-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

It's Official: Brits Embrace Nuclear Power

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Channel 4 News - Snowmail (UK) - Jan 10, 2008
http://www.channel4.com


Britain is going nuclear. It's official. There seems no way around the
reality that the present nuclear reactors will be clapped out by 2020
and Ministers are committing themselves to the building of a whole new
generation. It looks like they will be built close to where they all
are now. And we've seen the potential size of Sizewell C.

Our Science Correspondent Julian Rush has unearthed some disturbing
evidence about the possible risks of nuclear power. German researchers
have done the most thorough ever study into the increased risk of
childhood leukaemia amongst those living near power stations. It can't
prove causation, of course - but it does threaten to reopen the debate
about the health risks of nuclear power - the day the government
announces that it is eager to see new power stations built. [See
below].

Buried in the language of the government statement is the usual civil
service-ese in which it very much looks as if there are going to be
price guarantees to companies for electricity supply and some sort of
insurance against spiralling waste disposal costs. 

Nor does the government deal satisfactorily with what happens in the
period before 2021, when there will be a shortfall of nuclear supply. 

There's little doubt that the government has done a brilliant job at
softening up the population to accept this step but there are still
many unanswered questions. We shall be talking to the minister, the
industry and the opponents tonight. 


                               ***

http://tinyurl.com/2buuz8

FactCheck: what's new in nuclear? 

By Channel 4 News

Business secretary John Hutton boasts that he's 'giving the go ahead
today' to a new generation nuclear power station. Really? FactCheck
isn't so sure.

The claim

"Giving the go ahead today that new nuclear power should play a role in
providing the UK with clean, secure and affordable energy is in our
country's vital long term interest.

I therefore invite energy companies to bring forward plans to build and
operate new nuclear power stations." -John Hutton, business secretary,
House of Commons, 10 January 2008

The background

To some, nuclear power is the best proven source of climate friendly,
low-carbon power we have. To others, it's a phenomenally expensive and
potentially dangerous mistake.

No wonder politicians have tended to treat the issue as if it's
radioactive.

The bold announcement in the commons today, that the government is
'giving the go ahead' to a new generation of nuclear power stations has
unsurprisingly generated quite a few headlines.

But there's a very big gap between announcing something in the Commons
and it actually happening in real life. Indeed, does this announcement
actually contain anything new?

The analysis

The fact is that the government has been effectively pro-nuclear for
years. Power companies have been free to build new nuclear stations if
they think they can make money from them.

New planning legislation is already in place which allows them to
fast-track planning applications and override local opposition to new
build.

The obstacles to nuclear power are economic and technical - new power
stations are extremely expensive to build, and the skills to build them
are in very short supply.

The waste issue is still unsolved - leaving a potential bill of
billions of pounds to be picked up long after the last kilowatt has
flowed out of the power station.

So what is actually new in this bill?

Well, not much that we can actually see.

The chancellor has announced plans for a new body, the Nuclear
Liabilities Financing Assurance Board, to advise it on the financial
implications of decommissioning and waste.

The suspicion is that the government will need to provide some kind of
subsidy to make nuclear energy work - either in the form of a
guaranteed income stream, or some kind of incentive to reward nuclear
operations for their low emissions.

But this was announced today.

The verdict

The government hasn't given the go-ahead to nuclear power today. It has
always been in favour. It's just that the UK's power companies have not
found the nuclear option attractive.

In fact, this announcement seems to have almost no substance to it at
all.

                               ***

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/society/health/nuclear+cancer+risk+doubled/1300847?id=news_sm_nuclear


Leukaemia risk "doubled" for children who live near nuclear power 
stations - new German research.

By Julian Rush

Just as Britain decides to build new nuclear power stations, new
research, commissioned by the German government, reveals that children
under five who live within 5 km of a nuclear power plant, have twice
the risk of suffering from the blood cancer leukaemia.

In Germany it has re-opened the hugely controversial issue of the
health risks of nuclear power - which Germany is phasing out.

In Britain, discussion of the health risks has largely been absent from
the debate over new nuclear power stations, though it raged
post-Chernobyl and in the late 1980s and early 1990s when cancer
clusters were found around the village of Seascale in Cumbria, close to
the Sellafield nuclear plant, and around the nuclear site at Dounreay
in Scotland.

