21 pm

    Maybe we should immediately go after all who are gathering threats to global security now. Why not? Might be the only thing that perks up this economy. Drop some bombs, then clean it up. Like Israel.

  7. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    February 6, 2009 at 11:59 pm

    Well, Mr. Dings, that is always the question. Do we go after them now or wait until they become actual attacks?

  8. MR. Dings said,

    February 7, 2009 at 5:01 am

    I think the ole preemptive strike doctrine has been striken. Can’t even say nice try there.

  9. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    February 7, 2009 at 2:08 pm

    So, in light of Ali Larijani’s remarks yesterday that the States will have to give up the whole carrot-and-stick approach to dealing with Iran and also apologize for – well, exactly what, Mr. Larijani? – if it wants to improve relations with Iran. And we must consider his remarks in light of the Supreme Ayatollah’s remarks a few days earlier saying that all the new administration’s unclench-fist rhetoric shows that the West is weak and that its core princilpes – capitalism and the Judeo-Christian tradition – have been proven a failure, how are we to proceed?

    And non of this “I’m sure the highly qualified people at Obama’s State department and intelligence community are working on a viable strategy.” What do you, as a reasonably informed and intelligent citizen, prescribe?

  10. MR. Dings said,

    February 8, 2009 at 12:53 pm

    I think that the efforts of reasonable gentlepersons (with big sticks) should be applauded in the Middle East. We would be weak if we caved to their rhetoric. Does it make you mad for someone to tell lies about you when you know they’re wrong? What do you do in that instance? Shoot em?

Leave a Comment