On Wednesday, May 7, 2014 12:23:39 PM UTC-4, NorMinn wrote:
On 5/7/2014 11:28 AM, micky wrote:

On Wed, 07 May 2014 08:50:50 -0400, HomeGuy

Home@Guy.com wrote:



Google-groper trader_4 double-spaced and unnecessaryly full-quoted:



Yes, but the problem with that is that it's also happening to native

bees, bees in areas where they aren't near farming that's using the

new pesticides that are possible suspects.



Are you sure, or are you simply extrapolating from news reports that

stake-holders (bee keepers) are seeing declines, and you are just

supposing the declines are also happening in urban areas, as reported by

backyard gardeners or casual observers?



I think think this sentence contradicts itself. If there are reports by

backyard gardeners or casaual observers, he' s not "just supposing".



He might not have enough evidence to convince you but just supposing

means no evidence at all.



And who else is going to report on cities?



If it's pesticide, you'd expect those bees taken to farms to be

heavily impacted,



The bees that get trucked around to polinate cash crops *are* being

heavily impacted.



while native bees in remote areas would not be impacted at all.

Yet it appears to be happening everywhere.



Are there media reports where ecologists have measured bee populations

"everywhere" - in all possible settings, or just the ones that matter to

humans and are easily accessible?



Probably not -- you've set the bar incredibly high "everywhere... all

possible settings" -- . but otoh, the problem with bees is at least 10

years old and lots of people are looking into it, full time even, not

just industry employees (although there are several industries involved,

not just pesticides but farmers and agricultural suppliers, and

colleges in the farm belt (and the farm belt extends to 48 or 49 states)

and most of Canada and also Mexico if they are having bee problems, and

I'll bet they've checked a wide variety of settings and every possible

cause they could think of. Yet they have no answer.



I know what you mean. The "news" is often driven by press releases

by one corporation or one industry group, that only considers how it is

affecting them. And the "news" often does no more reseach. Often not

even on more controversial issues than this, where there is another side

even with its own press release





Several years ago, Florida started eradicating all honey bee hives on

residential property or where they were bothersome because it was safe

to assume almost all were Africanized. Hell, if it warms more up here

in the midwest, then we can look forward to Africanized bees, fire ants

and ? I'm not a doomsdayist, but I certainly have noticed the rarity of

honey bees over the last 30 or so years.

Here in NJ it was very sudden, maybe 5 years ago. Prior to that they
were plentiful, then went to zero. The suddeness would strongly suggest
to me that it's most likely some pathogen.

"Norminn" wrote in message

stuff snipped

Pesticides and herbicides could impact them in a few ways, either by
direct chemical effect or by changing their food sources. With people
so anxious to kill everything that crawls in their yard, I'd be hard to
convince that chemicals don't have an impact.

From the USDA's Ag. Research Service:

Not all pesticide impact is about directly killing honey bees, however.
Sublethal doses of the pesticide imidacloprid-one of the neonicotinoid group
of pesticides-were found to make honey bees more susceptible to the gut
parasite Nosema, according to a study by Pettis and University of Maryland
researchers Dennis vanEngelsdorp, Josephine Johnson, and Galen Dively.

The researchers fed three generations of honey bee colonies either 5 or 20
parts per billion (ppb) of imidacloprid, which is used to protect a wide
variety of crops and ornamentals from many different insects. The dosages
used in the study were intentionally well below the levels that have been
documented to kill honey bees after short-term exposure and reflected levels
that have been measured in the environment.


After the third generation, newly emerged adult bees from these colonies
were exposed to spores of N. apis and N. ceranae, gut parasites that have
been a growing problem for U.S. beekeepers since the 1990s.


There was up to a fourfold increase in the levels of Nosema in honey bees
from the imidacloprid-exposed colonies, regardless of whether 5 or 20 ppb
were fed.

http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archiv...colony0712.htm

While historical records seem to imply the CCD has occurred in the past,
there's no way to determine the actual similarity to today's CCD problems
because back then no one had ever even heard of DNA.

It reminds me a little of thalidomide, a drug whose ability to cause birth
defects was strongly denied by 1,000's of doctors who had successfully
prescribed it to pregnant women without incident. Eventually it turned out
that the US, which had not approved the drug, had very few cases but
countries that had approved had many.

That eventually led to the discovery that a certain dosage level taken at a
critical time (I think 60th day) led to the formation of flippers instead of
arms and legs. That's why I think the EU ban will either make or break the
connection to neonicotinoids. If they experience far fewer CCD incidents
after the ban, then we'll finally have a real smoking gun even if we still
don't understand the mechanism.

I was surprised to see a report that implied that CCD might be related to
cell and cordless phone use. The media came to that result based on a small
German study that implied close-by radio signals can disrupt bee's
direction-finding capabilities. Needless to say, it was quickly disproved
since CCD occurs in places with virtually no EMI.

--

Bobby G.

On Wednesday, May 7, 2014 12:49:59 PM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"Norminn" wrote in message



stuff snipped



Pesticides and herbicides could impact them in a few ways, either by

direct chemical effect or by changing their food sources. With people

so anxious to kill everything that crawls in their yard, I'd be hard to

convince that chemicals don't have an impact.



From the USDA's Ag. Research Service:



Not all pesticide impact is about directly killing honey bees, however.

Sublethal doses of the pesticide imidacloprid-one of the neonicotinoid group

of pesticides-were found to make honey bees more susceptible to the gut

parasite Nosema, according to a study by Pettis and University of Maryland

researchers Dennis vanEngelsdorp, Josephine Johnson, and Galen Dively.



The researchers fed three generations of honey bee colonies either 5 or 20

parts per billion (ppb) of imidacloprid, which is used to protect a wide

variety of crops and ornamentals from many different insects. The dosages

used in the study were intentionally well below the levels that have been

documented to kill honey bees after short-term exposure and reflected levels

that have been measured in the environment.





After the third generation, newly emerged adult bees from these colonies

were exposed to spores of N. apis and N. ceranae, gut parasites that have

been a growing problem for U.S. beekeepers since the 1990s.





There was up to a fourfold increase in the levels of Nosema in honey bees

from the imidacloprid-exposed colonies, regardless of whether 5 or 20 ppb

were fed.



http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archiv...colony0712.htm



While historical records seem to imply the CCD has occurred in the past,

there's no way to determine the actual similarity to today's CCD problems

because back then no one had ever even heard of DNA.



It reminds me a little of thalidomide, a drug whose ability to cause birth

defects was strongly denied by 1,000's of doctors who had successfully

prescribed it to pregnant women without incident. Eventually it turned out

that the US, which had not approved the drug, had very few cases but

countries that had approved had many.



That eventually led to the discovery that a certain dosage level taken at a

critical time (I think 60th day) led to the formation of flippers instead of

arms and legs. That's why I think the EU ban will either make or break the

connection to neonicotinoids. If they experience far fewer CCD incidents

after the ban, then we'll finally have a real smoking gun even if we still

don't understand the mechanism.



I was surprised to see a report that implied that CCD might be related to

cell and cordless phone use. The media came to that result based on a small

German study that implied close-by radio signals can disrupt bee's

direction-finding capabilities. Needless to say, it was quickly disproved

since CCD occurs in places with virtually no EMI.



Bobby G.


And I think you'll similarly find that CCD occurs in remote places
with virtually no pesticides and for sure no imidacloprid.

clipped

I was surprised to see a report that implied that CCD might be related to

cell and cordless phone use. The media came to that result based on a small

German study that implied close-by radio signals can disrupt bee's

direction-finding capabilities. Needless to say, it was quickly disproved

since CCD occurs in places with virtually no EMI.



Bobby G.


And I think you'll similarly find that CCD occurs in remote places
with virtually no pesticides and for sure no imidacloprid.


In a place with no agriculture and no pesticide/herbicide use, there
prolly isn't anyone there paying attention to honey bees ;o)

On 2014-05-07, trader_4 wrote:

And I think you'll similarly find that CCD occurs in remote places
with virtually no pesticides and for sure no imidacloprid.

You think? Wow, conclusive evidence!

One beekeeper in AZ does professional killer bee removal. He then
relocates the bees to the desert and sets up hives where the bees can
pollinate natural desert plants. Results: a plentitude of organic
honey and no CCD.

nb

"Norminn" wrote in message
m...
clipped

I was surprised to see a report that implied that CCD might be related
to
cell and cordless phone use. The media came to that result based on a
small
German study that implied close-by radio signals can disrupt bee's
direction-finding capabilities. Needless to say, it was quickly
disproved
since CCD occurs in places with virtually no EMI.

T4 And I think you'll similarly find that CCD occurs in remote places
with virtually no pesticides and for sure no imidacloprid.

There are a lot of bee die-offs that aren't CCD but are mistaken for CCD.
I'm no bee expert but I feel confident that the experts *are* on the case.
I also believe that banning the substances in the EU will be an important
step in proving or disproving neonic's role in what may be a problem of
multiple causations.

Their experts apparently feel at least a temporary ban is warranted because
of the potential threat to agriculture if "bee trucking" becomes unviable.
Reading through the USDA's various monographs on CCD makes it clear how many
threats bees face. Sort of like the first time I grew my own tomatoes and
discovered the legion of living creatures from fungus to four footed
furballs that wanted (and got!) a piece of my tomato patch. Who knew there
were so many blights, rots, bugs and furballs with a taste for tomatoes?