"What is very important about this study is its depth and rigour", says
Dr Paul Dorfman of Warwick University who was co-secretary of CERRIE,
the independent committee established by the British government in 2001
to examine the risks of internal radiation.

Scientists from the University of Mainz, who are responsible for the
German Register of Child Cancers, were asked by the German Federal
Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) to carry out the work after
earlier, inconclusive research had indicated there might be a higher
risk. It was published online last month by two well-respected
scientific journals: the International Journal of Cancer and the
European Journal of Cancer.

The German work was carefully conducted. To rule out local clustering
effects, the scientists looked at children living around 16 nuclear
plants in West Germany, slightly biasing their study areas to the east
of each plant - downwind, as the prevailing winds are westerly. They
carried out what's called a case-control study - comparing children
with cancer with those who did not have the disease.

They looked at data over 23 years, from 1980 to 2003, which gave them a
large sample, some 6300 children. And for the first time they carefully
measured the distance each child lived from the plant, to the nearest
25m.

If there was no link to the plants, they calculated there should have
been 17 leukaemia cases in children under five-years-old within 5 km of
a nuclear power station. They found 37 - double the risk.

    The German team are at pains to point out they can't say whether
radiation from the nuclear plants is the cause...

"The finding cannot be dismissed", says Professor Anthony Thomas of the
Department of Public Health Sciences at the University of Toronto in
Canada, who reviewed the study for the International Journal of Cancer.

The German team are at pains to point out they can't say whether
radiation from the nuclear plants is the cause because there is no
measurement of how much radiation each child was exposed to. But
Wolfram Koenig, director of the BfS, told a press conference last month
"Given the particularly high risk of nuclear radiation for children,
and the inadequacy of data on the emissions of nuclear power plants, we
must take the correlation between distance of residence and high risk
of leukaemia very seriously."

The British government's radiation advisors - the Committee on Medical
Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE) - have consistently
said there is no link, though they admit there is a "non-random"
distribution to childhood leukaemias in Britain and the known cancer
clusters around nuclear sites cannot be explained. A similar cancer
cluster has been found around the French nuclear site at La Hague.

"This study does throw doubt on those findings", says Dorfman. "They
may be right, but what happens if they're wrong?"

COMARE members I've spoken to have acknowledged the German researchers
are some of the best in the field and their work is of high quality and
significant, but they say they don't believe their committee needs to
change its position. 
                                 *
=================================================================
 NY Transfer News Collective     *    A Service of Blythe Systems
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
            Our main website:   http://www.blythe.org
   List Archives:       http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
   Subscribe:     http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
=================================================================

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFHhoqViz2i76ou9wQRAgrXAJ9/gLMleK+BtRWPXryB6Xg3fbgOogCdExla
huOTF9ePqjrLztt7ubdukys=
=Ui39
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

wrote in message 
news:1199999637.1921715031.4712271002@servebbs.org...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> It's Official: Brits Embrace Nuclear Power
>
> Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
>
> Channel 4 News - Snowmail (UK) - Jan 10, 2008
> http://www.channel4.com
>
>
> Britain is going nuclear. It's official. There seems no way around the
> reality that the present nuclear reactors will be clapped out by 2020
> and Ministers are committing themselves to the building of a whole new
> generation. It looks like they will be built close to where they all
> are now. And we've seen the potential size of Sizewell C.
>

And it's about time that the NuLabour cretins saw sense and started building 
nuclear power stations.
I expect that the usual total wankers - (so-called) Friends of the Earth, 
the Greens and the Liberal Demoprats and the Plaid welsh wankers will all 
try to sabotage this policy.

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:14:03 +0000, NY.Transfer.News wrote:

> There's little doubt that the government has done a brilliant job at
> softening up the population to accept this step but there are still many
> unanswered questions.

There's little doubt that, as usual the government are totally ignoring 
what the population want.

Dear me, it seems that the fat fornicating inarticulate slob must have spent 
so much of his time tupping Tracey Temple that he didn't have time to act on 
reports about dangerous immersion heaters. Though of course he did have time 
to roll out his idiotic Home Information Packs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/7180872.stm

"An inquest jury has blamed government failures for the death of a baby who 
was scalded when a water tank burst above her cot.
Rhianna Hardie, aged 10 months, received 95% burns at her home in Taunton, 
Somerset, in November 2006.
A health and safety inspector told the inquest he had notified the Office of 
the Deputy Prime Minister of the system's fault after Ms Minster's death in 
2002.
The warning was not passed on to local authorities. "

I think a self-administered punch in the face is surely called for.

"The Todal"  wrote in message 
news:5unngpF1j8ri3U1@mid.individual.net...
> Dear me, it seems that the fat fornicating inarticulate slob must have 
> spent so much of his time tupping Tracey Temple that he didn't have time 
> to act on reports about dangerous immersion heaters. Though of course he 
> did have time to roll out his idiotic Home Information Packs.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/7180872.stm
>
> "An inquest jury has blamed government failures for the death of a baby 
> who was scalded when a water tank burst above her cot.
> Rhianna Hardie, aged 10 months, received 95% burns at her home in Taunton, 
> Somerset, in November 2006.
> A health and safety inspector told the inquest he had notified the Office 
> of the Deputy Prime Minister of the system's fault after Ms Minster's 
> death in 2002.
> The warning was not passed on to local authorities. "
>
> I think a self-administered punch in the face is surely called for.

Looking at him, I suspect he's become immune to that. However, I know a guy 
in Rhyl.....

The Todal wrote:
> Dear me, it seems that the fat fornicating inarticulate slob must have spent 
> so much of his time tupping Tracey Temple that he didn't have time to act on 
> reports about dangerous immersion heaters. Though of course he did have time 
> to roll out his idiotic Home Information Packs.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/7180872.stm
> 
> "An inquest jury has blamed government failures for the death of a baby who 
> was scalded when a water tank burst above her cot.
> Rhianna Hardie, aged 10 months, received 95% burns at her home in Taunton, 
> Somerset, in November 2006.
> A health and safety inspector told the inquest he had notified the Office of 
> the Deputy Prime Minister of the system's fault after Ms Minster's death in 
> 2002.
> The warning was not passed on to local authorities. "
> 
> I think a self-administered punch in the face is surely called for. 
> 
> 
Boiling, or near boiling, water is coming out of the hot tap. But you 
don't notice or don't care....


--
Sue

"The Todal"  wrote in message 
news:5unngpF1j8ri3U1@mid.individual.net...
> Dear me, it seems that the fat fornicating inarticulate slob must have 
> spent so much of his time tupping Tracey Temple that he didn't have time 
> to act on reports about dangerous immersion heaters. Though of course he 
> did have time to roll out his idiotic Home Information Packs.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/7180872.stm
>
> "An inquest jury has blamed government failures for the death of a baby 
> who was scalded when a water tank burst above her cot.
> Rhianna Hardie, aged 10 months, received 95% burns at her home in Taunton, 
> Somerset, in November 2006.
> A health and safety inspector told the inquest he had notified the Office 
> of the Deputy Prime Minister of the system's fault after Ms Minster's 
> death in 2002.
> The warning was not passed on to local authorities. "
>
> I think a self-administered punch in the face is surely called for.
>

Typical.

A. One case in millions.

B. It was a council relet - a full electrical and gas safety check should 
have been carried out BEFORE the new tenants were given the keys.

Actually a fault whereby a thermostat sticks after a long period of non use 
is not that uncommon.  Modern correctly wired immersions have a safety cut 
out as well., but older ones might not.

"R. Mark Clayton"  wrote in
news:jeOdnehOLN0cMRvaRVnyugA@bt.com: 

> 
> Actually a fault whereby a thermostat sticks after a long period of
> non use is not that uncommon.  Modern correctly wired immersions have
> a safety cut out as well., but older ones might not. 

I was under the impression that they used a bimetalic strip, which is just 
about idiot proof.

-- 
Regards,

Periander

Periander wrote:
> "R. Mark Clayton"  wrote in
> news:jeOdnehOLN0cMRvaRVnyugA@bt.com: 
> 
>> Actually a fault whereby a thermostat sticks after a long period of
>> non use is not that uncommon.  Modern correctly wired immersions have
>> a safety cut out as well., but older ones might not. 
> 
> I was under the impression that they used a bimetalic strip, which is just 
> about idiot proof.
> 
Not quite - but it does use differential expansion.

The contacts can weld together. The body can corrode to the point where 
insufficient force is exterted on the switch to operate it.

