Irrelevant truths
At the time, those of us who dared to suggest the Lancet study (claiming 650,000 casualties in Iraq) was bogus and rife with evidence of partisan hackery were roundly criticized. Wrongly, in hindsight:
It turns out the Lancet study was funded by anti-Bush partisans and conducted by antiwar activists posing as objective researchers. It also turns out the timing was no accident. You can find the fascinating details in the current issue of National Journal magazine, thanks to reporters Neil Munro and Carl Cannon. And sadly, that may be the only place you’ll find them.
Naturally, where you find “anti-war activists” engaged in dirty tricks, you will find George Soros. That the Lancet study, which - on the eve of the 2006 election - claimed 10 times the amount of generally accepted casualty numbers, is now completely discredited, presents major issues for media outlets that reported the estimates.
Thus far though, those that hyped the study remain predictably silent. As the Wall Street Journal editorial notes, the truth, in this case, appears “irrelevant.”
Since the Lancet Study is irrelevant, that makes George Soros irrelevant.