Norminn In a place with no agriculture and no pesticide/herbicide use,
there
prolly isn't anyone there paying attention to honey bees ;o)

Then there's that! Frankly I wonder where the missing bees go? Are they
carrying a disease that they spread to other hives? The very act of moving
vast numbers of one stationary bees to all points on the compass makes me
suspect that transportation is part of the problem. Those traveling bees
have to ride in the backwash of diesel truck exhausts. I don't like
following a big rig, I am sure those tiny little bees don't like it much
either.

We have another hard puzzle, like the Malaysian airliner, that may never get
solved. From what I've read, the problem with CCD *isn't* getting worse.
Perhaps the bee genome contains some mechanism for killing off large numbers
of bees every 40 or 50 years. We already know from cicadas that insects can
"tell time" for at least 17 years in a row. Why not 40?

One thing for sure, it's a very knotty problem that's proven very hard to
get a handle on. It could easily be just a coincidence it appeared at the
same time neonic's became the pesticide of choice. Or not.

--
Bobby G.

On Wednesday, May 7, 2014 3:17:37 PM UTC-4, notbob wrote:
On 2014-05-07, trader_4 wrote:



And I think you'll similarly find that CCD occurs in remote places

with virtually no pesticides and for sure no imidacloprid.



You think? Wow, conclusive evidence!



One beekeeper in AZ does professional killer bee removal. He then

relocates the bees to the desert and sets up hives where the bees can

pollinate natural desert plants. Results: a plentitude of organic

honey and no CCD.



nb

I'd be happy to see the full story on this, but I suspect that
won't be forthcoming. Is relocation of killer bees even legal within
the USA? And assuming the anecdotal report is true, it's still
meaningless, unless you believe in junk science.

I could claim that measles is caused by watchng TV. So, I take
1000 people and put them on an isolated island, with no contact
with other people. They don't get measles, so following your logic,
TV is the cause of measles. Oh and for good measure, throw in the
fact that killer bees are naturally resistant to CCD disorder to
begin with. It's one of the things real scientists working on the
problem have established.

Pesticides remain on the list of possible causes, along with just
about everything else. The fact that CCD appeared so suddenly
and so aggressively, suggests to me that it's more likely a
bacteria or virus that has yet to be indentified. CCD like die-offs
have occured periodically for over 100 years. This could be from
the same cause, or a different cause.

On 5/7/2014 10:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Exactly. Scientists aren't stupid. One of the first things they'd
do is gather data on where it is happening and where it isn't, to what
extent, etc. If there was a strong correlation to pesticides, a
particular pesticide, etc, they would have found the cause. It's kind
of hard for me to believe that pesticides suddenly caused this CCD
phenomen to pop up. You would expect it to ramp up gradually over
decades.

This is like AIDS in the early 80's. That disease sure behaved like
a new pathogen, but you had some scientists postulating that it was from
recreational drug use, immune systems collapsing from having had too
many prior diseases, etc. and not a new virus. There are even some
loons that deny HIV is the cause of AIDS today.

The bee deaths are going to be blamed on Climate Change and Climate
Change is going to be blamed on humanity. A new junk science report has
come out blaming people for Climate Change and our Affirmative Action
President and moronic minions with the help of a Democrat run Senate are
going to use it as an excuse to slap regulations fees and taxes on
business and The American people in order to fix Climate Change. It
seems CO2 emissions are going to be a big target. CO2 emissions could be
drastically reduced if Democrats would just stop breathing. Heck, become
martyrs and take one for humanity and Gaia. ^_^

TDD

On Wed, 7 May 2014 12:49:59 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote:



It reminds me a little of thalidomide, a drug whose ability to cause birth
defects was strongly denied by 1,000's of doctors who had successfully
prescribed it to pregnant women without incident. Eventually it turned out
that the US, which had not approved the drug, had very few cases but
countries that had approved had many.

IIRC, even for the small number of cases in the US, it was oten the case
that they had gotten thalidomide when they were in the UK or elsewhere.

I've seen one or two adults in the US in the last 20 years who seem
clearly to have been thalidiomide babies.

I was surprised to see a report that implied that CCD might be related to
cell and cordless phone use. The media came to that result based on a small
German study that implied close-by radio signals can disrupt bee's
direction-finding capabilities. Needless to say, it was quickly disproved
since CCD occurs in places with virtually no EMI.

Hmm. My girlfriend says her direction-finding capabilites were
destroyed when cell phones got popular.

g

On 5/7/2014 7:39 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 5/7/2014 10:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Exactly. Scientists aren't stupid. One of the first things they'd
do is gather data on where it is happening and where it isn't, to what
extent, etc. If there was a strong correlation to pesticides, a
particular pesticide, etc, they would have found the cause. It's kind
of hard for me to believe that pesticides suddenly caused this CCD
phenomen to pop up. You would expect it to ramp up gradually over
decades.

This is like AIDS in the early 80's. That disease sure behaved like
a new pathogen, but you had some scientists postulating that it was from
recreational drug use, immune systems collapsing from having had too
many prior diseases, etc. and not a new virus. There are even some
loons that deny HIV is the cause of AIDS today.

The bee deaths are going to be blamed on Climate Change and Climate
Change is going to be blamed on humanity. A new junk science report has
come out blaming people for Climate Change and our Affirmative Action
President and moronic minions with the help of a Democrat run Senate are
going to use it as an excuse to slap regulations fees and taxes on
business and The American people in order to fix Climate Change. It
seems CO2 emissions are going to be a big target. CO2 emissions could be
drastically reduced if Democrats would just stop breathing. Heck, become
martyrs and take one for humanity and Gaia. ^_^

TDD
\

Haha ur so funny.

There is an interesting phenomenon in Australia; that has suffered
horrible droughts going on two decades. The average Australian doesn't
believe in man-made global warming, now more than ever. It's speculated
that Australians are very independent minded people that can't accept
man-made global warming because, they think, "they can't fix it."
Apparently, it's a typical reaction for people that are used to fixing
things to deny a problem exists if they can't fix it.

"micky" wrote in message
wrote:

It reminds me a little of thalidomide, a drug whose ability to cause
birth
defects was strongly denied by 1,000's of doctors who had successfully
prescribed it to pregnant women without incident. Eventually it turned
out
that the US, which had not approved the drug, had very few cases but
countries that had approved had many.

IIRC, even for the small number of cases in the US, it was oten the case
that they had gotten thalidomide when they were in the UK or elsewhere.

Yes, there were plenty of incidents like that which really complicated
finding the source of the problem. Doctors always seem surprised, too, when
they find out that people trade or acquire pills contrary to Federal law,
doctors order's and the Rule Of Law. (-:

I've seen one or two adults in the US in the last 20 years who seem
clearly to have been thalidiomide babies.

There is a Canadian film my wife and I watched a while back about the
thalidomide kids growing up that would make even a grizzled Navy Seal cry.
Kids reaching for and trying to play with toys that a normal child could
reach for a grab easily. Even the youngest of them knew that something was
terrible wrong. It's one of the saddest films I've ever seen and the wife
went through a substantial number of tissues she wept so much (and she's a
retired Army colonel who grew up in New England and who prides herself on
her ability to remain stoic and unemotional when required).

I think the film really bothers women because they are so worried about
delivering healthy babies. My mom (and others) have said that as soon as
the nurse handed me to her she counted all my fingers and toes and checked
my ding-a-ling to make sure nothing was missing.

Whenever someone rails against our "horrible" regulatory system I think of
the thousands of kids that got to lead normal lives because our FDA refused
to be pushed into approving Benedictin (IIRC that was the trade name) before
all the tests were in. What really sticks with me was how strongly doctors
who had successfully prescribed thalidomide without incident believed that
the drug was harmless.

I was surprised to see a report that implied that CCD might be related to
cell and cordless phone use. The media came to that result based on a
small
German study that implied close-by radio signals can disrupt bee's
direction-finding capabilities. Needless to say, it was quickly
disproved
since CCD occurs in places with virtually no EMI.

Hmm. My girlfriend says her direction-finding capabilites were
destroyed when cell phones got popular.

Does she have a wasp waist, wings, a black and yellow behind and a taste for
honey? (0:

There is some truth to our electronics interfering with the direction
finding abilities of animals. It is well-known that high-powered sonar
arrays really disrupt marine mammal communication and navigation abilities.
I'll bet there's more than one whale who could lead us right to the
Malaysian Flight 370 wreckage but they won't because they're ****ed off
about sonar noise pollution. humor alert

(FWIW, I read that it's not so much the sonar that's disrupted but the high
explosives they use in those sea trials to make sure that sonar works under
true battle conditions.)

--
Bobby G.

On Thu, 8 May 2014 19:39:07 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"micky" wrote in message
wrote:

It reminds me a little of thalidomide, a drug whose ability to cause
birth
defects was strongly denied by 1,000's of doctors who had successfully
prescribed it to pregnant women without incident. Eventually it turned
out
that the US, which had not approved the drug, had very few cases but
countries that had approved had many.

IIRC, even for the small number of cases in the US, it was oten the case
that they had gotten thalidomide when they were in the UK or elsewhere.