But also: They are adjustable. People fed up with the hot water running 
out, so there is no hot water to have a bath right after say the kids 
have had theirs, turn up the water temperature. Turn the adjuster with a 
big screwdriver and (with some) you can force it to a point where the 
water will boil and the stat still not cut power off...

Very common in student houses.. or used to be..


-- 
Sue

Palindrome  wrote in
news:ueyhj.50478$z92.16579@fe09.news.easynews.com: 

> Periander wrote:
>> "R. Mark Clayton"  wrote in
>> news:jeOdnehOLN0cMRvaRVnyugA@bt.com: 
>> 
>>> Actually a fault whereby a thermostat sticks after a long period of
>>> non use is not that uncommon.  Modern correctly wired immersions
>>> have a safety cut out as well., but older ones might not. 
>> 
>> I was under the impression that they used a bimetalic strip, which is
>> just about idiot proof.
>> 
> Not quite - but it does use differential expansion.
> 
> The contacts can weld together. The body can corrode to the point
> where insufficient force is exterted on the switch to operate it.
> 
> But also: They are adjustable. People fed up with the hot water
> running out, so there is no hot water to have a bath right after say
> the kids have had theirs, turn up the water temperature. Turn the
> adjuster with a big screwdriver and (with some) you can force it to a
> point where the water will boil and the stat still not cut power
> off... 
> 
> Very common in student houses.. or used to be..

Well teh one in my parents house has to have been there for nearly 50 
years and hasn't failed yet ... 

Still, no doubt the prescotts of this world will use this as an excuse 
to screw us by means of further regulation a la "Part P".

-- 
Regards,

Periander

Periander wrote:
> Palindrome  wrote in
> news:ueyhj.50478$z92.16579@fe09.news.easynews.com: 
> 
>> Periander wrote:
>>> "R. Mark Clayton"  wrote in
>>> news:jeOdnehOLN0cMRvaRVnyugA@bt.com: 
>>>
>>>> Actually a fault whereby a thermostat sticks after a long period of
>>>> non use is not that uncommon.  Modern correctly wired immersions
>>>> have a safety cut out as well., but older ones might not. 
>>> I was under the impression that they used a bimetalic strip, which is
>>> just about idiot proof.
>>>
>> Not quite - but it does use differential expansion.
>>
>> The contacts can weld together. The body can corrode to the point
>> where insufficient force is exterted on the switch to operate it.
>>
>> But also: They are adjustable. People fed up with the hot water
>> running out, so there is no hot water to have a bath right after say
>> the kids have had theirs, turn up the water temperature. Turn the
>> adjuster with a big screwdriver and (with some) you can force it to a
>> point where the water will boil and the stat still not cut power
>> off... 
>>
>> Very common in student houses.. or used to be..
> 
> Well teh one in my parents house has to have been there for nearly 50 
> years and hasn't failed yet ... 
> 
> Still, no doubt the prescotts of this world will use this as an excuse 
> to screw us by means of further regulation a la "Part P".
> 


Notice the "can" and "can". You "can" fall 50 floors and survive..

Whereas "maladjusted" thermostats are nothing exceptional.

It may be, for example, that the previous tenants of the house had lots 
of kids to bath..

Personally, if I ever did have a baby (or children) in the house, I 
wouldn't wan't boiling water coming out of the hot tap...

I like to think that most people would notice boiling water coming out 
of the tap and *very* loud noises coming from the plumbing and the 
airing cupboard, plus maybe water regularly coming out of the overflow, 
and *do* something..



-- 
Sue

On Jan 11, 11:10 am, Palindrome  wrote:

> Personally, if I ever did have a baby

Darling, Ive got news for you:

Youre 73 years old and well past the time of bearing children, not to
mention, not being attractive to any male other than losers who will
bonk anything, wake up sport, you just dont cut it anymore, perhaps if
you'd stop drinking cider or cheap plonk and had a complete make over
someone would take you out for walkies

Abu Ghraib conviction dismissed
  a.. Jordan says he had nothing to do with abuse at Abu Ghraib

  b.. He was acquitted at his court-martial in August

  c.. Jordan agrees enlisted soldiers, officers responsible for abuse escaped 
prosecution

  d.. Jordan was found guilty of disobeying an order not to talk about the 
investigation

BALTIMORE, Maryland (AP) -- The U.S. Army has thrown out the conviction of the 
only officer court-martialed in the Abu Ghraib scandal, bringing an end to the 
four-year investigation and drawing complaints from human rights activists of a 
Pentagon whitewash.

