PDA

View Full Version : 73,000 AMERICAN DEAD


roscoe
09-24-2007, 07:56 PM
According to Dept Vet Affairs, 73,000 americans have been killed in Iraq.

http://www.halturnershow.com/Iraq73000USTroopsKilled.html

BlueAngel
09-24-2007, 08:12 PM
Where is the link that Hal Turner says he has supplied in the article?

I don't see it.

Why is he referring to the Iraq War as the GULF WAR?

roscoe
09-24-2007, 09:19 PM
here is correct link

http://www1.va.gov/rac-gwvi/docs/GWVIS_May2007.pdf

George_Bush
09-25-2007, 04:20 PM
Now, finally, we actually have a believable casualty report. This is absolutely astounding! THIS IS A BLOODY OUTRAGE!!!

I seriously have to go right now. Heard about this this morning. I am so angry I am shaking.

------------------------
73,846 U.S. TROOPS DEAD;
1,620,906 PERMANENTLY DISABLED
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS ISSUES OFFICIAL REPORT CONFIRMING 73,000 U.S. TROOPS KILLED IN IRAQ
SAME GOVERNMENT AGENCY REPORT CONFIRMS 1.6 MILLION "DISABLED" BY THE WAR!
George Walker Bush has presided over the worst defeat of the United States Military since Vietnam and has deliberately skewed reporting of the deaths and injuries to conceal the facts.


Department of Veteran's Affairs, in conjunction with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has released the truth because they need the American People to know our military is literally, destroyed.

They cannot release these horrific numbers via the chain of command because they are under orders to conceal the truth at all costs, so they let slip a report which now cannot be "un-slipped."

Here are the facts and a link to the government source to prove these facts:



More Gulf War Veterans have died than Vietnam Veterans.

The Department of Veterans Affairs, May 2007, Gulf War Veterans Information System reports the following:

Total U.S. Military Gulf War Deaths: 73,846
– Deaths amongst Deployed: 17,847
– Deaths amongst Non-Deployed: 55,999

Total “Undiagnosed Illness” (UDX) claims: 14,874

Total number of disability claims filed: 1,620,906
- Disability Claims amongst Deployed: 407,911
- Disability Claims amongst Non-Deployed: 1,212,995

Percentage of combat troops that filed Disability Claims 36%

Soldiers, by nature, typically don’t complain. In other words, the real impact of those who are disabled from the US invasions in Iraq, Afghanistan and other Nations, is not fully reflected in the official Veterans Affairs numbers. When soldiers are sent to murder women and children they tend to never be able to live normal lives there after.

How come the government numbers of 3,777 as of 9/7/7 are so low? The answer is simple, the government does not want the 73,000 dead to be compared to the 55,000 U.S. soldiers killed in Vietnam Iraq = Vietnam. What the government is doing is only counting the soldiers that die in action before they can get them into a helicopter or ambulance. Any soldier who is shot but they get into a helicopter before he dies is not counted.

73,000 dead amongst the U.S. soldiers for this scale operation using weapons of mass destruction is not high - we expect the great majority of U.S. soldiers who took part in the invasion of Iraq to die of uranium poisoning, which can take decades to kill.

From a victors perspective, above any major war in history, The Gulf War has taken the severest toll on soldiers.

More than 1,820 tons of radio active nuclear waste uranium were exploded into Iraq alone in the form of armor piercing rounds and bunker busters, representing the worlds worst man made ecological disaster ever. 64 kg of uranium were used in the Hiroshima bomb. The U.S. Iraq Nuclear Holocaust represents far more than fourteen thousand Hiroshima’s. The nuclear waste the U.S. has exploded into the Middle East will continue killing for billions of years and can wipe out more than a third of life on earth. Gulf War Veterans who have ingested the uranium will continue to die off over a number of years.

So far more than one million people have been slaughtered in the illegal invasion of Iraqi by the U.S. Birth defects are up 600% in Iraq – the same will apply to U.S. Veterans.

Statistics and evidence published by the government and mainstream media in no way reflect the extreme gravity of the situation.

Those working for the government and media must wake up and take responsibility for immediately reversing this U.S. Holocaust. Understanding who is manipulating all of us is critical for all of us.

For those of you who doubt the veracity of this story, who naively believe it can't be true because if it were true, you would have heard it from the government or from the main stream media, can see the proof yourselves directly from the United States Department of Veteran's Affairs web site -Source: http://www1.va.gov/rac-gwvi/docs/GWVIS_May2007.pdf

This story is 100% accurate. 100% true. 100% verifiable.

BlueAngel
09-25-2007, 06:02 PM
1. Every three months, the DoD sends VBA an updated list identifying all current and prior military service members since the start of the Gulf War on August 2, 1990.

---------------------------------------------

HUH?

What's the deal?

These figures are based on Gulf War I and Gulf War II?