Yes, there were plenty of incidents like that which really complicated
finding the source of the problem. Doctors always seem surprised, too, when
they find out that people trade or acquire pills contrary to Federal law,
doctors order's and the Rule Of Law. (-:

I've seen one or two adults in the US in the last 20 years who seem
clearly to have been thalidiomide babies.

There is a Canadian film my wife and I watched a while back about the
thalidomide kids growing up that would make even a grizzled Navy Seal cry.
Kids reaching for and trying to play with toys that a normal child could
reach for a grab easily. Even the youngest of them knew that something was
terrible wrong. It's one of the saddest films I've ever seen and the wife
went through a substantial number of tissues she wept so much (and she's a
retired Army colonel who grew up in New England and who prides herself on
her ability to remain stoic and unemotional when required).

There are a lot of painful things I won't watch anymore. I've learned
more than enough about the suffering in the world and I won't forget.
But I don't have to watch more, either.

I think the film really bothers women because they are so worried about
delivering healthy babies. My mom (and others) have said that as soon as
the nurse handed me to her she counted all my fingers and toes and checked

This probably goes back thousands of years.

my ding-a-ling to make sure nothing was missing.

OTOH, this one, these days, for last 60 or more, is not such a serious
problem. The most common problem is undescended testicles, and I
thought http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undescended_testicles would say
they can almost always be fixed, but there were a lot of words and I got
confused.

It did say this much. .

" About 3% of full-term and 30% of premature infant boys are born with
at least one undescended testis. However, about 80% of cryptorchid
testes descend by the first year of life (the majority within three
months), making the true incidence of cryptorchidism around 1% overall."

Since this was probably always the case, I guess a lot of parents were
scared unnecessarily.

They start out just below the kidneys and end up lower.

Whenever someone rails against our "horrible" regulatory system I think of
the thousands of kids that got to lead normal lives because our FDA refused

Doesn't the current budget cut funds for the FDA? Also the IRS, even
though the IRS brings in money.

to be pushed into approving Benedictin (IIRC that was the trade name) before
all the tests were in. What really sticks with me was how strongly doctors
who had successfully prescribed thalidomide without incident believed that
the drug was harmless.

I was surprised to see a report that implied that CCD might be related to
cell and cordless phone use. The media came to that result based on a
small
German study that implied close-by radio signals can disrupt bee's
direction-finding capabilities. Needless to say, it was quickly
disproved
since CCD occurs in places with virtually no EMI.

Hmm. My girlfriend says her direction-finding capabilites were
destroyed when cell phones got popular.

Does she have a wasp waist,

I wish.

wings, a black and yellow behind and a taste for
honey? (0:

Fortunately, she doesn't have those things either.

There is some truth to our electronics interfering with the direction
finding abilities of animals. It is well-known that high-powered sonar
arrays really disrupt marine mammal communication and navigation abilities.
I'll bet there's more than one whale who could lead us right to the
Malaysian Flight 370 wreckage but they won't because they're ****ed off
about sonar noise pollution. humor alert

(FWIW, I read that it's not so much the sonar that's disrupted but the high
explosives they use in those sea trials to make sure that sonar works under
true battle conditions.)

"trader_4" wrote in message
news:8d9bc710-e8e5-4386-9c24-

stuff snipped

They saw tax increases on those that are the most productive.

How are you defining productive?

--
Bobby G.

"micky" wrote in message
On Thu, 8 May 2014 19:39:07 -0400, "Robert Green"

stuff snipped

There is a Canadian film my wife and I watched a while back about the
thalidomide kids growing up that would make even a grizzled Navy Seal
cry.
Kids reaching for and trying to play with toys that a normal child could
reach for a grab easily. Even the youngest of them knew that something
was
terrible wrong. It's one of the saddest films I've ever seen and the
wife
went through a substantial number of tissues she wept so much (and she's
a
retired Army colonel who grew up in New England and who prides herself on
her ability to remain stoic and unemotional when required).

There are a lot of painful things I won't watch anymore. I've learned
more than enough about the suffering in the world and I won't forget.
But I don't have to watch more, either.

Yeah, we've adopted the same attitude. For her it was when Flowers of
"Meerkat Manor" got killed. For me it was a Nature program where a mother
lemur abandons, with great and obvious anguish, her injured offspring who's
unable to keep up with the troupe. If she stayed she risked being rejected
by the troupe if she was ever able to catch up to them.

It's part of the "super realism" trend in nature documentaries I could do
without. "See these cute lion cubs? In just one minute the new male lions
who have taken over the pride will kill them all." No thanks. Time to
watch "Big Bang Theory" instead.

I think the film really bothers women because they are so worried about
delivering healthy babies. My mom (and others) have said that as soon as
the nurse handed me to her she counted all my fingers and toes and
checked

This probably goes back thousands of years.

I think you're right about that.

my ding-a-ling to make sure nothing was missing.

OTOH, this one, these days, for last 60 or more, is not such a serious
problem. The most common problem is undescended testicles, and I
thought http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undescended_testicles would say
they can almost always be fixed, but there were a lot of words and I got
confused.

That's interesting because studies with rats have shown that severe
overcrowding increases both congential sexual defects and homosexuality.
It's as if Nature knows there are too many rats and works to reduce the
population. I guess that's not a shocker because even pond scum knows when
the available water surface is exhausted. Apparently the cells that reach
the edges of the pond release a chemical inhibitor that stops the other
cells from reproducing further and the scum enters a 'steady state"
existence. (There's a straight line in there somewhere, I am sure.)

I just had a discussion with my MD about how impossible it is for layman to
make good medical decisions because we just don't have the training and
education to do so. So a lot of us resort to thinking along the lines
"well, Joe had the same sort of surgery they're proposing for me and he got
worse instead of better." That's actually true in my case.

My much older ex-boss had a THR and not only did it not improve his
locomotion, he ended up with a severe case of metallosis from a defective
artificial hip. Yet we both know a guy somewhere between us in age (my
ex-boss graduated from West Point the year I was born!) who's on his 2nd
successful artificial hip (they wear out through use) and he plays tennis
every morning.

It did say this much. .

" About 3% of full-term and 30% of premature infant boys are born with
at least one undescended testis. However, about 80% of cryptorchid
testes descend by the first year of life (the majority within three
months), making the true incidence of cryptorchidism around 1% overall."

My back doctor had cryptorchidism (latin for hidden flowers aka testicles!)
and when they did the surgery back in the 50's they actually stitched the
testes to the thigh temporarily. OUCH!!! They gave up on that when it was
determined it really didn't help them stay descended any better.

Since this was probably always the case, I guess a lot of parents were
scared unnecessarily.

I had a very devout Catholic friend whose son was born missing the
connection between the esophagus and the stomach. It's hard to describe how
such a joyous event (they had been trying for ten years!) became such a
never-ending tragedy.

The surgeons made an artificial one but that kid spent a good part of his
infancy in the ICU here at Children's Hospital. In a moment of terrible
doubt when his son was near death from a rupture in the repaired connection
he basically asked why God had forsaken him. How do you respond to
something like that? I said he was merely testing your faith. That
family's ordeal reminds me how true is that old saying: "There but for the
grace of God go I."

We lost touch after one day, when talking on the phone with the cat on my
lap, the cat "peeled out" off my lap ripping huge scratch marks in my thigh.
Naturally I screamed "Jesus Effing Christ" and I knew I had crossed the line
with my poor ex-seminarian friend. Sigh The law has a term for what I
did: "Excited Utterance" although I can't seem to recall (or even find) the
proper Latin term.

Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, an excited utterance is defined as a
statement that concerns a startling event, made by the declarant when the
declarant is still under stress from the startling event. An excited
utterance is admissible under an exception to the hearsay rule.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/excited_utterance

Having your groin area skin flayed by a "hot to trot" cat that suddenly got
scared for no reason certainly is a "startling (and painful) event."

Res Gestae!!! My brain certainly has slowed down since I cross the 60 year
line a while back.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_gestae
Statements that can be admitted into evidence as res gestae fall into three
headings:

1.. Words or phrases that either form part of, or explain, a physical act,
2.. Exclamations that are so spontaneous as to belie concoction, and
3.. Statements that are evidence of someone's state of mind.
Whenever someone rails against our "horrible" regulatory system I think
of
the thousands of kids that got to lead normal lives because our FDA
refused

Doesn't the current budget cut funds for the FDA? Also the IRS, even
though the IRS brings in money.

Don't get me started. They're trying to crucify the head of the VA, one of
the most honest and caring general officers I know of, for people dying
before they are able to get proper care. It seems more than a little
hypocritical to starve an agency of funding and then ream them out about
what was pretty predictable. Cut funding and care HAS to suffer. It's like
trying to do brain surgery with a dull cleaver instead of a scalpel.
Something's guaranteed to get cut that shouldn't be.

stuff snipped

Hmm. My girlfriend says her direction-finding capabilites were
destroyed when cell phones got popular.

Does she have a wasp waist,

I wish.

I've been watching old reruns of Linda Carter as Wonder Woman. Now there's
a wasp waist!

wings, a black and yellow behind and a taste for honey? (0:

Fortunately, she doesn't have those things either.

What? She doesn't like honey? My wife loves it and claims it's a miracle
food. I like maple syrup better, though. Tree blood instead of insect
vomit. (-;

--
Bobby G.

"gonjah" wrote in message
...

Failed attempt at humor disguised as partisan rant snipped - or was it a
failed partisan rant disguised as humor? Always hard to tell

Haha ur so funny.

There is an interesting phenomenon in Australia; that has suffered
horrible droughts going on two decades. The average Australian doesn't
believe in man-made global warming, now more than ever. It's speculated
that Australians are very independent minded people that can't accept
man-made global warming because, they think, "they can't fix it."
Apparently, it's a typical reaction for people that are used to fixing
things to deny a problem exists if they can't fix it.

As unreasonable as that sounds, it's still better than the US nutjobs who
postulate (as always) some massive world-wide conspiracy is to blame for all
this warming "hokum." To buy into this lunacy you have to believe that all
of the world's climate scientists are out to "cook the books" just to please
the people that fund their research. What they fail to realize is that many
more institutions than just governments hire and use climate experts to plan
their business activities. Are *all* of them on the take? Not bloody
likely but I hear people spout such nonsensical conspiracy crap all the
time.

Those conspiracy theorists would be closer to the mark to suspect the
research done by oil companies that show "no global warming" crisis because
such a crisis would be very, VERY bad for business. Fossil fuel companies
know that if we need to clean up CO2 that they will recede and solar, nuke
and wind will advance. That gives plenty of motive for legacy energy led
researchers to "cook the books." Protecting profits.

I am convinced global warming is real because the world's largest insurers
are convinced it's real and they're the ones on the hook to pay off any huge
weather disaster claims. IOW, they have some pretty big dogs in this hunt:

Even insurance companies are noticing. Dr. Peter Hoeppe runs the Geo Risks
division of German reinsurer Munich Re. They have observed significant
trends in the number of weather related disasters in the last 30 years. "It
has to be explained by changes in the atmospheric conditions," Hoeppe said

http://www.businessinsider.com/chasi...al-2013-7?op=1

I read the other day that ALEC and the Koch brothers are further trying to
protect their fossil fuel interests by funding legislation in each state to
make connecting solar to the grid more costly for solar pioneers. So the
people who are all for smaller government and less regulation are happy to
see any threat to their business model beseiged with new taxes and
regulations. It saddens me to see otherwise intelligent individuals fail to
realize that corporations have bribed their way out of paying taxes in the
25 years to an astonishing extent. Guess who's left holding the bag, Joe
Taxpayer?

Oklahoma residents who produce their own energy through solar panels or
small wind turbines on their property will now be charged an additional fee,
the result of a new bill passed by the state legislature and expected to be
signed into law by Gov. Mary Fallin (R).

Oklahoma and the Republicans, trying to take the world back 100 years in so
many areas. sigh The "champion state" of less regulation and lower taxes
passing both to please their wealthy masters, who genuinely fear the free
market. Yet people believe the press releases and the propaganda. Watch
what people do. It oftens says far more about their motives than their
words.

On Monday, S.B. 1456 passed the state House 83-5 after no debate.

If these are such good laws that the people will naturally support, how come
they so often seem to ram them through without debate? Could it be because
they don't want democracy - they want to dictate policy and discussion might
interfere with that goal?

The measure creates a new class of customers: those who install
distributed power generation systems like solar panels or small wind
turbines on their property and sell the excess energy back to the grid.
While those with systems already installed won't be affected, the new class
of customers will
now be charged a monthly fee - a shift that happened quickly and caught many
in the state off guard.

Just another example of ALEC and other right-wingers trying to sneak their
agenda through state-by-state hoping no one would be watching. Guess they
stepped on their wieners this time. People *are* watching and more
importantly in many states it turns out to be members of the Tea Party and
Libertarians who are crying "Foul!"

"It is unfortunate that some utilities that enthusiastically support wind
power for their own use are promoting a regressive policy that will make it
harder for their customers to use wind power on their own," said Mike
Bergey, president & CEO of Bergey Windpower in Norman, Oklahoma, in a
statement. "Oklahoma offers tax credits for large wind turbines which are
built elsewhere, but wants to penalize small wind which we manufacture here
in the state? That makes no sense to me."

It makes perfect sense if you realize ALEC is a shill for both the fossil
fuel industry and people like the Koch brothers who don't want to see
competition from anyone that threatens their existing oil and coal based
energy businesses. Or *any* of their businesses.

"We're not anti-solar or anti-wind or trying to slow this down, we're just
trying to keep it fair," Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. spokeswoman Kathleen
O'Shea told the Oklahoman. "We've been studying this trend. We know it's
coming, and we want to get ahead of it."

In other words, "we don't want any newcomers threatening our wonderfully
lucrative near-monopoly on energy generation so we're determined to lock
this threat to our wallets down as fast as we can." What's needed are
studies that show whether net metering actually *does* cost more. Plenty of
times when asked to show the numbers, people back down on their cost
assertions. Verizon did on Fire Island after Sandy.

But distributed energy sources also provide a clear value to utility
companies. Solar generates during peak hours, when a utility has to provide
electricity to more people than at other times during the day and energy
costs are at their highest. Solar panels actually feed excess energy back to
the grid, helping to alleviate the pressure during peak demand. In addition,
because less electricity is being transmitted to customers through
transmission lines, it saves utilities on the wear and tear to the lines and
cost of replacing them with new ones.

What matters most is pleasing their fossil-brained fossil-fuel loving
masters, not helping the country to be more energy independent and less
polluting. Poker players would call these new fees and regulations a very
clear "tell" - a way to gauge what a player is REALLY thinking.

As the use of solar power skyrockets across the U.S., fights have sprung
up
in several states over how much customers should be compensated for excess
power produced by their solar panels and sold back to the grid - a policy
known as net metering. Net metering laws have come under fire from the
secretive American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a group backed by
fossil fuel corporations, utility companies, and the ultra-conservative Koch
brothers. Forty-three states and the District of Columbia currently have net
metering policies in place and ALEC has set its sights on repealing them,
referring to homeowners with their own solar panels as "freeriders on the
system." ALEC presented Gov. Fallin the Thomas Jefferson Freedom award last
year for her "record of advancing the fundamental Jeffersonian principles of
free markets, limited government, federalism and individual liberty as a
nationally recognized leader."

Where's the award for keeping the profits of fossil-fuel businesses
stratospherically high and trying to choke off any new competition? Free
markets my ass. Protecting profits is their real goal. The sad part is
that dim-witted partisans swallow this "free market, limited government" BS
hook, line and sinker. Even when a blind man could see with a cane that
folks like the Kochs are very happy to use big government to try to kill off
their competition as they did in Oklahoma, apparently land of the dimwits
ALEC stooges.

Oklahoma "could be the first complete defeat for solar advocates in their
fight against utility efforts to recover costs lost to DG [distributed
generation] use," writes Utility Dive. Net metering survived attacks in
Colorado and Kansas and Vermont recently increased its policy in a
bipartisan effort. Last year, Arizona added what amounts to a $5 per month
surcharge for solar customers, a move that was widely seen as a compromise,
particularly after ALEC and other Koch-backed groups got involved.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...ee-solar-wind/

What I found most interesting is that the libertarian wing of the Tea Party
is pushing back hard against ALEC and the surcharge laws that ALEC is trying
to push. That's because many libertarian-leaning Tea Partiers want to be
able to "disconnect" from the grid and believe the surcharges are just more
government overreach. They're right on the money proving at least some Tea
Partiers know when they're being lied to.

The battle lines over this transformation are forming. In Georgia a
Southern Co. subsidiary has blocked solar power development. That caused the
local Tea Party, led by activist Debbie Dooley, to form what she called the
"Green Tea Coalition" with local environmentalists from the Natural
Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and other groups to push for more
solar in the state, rather than costly projects such as the new nuclear
reactors being built at the Vogtle power plant-the first new nuclear to be
approved in the U.S. since 1978-and financed through fees collected before
any electricity is produced from new fission.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...leaner-energy/

I think the solar's future just got a lot brighter because it's clear that
solar has become enough of a threat to Big Oil and Gas that they are trying
to muscle it out by "buying" legislation to try to squash it. More
importantly, ALEC and the Kochs have shown their "Freemarkets and less
government" mantra is a steaming crock of crap. They're more than happy to
use Big Government to beat up on their rivals and their determination to
crush their competition shows that a "free market" is actually the farthest
thing from their minds. They want to eliminate competition and apparently
will stop at nothing to do so.

Barry Goldwater, Jr., son of the famed conservative presidential candidate
and a former congressman in his own right, heads the Tell Utilities Solar
won't be Killed, or TUSK, coalition in Arizona. "Rather than innovate or
find ways to profit from solar power, APS decries the solar industry and
opines that its revenue is heading downward. That's not the ratepayers
problem," he wrote in a June op-ed. "Instead of trying to fix the problem,
APS is trying to fix the game. It's looking to rig the system so the utility
doesn't have to pay fair market value for the excess electricity that
rooftop solar customers send back to the grid.

http://www.trbimg.com/img-5363d970/t...140502-001/600

What worries me is the vast number of low intelligence voters who have been
thoroughly duped by ALEC and the Kochs into thinking that they're trying to
preserve the American way of life. It's clear they're mostly trying to
preserve the huge amounts of money they make pushing fossil fuels and trying
to destroy anything (like solar) that threatens that money train.

--
Bobby G.

On Friday, May 9, 2014 6:46:08 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:



Don't get me started. They're trying to crucify the head of the VA, one of

the most honest and caring general officers I know of, for people dying

before they are able to get proper care. It seems more than a little

hypocritical to starve an agency of funding and then ream them out about

what was pretty predictable. Cut funding and care HAS to suffer. It's like

trying to do brain surgery with a dull cleaver instead of a scalpel.

Something's guaranteed to get cut that shouldn't be.


Except that isn't the core of what happened or the allegations.
The allegation from a whistleblower is that there was a deliberate
coverup process in place to *hide the poor performance of the VA hospital*.
Patients names were kept on a special list and if they died while waiting
for treatment, they were never counted or entered into the system, thereby
making them disappear. Until all the facts are known it's a bit
premature to be calling this a crucifixtion. Did you have similar
reactin to the Christie affair? In that case, you joined in with the
lynch mob, without any need of more facts.

On 5/9/2014 6:38 AM, Robert Green wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message
news:8d9bc710-e8e5-4386-9c24-

stuff snipped

They saw tax increases on those that are the most productive.

How are you defining productive?

--
Bobby G.


Well, it depends on the definition of "is"
before Bobby G comments on the semen stains
on the blue dress.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 5/9/2014 7:57 AM, trader_4 wrote:

We had
the dust bowl of the 30's for example,

Sorry. I just have to point out that the dust-bowl was partly man-made.
Remember? Mechanized farming and grass lands? Fortunately, people back
then realized they could do something about it.

On Friday, May 9, 2014 5:18:32 PM UTC-4, gonjah wrote:
On 5/9/2014 7:57 AM, trader_4 wrote:



We had

the dust bowl of the 30's for example,



Sorry. I just have to point out that the dust-bowl was partly man-made.

Remember? Mechanized farming and grass lands? Fortunately, people back

then realized they could do something about it.

Yes, I agree, the dust part was. The drought part AFAIK, was just
part of climate change.

"trader_4" wrote in message
...
On Monday, May 5, 2014 7:05:13 AM UTC-4, micky wrote:

The bees all across the USA have been hit by a mysterious
syndrome called colony collapse disorder. A lot of research
has been done, but AFAIK, no one is sure if it's a disease,
pesticide, etc. Pesticide seems unlikely because it's so
sudden and widespread. I haven't seen a single honey bee
here in NJ for several years now. Right now the dandelions
are blooming and you used to see bees all over going after
them. this year, I haven't seen one.

Insecticide killing honey bees?
DDN Correspondent Posted on 10 May, 2014 at 10:34:AM
Honey bees are dying en masse due to exposure to a certain class of
insecticide, claims a recent study.

The phenomenon of en masse death of honey bees is called Colony Collapse
Disorder (CCD) and it is responsible for mass decline of the population o
the bee in the last five-six years, claimed the study.

The report was published today in the Bulletin of Insectology and it
recreated a 2012 study which first linked the bee-killing disease with
neonicotinoids. The same team of researchers from the Harvard School of
Public Health who was involved in the 2012 study did this study too.

According to lead author Chensheng (Alex) Lu, "We demonstrated again in this
study that neonicotinoids are highly likely to be responsible for triggering
CCD in honey bee hives that were healthy prior to the arrival of winter."

At least 18 bee colonies in three different locations in central
Massachusetts were examined by the researchers. For the study, the
researchers split each colony into three groups - one treated with a
neonicotinoid called imidacloprid, one with a neonicotinoid called
clothianidin, and one left in pristine condition to serve as a control
group.

The study put to rest the speculation that honey bees were dying due to
parasites.

"When CCD first emerged in honeybee colonies in the mid 2000s, N. ceranae
was put forward as a possible cause. Subsequent research in Europe, however,
has suggested N. ceranae was widespread in many areas before CCD and is not
associated with the phenomenon. Although other studies have suggested that
pesticides, particularly neonicotinoids, cause bees to become more
susceptible to mites or other parasites that then kill off the bees, today's
study found that bees in the CCD hives had the same levels of parasite
infestation as the control colonies," said a researcher.



http://www.delhidailynews.com/news/I...es-1399718807/

"Sherlock.Homes" wrote:

Insecticide killing honey bees?
DDN Correspondent Posted on 10 May, 2014 at 10:34:AM

Honey bees are dying en masse due to exposure to a certain class of
insecticide, claims a recent study.

The report was published today in the Bulletin of Insectology and
it recreated a 2012 study which first linked the bee-killing disease
with neonicotinoids.

I've already posted in this thread, last Monday (May 5), that the reason
was neo-nicotinoids. Seeds coated with the stuff planted by farmers.

On Saturday, May 10, 2014 9:49:44 AM UTC-4, HomeGuy wrote:
"Sherlock.Homes" wrote:



Insecticide killing honey bees?

DDN Correspondent Posted on 10 May, 2014 at 10:34:AM



Honey bees are dying en masse due to exposure to a certain class of

insecticide, claims a recent study.



The report was published today in the Bulletin of Insectology and

it recreated a 2012 study which first linked the bee-killing disease

with neonicotinoids.



I've already posted in this thread, last Monday (May 5), that the reason

was neo-nicotinoids. Seeds coated with the stuff planted by farmers.

And of course just like last week, you're still the village idiot. No one
has denied that neonicotinoids are on the list of possible causes. What
Sherlock has posted is one more study that suggests there may be a link.
One more study, that has just been released, does not make a conclusion.
If you look at ALL the research, the consensus of most of the researchers
as of now is that they still don't know what causes it. There have been
other studies that showed no correlation with neonicotinoids. Until that
study is thoroughly reviewd, digested, replicated, etc, it doesn't mean
a whole lot. We don't even know if the level of exposure to the chemical
was realistic and consistent with what bees actually would receive. Among obvious
problems are here in urban NJ, there isn't much farming and farming is
where that class of pesticides is almost exclusively used. It's not
used on lawn/garden/turf products. Bees used to be abundant here, but
starting several years ago, I haven't seen a single one. Not a reduction,
but it's gone down to not a single one.
At the same time, in some areas treated with that pesticide, you don;t
have CCD. Also there have been prior episodes of sudden, mysterious bee
declines going back hundreds of years.

The bottom line is that as of now no one knows what causes it, that is
the conclusion of the overwhelming majority of researchers.

On Saturday, May 10, 2014 10:23:27 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, May 10, 2014 9:49:44 AM UTC-4, HomeGuy wrote:

"Sherlock.Homes" wrote:







Insecticide killing honey bees?



DDN Correspondent Posted on 10 May, 2014 at 10:34:AM







Honey bees are dying en masse due to exposure to a certain class of



insecticide, claims a recent study.







The report was published today in the Bulletin of Insectology and



it recreated a 2012 study which first linked the bee-killing disease



with neonicotinoids.







I've already posted in this thread, last Monday (May 5), that the reason



was neo-nicotinoids. Seeds coated with the stuff planted by farmers.



And of course just like last week, you're still the village idiot. No one

has denied that neonicotinoids are on the list of possible causes. What

Sherlock has posted is one more study that suggests there may be a link.

One more study, that has just been released, does not make a conclusion.

If you look at ALL the research, the consensus of most of the researchers

as of now is that they still don't know what causes it. There have been

other studies that showed no correlation with neonicotinoids. Until that

study is thoroughly reviewd, digested, replicated, etc, it doesn't mean

a whole lot. We don't even know if the level of exposure to the chemical

was realistic and consistent with what bees actually would receive. Among obvious

problems are here in urban NJ, there isn't much farming and farming is

where that class of pesticides is almost exclusively used. It's not

used on lawn/garden/turf products. Bees used to be abundant here, but

starting several years ago, I haven't seen a single one. Not a reduction,

but it's gone down to not a single one.

At the same time, in some areas treated with that pesticide, you don;t

have CCD. Also there have been prior episodes of sudden, mysterious bee

declines going back hundreds of years.



The bottom line is that as of now no one knows what causes it, that is

the conclusion of the overwhelming majority of researchers.

Funny thing happened. After I told you all that I hadn't seen a single
honey bee here in NJ for several years now, guess what? They're back. I first
noticed one buzzing around my door screen. Then outside, a holly tree had
probably a dozen buzzing around. AT least that's some good news.

http://www.wired.com/2014/05/wild-be...rfly-declines/

But it's not just honeybees that are in trouble. Many wild
pollinators-thousands of species of bees and butterflies and moths-are also
threatened. Their decline would affect not only our food supply, but our
landscapes, too. Most honeybees live in commercially managed agricultural
colonies; wild pollinators are caretakers of our everyday surroundings.

"Almost 90 percent of the world's flowering species require insects or other
animals for pollination," said ecologist Laura Burkle of Montana State
University. "That's a lot of plants that need these adorable creatures for
reproduction. And if we don't have those plants, we have a pretty
impoverished world."

Compared to honeybees, wild pollinators are not well studied, and their
condition has received relatively little public attention. Most people don'
t realize that there are thousands of bee species in the United States. Even
many butterflies are overlooked, with the plight of just a few species,
particularly monarchs, widely recognized.


'Species that used to be in all our yards are dropping out.'
Wild bees and butterflies are out on the landscape, making them difficult to
count, and a lack of historical baselines makes it challenging to detect
long-term trends. Slowly but surely, though, results from field studies and
anecdotal reports from experts are piling up. They don't paint a pretty
picture. Many pollinator populations seem to be dwindling.

According to a recent survey organized by the Xerces Society, an
invertebrate conservation group, nearly one-third of North American
bumblebee species are declining. Other studies have reported similar trends,
documenting dramatic declines in once-common species such as the American
bumblebee. If that's happening to bumblebees, says Xerces Society executive
director Scott Black, it's quite possible, even likely, that others are
hurting, too.

"There's very little information status on most of the bees other than
bumblebees, but if you look at the life histories of these groups, many are
likely even more sensitive to the disturbances leading to the declines, such
as pesticides and habitat loss," Black said. "Although we don't know what's
going on with all bees, I think we could be seeing real problems."

Among other pollinators, iconic monarch butterfly declines are well
documented: Their numbers are now at a small fraction of historical levels.
And entomologist Art Shapiro of the University of California, Davis spent
most of the last four decades counting butterflies across central
California, and found declines in every region. These declines don't just
involve butterflies that require very specific habitats or food sources, and
might be expected to be fragile, but so-called generalist species thought to
be highly adaptable. Many other entomologists have told Black the same
thing.

"Species that used to be in all our yards are dropping out, but nobody's
monitoring them," Black said.

On Fri, 9 May 2014 06:46:08 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote:


That's interesting because studies with rats have shown that severe
overcrowding increases both congential sexual defects and homosexuality.
It's as if Nature knows there are too many rats and works to reduce the
population. I guess that's not a shocker because even pond scum knows when
the available water surface is exhausted. Apparently the cells that reach
the edges of the pond release a chemical inhibitor that stops the other
cells from reproducing further and the scum enters a 'steady state"
existence. (There's a straight line in there somewhere, I am sure.)

My roommate did his PhD thesis on leaf-cutter ants. They don't eat
leaves, but they cut pieces off them, bring the pieces back to the hill
and feed them to fungus, and they eat the fungus.

Anyhow, it turns out they won't eat more than a third of the leaves on a
tree. Then they go to another tree. They don't "want to " kill the
tree, it seems. How much eating would it take to kill the tree, my
roommate wanted to know. So he and his fiancee got on ladders and
picked all the leaves off the tree. It grew more leaves. So they did
it again. The second time, the tree died.

I just had a discussion with my MD about how impossible it is for layman to
make good medical decisions because we just don't have the training and
education to do so. So a lot of us resort to thinking along the lines
"well, Joe had the same sort of surgery they're proposing for me and he got
worse instead of better." That's actually true in my case.

I have a friend, 10 years older, with a similar but not identical
prostate problem. He wasn't taking the same drug, and it took him
months to recover from the laser surgery I'm considering, instead of the
weeks predicted. Our doctors, acquired without consultation between us,
used to have offices right next to each other, but mine moved. But he
says he's much improved so that's what I'm going to do. (Well, even if
I didnt know him I'd do it. Long reason why it's been postponed 7
months.)

My much older ex-boss had a THR and not only did it not improve his
locomotion, he ended up with a severe case of metallosis from a defective
artificial hip. Yet we both know a guy somewhere between us in age (my
ex-boss graduated from West Point the year I was born!) who's on his 2nd
successful artificial hip (they wear out through use) and he plays tennis
every morning.

I know two women, one 7 years older than I (I'm 67) and one about my
age, who both got THR. The older one's walking pretty well after a few
months and the younger has other serious unrelate problems. They're
both overweight, which I presume is why they needed the hips. I am too.
Ugh. Hard to lose weight but I don't want to artificial anything
(Different from laser zapping my prostate. I don't object to that at
all. I have too much and then I'll have less.)

It did say this much. .

" About 3% of full-term and 30% of premature infant boys are born with
at least one undescended testis. However, about 80% of cryptorchid
testes descend by the first year of life (the majority within three
months), making the true incidence of cryptorchidism around 1% overall."

My back doctor had cryptorchidism (latin for hidden flowers aka testicles!)
and when they did the surgery back in the 50's they actually stitched the
testes to the thigh temporarily. OUCH!!! They gave up on that when it was
determined it really didn't help them stay descended any better.

Since this was probably always the case, I guess a lot of parents were
scared unnecessarily.

I had a very devout Catholic friend whose son was born missing the
connection between the esophagus and the stomach. It's hard to describe how
such a joyous event (they had been trying for ten years!) became such a
never-ending tragedy.

That is terrible.

The surgeons made an artificial one but that kid spent a good part of his
infancy in the ICU here at Children's Hospital. In a moment of terrible
doubt when his son was near death from a rupture in the repaired connection
he basically asked why God had forsaken him. How do you respond to
something like that? I said he was merely testing your faith. That
family's ordeal reminds me how true is that old saying: "There but for the
grace of God go I."

We lost touch after one day, when talking on the phone with the cat on my
lap, the cat "peeled out" off my lap ripping huge scratch marks in my thigh.
Naturally I screamed "Jesus Effing Christ" and I knew I had crossed the line
with my poor ex-seminarian friend. Sigh The law has a term for what I
did: "Excited Utterance" although I can't seem to recall (or even find) the
proper Latin term.

Have you tried to apologize?

Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, an excited utterance is defined as a
statement that concerns a startling event, made by the declarant when the
declarant is still under stress from the startling event. An excited
utterance is admissible under an exception to the hearsay rule.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/excited_utterance

Having your groin area skin flayed by a "hot to trot" cat that suddenly got
scared for no reason certainly is a "startling (and painful) event."

Res Gestae!!! My brain certainly has slowed down since I cross the 60 year
line a while back.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_gestae
Statements that can be admitted into evidence as res gestae fall into three
headings:

1.. Words or phrases that either form part of, or explain, a physical act,
2.. Exclamations that are so spontaneous as to belie concoction, and
3.. Statements that are evidence of someone's state of mind.
Whenever someone rails against our "horrible" regulatory system I think
of
the thousands of kids that got to lead normal lives because our FDA
refused

Doesn't the current budget cut funds for the FDA? Also the IRS, even
though the IRS brings in money.

Don't get me started. They're trying to crucify the head of the VA, one of
the most honest and caring general officers I know of, for people dying
before they are able to get proper care. It seems more than a little
hypocritical to starve an agency of funding and then ream them out about
what was pretty predictable. Cut funding and care HAS to suffer. It's like
trying to do brain surgery with a dull cleaver instead of a scalpel.
Something's guaranteed to get cut that shouldn't be.

stuff snipped

Hmm. My girlfriend says her direction-finding capabilites were
destroyed when cell phones got popular.

This was actually a joke line. No real girlfriend exists. My ex wasnt'
very good at direction finding iirc, but I wouldn't want to rely on
someone else anyhow, except to read a map. She has gps now.

Does she have a wasp waist,

I wish.

I've been watching old reruns of Linda Carter as Wonder Woman. Now there's
a wasp waist!

wings, a black and yellow behind and a taste for honey? (0:

Fortunately, she doesn't have those things either.

What? She doesn't like honey? My wife loves it and claims it's a miracle
food. I like maple syrup better, though. Tree blood instead of insect
vomit. (-;

--
Bobby G.

On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 2:43:02 AM UTC-4, micky wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 16:13:29 -0400, Stormin Mormon

wrote:



On 5/4/2014 8:45 PM, micky wrote:

On Sun, 04 May 2014 18:28:38 -0600, Tony Hwang wrote:

If there isn't much fruit, how do I fertilize the flowers myself next

year? A brush? A toothbrush?



Hi,

Fertilize or Pollinate????



Whichever would not be humiliating.

Perhaps that is pollinate.



Fertilizie, using a woodie? Pollenate with

small artists paint brush maybe.



I'll look around for some small artists.

Try finding a cereal rapist

On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 9:17:52 AM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
micky wrote:



I'll look around for some small artists.



Toulouse-Lautrec has been dead for a long time. Good luck.

There are cereal rapists that love cherrios

"micky" wrote in message

stuff snipped

My roommate did his PhD thesis on leaf-cutter ants. They don't eat
leaves, but they cut pieces off them, bring the pieces back to the hill
and feed them to fungus, and they eat the fungus.

Anyhow, it turns out they won't eat more than a third of the leaves on a
tree. Then they go to another tree. They don't "want to " kill the
tree, it seems. How much eating would it take to kill the tree, my
roommate wanted to know. So he and his fiancee got on ladders and
picked all the leaves off the tree. It grew more leaves. So they did
it again. The second time, the tree died.

That reminds me of a famous short story by Katherine Mansfield ("Ship of
Fools") titled "The Fly". An old man describes his life and the death of
his son as he puts tiny drops of ink on a fly's wings, studying and
remarking at how well it cleans itself and carries on, until, of course, it
finally can't cope with the onslaught of inkdrops and dies.

I've thought that a better way to describe the generations (i.e. "X", the
Millenials, etc) would be by the most popular cutural icons of the period.
The "Dune" generation, the "Grok/Water Brother" generation (can't remember
the name of the Heinlein novel those terms are from - "Stranger in a Strange
Land!!" -- another neuron that wasn't quite dead yet - only sleeping), the
Harry Potter generation, the "Twilight" generation, the "Star Wars"
generation, etc. Gives a much finer gradation to the cohort of people who
all share a deep affinity for those books or movies.

Not sure where to divide the groups age-wise. Films and books seem to have
had the most profound effect on me from age 12 to 24 or so. What famous
lines do you remember from movies from that time in your life? I know it's
pretty cliche but "I am Spartacus" really stuck with me as well as "Because
we LIVE here!" and in two different movies "I am my own police". "Take the
cannoli, leave the gun!" and of course "Help me Obi Wan." (-: "The slow
blade penetrates the shield." "You have to ask yourself, do you feel lucky,
punk?" "Is this the end of Rico?" "I'm killed, Jed."

I realized recently that good writing is writing that you can remember as
you advance in years. I'm really thinning out the herd in my head.

--
Bobby G.

"trader_4" wrote in message news:15f40a95-
micky wrote:

where are the honey bees?

They're not around anymore - because of this:

http://www.dillonchem.com/images/PRO...m/CDRA2987.JPG


You must be a real genius to figure out what all the scientists
working on the problem haven't be able to.

I guess he is:

A United States appeals court ruled on Thursday that federal regulators
erred in allowing an insecticide developed by Dow AgroSciences onto the
market, canceling its approval and giving environmentalists a major victory.
The ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in
San Francisco, is significant for commercial beekeepers and others who say a
decline in bee colonies needed to pollinate key food crops is tied to the
widespread use of a class of insecticides known as neonicotinoids.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/11...secticide.html

It probably didn't take a genius to figure out. The EPA approved in 2010
(without rigorous testing) a new form of insecticide unlike anything
previously used and suddenly:

The Agriculture Department said this year that losses of managed honeybee
colonies hit 42.1 percent from April 2014 through April 2015, up from 34.2
percent for 2013-14 and the second-highest annual loss to date.

At least now the science will be done:

In its ruling, the court found that the E.P.A. relied on "flawed and
limited data" to approve the unconditional registration of sulfoxaflor, and
that approval was not supported by "substantial evidence."

--

Bobby G.

On Friday, September 11, 2015 at 11:33:21 PM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message news:15f40a95-
micky wrote:

where are the honey bees?

They're not around anymore - because of this:

http://www.dillonchem.com/images/PRO...m/CDRA2987.JPG


You must be a real genius to figure out what all the scientists
working on the problem haven't be able to.

I guess he is:

A United States appeals court ruled on Thursday that federal regulators
erred in allowing an insecticide developed by Dow AgroSciences onto the
market, canceling its approval and giving environmentalists a major victory.
The ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in
San Francisco, is significant for commercial beekeepers and others who say a
decline in bee colonies needed to pollinate key food crops is tied to the
widespread use of a class of insecticides known as neonicotinoids.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/11...secticide.html

It probably didn't take a genius to figure out. The EPA approved in 2010
(without rigorous testing) a new form of insecticide unlike anything
previously used and suddenly:

The Agriculture Department said this year that losses of managed honeybee
colonies hit 42.1 percent from April 2014 through April 2015, up from 34.2
percent for 2013-14 and the second-highest annual loss to date.

At least now the science will be done:

In its ruling, the court found that the E.P.A. relied on "flawed and
limited data" to approve the unconditional registration of sulfoxaflor, and
that approval was not supported by "substantial evidence."

--

Bobby G.

It's once again amazing how you find year old, long, off
topic threads and then revive them. And once again, you're
mistaking the facts and jumping to conclusions. You're mistaking
a court decision that enough testing was not done on sulfoxaflor
prior to approval
in the USA as scientific proof of the cause of colony collapse disorder
around the world. Then you try to link it's first use with colony
collapse disorder, without bothering to even see if it's used at
all in other countries that also have CCD. A quick check shows
that sulfoxaflor was just given approval for use in the EU last
month. Yet the EU has had CCD for years. In fact, they banned
neonicotinoids another insecticide, two years ago because they
bought some early and inconclusive science that possibly implicated
that insecticide. Now two years later, CCD still exists in the EU
and with large crop losses, the EU is reconsidering the ban.
The UK has already reversed the ban for those reasons.

The majority of scientists studying CCD, all the honest ones,
freely admit they aren't sure what causes CCD. One big problem
is that it's occurring in areas where neonicotinoids are used
and in areas where they aren't. Same thing with your sulfoxaflor.
CCD is occurring in areas with lots of agriculture and agricultural
chemical operations that use those insecticides and it's occurring
in areas without.

In short, court decisions on inadequate regulatory review of
a pesticide prior to approval doesn't make science that proves
anything about CCD. You're once again confused and grasping at
straws.

On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 05:25:00 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

In its ruling, the court found that the E.P.A. relied on "flawed and
limited data" to approve the unconditional registration of sulfoxaflor, and
that approval was not supported by "substantial evidence."

--

Bobby G.

It's once again amazing how you find year old, long, off
topic threads and then revive them. And once again, you're
mistaking the facts and jumping to conclusions. You're mistaking
a court decision that enough testing was not done on sulfoxaflor
prior to approval
in the USA as scientific proof of the cause of colony collapse disorder
around the world. Then you try to link it's first use with colony
collapse disorder, without bothering to even see if it's used at
all in other countries that also have CCD. A quick check shows
that sulfoxaflor was just given approval for use in the EU last
month. Yet the EU has had CCD for years. In fact, they banned
neonicotinoids another insecticide, two years ago because they
bought some early and inconclusive science that possibly implicated
that insecticide. Now two years later, CCD still exists in the EU
and with large crop losses, the EU is reconsidering the ban.
The UK has already reversed the ban for those reasons.

The majority of scientists studying CCD, all the honest ones,
freely admit they aren't sure what causes CCD. One big problem
is that it's occurring in areas where neonicotinoids are used
and in areas where they aren't. Same thing with your sulfoxaflor.
CCD is occurring in areas with lots of agriculture and agricultural
chemical operations that use those insecticides and it's occurring
in areas without.

In short, court decisions on inadequate regulatory review of
a pesticide prior to approval doesn't make science that proves
anything about CCD. You're once again confused and grasping at
straws.

My favorite is when Boobie G was a reporter on the police beat.
Implied that facts don't matter or can't be met when Editors want
deadlines met.

PBS has a great episode on CCD. How it was in Europe, etc.

"Never let the facts interfere with the writing of a good report!" --
Jim Haslip, Army CID Investigator (ret)

On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 13:29:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Didn't Hillary claim she was under attack. like Brian Williams? Both
proved to be false. Fabricated lies.


She's under attack for real this time, and it's the FBI. Incoming!
I'm sure she did nothing wrong with those emails, it was all not only
legal but it followed all state dept guidelines. That's why Pagliano,
the IT tech who implemented it for her, just pleaded the fifth.

Something I noticed in all this that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere.
When the whole email thing broke back in March, Hillary first said that
the server was set up for Bill, in his office, under the watchful eye of
the SS. Then she never said that again. What are the chances that was
true and the Clinton Foundation, not the Clintons has been paying Pagliano
for the work he did all along? That would be a crime and drag the foundation
into the mix.
took the fifth

I looked awhile back trying to find the Code of Conduct for Dept. of
State employees. No real luck, regarding "outside employment" by
staff. Normally, one would not be allowed to work in a similar job.
For example, a federal correctional officer would not be able to work
in an outside job that required firearms. The IT guy would need
special approval from a superior -- department head level. Money
earned would have to be reported to the agency AND the IRS. Where are
those records?

She is up to here ass in alligators and doesn't know how to drain the
pond. There may be as many as twelve (12) violations of federal law.

_Hillary for Prison 2016_

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 13:29:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Didn't Hillary claim she was under attack. like Brian Williams? Both
proved to be false. Fabricated lies.


She's under attack for real this time, and it's the FBI. Incoming!
I'm sure she did nothing wrong with those emails, it was all not only
legal but it followed all state dept guidelines. That's why Pagliano,
the IT tech who implemented it for her, just pleaded the fifth.

Something I noticed in all this that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere.
When the whole email thing broke back in March, Hillary first said that
the server was set up for Bill, in his office, under the watchful eye of
the SS. Then she never said that again. What are the chances that was
true and the Clinton Foundation, not the Clintons has been paying Pagliano
for the work he did all along? That would be a crime and drag the foundation
into the mix.
took the fifth

I looked awhile back trying to find the Code of Conduct for Dept. of
State employees. No real luck, regarding "outside employment" by
staff. Normally, one would not be allowed to work in a similar job.
For example, a federal correctional officer would not be able to work
in an outside job that required firearms. The IT guy would need
special approval from a superior -- department head level. Money
earned would have to be reported to the agency AND the IRS. Where are
those records?

She is up to here ass in alligators and doesn't know how to drain the
pond. There may be as many as twelve (12) violations of federal law.

_Hillary for Prison 2016_

In the grand scheme of things, if Pagliano was doing work on the side,
even if unauthorized, I don't see that as a big deal. But if the
foundation were paying him, instead of the Clintons, or he's not reporting
it, those would be crimes.

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 08:39:35 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 13:29:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Didn't Hillary claim she was under attack. like Brian Williams? Both
proved to be false. Fabricated lies.


She's under attack for real this time, and it's the FBI. Incoming!
I'm sure she did nothing wrong with those emails, it was all not only
legal but it followed all state dept guidelines. That's why Pagliano,
the IT tech who implemented it for her, just pleaded the fifth.