Lt. Col. Steven L. Jordan was cleared this week of any criminal wrongdoing by 
Maj. Gen. Richard J. Rowe, commander of the Military District of Washington. 
Jordan was instead given an administrative reprimand, a blot on his record.

But while he says he had nothing to do with abuse at Abu Ghraib, others who were 
responsible for the abuse have not been prosecuted, Jordan said Thursday.

Barring any startling new information, the decision means no officers or 
civilian leaders will be held criminally responsible for the prisoner abuse that 
embarrassed the U.S. military and inflamed the Muslim world.

Jordan, 51, of Fredericksburg, Virginia, was acquitted at his court-martial in 
August of charges he failed to supervise the 11 lower-ranking soldiers convicted 
for their roles in the abuse. It included the photographing of Iraqi prisoners 
in painful and sexually humiliating positions.

But he was found guilty of disobeying an order not to talk about the 
investigation, and the jury recommended a criminal reprimand, the lightest 
possible punishment.

Jordan told The Associated Press on Thursday that he felt victimized by press 
coverage that seemed eager for an officer to be blamed for the abuse. He also 
said he agreed that there were both enlisted soldiers and officers responsible 
for the abuse who escaped prosecution.

"Everybody that's seen all the evidence and looked at it, or the lack of it, 
realizes that Steve Jordan had nothing to do with abusing detainees at Abu 
Ghraib," Jordan said.

Maj. Kris Poppe, Jordan's attorney, said he argued that Jordan "faced these very 
serious charges for a long period of time, that he had been found not guilty of 
any offense related to the abuse of detainees, and that he had a stellar 
record."

Rowe agreed.

"In light of the nature of the offense that Jordan had been found guilty of 
committing and the substantial evidence in mitigation at trial and in post-trial 
matters submitted by defense counsel, Rowe determined that an administrative 
reprimand was a fair and appropriate disposition of the matter," Joanna P. 
Hawkins, a military spokeswoman, said in a statement.

Eugene R. Fidell, a Washington lawyer who specializes in military law, said the 
decision was not at all surprising. If disobeying an order had been the only 
charge against Jordan, the matter almost certainly would not have gone to a 
court-martial, Fidell said.

But human rights advocates complained that the case did not go higher up the 
chain of command and said the decision sent a troubling message.

"It could not be more clear that prisoner abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan resulted 
from policies and practices authorized by high-level officials, including 
military and civilian leaders," said Hira Shamsi, an attorney with the National 
Security Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. "Although the abuse was 
systemic and widespread, the accountability for it has been anything but."

Mila Rosenthal, deputy executive director for research and policy for Amnesty 
International USA, said: "I think we're emboldening dictators and despots around 
the world. We're saying that it's OK to allow these kinds of abuses to 
flourish."

Jordan, who remains on active duty at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, said he planned to 
write a book about his experiences serving at Abu Ghraib and his protracted 
effort to clear his name.

"It's been a unique ordeal," he said. "I still love the Army, you know? I love 
being a soldier. I love being around soldiers, and there were just some folks in 
the Army, I feel, that had maybe political motives to go after Steve Jordan as a 
reservist."

Jordan joins four other officers who received administrative, or non-criminal, 
punishment in the scandal, including former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who was 
in charge of all U.S.-run prisons in Iraq. She was demoted to colonel for 
dereliction of duty and an unrelated allegation of shoplifting.

The military found that criminal responsibility for the abuse of prisoners did 
not rise above Staff Sgt. Ivan L. Frederick, a military policeman who was 
paroled in October after serving about three years of an eight-year sentence.

Pfc. Lynndie England, who was shown in some of the most lurid photos holding a 
naked prisoner on a leash and posing with a pyramid of naked detainees, received 
a three-year sentence and was released after about 16 months.

The only soldier still behind bars for crimes at Abu Ghraib is former Cpl. 
Charles Graner Jr., who received a 10-year sentence for assault, battery, 
conspiracy, maltreatment, indecent acts and dereliction of duty.

Jordan acknowledged e-mailing a number of soldiers about the investigation, 
despite an order not to discuss the case.

"_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote in message 
news:5uo7goF1hlkcfU1@mid.individual.net...
>\

Being as ignorantly, feverishly Anti-American as you are is the very reason 
no one like *YOU*.


You are a pathetic, despicable human being.

Honu

In article ,
 "_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:

> 
> But while he says he had nothing to do with abuse at Abu Ghraib, others who 
> were 
> responsible for the abuse have not been prosecuted, Jordan said Thursday.
and about Fragging ;

  By Ali Al-Fadhily, IPS News. Posted January 8, 2008.

The story of an Iraqi soldier defending a pregnant woman against U.S. 
troops is front page news in Iraq.

The recent killing of two U.S. soldiers by their Iraqi colleague has 
raised disturbing questions about U.S. military relations with the 
Iraqis they work with.

On Dec. 26, an Iraqi soldier opened fire on U.S. soldiers accompanying 
him during a joint military patrol in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul. 
He killed the U.S. captain and another sergeant, and wounded three 
others, including an Iraqi interpreter.

Conflicting versions of the killing have arisen. Col. Hazim al-Juboory, 
uncle of the attacker Kaissar Saady al-Juboory, told IPS that his nephew 
at first watched the U.S. soldiers beat up an Iraqi woman. When he asked 
them to stop, they refused, so he opened fire.

"Kaissar is a professional soldier who revolted against the Americans 
when they dragged a woman by her hair in a brutal way," Col. Juboory 
said. "He is a tribal man, and an Arab with honor who would not accept 
such behavior. He killed his captain and sergeant knowing that he would 
be executed."

Others gave IPS a similar account. "I was there when the American 
captain and his soldiers raided a neighborhood and started shouting at 
women to tell them where some men they wanted were," a resident of 
Mosul, speaking on condition of anonymity, told IPS on phone. "The women 
told them they did not know, and their men did not do anything wrong, 
and started crying in fear."

The witness said the U.S. captain began to shout at his soldiers and the 
women, and his men then started to grab the women and pull them by their 
hair.

"The soldier we knew later to be Kaissar shouted at the Americans, 'No, 
no,' but the captain shouted back at the Iraqi soldier," the witness 
told IPS. "Then the Iraqi soldier shouted, 'Let go of the women, you 
sons of bitches,' and started shooting at them." The soldier, he said, 
then ran off.

The Association of Muslim Scholars, a Sunni organization, issued a 
statement saying the Iraqi soldier had shot the U.S. soldiers after he 
saw them beat up a pregnant woman.

"His blood rose and he asked the occupying soldiers to stop beating the 
woman," they said in the statement. "Their answer through the translator 
was: 'We will do what we want.' So he opened fire on them."

The story was first reported on al-Rafidain satellite channel. That 
started Iraqis from all over the country talking about "the hero" who 
sacrificed his life for Iraqi honor.

AlterNet.org

-- 
when you believe the only tool you have is a hammer.
 problems tend to look like nails.

On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:31:21 -0800, Veteran
 wrote:

>In article ,
> "_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:
>
>> 
>> But while he says he had nothing to do with abuse at Abu Ghraib, others who 
>> were 
>> responsible for the abuse have not been prosecuted, Jordan said Thursday.
>and about Fragging ;
>
>  By Ali Al-Fadhily, IPS News. Posted January 8, 2008.
>
>The story of an Iraqi soldier defending a pregnant woman against U.S. 
>troops is front page news in Iraq.
>
>The recent killing of two U.S. soldiers by their Iraqi colleague has 
>raised disturbing questions about U.S. military relations with the 
>Iraqis they work with.

But is the story you relate credible?

Or is this just another one of those instances where you will believe
anything?


--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.

Colin Campbell wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:31:21 -0800, Veteran
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>>In article ,
>>"_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:
>>
>>
>>>But while he says he had nothing to do with abuse at Abu Ghraib, others who 
>>>were 
>>>responsible for the abuse have not been prosecuted, Jordan said Thursday.
>>
>>and about Fragging ;
>>
>> By Ali Al-Fadhily, IPS News. Posted January 8, 2008.
>>
>>The story of an Iraqi soldier defending a pregnant woman against U.S. 
>>troops is front page news in Iraq.
>>
>>The recent killing of two U.S. soldiers by their Iraqi colleague has 
>>raised disturbing questions about U.S. military relations with the 
>>Iraqis they work with.
> 
> 
> But is the story you relate credible?
> 
> Or is this just another one of those instances where you will believe
> anything?