Excerpt:

"since the start of the Gulf War on august 2, 1990."

I think someone needs to do a better job than Hal in interpreting these figures.

roscoe
09-25-2007, 08:06 PM
Ron Paul isn't going to help anything.

It's all the same Gulf(Iraq) War-pt 1 pt2. Even if the statistics cover both, the lies are still immense.

BlueAngel
09-25-2007, 09:40 PM
Come on, now, Roscoe.

You don't think Ron Paul is going to save the world from the "evil doers?"

BlueAngel
09-25-2007, 09:43 PM
I'm not saying that I think accurate casualty figures are being reported for this war. I'm just sayin' that the report is a confusing mess and I don't have the time nor the energy to attempt to sift through this one.

We know they're killing, wounding and maiming our soldiers and innocent Iraqi civilians all in the name of OIL.

George_Bush
09-26-2007, 10:26 AM
17000 + is still a far cry from the 4000 being reported.

This is an utter falsification. It is nothing less than treasonous. It is a federal crime against the American public.

There is no more time to talk. They have hoodwinked the public too long.

Ron Paul may not save us from the evil doers, but the American people voting Ron Paul into office might just change the tide.

WE DON'T NEED A HERO TO SAVE US! WE ARE THE PEOPLE! WE HAVE THE POWER TO CHOOSE OUR DESTINY! IT IS A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH! IT IS GOD OR SATAN! IT IS HEAVEN OR HELL!

America, if you do not wake up at this hour and see the clarion call, then perhaps you do not deserve to be a 'free' nation anymore.

God put the power within our hands. What other nation in history could boast of such a great constitution as ours?

The power is in our hands. BUT THAT MEANS YOU'VE GOT TO FIGHT! NOW IS THE TIME FOR ALL GOOD MEN TO RISE TO THE AID OF THEIR COUNTRY! WE WILL STAND OUR GROUND! WE WILL FIGHT TO THE DEATH!

Ron Paul may not save us from evil doers, but WE WILL! AND RON PAUL REPRESENTS THE ZEITGEIST OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AT THIS VERY HOUR!

redrat11
09-26-2007, 06:11 PM
George_Bush wrote:
17000 + is still a far cry from the 4000 being reported.

This is an utter falsification. It is nothing less than treasonous. It is a federal crime against the American public.

There is no more time to talk. They have hoodwinked the public too long.

Ron Paul may not save us from the evil doers, but the American people voting Ron Paul into office might just change the tide.

WE DON'T NEED A HERO TO SAVE US! WE ARE THE PEOPLE! WE HAVE THE POWER TO CHOOSE OUR DESTINY! IT IS A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH! IT IS GOD OR SATAN! IT IS HEAVEN OR HELL!

America, if you do not wake up at this hour and see the clarion call, then perhaps you do not deserve to be a 'free' nation anymore.

God put the power within our hands. What other nation in history could boast of such a great constitution as ours?

The power is in our hands. BUT THAT MEANS YOU'VE GOT TO FIGHT! NOW IS THE TIME FOR ALL GOOD MEN TO RISE TO THE AID OF THEIR COUNTRY! WE WILL STAND OUR GROUND! WE WILL FIGHT TO THE DEATH!

Ron Paul may not save us from evil doers, but WE WILL! AND RON PAUL REPRESENTS THE ZEITGEIST OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AT THIS VERY HOUR!



Relax buddy, the time is not right, IN DUE TIME everything corrects itself for the better, this is universal. :-) (or maybe not.)

redrat11
09-26-2007, 07:19 PM
Hal Turner



Hal Turner is a NUT JOB. He always say he will be violent against Jews or Blacks, in the end he's probably a JEW himself, self hater, probably a NWO shill, read all the hate he generates for them. Hate sells, hate makes money.


http://www.halturnershow.com/index.html


Entertainment I guess.

roscoe
09-27-2007, 01:24 AM
Do you believe there should be Hate Crimes Laws?(like Hal)

BlueAngel
09-27-2007, 12:55 PM
Speaking about Hate Crime laws:

Hate crimes bill put on Pentagon measure By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer
46 minutes ago
September 27, 2007

WASHINGTON - The Senate on Thursday attached legislation to help states prosecute attacks on homosexuals to a bill funding the war in Iraq in an effort to force President Bush to sign it into law. Opponents, citing a Bush veto threat, predicted it ultimately would fail.

"The president is not going to agree to this social legislation on the defense authorization bill," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Nonetheless, the Senate agreed by voice vote — with no dissenting votes — to attach the hate-crimes provision to a pending defense authorization bill that designates billions of federal dollars to the Defense Department and the Iraq war.

