Home | Hegemony | Archives | Blogroll | Resume | Links | RSS Feed | subscribe by email    


to Reason


blog roll

    10 worst stacks of paper, 2004..., 2005-01-27 11:06:47 | Main | cnn..., 2005-01-28 12:10:59

    Things that make you go hmm:

    the only beef I would have is that the Lancet study did not differentiate between military and civillian deaths, but gave a trend for additional deaths over the previous year's "normal" pre-invasion total: that is, shit is a whole lot worse now with Saddam gone and the Coallition of Liberty occupying his chintzy palaces with all the Boris Vallajero posters.

    Numerous basketcases - e.g. what members of the conservative and liberal punditocracy that bothered to address the study - devoted themselves to undermining the Lancet study but generally did and continue to justify the war with the hundreds of thousands killed by Saddam - figures estimated by similar, probably far shakier extrapolations - have demonstrated the well worn imperialist's double-standard of worthy and unworthy victims: for we are forthright and humanitarian in our convictions, spreading liberty abroad, marred only by the imperfection of believing in freedom too much - such tolls simply aren't possible as the result of our actions, therefor.

    update: There's a long thread by d-squared on this, and the old round-up of DEVASTATING critiques, should confusion persist. [via]

:: posted by buermann @ 2005-01-28 11:54:55 CST | link

    go ahead, express that vague notion

    your turing test:

journals, notes,
other curmudgeonry

- A Timeline -

Oil for Nothing:
US Holds On Humanitarian Supplies
Iraq: 1997-2001

the good book
and other cultural

The Autobiography
Mother Jones

Contact Info: