On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 23:48:10 -0700, Jim Stewart wrote:
The possiblility of smuggled-in NBC weapons is still
real.

But very improbable.

Gary

On 12 Oct 2003 19:45:04 -0700, jim rozen wrote:
2) politicians cannot influence the economy.

Sure they can, via tax and regulatory policy.

Gary

Gunner wrote:
the time came to pay the bills..the money was not in the kiddy.

Do you consider Insight Magazine a Blog?

http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm/i...id/158410.html

Insight magazine is a Moonie publication. You're getting your information
from a cult.

Shrug..so the jury is STILL out and is likely to be for some time.

Yep and the Dumbocrats are good at calling things like elections before all the
votes are counted ). They still have over 90% of the munitions dumps to
inspect and 98% of the countryside. The evidence they were engaged in the
programs is clear from what they found already. Only the stage of their
progress is in doubt at this point.
Greg Sefton

You're so cute when you do economics, Gunner. g Most economists say that
the trouble showed up in the second quarter of 2000, although the first
actual decline in GDP occurred in 2001.

Recessions and economic "booms" are pendulous occurrences. The pendulum had
started to swing a year before Clinton left office; just ast it had started the
other way before he got there. A bunch of creative accounting, and no
(expensive) wars made it easy for him to make it look like he was responsible.
There are plenty of jobs in America, but many are spoiled into only accepting
something at (or close to) their previous position.
Greg Sefton

I've said it
before, at least it's going to be the republiscams children and grand
children that will have to pay it back, I don't have any.

I wonder why )
Gregt S.

In article ,
says...

So Agent Orange was never used in Vietnam???????, Vietnamese people and Yank
Grunts never got poisened by Chemical defoliants dropped and sprayed by
trhe USAF.

To say nothing of the estimated 500,000 to 1 million Vietnamese kids born
with birth defects as a probable consequence of the spraying of Agent
Orange etc.

A quote from UNICEF ( http://www.unicef.org.vn/disable.htm )

"An untold number of Vietnamese children suffer from disabilities
attributable to Agent Orange, the chemical defoliant the United States
military sprayed over vast areas of Viet Nam during the war. While a
recent study funded by the Vietnamese government places the total number
of Agent Orange victims at 30,000, the specific number of child victims
identified in the study has not been disclosed. What is known with
certainty is that some Vietnamese children continue to be exposed to this
dangerous substance.

Studies conducted by the Canadian-based Hatfield Group reveal that there
are still areas in Viet Nam with alarmingly high levels of dioxin (the
toxic agent in Agent Orange), and indicate that in these areas dioxin is
entering the food chain. The studies suggest a direct relationship
between dioxin contamination and human health, a link that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency recently confirmed. In a tacit
acknowledgement of the harmful effects Agent Orange can have on the
children of persons exposed to the defoliant, the United States
government provides benefits for U.S. veterans who were exposed to Agent
Orange in Viet Nam, and whose children suffer from spina bifida, a
debilitating spinal disease. However, the United States has not offered
any such aid to disabled children in Viet Nam."


Of course there's also the minor problem of the use of depleted uranium
shells in both Iraq and the former state of Yugoslavia and it's long term
consequences for both vetrans and the civilian population.
Ian

"Bray Haven" wrote in message
...
You're so cute when you do economics, Gunner. g Most economists say
that
the trouble showed up in the second quarter of 2000, although the first
actual decline in GDP occurred in 2001.

Recessions and economic "booms" are pendulous occurrences. The pendulum
had
started to swing a year before Clinton left office; just ast it had
started the
other way before he got there. A bunch of creative accounting, and no
(expensive) wars made it easy for him to make it look like he was
responsible.

Generally agree, but it was more a matter of not *understanding* what was
responsible, and jumping to many wrong conclusions. It will be another five
years, at least, before the economy of the '90s is fully analyzed.

There are plenty of jobs in America, but many are spoiled into only
accepting
something at (or close to) their previous position.

That's an interesting thought, but can you back it up? Do you have any idea
what the average hourly wage is for those who are displaced and who find new
jobs, versus what they were making before?

Ed Huntress

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 22:22:13 +0800, Ian W wrote:
In article ,
says...

So Agent Orange was never used in Vietnam???????, Vietnamese people and Yank
Grunts never got poisened by Chemical defoliants dropped and sprayed by
trhe USAF.

To say nothing of the estimated 500,000 to 1 million Vietnamese kids born
with birth defects as a probable consequence of the spraying of Agent
Orange etc.

A quote from UNICEF ( http://www.unicef.org.vn/disable.htm )

"An untold number of Vietnamese children suffer from disabilities
attributable to Agent Orange, the chemical defoliant the United States
military sprayed over vast areas of Viet Nam during the war. While a
recent study funded by the Vietnamese government places the total number
of Agent Orange victims at 30,000, the specific number of child victims
identified in the study has not been disclosed. What is known with
certainty is that some Vietnamese children continue to be exposed to this
dangerous substance.

Studies conducted by the Canadian-based Hatfield Group reveal that there
are still areas in Viet Nam with alarmingly high levels of dioxin (the
toxic agent in Agent Orange), and indicate that in these areas dioxin is
entering the food chain. The studies suggest a direct relationship
between dioxin contamination and human health, a link that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency recently confirmed. In a tacit
acknowledgement of the harmful effects Agent Orange can have on the
children of persons exposed to the defoliant, the United States
government provides benefits for U.S. veterans who were exposed to Agent
Orange in Viet Nam, and whose children suffer from spina bifida, a
debilitating spinal disease. However, the United States has not offered
any such aid to disabled children in Viet Nam."

The major risk of believing alarmist "science" is that it is often wrong.

In this case, dioxins are produced as a byproduct of the manufacture
of chlorinated biphenols such as 245T (Agent Orange is a mixture of
24D, weed killer, and 245T, brush killer), transformer oils, etc. It is
present in parts per billion concentrations in these products. It was
once thought to be persistent in the environment, but better science
has demonstrated that it rapidly breaks down in soil when exposed
to sunlight (see follow up reports on Times Beach).

Of course there's also the minor problem of the use of depleted uranium
shells in both Iraq and the former state of Yugoslavia and it's long term
consequences for both vetrans and the civilian population.

Depeleted uranium can be hazardous (heavy metal poison) if it is ingested.
So eating depleted uranium is not recommended. (Eating lead, tungsten or
any other heavy metal is also not recommended for the same reason.) But
it is no more radioactive than granite. It is called depleted because the fissile
U235 has been removed from it.

Gary

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 22:18:08 +0100, "The Rifleman"
wrote:


"Jim Dauven" wrote in message
...
Same for the Umitilla Army Depot in Oregon. They built an incenerator
but the environmentalists have stopped the project in favor of
chemical neutralization that won't put as much crap in the air but
is more dangerous to human beings and produces a whole lot more
toxic chemical waste that has to be gotten rid of.



You were saying Gunner old chap )

Saying what? That we have huge stockpiles of BC that we are
destroying? Of course, and thats been no secret.

Your question was?

Gunner
) The point is old chap the US was supposed to have already disposed of
the very weapons it has suddenly stumbled across , years ago, Can you not
see the hypocracy of the US and Brit govts in the eyes of the rest of the
world. The US as an example is the only nation to have used nukes in a
conflict, it is the US that for whatever reason, just or not that has done
most of the invading or attacking because of "" Percieved threats"", and
again dear friend through shear bad luck or misfortune over the last fifty
years. America has tended to kill far more than its fair share of innocent
civilians. The US has now attacked , and invaded Iraq killing god knows how
many people, for an unproven percieved threat, The assault happened after
the US and Brit govt assured the world that saddam had **** loads of nasty
weapons easily to hand and ready to use within 45 minutes all under the gaze
of thwe Brit and Yank inteligence agencies, And not of it has come true.
When this is combined with the fact that Britain and the US still has ****
loads of nukes and massive forces of our own the utter hypocracy of trying
to tell other nations who have not attacked us that they can not have the
same qweapons as us???.

We can not honestly tell one nation it can not have or own NBC weapons so
long as we have them ourselves, especially when it is our nations who have
dont most of the interfering in other nations internal affairs, it does not
take much to petrsuasde ill educated subsistance farmers in the middle east,
asia or south america that we are just big bully boys who will not follows
the laws we demand they live by, just being british or american does not
make us any more less rersponsible or culpable than any other nation.

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 22:13:44 +0100, "The Rifleman"
wrote:


Not at all. The US has had a long history of having BC in its
inventory and made no bones about it. Unlike Iraq though we never
intentionally used it on our enemies, or our countrymen.

So Agent Orange was never used in Vietnam???????, Vietnamese people and
Yank
Grunts never got poisened by Chemical defoliants dropped and sprayed by
trhe USAF.

Gunner my much vaunted and greatly respected friend I think you are
telling
me fibs ???

Agent orange was not considered a war chemical. It was also used in
several other countries for what it was intended for..a defoliant, and
as such, was not considered a antipersonnel device as all the other
war gases and bio agents are.

That's like saying gasoline was a chemical agent....

It is when mixed with detergent and dropped as napalm, I am sorry dear
friend but you are simply wrong on this point ( though it is rare for you I
will admit) , Phosgene was developed as a chem weapon after it was used as a
dry cleaning agent, Chlorine was used for disinfection before it was used as
a chemical weapon, and agent orage if sprayed from an aircraft onto a
community living in a forested are is still a chemical warfar attack

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 22:16:13 +0100, "The Rifleman"
wrote:


Sure we have the right. We have destroyed ours, even the stuff that
was misplaced. And we have no history of using it on our enemies or
friends, and quite frankly we have the might to make it so.

Just thinking about the US army and its deliberate infecting of certain
black troops with syphalis as well???

That never happened. We did however allow individuals already infected
to continue to be infected as we tracked the course of their disease.
Still a terrible thing however.

And yes I agree our country aint perfect either but we are not trying to
claim the moral highground, america is.

At which time in which part of our history? Your history is rotten
with horrible things as well. Perhaps indeed far more than ours, so
if you wish to define todays US with bad **** that happened 50 yrs
ago..shall we discuss similar situations with the UK?

Gunner
There is no need to, old chap we brits open acknowlege just how ****ty our
behaviour has been even up to and including some of the more nasty things we
did to the argies and in Gulf war 1, We know we are sneaky and underhand at
warfare thats why we are so good at it, after all its the brits who created
the first concentration camps, but we dont( apart from Blair and Co ) try to
claim the moral highground when we know we are wrong. and in this war and in
Afghasnistan both the Us and UK are simply in the wrong, we may have removed
a few hundred Al Quaeda and Mujahadeen ( Who were equipped and trained by
the brits and yanks) and got rid of Saddam ( who was Americas allie when the
US fell out with Ian) But look at the cost in innocent lives?? 3000 innocent
people were killed by terrs on 911, yet in revenge we are believed to have
killed over ten times that number of people only getting a 1000 or so gun
men in Afghanstan and destrying the socioal infrastructure of Iraq.
This will go down in everyones history books as a bad bloody state of
affairs for Britain and the US.

Eyewitness reports from former Iraqi servicemen say that they just took
the
munitions out into the desert and detonated them (I'm assuming from well
upwind). They've got lots of desert, and most of the agents are
non-persistent,
so while that might not satisfy US enviroweenies, it was probably an
adequate
way of dealing with them.

Gary

So in that case their behaviour was no worse than the yanks setting off
nukes in New Mexico and us Brits setting em off in Australia(

In article ,
says...
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 22:22:13 +0800, Ian W wrote:
In article ,
says...

So Agent Orange was never used in Vietnam???????, Vietnamese people and Yank
Grunts never got poisened by Chemical defoliants dropped and sprayed by
trhe USAF.

To say nothing of the estimated 500,000 to 1 million Vietnamese kids born
with birth defects as a probable consequence of the spraying of Agent
Orange etc.

A quote from UNICEF ( http://www.unicef.org.vn/disable.htm )

"An untold number of Vietnamese children suffer from disabilities
attributable to Agent Orange, the chemical defoliant the United States
military sprayed over vast areas of Viet Nam during the war. While a
recent study funded by the Vietnamese government places the total number
of Agent Orange victims at 30,000, the specific number of child victims
identified in the study has not been disclosed. What is known with
certainty is that some Vietnamese children continue to be exposed to this
dangerous substance.

Studies conducted by the Canadian-based Hatfield Group reveal that there
are still areas in Viet Nam with alarmingly high levels of dioxin (the
toxic agent in Agent Orange), and indicate that in these areas dioxin is
entering the food chain. The studies suggest a direct relationship
between dioxin contamination and human health, a link that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency recently confirmed. In a tacit
acknowledgement of the harmful effects Agent Orange can have on the
children of persons exposed to the defoliant, the United States
government provides benefits for U.S. veterans who were exposed to Agent
Orange in Viet Nam, and whose children suffer from spina bifida, a
debilitating spinal disease. However, the United States has not offered
any such aid to disabled children in Viet Nam."

The major risk of believing alarmist "science" is that it is often wrong.

In this case, dioxins are produced as a byproduct of the manufacture
of chlorinated biphenols such as 245T (Agent Orange is a mixture of
24D, weed killer, and 245T, brush killer), transformer oils, etc. It is
present in parts per billion concentrations in these products. It was
once thought to be persistent in the environment, but better science
has demonstrated that it rapidly breaks down in soil when exposed
to sunlight (see follow up reports on Times Beach).

Of course there's also the minor problem of the use of depleted uranium
shells in both Iraq and the former state of Yugoslavia and it's long term
consequences for both vetrans and the civilian population.

Depeleted uranium can be hazardous (heavy metal poison) if it is ingested.
So eating depleted uranium is not recommended. (Eating lead, tungsten or
any other heavy metal is also not recommended for the same reason.) But
it is no more radioactive than granite. It is called depleted because the fissile
U235 has been removed from it.

Gary

I'll take the word of an internationally respected organisation such as
UNESCO, whom while not perfect is at least an in a position to speak with
some degree of proved authority on such matters as the long term effects
of exposure to the human body of likes of Dioxin and other highly toxic
defoliants used by the US military in both Vietnam and Thailand.

Care to explain away the massive increase in cancer amongst Gulf War (Mk-
1) vetrans and amongst the iraqi population then?

This doesn't mean that I don't have a degree of agreeance with your
statements, however at this point in time it's merely the word of someone
who has not cited any references nor who has appended any professional
qualifications that can form the basis for judging if your comments are
valid or a waste of space.

Ian

but many are spoiled into only
accepting
something at (or close to) their previous position.

That's an interesting thought, but can you back it up? Do you have any idea
what the average hourly wage is for those who are displaced and who find new
jobs, versus what they were making before?

Ed Huntress

No, I'm just going by those I know who are out of work (or have been) an
continue the lifestyle and complain they can't find employment comensurate with
their "ability & experience". Also, common sense. Truth is (IMO) that we are
now in a world economy and becoming more entertwined each year. We can expect
that to put downward pressure on the "wages" in this country. We (our standard
of living) will equilibrate to some extent with other countries. The only
alternative, isolationism, isn't really an option. The old days of forty bucks
an hour, negotiated by the good old union, to stick a bolt in a hole on an
assy. line, are long past. Like it or not.
Greg Sefton

Chuck Connors says:
That's like saying gasoline was a chemical agent....

It is when mixed with detergent and dropped as napalm,

Er, Uh, no it was an incindiary agent, much like an explosive but never a
chemical agent and it was mixed with a coagulant to gel it for better effect.
Greg Sefton

In article , Bray Haven says...

The old days of forty bucks
an hour, negotiated by the good old union, to stick a bolt in a hole on an
assy. line, are long past. Like it or not.

Ok, what about the 'good old days' when management extracts a
promise from the bad union, to give back benefits and wages.
And then goes and votes itself a big bonus and raise?

Could those good old days be gone too?

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:38:31 +0100, "The Rifleman"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 22:18:08 +0100, "The Rifleman"
wrote:


"Jim Dauven" wrote in message
...
Same for the Umitilla Army Depot in Oregon. They built an incenerator
but the environmentalists have stopped the project in favor of
chemical neutralization that won't put as much crap in the air but
is more dangerous to human beings and produces a whole lot more
toxic chemical waste that has to be gotten rid of.



You were saying Gunner old chap )

Saying what? That we have huge stockpiles of BC that we are
destroying? Of course, and thats been no secret.

Your question was?

Gunner
) The point is old chap the US was supposed to have already disposed of
the very weapons it has suddenly stumbled across , years ago,

Sorry laddy boyo. The US has had a long standing program to destroy
its existing stocks of BC, but no one has claimed that they have all
been destroyed. The programs have had a number of well publishised
stopages due to environmental concerns, and what was scheduled to have
been destroyed 10 yrs ago, according to the programs, are still on
going. I was under the impression you has a firmer grip on this
subject. Im sorry to hear you dont. Shrug. The "discovered" stockpiles
were not in the original inventory listing of chemical agents that
were to be destroyed, as they were lost in the system, but they have
been added to the list of things to destroy, that is ongoing.


Snip misinformed propaganda

Gunner

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:42:04 +0100, "The Rifleman"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 22:13:44 +0100, "The Rifleman"
wrote:


Not at all. The US has had a long history of having BC in its
inventory and made no bones about it. Unlike Iraq though we never
intentionally used it on our enemies, or our countrymen.

So Agent Orange was never used in Vietnam???????, Vietnamese people and
Yank
Grunts never got poisened by Chemical defoliants dropped and sprayed by
trhe USAF.

Gunner my much vaunted and greatly respected friend I think you are
telling
me fibs ???

Agent orange was not considered a war chemical. It was also used in
several other countries for what it was intended for..a defoliant, and
as such, was not considered a antipersonnel device as all the other
war gases and bio agents are.

That's like saying gasoline was a chemical agent....

It is when mixed with detergent and dropped as napalm, I am sorry dear
friend but you are simply wrong on this point ( though it is rare for you I
will admit) , Phosgene was developed as a chem weapon after it was used as a
dry cleaning agent, Chlorine was used for disinfection before it was used as
a chemical weapon, and agent orage if sprayed from an aircraft onto a
community living in a forested are is still a chemical warfar attack


You are just a bundle of misinformation tonight. Sigh..

http://www.lewispublishing.com/orange.htm
Agent Orange was a 50-50 mix of two chemicals, known conventionally as
2,4,D and 2,4,5,T. The combined product was mixed with kerosene or
diesel fuel and dispersed by aircraft, vehicle, and hand spraying. An
estimated 19 million gallons of Agent Orange were used in South
Vietnam during the war.

Mixing it with Kero of fuel oil made the mixture heavier, and more
persistant, ie making it stick to the plants much better, rather than
running off on to the jungle floor. It was NEVER used as a component
of napalm, as the desired effect of nape, was to burn people and
structures, not to burn off the herbicide.

You are aware that other herbicides were also used?

The Fifteen Herbicides Used in Vietnam

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


PURPLE: A formulation of 2,4,-D and 2,4,5,-T used between 1962 and
1964.

GREEN: Contained 2,4,5-T and was used 1962-1964.

PINK: Contained 2,4,5-T and was used 1962-1964.

ORANGE: A formulation of 2,4,-D and 2,4,5-T used between 1965 and
1970.

WHITE: A formulation of Picloram and 2,4,-D.

BLUE: Contained cacodylic acid.

ORANGE II: A formualtion of 2,4,-D and 2,4,5-T used in 1968 and 1969
(also sometimes referred to as "Super Orange")

DINOXOL: A formulation of 2,4,-D and 2,4,,5-T. Small quantities were
tested in Vietnam between 1962 and 1964.

TRINOXOL: Contained 2,4,5-T. Small quantities tested in Vietnam
1962-1964.

BROMACIL
DIQUAT:
TANDEX:
MONURON:
DIURON:
DALAPON:
Small quantities of all of the above were tested in Vietnam,
1962-1964.
------------------------------------------------------

If you will check out the various herbicides in current usage today,
you will find at least 3 of the above.

Steve..stick to what you know..not what you think you know. Btw..Ive
been tested for dioxin, and while I have measureable levels in my
body..they are below the danger levels found so far.

I have buried a number of friends whom were in the AOs sprayed by
Agent Orange, either directly sprayed, or in the areas not long
afterwards.

While the side effects of Agent Orange are tragic, they were largely
unforeseen at the time, and were not the primary effect looked for by
its usage. It was to kill jungle, and hence deny Mr. Charles a place
to hide.

All your wishing will not make it otherwise. Sorry troup, but as you
are wrong so many times with issues regarding Vietnam, and other
aspects of the US military, you are again wrong on this subject.

Gunner

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

jim rozen wrote:
In article , Bray Haven says...


The old days of forty bucks
an hour, negotiated by the good old union, to stick a bolt in a hole on an
assy. line, are long past. Like it or not.


Ok, what about the 'good old days' when management extracts a
promise from the bad union, to give back benefits and wages.
And then goes and votes itself a big bonus and raise?

Could those good old days be gone too?

Sadly, no. But it's getting harder and harder. I see
a jury has been seated to try Koslowski and Swartz,
the two pigs at the trough at Tyco.

A few heads were rolled onto the street from the New
York Stock Exchange.

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 04:47:40 +0800, Ian W wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 22:22:13 +0800, Ian W wrote:
In article ,
says...

So Agent Orange was never used in Vietnam???????, Vietnamese people and Yank
Grunts never got poisened by Chemical defoliants dropped and sprayed by
trhe USAF.

To say nothing of the estimated 500,000 to 1 million Vietnamese kids born
with birth defects as a probable consequence of the spraying of Agent
Orange etc.

A quote from UNICEF ( http://www.unicef.org.vn/disable.htm )

"An untold number of Vietnamese children suffer from disabilities
attributable to Agent Orange, the chemical defoliant the United States
military sprayed over vast areas of Viet Nam during the war. While a
recent study funded by the Vietnamese government places the total number
of Agent Orange victims at 30,000, the specific number of child victims
identified in the study has not been disclosed. What is known with
certainty is that some Vietnamese children continue to be exposed to this
dangerous substance.

Studies conducted by the Canadian-based Hatfield Group reveal that there
are still areas in Viet Nam with alarmingly high levels of dioxin (the
toxic agent in Agent Orange), and indicate that in these areas dioxin is
entering the food chain. The studies suggest a direct relationship
between dioxin contamination and human health, a link that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency recently confirmed. In a tacit
acknowledgement of the harmful effects Agent Orange can have on the
children of persons exposed to the defoliant, the United States
government provides benefits for U.S. veterans who were exposed to Agent
Orange in Viet Nam, and whose children suffer from spina bifida, a
debilitating spinal disease. However, the United States has not offered
any such aid to disabled children in Viet Nam."

The major risk of believing alarmist "science" is that it is often wrong.

In this case, dioxins are produced as a byproduct of the manufacture
of chlorinated biphenols such as 245T (Agent Orange is a mixture of
24D, weed killer, and 245T, brush killer), transformer oils, etc. It is
present in parts per billion concentrations in these products. It was
once thought to be persistent in the environment, but better science
has demonstrated that it rapidly breaks down in soil when exposed
to sunlight (see follow up reports on Times Beach).

Of course there's also the minor problem of the use of depleted uranium
shells in both Iraq and the former state of Yugoslavia and it's long term
consequences for both vetrans and the civilian population.

Depeleted uranium can be hazardous (heavy metal poison) if it is ingested.
So eating depleted uranium is not recommended. (Eating lead, tungsten or
any other heavy metal is also not recommended for the same reason.) But
it is no more radioactive than granite. It is called depleted because the fissile
U235 has been removed from it.

Gary

I'll take the word of an internationally respected organisation such as
UNESCO, whom while not perfect is at least an in a position to speak with
some degree of proved authority on such matters as the long term effects
of exposure to the human body of likes of Dioxin and other highly toxic
defoliants used by the US military in both Vietnam and Thailand.

Care to explain away the massive increase in cancer amongst Gulf War (Mk-
1) vetrans and amongst the iraqi population then?

This doesn't mean that I don't have a degree of agreeance with your
statements, however at this point in time it's merely the word of someone
who has not cited any references nor who has appended any professional
qualifications that can form the basis for judging if your comments are
valid or a waste of space.

The EPA released a reassessment of dioxin in 2001. Here's what it says
about dioxin life cycle:

"The life-span of Dioxin is directly related to the amount of sunlight to which
it is exposed. If left in the open, the half-life (the time it takes for the substance
to degrade to ½ it’s size) is believed to be only 20 hours. However, in most instances
dioxin finds refuge in near by water systems, or soil that can significantly increase
it’s life. If released in to the water, dioxin will usually find it’s way into sediments or
suspended materials. Under such conditions dioxin’s half-life has been estimated
to excess 1.5 years. The life-span of Dioxin also depends on the climate. Because
of the higher amounts of sunlight founds in hot climates, Dioxin does not last very
long. However in cold, or frozen climates Dioxin can remain hidden away for
centuries."

Here's a quote from an article by Dr. Gordon Gribble published by the
American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) on health effects of
dioxin.

"The only documented adverse health effect of exposure to dioxin is the skin disease
chloracne. Although it is often persistent and disfiguring, chloracne is not life-threatening
and is often reversible when exposure ceases.

Studies following certain groups of Vietnam veterans who were exposed to high levels
of dioxin, a contaminant of the defoliant Agent Orange, show no association between
dioxin tissue levels and cancer or other health effects. A two-part, twenty-year mortality
and health-effects evaluation of 995 Air Force Ranch Hands, the personnel who handled
and sprayed Agent Orange, found no chloracne, no increase in nine immune-system
tests and no increase in either melanoma or systemic cancer (cancers of the lung, colon, testicle, bladder, kidney, prostate;
Hodgkin's disease; soft tissue sarcoma or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma).

The authors of this study concluded that "there is insufficient scientific evidence
to implicate a causal relationship between herbicide exposure and adverse health in
the Ranch Hand Group."

Studies of more than 800 dioxin-exposed workers in nine industrial-plant accidents
in the United States, England, Germany, France, Czechoslovakia and the Netherlands
fail to indicate serious long-term health effects in these men, some of whom have dioxin concentrations in their bodies
exceeding 1,000 ppt (parts per trillion) thirty years after
their initial exposure. Some 465 cases of chloracne were observed in these workers.

A study of 2,200 Dow Chemical workers who were potentially exposed to dioxin revealed
that they had a slightly lower mortality than a control group and that they have had no
total cancer increase. A study of 370 wives of dioxin-exposed men showed no excess miscarriages and no excess fetal deaths or
birth defects in their children.

Life-threatening health effects in humans, in short, have not been linked definitively to
dioxin, despite our fears to the contrary. Over 40,000 scientific papers have provided
enormous information about this greatly misunderstood chemical, and the scientific and
medical communities will continue to monitor the health of those people who have been
exposed to large amounts of dioxins. The evidence now in hand does not support claims
that dioxin is a major health threat."

Here's an excerpt from the CDC on dioxin health effects:

"Many studies have looked at how CDDs can affect human health. Most of
these studies examined workers exposed during the manufacture of chemicals
and pesticides contaminated with 2,3,7,8-TCDD. Other studies have looked at
American Vietnam veterans and Vietnamese populations exposed to Agent
Orange and populations exposed to 2,3,7,8-TCDD as a result of an accident.
The workers and Vietnam veterans were most likely exposed to 2,3,7,8-TCDD
mainly through breathing and skin contact. People who were accidentally
exposed to 2,3,7,8-TCDD in Seveso, Italy, or Times Beach, Missouri, were
probably exposed through eating and drinking contaminated food and milk,
breathing contaminated particles and dust, through skin contact with
contaminated soil and through unintentional hand-to mouth activity.

Epidemiology is an inexact science and many of the human studies have
many shortcomings which make it difficult for scientists to establish an
association between 2,3,7,8-TCDD exposure levels and health effects.
A common problem with most of the human studies is that the people
are exposed to a number of chemicals at the same time. In most human
health studies, we do not know how much 2,3,7,8-TCDD people were
exposed to or how long the exposure lasted. In other studies, the people
were examined many years after they were exposed and some of the
effects may have not have been present at the time of examination or
the effects observed may not have been caused by 2,3,7,8-TCDD.

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT
A number of effects have been observed in people exposed to 2,3,7,8-TCDD
levels which are at least 10 times higher than background levels. The most
obvious health effect in people exposed to relatively large amounts of 2,3,7,8-
TCDD is chloracne. Chloracne is a severe skin disease characterized by acne-
like lesions. Chloracne generally occurs on the face and upper body, but may
occur elsewhere on the body. Unlike common acne, severe chloracne is harder
to cure and can be more disfiguring. In milder cases, the lesions heal several
months after exposure ends. In more severe cases, the lesions may last for
many years after exposure. Most of the chloracne cases have been attributed
to accidental exposure to high doses of 2,3,7,8-TCDD. Other effects to the skin,
such as erythematous or red skin rashes, discoloration, and excessive body hair,
have been reported to occur in people following exposure to high concentrations
of 2,3,7,8-TCDD. Changes in blood and urine that may indicate liver damage have
been observed in people. Alterations in the ability of the liver to metabolize (or
breakdown) hemoglobin, lipids, sugar, and protein have been reported in people
exposed to relatively high concentrations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD.

Most of the effects are considered mild and were reversible. However, in some
people these effects may last for many years. Slight increases in the risk of
diabetes and abnormal glucose tolerance have been observed in some studies
of people exposed to 2,3,7,8-TCDD. We do not have enough information to
know if exposure to 2,3,7,8-TCDD will result in reproductive or developmental
effects in people, but animal studies suggest that this is a potential health
concern."

So, the earlier scare stories about dioxin have largely been repudiated. No
one is claiming dioxin exposure is harmless, but provable effects are much
less than were previously thought. The half-life of dioxins on surfaces
exposed to sunlight is also *much* shorter than previously believed.

If you wish, I can quote similar information about depleted uranium
exposure.

Gary

Gunner scribed in
:

Did the Prez lie about WMD?

if he didn't lie about that, he lied about soemthing else. best you
look real good at what the whoel war thing took your mind off of.
(-:



swarf, steam and wind

--
David Forsyth -:- the email address is real /"\
http://terrapin.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/welcome.html \ /
ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail - - - - - - - X
If you receive email saying "Send this to everyone you know," / \
PLEASE pretend you don't know me.

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 19:35:53 +0100, "The Rifleman"
wrote:


"Ignoramus19432" wrote in message
...
That Clinton is scum and a liar is no news.

The Bush is scum and a liar is a much more relevant news.

You forgot the lying traitorous scumbag Tony Blair.

Can forget the both of them, actually. Really just chicken****
puppets. Bush and Blair both.

Shouldn't forget the cadre of New World Ordure architects - Perle,
Wolfowitz, et al., that are yanking their strings and making them look
and feel like complete ASSHOLES - you can see the embarrassment on
their faces at press conferences - mouthing nonsense that's not
fooling anybody that still has a few firing synapses.

Gunner wrote:
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 20:11:55 GMT, Ike wrote:



Gunner wrote:


SO, OUR PRESIDENT LIED ABOUT WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
This might come in handy.....


Re-evaluating Weapons of Mass Destruction

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the
capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the
missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our
purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat
posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there
matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders
of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological
weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security
threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as
he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton
National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and
consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take
necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and
missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end
its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to
President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of
weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat
to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of
the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D,
CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building
weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov.10,
1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated
his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological,
chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be
back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues
to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the
cover of an elicit missile program to develop longer-range
missiles that will threaten the United States and our
allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob
Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a
tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the
region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations
and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means
of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19,
2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological
and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore,
Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven
impossible to deter and we should assume that it will
continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore,
Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is
seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen.
Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of
1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some
stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he
has since embarked on a crash course to build up his
chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United
States the authority to use force-if necessary-to disarm
Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of
weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and
grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA),
Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is
working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will
likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ...
We also should remember we have always underestimated the
progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
destruction." Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the
past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has
demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and
biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence
reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his
chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile
delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including
al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left
unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his
capacity to wage biological and chemical rfare, and will
keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary
Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling
evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number
of years, a developing capacity for the production and
storage of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Bob Graham
(D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is
a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime
... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he
is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he
is miscalculating America's response to his continued
deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass
destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with
weapons of mass destruction is real..." Sen. John F. Kerry
(D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
------------------------------------

So how come the Democrats say there never was any WMD and Bush went to
war for oil?

Gunner


How is it you can dig up quotes from Clinton yet have YET to
state where WMD have been or are to be found?

Could it be that there ARE NO WMD???? That Bush's War was
nothing but a SHAM???


Bush Ethics: Lie, Cheat, Steal & Commit War crimes...

Ike the Anti-Sheep


Ike...some..and only a few of those quotes are from Clinton. Nancy
Pelosi is Clinton in drag? They are from Prominent Democrats, all of
them. Why do you keep denying them? Is there some reason you have this
huge blank spot in your perception? Some from of DNC programming? Are
you a Manchurian Candidate?

Have you read the David Kay 3 month interim report yet that was
released recently? I suggest you do so.

Gunner

All that & you STILL can not name ONE location where WMD can be found
in Iraq.

Wake me when you have something important to say....

Ike
Killer of sheep, Eater of lamb. Milker of Goat & Cow.



"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

Gary Coffman wrote:

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 23:57:20 GMT, Gunner wrote:

Have you read the David Kay 3 month interim report yet that was
released recently? I suggest you do so.


It might be helpful if you read the full text, *carefully*. What it admits
is that not even one liter of nerve gas has been found. It says not a
milliliter of bioweaponry has been found. And it provides no evidence
at all, zero, of any ongoing nuclear materials enrichment. This despite
claims by Bush in the build up to invasion that Iraq had *stockpiles*
of nerve gas, bioweapons, and was within months of producing
nuclear weapons.

BTW, a nuclear material enrichment plant is basically impossible
to hide. Ever been to Oak Ridge? It takes *huge* amounts of
electricity to run an enrichment facility. That's why Oak Ridge
was located next to TVA. You can't hide something like that
for even a week from both aerial surveillance and ground truth
inspections. Basically, all you have to do is follow the heaviest
power lines to find it. Iraq doesn't have any facility with that
sort of electrical power feeding it.

Even civilian satellites like SPOT (imagery available via
Terraserver) are sufficient to spot something like that.
We don't need to depend on what politicians or their
toadys claim, we can look for ourselves.


Gary, you may want to Republican that down. Gunner's a lot like
his hero Bush. Reading ain't what he do best... Keep the word's
simple (1st grade) & cliff note everything.


Ike

Hi Gunner,
-
Yeah, you just supported what I noticed as soon as Bush-the-2nd took
office, the media quipped "We are in a recession and it's YOUR fault!
Big Joke!
-
I'd say taking down those two big towers in Downtown NY City had a bit
of influence in our negative economy. (And BOY! watch services get cut
in NY State to pay for new ones.)
-
Remember? Before 8 years of Clinton and Gore, "What about that 36
(random #) trillion dollar National Debt?" And in 8 years following
Bush-the-1st, not one mention of the National Debt or Recession, we were
in good times. Please define GOOD!
-
I think most the USA press/media support the Democrats and what the hell
happened to objective journalism? I don't think Bush will get
re-elected (We got another Viet 'Nam whatever the excuse.), The
Democrats will get the ball---most likely Hillary (Oh, yeah, I forgot,
she's not running, yeah right!) and you watch how fast that National
Debt gets zeroed and we will be in GOOD times again and the media will
tell us how much more money we got in our pockets. It won't be true, we
will still be in recession and out of work, but the media will covince
us we are better off!
-
I'll vote for Hillary, not because I believe in her (she was
WHITEWATER!) but because this Country deserves her. It will be an
interesting ride.
-
Nobody in USA government supports me or the average "Joe Blow." They
all support the rich and special interest groups---case closed!
-
From most of the posts I have read here (including mine!) on this thread
I am convinced The Electorial College is STILL justifiable!! {;^)
~~~~~~~~~
On another note:
======
"COMMUNISM and The Domino Effect."
======
How come we (USA), oh yeah, don't forget the U.N. (Big Joke!) fought
Korea and 'Nam because we got to "nip this stuff in the budd" to keep it
from spreading? NOW fifty years later, it's OK! to do business with a
Communist country to "contain" it. (MARKETING! Same thing, just call
it something else.) Sounds like history repeating. Bottom line---CHEAP
LABOR! Remember Japan?
-
I still think, though I've never read it anywhere, Viet Nam was about
losing cheap labor for USA markets and buying Coke.
-
Kurt
{:{
=========



OT- Did the Prez lie about WMD?

Group: rec.crafts.metalworking Date: Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 12:24am (EDT+4)
From: (Gunner)
On 11 Oct 2003 15:22:45 -0700, jim rozen wrote:
In article , Bray Haven
says...
A He's still trying to clean up the Clinton recession.
Ah, is that what you call it when everyone has a job, and there's no
federal deficit.
I have to update my dictionary.
Jim
============
============
Denial is not a river in Egypt. The Recession started in the last 18
months of the Clinton administration. And as far as Surplus..IE no
deficit..that was a very nice job of smoke and mirrors. However the
facts quite spoke differently.
Gunner
=============
=============
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

(Repeat, sorry)
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Hi Gunner,
-
Yeah, you just supported what I noticed as soon as Bush-the-2nd took
office, the media quipped "We are in a recession and it's YOUR fault!
Big Joke!
-
I'd say taking down those two big towers in Downtown NY City had a bit
of influence in our negative economy. (And BOY! watch services get cut
in NY State to pay for new ones.)
-
Remember? Before 8 years of Clinton and Gore, "What about that 36
(random #) trillion dollar National Debt?" =A0 And in 8 years following
Bush-the-1st, not one mention of the National Debt or Recession, we were
in good times. Please define GOOD!
-
I think most the USA press/media support the Democrats and what the hell
happened to objective journalism? I don't think Bush will get re-elected
(We got another Viet 'Nam whatever the excuse.), The Democrats will get
the ball---most likely Hillary (Oh, yeah, I forgot, she's not running,
yeah right!) and you watch how fast that National Debt gets zeroed and
we will be in GOOD times again and the media will tell us how much more
money we got in our pockets. It won't be true, we will still be in
recession and out of work, but the media will covince us we are better
off!
-
I'll vote for Hillary, not because I believe in her (she was WHITEWATER!
and 55 interesting questionable related deaths) but because this Country
deserves her. It will be an interesting ride.
-
Nobody in USA government supports me or the average "Joe Blow." They all
support the rich and special interest groups---case closed!
-
From most of the posts I have read here (including mine!) on this thread
I am convinced The Electorial College is STILL justifiable!! {;^)
~~~~~~~~~
On another note:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
"COMMUNISM and The Domino Effect."
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
How come we (USA), oh yeah, don't forget the U.N. (Big Joke!) fought
Korea and 'Nam because we got to "nip this stuff in the budd" to keep it
from spreading? NOW fifty years later, it's OK! to do business with a
Communist country to "contain" it. (MARKETING! Same thing, just call it
something else.) Sounds like history repeating. Bottom line---CHEAP
LABOR! Remember Japan?
-
I still think, though I've never read it anywhere, Viet Nam was about
losing cheap labor for USA markets and buying Coke.
-
Kurt
{:{
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

OT- Did the Prez lie about WMD?
Group: rec.crafts.metalworking Date: Sun, Oct 12, 2003, 12:24am (EDT+4)
From: (Gunner)
On 11 Oct 2003 15:22:45 -0700, jim rozen wrote:
In article , Bray Haven
says...
A He's still trying to clean up the Clinton recession. Ah, is that what
you call it when everyone has a job, and there's no federal deficit.
I have to update my dictionary.
Jim
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Denial is not a river in Egypt. The Recession started in the last 18
months of the Clinton administration. And as far as Surplus..IE no
deficit..that was a very nice job of smoke and mirrors. However the
facts quite spoke differently.
Gunner
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 06:58:41 GMT, Ike wrote:



Gunner wrote:
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 20:11:55 GMT, Ike wrote:



Gunner wrote:


SO, OUR PRESIDENT LIED ABOUT WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
This might come in handy.....


Re-evaluating Weapons of Mass Destruction

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the
capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the
missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our
purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat
posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there
matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders
of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological
weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security
threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as
he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton
National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and
consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take
necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and
missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end
its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to
President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of
weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat
to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of
the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D,
CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building
weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov.10,
1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated
his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological,
chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be
back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues
to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the
cover of an elicit missile program to develop longer-range
missiles that will threaten the United States and our
allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob
Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a
tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the
region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations
and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means
of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19,
2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological
and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore,
Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven
impossible to deter and we should assume that it will
continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore,
Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is
seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen.
Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of
1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some
stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he
has since embarked on a crash course to build up his
chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United
States the authority to use force-if necessary-to disarm
Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of
weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and
grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA),
Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is
working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will
likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ...
We also should remember we have always underestimated the
progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
destruction." Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the
past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has
demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and
biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence
reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his
chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile
delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including
al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left
unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his
capacity to wage biological and chemical rfare, and will
keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary
Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling
evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number
of years, a developing capacity for the production and
storage of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Bob Graham
(D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is
a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime
... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he
is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he
is miscalculating America's response to his continued
deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass
destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with
weapons of mass destruction is real..." Sen. John F. Kerry
(D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
------------------------------------

So how come the Democrats say there never was any WMD and Bush went to
war for oil?

Gunner


How is it you can dig up quotes from Clinton yet have YET to
state where WMD have been or are to be found?

Could it be that there ARE NO WMD???? That Bush's War was
nothing but a SHAM???


Bush Ethics: Lie, Cheat, Steal & Commit War crimes...

Ike the Anti-Sheep


Ike...some..and only a few of those quotes are from Clinton. Nancy
Pelosi is Clinton in drag? They are from Prominent Democrats, all of
them. Why do you keep denying them? Is there some reason you have this
huge blank spot in your perception? Some from of DNC programming? Are
you a Manchurian Candidate?

Have you read the David Kay 3 month interim report yet that was
released recently? I suggest you do so.

Gunner

All that & you STILL can not name ONE location where WMD can be found
in Iraq.

Wake me when you have something important to say....

Ike
Killer of sheep, Eater of lamb. Milker of Goat & Cow.

Ike..can you tell me where atomic bombs are found in the United
States? Have you seen one? Can you prove that they are there?

Gunner

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

In article , Gunner says...

...can you tell me where atomic bombs are found in the United
States? Have you seen one? Can you prove that they are there?

Sure, there's two of them right across the river, at the
museum. Seen both of em. Also seen the Japanese tourists,
who cannot seem to resist taking photos of same.

What kind of proof?

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 09:20:28 -0400 (EDT), (Kurt
{:{) wrote:

(Repeat, sorry)
========
Hi Gunner,
-
Yeah, you just supported what I noticed as soon as Bush-the-2nd took
office, the media quipped "We are in a recession and it's YOUR fault!
Big Joke!
-
I'd say taking down those two big towers in Downtown NY City had a bit
of influence in our negative economy. (And BOY! watch services get cut
in NY State to pay for new ones.)
-
Remember? Before 8 years of Clinton and Gore, "What about that 36
(random #) trillion dollar National Debt?" * And in 8 years following
Bush-the-1st, not one mention of the National Debt or Recession, we were
in good times. Please define GOOD!
-
I think most the USA press/media support the Democrats and what the hell
happened to objective journalism? I don't think Bush will get re-elected
(We got another Viet 'Nam whatever the excuse.), The Democrats will get
the ball---most likely Hillary (Oh, yeah, I forgot, she's not running,
yeah right!) and you watch how fast that National Debt gets zeroed and
we will be in GOOD times again and the media will tell us how much more
money we got in our pockets. It won't be true, we will still be in
recession and out of work, but the media will covince us we are better
off!
-
I'll vote for Hillary, not because I believe in her (she was WHITEWATER!
and 55 interesting questionable related deaths) but because this Country
deserves her. It will be an interesting ride.
-
Nobody in USA government supports me or the average "Joe Blow." They all
support the rich and special interest groups---case closed!
-
From most of the posts I have read here (including mine!) on this thread
I am convinced The Electorial College is STILL justifiable!! {;^)

I agree! Thank God we are a representative republic rather than a true
democracy.

~~~~~~~~~
On another note:
======
"COMMUNISM and The Domino Effect."
======
How come we (USA), oh yeah, don't forget the U.N. (Big Joke!) fought
Korea and 'Nam because we got to "nip this stuff in the budd" to keep it
from spreading? NOW fifty years later, it's OK! to do business with a
Communist country to "contain" it. (MARKETING! Same thing, just call it
something else.) Sounds like history repeating. Bottom line---CHEAP
LABOR! Remember Japan?
-
I still think, though I've never read it anywhere, Viet Nam was about
losing cheap labor for USA markets and buying Coke.
-
Kurt
{:{
=========

Gunner

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

Gunner wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 06:58:41 GMT, Ike wrote:

All that & you STILL can not name ONE location where WMD can be found
in Iraq.

Wake me when you have something important to say....

Ike..can you tell me where atomic bombs are found in the United
States? Have you seen one? Can you prove that they are there?

I wouldn't expect Gunner to know where any Iraqi WMD's are, or Ike to
know where any US WMD's are. But it does disturb me that the people
who are looking have been unable to find a trace of any Iraqi weapons.
Perhaps the most on-point question was asked by Hans Blix (I believe)
several months ago: How could the administration be 100% certain about
the existence of Iraqi WMD's [and in sufficient quantities to pose an
"imminent threat" to the US, I might add] and yet be 0% certain about
the location of any of them?

Bert

On 18 Oct 2003 09:36:40 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

...can you tell me where atomic bombs are found in the United
States? Have you seen one? Can you prove that they are there?

Sure, there's two of them right across the river, at the
museum. Seen both of em. Also seen the Japanese tourists,
who cannot seem to resist taking photos of same.

What kind of proof?

Jim

But Jim..are they really atomic bombs? Prove it one way or another.

Gunner


================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

In article , Gunner says...

But Jim..are they really atomic bombs?

The curator at west point says so. Besides,
why else would the tourists be snapping photos
so fast? LOL.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On 18 Oct 2003 17:06:41 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

But Jim..are they really atomic bombs?

The curator at west point says so. Besides,
why else would the tourists be snapping photos
so fast? LOL.

Jim

And Ive got some prime beach front property just outside of Florence
Arizona Id be happy to sell you.

Zooooo..you are vilink to dake da verd of za pawn of za military
induztrial complex about za bombs..no?

Gunner

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

by Hans Blix (I believe)
several months ago: How could the administration be 100% certain about
the existence of Iraqi WMD's [and in sufficient quantities to pose an
"imminent threat" to the US, I might add] and yet be 0% certain about
the location of any of them?

Is this the same Hans Blix who said he was certain of their existence and just
needed a little more time to find them and that he could do it easily if the
Iraqis would cooperate and quit hiding them???? )
Greg Sefton

In article , Gunner says...

And Ive got some prime beach front property just outside of Florence
Arizona Id be happy to sell you.

Thanks, I think I'd rather move to Flagstaff.

That's where our family had settled years ago.
There are still houses in that town that were
built by my great-grandfather.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On 19 Oct 2003 13:27:54 GMT, (Bray Haven) wrote:

by Hans Blix (I believe)
several months ago: How could the administration be 100% certain about
the existence of Iraqi WMD's [and in sufficient quantities to pose an
"imminent threat" to the US, I might add] and yet be 0% certain about
the location of any of them?

Is this the same Hans Blix who said he was certain of their existence and just
needed a little more time to find them and that he could do it easily if the
Iraqis would cooperate and quit hiding them???? )
Greg Sefton

Yup..same guy, same time frame.

Gunner

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle
behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

Bert wrote:
Gunner wrote:


On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 06:58:41 GMT, Ike wrote:


All that & you STILL can not name ONE location where WMD can be found
in Iraq.

Wake me when you have something important to say....

Ike..can you tell me where atomic bombs are found in the United
States? Have you seen one? Can you prove that they are there?


I wouldn't expect Gunner to know where any Iraqi WMD's are, or Ike to
know where any US WMD's are. But it does disturb me that the people
who are looking have been unable to find a trace of any Iraqi weapons.
Perhaps the most on-point question was asked by Hans Blix (I believe)
several months ago: How could the administration be 100% certain about
the existence of Iraqi WMD's [and in sufficient quantities to pose an
"imminent threat" to the US, I might add] and yet be 0% certain about
the location of any of them?

Bert

Actually Bert, I do Know where a few WMDs can be found.

Whiteman AFB, Missouri Has The Minuteman Missile system as well as
B-52s, & B-2s.

The only POSSIBLE Nuclear Items they have are Depleted Uranium Shell
cases that are laying all over the place from Both gulf wars.

Gunner is a Gop sheeple... Must be that Oxycontin he's using...

Ike

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:23:38 GMT, Go_Chiefs
wrote:



Bert wrote:
Gunner wrote:


On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 06:58:41 GMT, Ike wrote:


All that & you STILL can not name ONE location where WMD can be found
in Iraq.

Wake me when you have something important to say....

Ike..can you tell me where atomic bombs are found in the United
States? Have you seen one? Can you prove that they are there?


I wouldn't expect Gunner to know where any Iraqi WMD's are, or Ike to
know where any US WMD's are. But it does disturb me that the people
who are looking have been unable to find a trace of any Iraqi weapons.
Perhaps the most on-point question was asked by Hans Blix (I believe)
several months ago: How could the administration be 100% certain about
the existence of Iraqi WMD's [and in sufficient quantities to pose an
"imminent threat" to the US, I might add] and yet be 0% certain about
the location of any of them?

Bert

Actually Bert, I do Know where a few WMDs can be found.

Whiteman AFB, Missouri Has The Minuteman Missile system as well as
B-52s, & B-2s.

The only POSSIBLE Nuclear Items they have are Depleted Uranium Shell
cases that are laying all over the place from Both gulf wars.

Gunner is a Gop sheeple... Must be that Oxycontin he's using...

Ike

So, what did Saddam kill all those Kurds with, flattulence?

Strider

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:23:38 GMT, Go_Chiefs
wrote:



Bert wrote:
Gunner wrote:


On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 06:58:41 GMT, Ike wrote:


All that & you STILL can not name ONE location where WMD can be found
in Iraq.

Wake me when you have something important to say....

Ike..can you tell me where atomic bombs are found in the United
States? Have you seen one? Can you prove that they are there?


I wouldn't expect Gunner to know where any Iraqi WMD's are, or Ike to
know where any US WMD's are. But it does disturb me that the people
who are looking have been unable to find a trace of any Iraqi weapons.
Perhaps the most on-point question was asked by Hans Blix (I believe)
several months ago: How could the administration be 100% certain about
the existence of Iraqi WMD's [and in sufficient quantities to pose an
"imminent threat" to the US, I might add] and yet be 0% certain about
the location of any of them?

Bert

Actually Bert, I do Know where a few WMDs can be found.

Whiteman AFB, Missouri Has The Minuteman Missile system as well as
B-52s, & B-2s.

The only POSSIBLE Nuclear Items they have are Depleted Uranium Shell
cases that are laying all over the place from Both gulf wars.

Gunner is a Gop sheeple... Must be that Oxycontin he's using...

Ike

Welcome back Ike. Just get out of jail again? I notice its been around
30 or so days since I last saw you pop up your gopher like head.
Exhibition again? You should know by now , that exposing yourself to
others is gonna get you put in the graybar hotel. Or did you simply
miss your husband Bubba?

Hummmm I wonder..would that be some form of conjugal visit?

Gunner



"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia', the 'security' of the
nation, and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms', our founding
fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although
it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave
rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the
Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic
civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to
participate in the defense of his country. For that reason, I believe the
Second Amendment will always be important."
-- Senator John F. Kennedy, (D) 1960