Ooops.
Seems a new, theoretically more accurate, estimate of the Iraq death toll now puts it at 655K. Read here.Ooops.
posted by Bag @ 2:14 pm
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
The inarticulate rants of a paranoid who has looked around after the birth of his granddaughter and does not like what he sees.
About Me
- Name: Bag
- Location: Cheshire, United Kingdom
I'm a divorced guy with two grown up kids. One has a child of her own so I'm a granddad. Makes me sound old which is right. We live in the NW of England and I'm a manager in a computer consultancy and tend to get involved in fixing things. I enjoy my job which seems to be unusual in this day and age even with the Dilbert type things that drive me loopy.
Previous Posts
- New NK test is good news.
- Labour keep a promise. Well, half of one anyway.
- The guesswork is over.
- It's not sporting to take advantage.
- UKIP. Can they shed the single issue tag?
- Another word bites the bullet.
- What am I paying my council tax for then?
- Voters are looking for quick returns lately.
- The EU wimps out.
- Climate Change. Just a thought.
You might not like what you read here but it is the way I see it.
As you have probably worked out I have an opinion on everything. I'm happy to discuss any subject with anyone and it's not unknown for me to change my views with a new viewpoint or a few well thought out arguments.
Leave a comment if you want to contribute. You never know you might make me change my opinion.
If you want to EMail me then I can be contacted here . My PGP Key is available here.
2 Comments:
Not so fast- the Lancet is the same publication that ran the fake death toll numbers the last time there was going to be an election in the US. And that work was thoroughly discredited at the time. Now we're looking at another election and the same team uses the same methodology to obtain some more outrageous results.
Clayton Cramer has some more on the figures they conjured out of thin air-
http://www.claytoncramer.com/weblog/2006_10_08_archive.html#116062627712105482
http://www.claytoncramer.com/weblog/2006_10_08_archive.html#116069912405842066
Maybe, maybe not. To be honest 655K does appear to be a bit high. I think it is between the two figures but as nobody really knows one takes the figures from the group you choose to believe. I'm convinced that Bush and Blairs figures are way too low. These look high but at least have a basis for the estimates unlike our leaders figures. I think our goverment has figures, less than the Lancets, but significantly more than they admit only thing is they can't release them because of the numbers.
I like Clayton because of the way he explains things and he seems a very astute character. I'm not going to argue against his logic because I agree with the way he argues it. However, that does not make the data wrong as there could be thousands dying a day now away from the media which is only in a few areas in Iraq.
My personal feeling it is half the Lancet figures. Still a lot and worth consideration when we look at the justification given for removing Saddam.
Post a Comment
<< Home