TheRealNews: Iraq Story Buried by US Networks = one million killed

[L. Coyote]

Run time: 02:53 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6zDb7jx4gw   Posted on YouTube: June 24, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: June 24, 2008 By DU Member: L. Coyote Views on DU: 1178

 
Major networks spend only 2 minutes per week on Iraq war coverage; Lara Logan of CBS joins critique

[boomerbust]

1. 4 Americans killed

in Iraq, Fox news is silent. Go figure

[iamthebandfanman]

2. if somebody

if somebody has a link to the thelancet.com article please post it. i cant find it for some reason.

[slipslidingaway]

4. Lancet link to the 2006 study...

I do not have the link to the 2004 study, at one time it was only available to those who registered at the site, but that was a couple of years ago??? Kucinich and Ron Paul held a hearing in December 2006 after the study was dismissed, the transcript is at Juan Cole's site as he was one of the people invited to speak along with the authors of the study, last link below.

8 page pdf
Published online October 11, 2006
http://www.thelancet.com/webfiles/images/journals/lancet/s0140673606694919.pdf


Also

http://www.jhsph.edu/publichealthnews/press_releases/2006/burnham_iraq_2006.html

"October 11, 2006

Updated Iraq Survey Affirms Earlier Mortality Estimates

Mortality Trends Comparable to Estimates by Those Using Other Counting Methods

As many as 654,965 more Iraqis may have died since hostilities began in Iraq in March 2003 than would have been expected under pre-war conditions, according to a survey conducted by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. The deaths from all causes—violent and non-violent—are over and above the estimated 143,000 deaths per year that occurred from all causes prior to the March 2003 invasion..."


And...

http://www.jhsph.edu/publichealthnews/press_releases/PR_2004/Burnham_Iraq.html

October 28, 2004

Iraqi Civilian Deaths Increase Dramatically After Invasion

Civilian deaths have risen dramatically in Iraq since the country was invaded in March 2003, according to a survey conducted by researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Columbia University School of Nursing and Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. The researchers found that the majority of deaths were attributed to violence, which were primarily the result of military actions by Coalition forces. Most of those killed by Coalition forces were women and children. However, the researchers stressed that they found no evidence of improper conduct by the Coalition soldiers.

The survey is the first countrywide attempt to calculate the number of civilian deaths in Iraq since the war began. The United States military does not keep records on civilian deaths and record keeping by the Iraq Ministry of Health is limited. The study is published in the October 29, 2004, online edition of The Lancet..."


http://www.juancole.com/2006/12/kucinich-paul-congressional-hearing-on.html

Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Kucinich-Paul Congressional Hearing on Civilian Casualties in Iraq

"Here is the transcript of Monday's hearing on Capitol Hill on the Lancet study, at which I spoke along with two co-authors of the study. The video can be seen at the C-Span archive page (scroll down to the bottom). Thanks to Representatives Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul for the kind invitation to speak at the hearing..."

[Echo In Light]

3. Guess they were "liberated" from their earthly existence

[slipslidingaway]

5. Thank L. Coyote, too bad so few speak on this subject :( n/t

[L. Coyote]

7. They should, before there is a moment of retribution.

If the USA does not repudiate Bush's War on Iraq, and punish those
who created this tragedy, I fear there will be retribution one day.

[slipslidingaway]

8. Sadly I do as well :( n/t

[slipslidingaway]

6. Columbia Journalism Review on Lancet Study

http://timlambert.org/2005/03/lancet26/

"Lila Guterman writes in the Columbia Journalism Review about the dismal reporting of the Lancet study:

Last fall, a major public-health study appeared in The Lancet, a prestigious British medical journal, only to be missed or dismissed by the American press. To the extent it was covered at all, the reports were short and usually buried far from the front pages of major newspapers. The results of the study could have played an important role in future policy decisions, but the press’s near total silence allowed the issue to pass without debate. …

Reporters’ unease about the wide range may have been a primary reason many didn’t cover the study. One columnist, Fred Kaplan of Slate, called the estimate “meaningless” and labeled the range “a dart board.”

But he was wrong. I called about ten biostatisticians and mortality experts. Not one of them took issue with the study’s methods or its conclusions. If anything, the scientists told me, the authors had been cautious in their estimates. With a quick call to a statistician, reporters would have found that the probability forms a bell curve—the likelihood is very small that the number of deaths fell at either extreme of the range. It was very likely to fall near the middle.

The Washington Post’s Rob Stein quoted a military analyst at Human Rights Watch as saying, “These numbers seem to be inflated.” If even Human Rights Watch doesn’t believe the estimate, why should you? (The analyst told me that he hadn’t read The Lancet paper at the time, and that he told Stein so, although the Post didn’t mention that. The analyst now has no reservations about the study’s conclusions.) A reporter asserted in The New York Times that “the finding is certain to generate intense controversy,” even though she quoted no one critical of the study."


Dead Iraqis Why an Estimate was Ignored

http://cjrarchives.org/issues/2005/2/voices-guterman.asp

[irislake]

9. Ho hum

Who cares? Just so long as you get the Iraqi oil. They are just "rag-heads" and all their dead children were potential terrorists.

[slipslidingaway]

10. Kick, only one R ??? n/t