5 Feb 2009 02:44
Re: [FWD] CSC: Like, George Bush murdered 600,000 Iraqis...or not...whatever...
2009-02-05 01:44:39 GMT
2009-02-05 01:44:39 GMT
Hi As I pointed out at the time the bogus Lancet "study" appeared, it was not even remotely possible that there were 485 war deaths per day, each and every day for 3.5 years without interruption....as there would have been if the "study" had been correct. You can look at the news archives of that time period and there was never one single solitary isolated day that even approached that death toll, to say nothing of every day for 3.5 years. Naturally, to achieve a day-in and day-out average of 485, there would almost undoubtedly be days with 3, 4, or even 10 times the average death toll. Just think about that....4850 deaths in a single day! Let us not forget that the country of Iraq was swarming with reporters during that interval, and 98% of them would have given their right arm to pin something, anything, on the evil American warmongers. Hardly a peep out of them, even by the most egregiously anti-American non-journalistic propagandists. Not one of them, nor even the combined members of the news "bureaus" ever claimed a death toll of 485 on a single day. Let us look for comparison at the news coverage of the Mumbai terrorist attacks, that killed 50 per day for 4 days. That news coverage held the world's attention and outraged every reasonable person, but it was happening at an absolute rate less than 1/9 that of the supposed day-to-day-to-day-to-day mass slaughters that the Americans were "causing". The per capita fatality rate of the Mumbai attacks was less than 1/200 that of the death rate in Iraq. This "study" never passed either the "science test" or the "laugh test" or the "smell test", and the bogus "researcher" should be fired and professionally sanctioned for dishonesty that taints an entire profession. At least the professional polling group was willing to point out that the "study" was not done in accord with established standards, and that the "pollster" was unwilling to disclose his methods and specfic questions, as is normal in cases like this. There is only one reason why somebody would hide those things.....becasue they had something really dirty and dishonest to hide. As various media people have said about people they don't like, "It's not the original violation that is so bad, it's the cover-up!" Q.E.D. --- Randy _______________________________________________ -----Original Message----- >From: >Sent: Feb 4, 2009 1:41 PM >To: >Cc: >Subject: [FWD] Like, George Bush murdered 600,000 Iraqis...or not...whatever... > >http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/02/04/america/Iraq-Civilian-Deaths.php > >Polling group censures Iraq death toll researcher > > >The Associated Press via the International Herald Tribune >February 4, 2009 > >WASHINGTON: A prominent group of polling researchers has accused the lead author of a 2006 study suggesting massive civilian deaths in Iraq of violating the polling profession's codes and ethics. > >The Executive Council of the American Association for Public Opinion Research said Dr. Gilbert Burnham, a Johns Hopkins University professor, had repeatedly refused to cooperate with an eight-month investigation into his research on the Iraqi death toll that made headlines in October 2006 when it was published by The Lancet, a British medical journal. > >The widely publicized study headed by Burnham contended that nearly 655,000 Iraqis had died because of the U.S.-led invasion and war in Iraq. > >"When asked to provide several basic facts about this research, Burnham refused," the council said in a statement. It noted that the group's Code of Professional Ethics and Practices calls for researchers to disclose their methodology when survey findings are made public so they can be independently evaluated and verified. > >"Dr. Burnham provided only partial information and explicitly refused to provide complete information about the basic elements of his research," said Mary Losch, chair of the association's Standards Committee. > >The group made no judgment on whether Burnham's findings were accurate but said his refusal to fully cooperate with the probe "violates the fundamental standards of science, seriously undermines open public debate on critical issues and undermines the credibility of all survey and public opinion research." > >Burnham is the co-director of the Center for Refugee and Disaster Response at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. He could not be reached for comment. > >Tim Parsons, a spokesman for the school said: "We are disappointed AAPOR has chosen to find Dr. Burnham in violation of the organization's ethics code. However, neither Dr. Burnham nor the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health are members of AAPOR." > >Burnham's research was based on interviews of households and not a body count. It found that about 600,000 Iraqis had died from violence, mostly gunfire. It also found a small increase in deaths from other causes such as heart disease and cancer. > >He contended that as of the date of his study, deaths were occurring in Iraq at a rate more than three times higher than before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. > >Burnham's research, released just weeks before congressional midterm elections, was immediately questioned by some experts who said the figures appeared too high. An accurate count of Iraqi deaths has been difficult to obtain, but one respected group put its rough estimate at the time of Burnham's study closer to 50,000. > >Burnham said at the time that his estimate was much higher than others because it was derived from a house-to-house survey rather than approaches that depend on body counts or media reports. > >The Association for Public Opinion Research said it began investigating Burnham's findings in March 2008 after one of its members complained. It said it had several times formally requested basic information about the survey, including the wording of questions asked and instructions and explanations given to respondents. It said Burnham refused to provide the information. > >Burnham is not a member of the group, which says it has nearly 2,200 members from government agencies, colleges and universities, nonprofit organizations, media corporations and commercial polling firms. > ------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send a message to: concealed-unsubscribe@... Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/concealed/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/concealed/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:concealed-digest@... mailto:concealed-fullfeatured@... <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: concealed-unsubscribe@... <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/