Something I noticed in all this that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere.
When the whole email thing broke back in March, Hillary first said that
the server was set up for Bill, in his office, under the watchful eye of
the SS. Then she never said that again. What are the chances that was
true and the Clinton Foundation, not the Clintons has been paying Pagliano
for the work he did all along? That would be a crime and drag the foundation
into the mix.
took the fifth

I looked awhile back trying to find the Code of Conduct for Dept. of
State employees. No real luck, regarding "outside employment" by
staff. Normally, one would not be allowed to work in a similar job.
For example, a federal correctional officer would not be able to work
in an outside job that required firearms. The IT guy would need
special approval from a superior -- department head level. Money
earned would have to be reported to the agency AND the IRS. Where are
those records?

She is up to here ass in alligators and doesn't know how to drain the
pond. There may be as many as twelve (12) violations of federal law.

_Hillary for Prison 2016_

In the grand scheme of things, if Pagliano was doing work on the side,
even if unauthorized, I don't see that as a big deal. But if the
foundation were paying him, instead of the Clintons, or he's not reporting
it, those would be crimes.

What we haven't heard yet is if any person (s) having access or
ability to manage the server (Platte River), has security clearance
levels to see the contents. There is a reason the IT guy has dummied
up. Aside from the Clinton Foundation, show me the Contracts

Judge Jeanine:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4481857888001/judge-jeanine-hillary-keep-your-stories-straight/?playlist_id=937116552001#sp=show-clips

https://tinyurl.com/off99gp

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 12:33:11 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 08:39:35 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 13:29:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Didn't Hillary claim she was under attack. like Brian Williams? Both
proved to be false. Fabricated lies.


She's under attack for real this time, and it's the FBI. Incoming!
I'm sure she did nothing wrong with those emails, it was all not only
legal but it followed all state dept guidelines. That's why Pagliano,
the IT tech who implemented it for her, just pleaded the fifth.

Something I noticed in all this that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere.
When the whole email thing broke back in March, Hillary first said that
the server was set up for Bill, in his office, under the watchful eye of
the SS. Then she never said that again. What are the chances that was
true and the Clinton Foundation, not the Clintons has been paying Pagliano
for the work he did all along? That would be a crime and drag the foundation
into the mix.
took the fifth

I looked awhile back trying to find the Code of Conduct for Dept. of
State employees. No real luck, regarding "outside employment" by
staff. Normally, one would not be allowed to work in a similar job.
For example, a federal correctional officer would not be able to work
in an outside job that required firearms. The IT guy would need
special approval from a superior -- department head level. Money
earned would have to be reported to the agency AND the IRS. Where are
those records?

She is up to here ass in alligators and doesn't know how to drain the
pond. There may be as many as twelve (12) violations of federal law.

_Hillary for Prison 2016_

In the grand scheme of things, if Pagliano was doing work on the side,
even if unauthorized, I don't see that as a big deal. But if the
foundation were paying him, instead of the Clintons, or he's not reporting
it, those would be crimes.

What we haven't heard yet is if any person (s) having access or
ability to manage the server (Platte River), has security clearance
levels to see the contents. There is a reason the IT guy has dummied
up. Aside from the Clinton Foundation, show me the Contracts


I though I had heard that P River did not have security clearances.
Neither did Hillary's lawyer, who she gave a thumb drive to with
the emails on them. The state dept eventually sent him a safe to
put it in. P River is just a small firm, people who worked
there said the server was in a bathroom closet, they were working out
of a loft, etc. IDK how she picked them, except that they were used
or had some connection to the former CO Dem governor.

One line of questioning Pagliano might be worried about would be this:

Mr. P, were you trained in govt requirements, policies, procedures,
for email systems that would serve state dept officials and could be
expected to have classified info on them? Did you work with any other
state dept email accounts, where were they hosted and how were they
protected? Who first came to you with the request to set up a private
email system for H, what did they tell you the purpose was, and what
did you tell them?

I would not be surprised that P knew what he was doing was wrong,
violated policies, procedures and that he may very well have told
the Clinton team that initially, but eventually agreed to do it anyway.
That would be a good reason to take the fifth.

"trader_4" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 12:33:11 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 08:39:35 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 13:29:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Didn't Hillary claim she was under attack. like Brian Williams?
Both
proved to be false. Fabricated lies.


She's under attack for real this time, and it's the FBI. Incoming!
I'm sure she did nothing wrong with those emails, it was all not only
legal but it followed all state dept guidelines. That's why
Pagliano,
the IT tech who implemented it for her, just pleaded the fifth.

Something I noticed in all this that I haven't seen mentioned
anywhere.
When the whole email thing broke back in March, Hillary first said
that
the server was set up for Bill, in his office, under the watchful eye
of
the SS. Then she never said that again. What are the chances that
was
true and the Clinton Foundation, not the Clintons has been paying
Pagliano
for the work he did all along? That would be a crime and drag the
foundation
into the mix.
took the fifth

I looked awhile back trying to find the Code of Conduct for Dept. of
State employees. No real luck, regarding "outside employment" by
staff. Normally, one would not be allowed to work in a similar job.
For example, a federal correctional officer would not be able to work
in an outside job that required firearms. The IT guy would need
special approval from a superior -- department head level. Money
earned would have to be reported to the agency AND the IRS. Where are
those records?

She is up to here ass in alligators and doesn't know how to drain the
pond. There may be as many as twelve (12) violations of federal law.

_Hillary for Prison 2016_

In the grand scheme of things, if Pagliano was doing work on the side,
even if unauthorized, I don't see that as a big deal. But if the
foundation were paying him, instead of the Clintons, or he's not
reporting
it, those would be crimes.

What we haven't heard yet is if any person (s) having access or
ability to manage the server (Platte River), has security clearance
levels to see the contents. There is a reason the IT guy has dummied
up. Aside from the Clinton Foundation, show me the Contracts


I though I had heard that P River did not have security clearances.
Neither did Hillary's lawyer, who she gave a thumb drive to with
the emails on them. The state dept eventually sent him a safe to
put it in. P River is just a small firm, people who worked
there said the server was in a bathroom closet, they were working out
of a loft, etc. IDK how she picked them, except that they were used
or had some connection to the former CO Dem governor.


They (Bill was in on it) picked them because they could tell P River that
they could "be disappeared" without anyone caring too much.

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:02:04 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

I would not be surprised that P knew what he was doing was wrong,
violated policies, procedures and that he may very well have told
the Clinton team that initially, but eventually agreed to do it anyway.
That would be a good reason to take the fifth.

Just months before I retired I was read my Miranda Warnings. Something
was going on that was not clear. I had held the IT position at work in
an acting capacity. I waved my Fifth Amendment right. Yes I did this,
I did that, etc.. It took them months and months to interview me as I
was on family leave to support my wife's medical concerns. Agents had
to come back twice. I asked "but don't like Las Vegas?" g I denied
them a chance to come to my home. See me at work!

Finally the two assistant IG (inspector general) agents, told me to
enjoy my "retirement".

The Hillary IT guy has been offered immunity. He must be really dumb
to not take that offer. I never had that offer.

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:07:08 -0700, "taxed and spent"
wrote:

I though I had heard that P River did not have security clearances.
Neither did Hillary's lawyer, who she gave a thumb drive to with
the emails on them. The state dept eventually sent him a safe to
put it in. P River is just a small firm, people who worked
there said the server was in a bathroom closet, they were working out
of a loft, etc. IDK how she picked them, except that they were used
or had some connection to the former CO Dem governor.


They (Bill was in on it) picked them because they could tell P River that
they could "be disappeared" without anyone caring too much.

How many years did it take for Hillary to find a box of documents in
the White House bed room that didn't exist?

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 1:36:59 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:02:04 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

I would not be surprised that P knew what he was doing was wrong,
violated policies, procedures and that he may very well have told
the Clinton team that initially, but eventually agreed to do it anyway.
That would be a good reason to take the fifth.

Just months before I retired I was read my Miranda Warnings. Something
was going on that was not clear. I had held the IT position at work in
an acting capacity. I waved my Fifth Amendment right. Yes I did this,
I did that, etc.. It took them months and months to interview me as I
was on family leave to support my wife's medical concerns. Agents had
to come back twice. I asked "but don't like Las Vegas?" g I denied
them a chance to come to my home. See me at work!

Finally the two assistant IG (inspector general) agents, told me to
enjoy my "retirement".

The Hillary IT guy has been offered immunity. He must be really dumb
to not take that offer. I never had that offer.

Did they actually make the offer? I know there was talk about the House
Committee making it, IDK if they actually did.

Also, if they make the offer, can one then refuse the offer and still
plead the fifth? I would think that once they give you immunity, then
there is no potential self-incrimination any more and you'd have to testify
or face contempt, no?

"Oren" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:07:08 -0700, "taxed and spent"
wrote:

I though I had heard that P River did not have security clearances.
Neither did Hillary's lawyer, who she gave a thumb drive to with
the emails on them. The state dept eventually sent him a safe to
put it in. P River is just a small firm, people who worked
there said the server was in a bathroom closet, they were working out
of a loft, etc. IDK how she picked them, except that they were used
or had some connection to the former CO Dem governor.


They (Bill was in on it) picked them because they could tell P River that
they could "be disappeared" without anyone caring too much.

How many years did it take for Hillary to find a box of documents in
the White House bed room that didn't exist?

That room was in too much use by Bill to let her in.