The Democratic-controlled House passed the same hate crimes legislation as a stand-alone bill earlier this year despite Bush's veto threat. That makes a repeat of 2004, when the Senate passed a similar amendment to the same bill only to see it stripped out during negotiations with the Republican-led House, less likely this time around. President Bush, who says the bill is not needed, could then be faced with vetoing the vast defense authorization bill containing the same provision.

Bush believes that "all people should be protected from violent crimes," but that states have their own hate crime laws, many more strict than what is being proposed, according to White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

"We believe that state and local law enforcement agencies are effectively using their laws to the full extent they can," Perino said. She wouldn't comment on the prospects for a veto.

The bill is named for Matthew Shepard, a gay college freshman who was beaten into a coma in 1998 in Laramie, Wyo. He died five days later.

Writing violent attacks on gays into federal hate crime laws is an appropriate add-on to legislation funding the war, Democrats argued, because both initiatives are aimed at combating terrorist acts.

"The defense authorization is about dealing with the challenges of terrorism overseas...This (bill) is about terrorism in our neighborhood," said Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, the chief Democratic sponsor. "We want to fight terrorism here at home with all of our weapons."

That's a stretch, not to mention a heavy-handed maneuver that "hijacks" a bill that includes a pay increase for troops in wartime, said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.

"I think it's shameful we're changing the subject to take care of special interest legislation at a time like this," Cornyn said on the Senate floor.

Other Republicans complained that states should remain the chief prosecutors of such crimes, as in current law.

"Absent a clear demonstration that the states have failed in their law-enforcement responsibilities, the federalization of hate crimes is premature," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, who proposed instead a study of the matter in a separate amendment. That measure passed as well, 96-3.

Attaching hard-to-pass legislation to weighty bills is a well-established strategy used by lawmakers of both parties, no matter who controls the chamber. Success means forcing squeamish lawmakers to technically vote for controversial policies embedded in massive spending bills — then hold them accountable at re-election time.

The White House has contended that state and local laws already cover the new crimes defined under the hate crimes proposal and that there is no need to provide federal sanctions for what could be a wide range of violent crimes.

The hate crimes amendment is especially tempting for majority Democrats because of Bush's weakened, lame-duck status and some support for the measure among Republicans.

Republicans were careful not to attack the intent of the legislation, focusing instead on what they said was the "non-germane" nature of the amendment to the overall spending bill.

"There may be a time and place for a hate crimes discussion, but it is certainly not now when national security legislation is being held up," said Senate Republican Conference Chairman Jon Kyl of Arizona. "Forcing a vote on the so-called hate crimes amendment shows an utter lack of seriousness about our national defense."

Retorted Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J.: "For some, it never seems to be the right time or the right place."

Under current federal law, hate crimes apply to acts of violence against individuals on the basis of race, religion, color or national origin. Federal prosecutors have jurisdiction only if the victim is engaged in a specific federally protected activity such as voting.

The House bill would extend the hate crimes category to include sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability and give federal authorities greater leeway to participate in hate crime investigations. It would approve $10 million over the next two years to help local law enforcement officials cover the cost of hate crime prosecutions.

Federal investigators could step in if local authorities were unwilling or unable to act.

roscoe
09-27-2007, 05:33 PM
I wonder if redrat11 is happy now that the "Hate Crimes" bill has been passed?

redrat11
09-27-2007, 05:37 PM
Hate Crimes?????


Of course I'M against Hate Crimes Laws,



Why would you think I would even consider those NWO laws?


read here.

Hate Laws (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=4831&forum=31&PHPSESSID=ca535fca708319f16b221c5ba92a368b)

roscoe
09-27-2007, 08:28 PM
Judging from your above post, you were accusing Hal of being full of hate(Hate is a human emotion that we all are endowed with). Sorry if I got the wrong idea. This is not a defense of Hal Turner.

redrat11
09-27-2007, 08:35 PM
roscoe wrote:
Judging from your above post, you were accusing Hal of being full of hate(Hate is a human emotion that we all are endowed with). Sorry if I got the wrong idea. This is not a defense of Hal Turner.


Hal turner is a HATE MONGER. There is nothing wrong with that, This is the U.S.A. where freedom of speech exist (thankfully.)

and you don't need to be sorry about anything, I read everything with a open mind, and I try to be cordial, except when I get upset. Your right it is a human emotion that has been nullified by the controllers, exception being me on this forum.

george
12-03-2008, 09:25 AM
if this is true,then it just shows how believing the general public are.i feel awful for all the dead,injured and civilians.

stompk
12-04-2008, 06:46 PM
Nice find roscoe.

Five stars for you.

BlueAngel
12-04-2008, 10:08 PM
if this is true,then it just shows how believing the general public are.i feel awful for all the dead,injured and civilians.

When the government reports ANYTHING, who you gonna call to rebuke them?

"Ghost Busters?"