Stupid Americans believed Iraq had WMDs and was allied with al Qaeda.
Stupid Americans will believe anything.  I don't think Veteran is
included in that group.

--Jeff

-- 
Ignorance, allied with power, is the
most ferocious enemy justice can have.
-James Baldwin

"Colin Campbell" <activated_95b@gmail.com (remove underscore)> wrote in 
message news:mctho3lrnkbd2adhfltj2cnispms22ev2v@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:31:21 -0800, Veteran
>  wrote:
>
>>In article ,
>> "_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But while he says he had nothing to do with abuse at Abu Ghraib, others 
>>> who
>>> were
>>> responsible for the abuse have not been prosecuted, Jordan said 
>>> Thursday.
>>and about Fragging ;
>>
>>  By Ali Al-Fadhily, IPS News. Posted January 8, 2008.
>>
>>The story of an Iraqi soldier defending a pregnant woman against U.S.
>>troops is front page news in Iraq.
>>
>>The recent killing of two U.S. soldiers by their Iraqi colleague has
>>raised disturbing questions about U.S. military relations with the
>>Iraqis they work with.
>
> But is the story you relate credible?
>
> Or is this just another one of those instances where you will believe
> anything?

LOL!

Find those "massive stockpiles" of ready weaponized WMD in Iraq yet?

How about those new-ku-lar weapons ?

Go catch some IED fragments for your Liar in Chief, jackass.




-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:16:19 -0700, "Reality_Check©"
 wrote:

>
>"Colin Campbell" <activated_95b@gmail.com (remove underscore)> wrote in 
>message news:mctho3lrnkbd2adhfltj2cnispms22ev2v@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:31:21 -0800, Veteran
>>  wrote:
>>
>>>In article ,
>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But while he says he had nothing to do with abuse at Abu Ghraib, others 
>>>> who
>>>> were
>>>> responsible for the abuse have not been prosecuted, Jordan said 
>>>> Thursday.
>>>and about Fragging ;
>>>
>>>  By Ali Al-Fadhily, IPS News. Posted January 8, 2008.
>>>
>>>The story of an Iraqi soldier defending a pregnant woman against U.S.
>>>troops is front page news in Iraq.
>>>
>>>The recent killing of two U.S. soldiers by their Iraqi colleague has
>>>raised disturbing questions about U.S. military relations with the
>>>Iraqis they work with.
>>
>> But is the story you relate credible?
>>
>> Or is this just another one of those instances where you will believe
>> anything?
>
>LOL!
>
>Find those "massive stockpiles" of ready weaponized WMD in Iraq yet?
>
>How about those new-ku-lar weapons ?

Hitler had none of those weapons either, yet we totally destroyed his
regime - just like with Saddam's.

Get the hint yet, or do you want to play stupid some more?


>Go catch some IED fragments for your Liar in Chief, jackass.

Zeno wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:16:19 -0700, "Reality_Check©"
>  wrote:
>
>>
>> "Colin Campbell" <activated_95b@gmail.com (remove underscore)> wrote
>> in message news:mctho3lrnkbd2adhfltj2cnispms22ev2v@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:31:21 -0800, Veteran
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article ,
>>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But while he says he had nothing to do with abuse at Abu Ghraib,
>>>>> others who
>>>>> were
>>>>> responsible for the abuse have not been prosecuted, Jordan said
>>>>> Thursday.
>>>> and about Fragging ;
>>>>
>>>>  By Ali Al-Fadhily, IPS News. Posted January 8, 2008.
>>>>
>>>> The story of an Iraqi soldier defending a pregnant woman against
>>>> U.S. troops is front page news in Iraq.
>>>>
>>>> The recent killing of two U.S. soldiers by their Iraqi colleague
>>>> has raised disturbing questions about U.S. military relations with
>>>> the Iraqis they work with.
>>>
>>> But is the story you relate credible?
>>>
>>> Or is this just another one of those instances where you will
>>> believe anything?
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>> Find those "massive stockpiles" of ready weaponized WMD in Iraq yet?
>>
>> How about those new-ku-lar weapons ?
>
> Hitler had none of those weapons either, yet we totally destroyed his
> regime - just like with Saddam's.

Who's "we" you pig-ignorant imbecile ?