ARE IRAQI DEATHS BEING REPORTED IN THE US?

user ballots

ARE IRAQI DEATHS BEING REPORTED IN THE US?


[+] ballot by B_P
created Wed Oct 11, 06

600,000 Iraqi civilians killed since US/British invasion

Two-and-a-half percent of the Iraqi population have been killed since the United States and Britain invaded the country in March 2003 to overthrow President Saddam Hussein.
The figure is contained in a new report published today by American and Iraqi public health researchers.

The report estimates that 600,000 civilians have lost their lives since the beginning of the war, an average of around 15,000 every month.

Meanwhile, the UN's top humanitarian official said today that violence in Iraq was "out of control", with scores of revenge killings taking place on a daily basis.

Around 100 people are being killed every day by sectarian death squads, while women are also being increasingly targeted in so-called honour killings.

Jan Egeland also said today that more than 300,000 Iraqis had been uprooted from their homes in the past eight months due to the deteriorating security situation.

****

Are figures for Iraqi deaths being reported in the US?

Yes
No
Not all of them


Ballot #103229 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 1.5 © BESTANDWORST.COM
smile bank:









similiar ballots:
111252. Who is responsible for the deaths 34, 452 Iraqi civilians in 2006?
65756. Are the Iraqi people being lead off to their deaths like so many American Troops by GW BU_ _ SH_ _?
76639. Opponents Of The Iraqi War: If Iraqi Becomes A Successful Democracy Will You Admit That Bush's Plan Worked?
119035. Can Anyone Believe Anything Reported in the News?
119801. Which U.S. President once reported seeing a UFO?
68032. U.N. Sex Crimes in Congo: Can you believe this was never widely reported in the news?
9126. Which Drug Is The Cause of Most Deaths?
79653. Pat Robertson reported early this year about a conversation he had with Dubya before the Iraq War...
110902. People Who Became Famous Because of their Deaths?
114030. Why are certain deaths publicly mourned and not others?


COMMENTS:
Voted : No
They barely report their own losses..
by Upstandingmale on Wed Oct 11, 06 8:12am [+]

Pssst! Rightwingers ... this is another example of holding to principle even when politically inconvenient. You should try it sometime.
by Cathexis on Wed Oct 11, 06 8:24am [+]

Voted : Yes
Thank you for being there, cathexis.
by Black_Lava on Wed Oct 11, 06 8:30am [+]

Voted : No
No, even the Pentagon has admitted to 'not counting' those civilians killed by mortar attacks and roadside bombs.
by mojo on Wed Oct 11, 06 8:52am [+]

Voted : Yes
Yes. It has been all over the news. Just sickening to think about. Really a horror that did not need to have ever happened.
by Beauregard on Wed Oct 11, 06 9:03am [+]

I don't know who is voting no. You must not be watching the news, because its been on every channel and in every paper the last few days.
by Beauregard on Wed Oct 11, 06 9:04am [+]

AP NEW YORK
A controversial new study contends nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died because of the war, suggesting a far higher death toll than other estimates.

The timing of the survey's release, just a few weeks before the U.S. congressional elections, led one expert to call it "politics."

In the new study, researchers attempt to calculate how many more Iraqis have died since March 2003 than one would expect without the war. Their conclusion, based on interviews of households and not a body count, is that about 600,000 died from violence, mostly gunfire. They also found a small increase in deaths from other causes like heart disease and cancer.

"Deaths are occurring in Iraq now at a rate more than three times that from before the invasion of March 2003," Dr. Gilbert Burnham, lead author of the study, said in a statement.

The study by Burnham, of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and others is to be published Thursday on the Web site of The Lancet, a medical journal.

An accurate count of Iraqi deaths has been difficult to obtain, but one respected group puts its rough estimate at closer to 50,000. And at least one expert was skeptical of the new findings.

"They're almost certainly way too high," said Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic & International Studies in Washington. He criticized the way the estimate was derived and noted that the results were released shortly before the Nov. 7 election.

"This is not analysis, this is politics," Cordesman said.

by Beauregard on Wed Oct 11, 06 9:06am [+]

The U.S. has quashed the accurate counting of Iraqi casualities, for obvious reasons. Nothing must be done to contradict the image of "Mission Accomplished!"

Viva Bush!
by cranky on Wed Oct 11, 06 9:34am [+]

BL: The comment was an error -- supposed to have gone on a different ballot. Don't know how I ended up getting it here.
by Cathexis on Wed Oct 11, 06 10:59am [+]

^A little dementia setting in maybe?;)
by mindy on Wed Oct 11, 06 12:44pm [+]

Yes BP, I've read about the number of deaths.
by mindy on Wed Oct 11, 06 12:45pm [+]

Voted : No
To quote one Nelson Muntz, "Haha!"
by Truthseeker013 on Wed Oct 11, 06 1:06pm [+]

Voted : Yes
Yes, reported all over the place.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Wed Oct 11, 06 2:09pm [+]

Probably just as much as any other country.

600,000 is an estimate, based on sampling. Most of the interviews for this study were carried out in Baghdad, so it's bound to be an incorrect figure, because, according to the news, the capital is far more violent than anywhere else in the country.

Having said that, western reporters are not reporting from any other cities or towns, except perhaps for Basra. The violence could be equally as bad in those smaller towns, but we never hear about it.

We simply don't know, and any group or news report that attempt to report deaths are just as ignorant as the rest of us. Our reporter just sit hiding in the green zone, relying on independent Iraqy journalists and photographers for their stories and figures.
by wolf_nipple_chips on Wed Oct 11, 06 2:40pm [+]

I notice no one bothered to question the source, the way the study was carried out, the bias of those who initiated it.

Does this ballot reek of double standards or what?
by herzog on Wed Oct 11, 06 3:43pm [+]

Cath: you especially are extremely critical of any report I put up, even when it's from the BBC which isn't known for rightwing pandering, and yet you accepted this 'controversial new study' released at a suspicious time, and without citation, without even a bit of doubt. You do realize this is hypocrisy don't you?
by herzog on Wed Oct 11, 06 3:46pm [+]

^This ballot didn't reek until islamzog showed up.
by cranky on Wed Oct 11, 06 3:57pm [+]

Voted : No
Not truthfully at least
by Kiki on Sun Mar 11, 07 7:50pm [+]






About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact
© 2002-2008 BestAndWorst.com All Rights Reserved