The Old Medic
01-29-2009, 02:45 PM
You are a liar.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has said no such thing, and they wouldn't. There is no 73,000 dead in the Iraq war. Your "source" made this up, and he must be smoking something really powerfull to have hallucinations that strong.

BlueAngel
01-29-2009, 11:34 PM
You are a liar.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has said no such thing, and they wouldn't. There is no 73,000 dead in the Iraq war. Your "source" made this up, and he must be smoking something really powerfull to have hallucinations that strong.

A link was provided; however, it appears to be inactive at present.

George_Bush copied and pasted a portion of it.

Did Roscoe's source make it up?

I don't know, but I find the following figure very odd:

Total U.S. Military Gulf War Deaths: 73,846
– Deaths amongst Deployed: 17,847
– Deaths amongst Non-Deployed: 55,999
--------------------------------------------------------------

Deaths amongst non-deployed: 55,999.

To whom are they referring?

Iraqi citizens?

How do they even know?

jmt
03-10-2009, 06:10 PM
since this thread is about numbers I have a newsstory that i saw well about three weeks ago. I was in a mcdonalds where they play cnn on TV, well theirs was a story on how thier was 83,000 missing guns and i was with two of my friends and one believed the story so i called him out on it! so i tell him

" that story is a lie 83,000 guns missing???? you have to be stupid to believe that story now just image this mcdonalds had 40ppl in it all with guns! now thats alot of people with AK47s....now image 100 people in the micky D's with guns that even alot more guns! now image 1,000 guns one to each person! then multiply that by 80,000!" Now how the hell does the fing United States of America lose 83,000 AK47 that are three feet long!?
the lies they try to sell you.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/07/opinion/07tue3.html

BlueAngel
03-10-2009, 09:03 PM
There was an estimate of Iraqi deaths in our local newspaper and the number was from (?) to 600,000.

jmt
03-11-2009, 07:18 AM
^ i dint think we have lost that many blueangel.

Revelation1217
03-25-2009, 03:23 PM
I know things look bad, but sometimes it pays to hope for the best.

BlueAngel
03-25-2009, 10:56 PM
^ i dint think we have lost that many blueangel.

I was referencing Iraqi deaths.

EireEngineer
10-27-2009, 01:42 PM
A quick search of "Iraq US Casualties" comes up with numbers that are quite a ways away from 73,000. Both ICasualties and AntiWar.com come up with 4351 dead and 31,536 wounded whil Global Security has 4,269 and 30,182. Everyone should beware of single source reporting. I find it is helpful to look at a few sites on the left and a few on the right, and if there numbers agree within %10 or so, its a pretty safe bet the true number is somewhere in between them.

BlueAngel
10-27-2009, 10:01 PM
A quick search of "Iraq US Casualties" comes up with numbers that are quite a ways away from 73,000. Both ICasualties and AntiWar.com come up with 4351 dead and 31,536 wounded whil Global Security has 4,269 and 30,182. Everyone should beware of single source reporting. I find it is helpful to look at a few sites on the left and a few on the right, and if there numbers agree within %10 or so, its a pretty safe bet the true number is somewhere in between them.

I know a military person.

He says they lie as far as casualties are concerned.

Thanks for your opinion, however.

We'll take it into consideration.

EireEngineer
10-28-2009, 08:57 AM
Ahh...anecdotal evidence....the purest kind. True that they do delay releasing casualty information, or lie about the extent of the casualties, when there is a controversial situation, like a "Friendly Fire" incident. When I hit a landmine in Bosnia things were certainly covered up while the investigation went on, since my unit had proofed this road the day before. Part of the reason that coverups like this happen, though, is that people outside the military have little, if any, understanding about the nature of warfighting. In the fog of war all manner of calamities can befall the soldier, from friendly fire to poor intel. Combat is an inherently dangerous business, and no matter what level of training you have nor and high tech gear they may issue, people get killed for the stupidest reasons. Then, because of the media reaction, yes, sometimes they have to lie to the press while they figure out just why Pvt Johnson had a gun stuck down his pants.

Out of the Box
11-05-2009, 10:51 AM
I know a military person.

He says they lie as far as casualties are concerned.

Probably. Low death counts make better PR than high ones.

Ahh...anecdotal evidence....the purest kind.

True, however it reminds us not to take any figures for granted.

EireEngineer
11-06-2009, 01:57 PM
Probably. Low death counts make better PR than high ones.



True, however it reminds us not to take any figures for granted.
True, there are three kinds of lies they say: lies, damn lies, and statistics. But like I said when you have similar statistics from two different groups, with differing political views, and those statistics agree, the truth is probably somewhere near those numbers. It is hard to tell absolutely though.
What makes statistics even more confusing for people is that most don't understand the difference between the mean, the median, and the mode. Basic mathematical and science education is highly lacking in this country, and it makes it increasing difficult for them to understand all of the studies they are bombarded with.