Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anti War Billionaire George Soros Funded Iraq Study
FOXNEWS.COM ^ | Sunday, January 13, 2008 | FOXNEWS.COM

Posted on 01/13/2008 8:05:55 AM PST by Son House

Soros, 77, provided almost half the nearly $100,000 cost of the research, which appeared in The Lancet, the medical journal. Its claim was 10 times higher than consensus estimates of the number of war dead.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: anti; billionaires; enemypropaganda; funded; fundingtheleft; george; lancet; soros
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last
To: Son House

One man’s funding is another man’s bribery. Guess which one Soros did?


21 posted on 01/13/2008 9:09:33 AM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (Oh, the huge manatee!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Son House

Faux News trying to redeem itself?


22 posted on 01/13/2008 9:10:26 AM PST by wastedyears (This is my BOOMSTICK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Viking2002

***and the hippy-dippy sheeple on the left will lap it up like a fat broad drinking out of a gravy boat.**

LOL


23 posted on 01/13/2008 9:10:51 AM PST by wastedyears (This is my BOOMSTICK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

I haven’t yet read this....but figured you’d be interested, Cal.


24 posted on 01/13/2008 9:11:42 AM PST by nicmarlo (I hereby declare my support for Duncan Hunter. 1/10/08; late to the party, but I have arrived!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Albert Guérisse; Son House; avacado; Brujo
Geez, I don't want to be banned, but the Lancet's study was peer reviewed and quite valid.

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/databomb/index.htm

The Lancet's Data Bomb Debunked for Good

25 posted on 01/13/2008 9:12:49 AM PST by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Albert Guérisse
Geez, I don't want to be banned, but the Lancet's study was peer reviewed and quite valid. The investigators don't care where the money comes from, and it would be unethical to bend the results based upon the funding.

You don't get banned by being naive or ignorant. Or absolutely wrong. Where did you come up with the assertion that researchers don't care where their financial support comes from? Where do you think the human-caused global warming lunacy comes from? I know reviewers and they review manuscripts for the data included in them. They do not question fundamental issues such as Who was paying for the project. Thats the editor's job and they serve at the pleasure of the publisher. Many prominent journals have helped foster one hoax or another.

So let's say a thousand civilian dead have occurred in Iraq. Isn't that a crime to kill civilians? Or do we cover it up and say "collateral damage?"

Well I suppose it all depends on who killed them? Further, if they provided cover and allowed AQ or sunni guerrillas to hide among them and then caught some shrapnel are they truly "civilian"? Because AQ and the "insurgents" refuse to wear uniforms arent they all "civilian" deaths? This is what the editors at Lancet should have been asking

As I imagine you should know its called War for a reason. Trying to manipulate the US policy by foisting bad data at a critical time is not above the pinkos at Lancet.

26 posted on 01/13/2008 9:13:06 AM PST by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: corkoman
You don't get banned by being naive or ignorant.

You do for being a troll. He's gone.

27 posted on 01/13/2008 9:20:52 AM PST by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lead Moderator

LOL!! Good job.


28 posted on 01/13/2008 9:27:41 AM PST by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: corkoman

;)


29 posted on 01/13/2008 9:28:33 AM PST by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lead Moderator

Well, the study WAS peer-reviewed. But as clinton might say, it depends what you mean by “peer.”

In this case, it means leftist flakes much like the authors of the article in question. Academia is stuffed full of leftists, and regretably that is now often true of science and medicine as well as the humanities.

In our own country, the New England Journal of Medicine is supposed to be the most prestigious in this field, just as the Lancet is in England. Yet the New England Journal of Medicine has been in the forefront of spreading the Culture of Death. It’s clearly a deliberate policy. They are among the earliest and most persistent advocates of abortion, euthanasia, mercy killing, assisted suicide, fetal stem cell research, and all the rest of the program.

And of course every article is peer-reviewed, by likeminded editors and readers, carefully chosen for their known leftist views.


30 posted on 01/13/2008 9:40:29 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Well said.


31 posted on 01/13/2008 9:43:06 AM PST by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Son House

I personally had a run-in with a Soros funded (anti-war) project. I went right after the donee rather than the donor and their scheme dried right up before it got started-too far. I think the donee was rather surpised that I was on to it right away. Never let your guard down.


32 posted on 01/13/2008 9:44:48 AM PST by PaRepub07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

“He could be involved with sinking the stock market as well”

there is no doubt, that is part of their strategy, to make the Republicans look bad. Bad economy, high energy prices makes people mad and equals lost Republican votes.


33 posted on 01/13/2008 10:16:27 AM PST by PaRepub07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lead Moderator
"You do for being a troll. He's gone."

Good work!

Just another liberal who desperately needs a high death count in Iraq to justify his existence as a "progressive." Most normal people would be over joyed to find out that the report and death count was bogus. But not liberals.

34 posted on 01/13/2008 10:29:14 AM PST by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Viking2002
"objective"

Any number put out by any organization identified as left-wing is always suspect. Just like the numbers of homeless in America and the numbers of women beaten by their husbands on Super Bowl Sunday this Iraq war dead number is a crock. Leftists can't print the truth to save their lives.

35 posted on 01/13/2008 10:33:08 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: avacado

Thanks ;)


36 posted on 01/13/2008 10:41:44 AM PST by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Son House
Its claim was 10 times higher than consensus estimates of the number of war dead.

I don't understand this fear of the number of Iraqi war dead.

I believe our soldiers are the best in the world, if they kill them, they deserve to be dead.

We should celibrate the number dead.

Better a 100,000 terrorists dead than only 25,000 dead.

37 posted on 01/13/2008 10:45:40 AM PST by Balding_Eagle (If America falls, darkness will cover the face of the earth for a thousand years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lead Moderator
Aw, man, I hate it when I'm not IBTZ. LOL


38 posted on 01/13/2008 10:46:45 AM PST by Viking2002 (Waterboarding the Left every chance I get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle
"I don't understand this fear of the number of Iraqi war dead. I believe our soldiers are the best in the world, if they kill them, they deserve to be dead. We should celibrate the number dead. Better a 100,000 terrorists dead than only 25,000 dead."

The Lancet Report was an alleged civilian count. In this sense, we want as few killed as possible. See my post #12 with figures of civilians killed by the coalition.

39 posted on 01/13/2008 10:59:57 AM PST by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Viking2002

Better luck next time ;)


40 posted on 01/13/2008 11:12:44 AM PST by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson