Yep, the only scientific study, overseen by John Hopkins Univ, but Bush
claimed it's wrong. Well, ok.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

OzOne wrote in message ...
It's good news week!

http://www.optusnet.com.au/news/stor...al/1762691.inp


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

You can tell how accurate it was by the HUGE sample base.


"Capt. JG" wrote
Yep, the only scientific study, overseen by John Hopkins Univ, but Bush
claimed it's wrong. Well, ok.

OzOne wrote in message
...
It's good news week!

http://www.optusnet.com.au/news/stor...al/1762691.inp


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

And the matching death certificates!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Bart" .@. wrote in message ...
You can tell how accurate it was by the HUGE sample base.


"Capt. JG" wrote
Yep, the only scientific study, overseen by John Hopkins Univ, but Bush
claimed it's wrong. Well, ok.

OzOne wrote in message
...
It's good news week!

http://www.optusnet.com.au/news/stor...al/1762691.inp


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:11:01 -0500, Dave wrote:


Never trust anything called a "study." Nine times out of ten it's nothing
more than a propaganda piece dressed up in black tie.

And Bush's number, 30,000?

Yeah, I guess the Lancet and John's Hopkins researchers must be wrong and
Bush is right.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:02:54 -0400, "Bart" .@. said:

"Capt. JG" wrote
Yep, the only scientific study, overseen by John Hopkins Univ, but Bush
claimed it's wrong. Well, ok.

Never trust anything called a "study." Nine times out of ten it's nothing
more than a propaganda piece dressed up in black tie.

Even if you're watch is broken, you're right twice a day.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"OzOne" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:43:02 -0700, "Capt. JG"
scribbled thusly:

Yeah, I guess the Lancet and John's Hopkins researchers must be wrong and
Bush is right.

Isn't he always?


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

Perhaps you should open your mind just a tiny bit. You'd be amazed what
you'll find.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:43:02 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

Yeah, I guess the Lancet and John's Hopkins researchers must be wrong and
Bush is right.

I am rather surprised that either would lend its name to such an effort.
Looks like a case of defining integrity down.

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 18:00:01 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:49:14 -0000, "thunder" said:

And Bush's number, 30,000?

Likely closer than anything contained in something called a "study."

Actually, not likely. As Gen. Franks said, "We don't do body counts." So
Bush's number did not come from within the government. It most likely
came from the Iraqi Body Count website, which now has civilian deaths at
@45,000. The IBC site uses a very conservative methodology, and only
counts *civilian* deaths. Total deaths are obviously much higher. It is
quite possible, this study is accurate, but more important than the
numbers is the trend, and the trend is more deaths, not less. Can you say
Civil War?

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/background.php#methods

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121700017.html

Dave wrote:
Given that publications of the once-respected ABA have become shills for a
left-wing cheering section, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised to see the
doctors following.

Don't you ever get tired of accusing everybody who doesn't
think Bush & Cheney are utterly perfect is a far left-wing
whacko?

The AARP, doctors, who's next?

DSK

It's a conspiracy right?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 17:35:10 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

Perhaps you should open your mind just a tiny bit. You'd be amazed what
you'll find.

Given that publications of the once-respected ABA have become shills for a
left-wing cheering section, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised to see the
doctors following.