24
   

Is that stuff that JTT says about America true?

 
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2011 05:21 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
He was free and autonomous.
I felt duty-bound to respect his freedom


Come on David do you consider a one month old free and autonomous or a three years old or.....................

Human children were not design to be free and autonomous from their care givers and any such children are dead children.

Hell the brain of a human is not completely done forming until the early twenties.

An eleven year olds is not able to be free and autonomous from the control and guided of his or her parents and in an emergency any other adult around.

Hell human beings by their nature are as must pack animals as a wolf pack happen to be.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2011 05:47 pm
@BillRM,
DAVID wrote:
He was free and autonomous.
I felt duty-bound to respect his freedom
BillRM wrote:
Come on David do you consider a one month old free
and autonomous or a three years old or.....................
Free from ME, yes. I 'd be only a stranger.

BillRM wrote:
Human children were not design to be free and autonomous from
their care givers and any such children are dead children.
I am seldom their care giver.
I have been asked to render that service, occasionally.
When I do, I like to be friendly, not authoritarian.

Indeed, I have been reprimanded by one of the kids
in my care for failing to restrain him; his exact words to me: "YOU'RE the adult!"





BillRM wrote:
Hell the brain of a human is not completely done forming until the early twenties.
Yes, but that does not give people around them the right to CONTROL them,
the same as if I see an adult about to do something stupid
I have no right to interfere (unless I'm defending myself or my property).



BillRM wrote:
An eleven year olds is not able to be free and autonomous
from the control and guided of his or her parents
and in an emergency any other adult around.
This boy was able,
as we walked toward that door. There was no one else out there.
For example: I think it is terrible judgment
for a middle aged man to begin to smoke cigaretts,
but no one has a right to stop him.

If I see a child about to do something stupid,
I have no right to interfere, so far as I can figure it out.
If he were to ASK me: "what right to U have to interfere in my business? "
I woud not have any good answer other than to humbly apologize to him.





BillRM wrote:
Hell human beings by their nature are as must pack animals as a wolf pack happen to be.
I 've usually been a loner; I don 't think that 's unnatural.





David
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2011 06:37 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I 've usually been a loner; I don 't think that 's unnatural.


I share that characteristic of being a loner with you however that just mean that we are both slightly less a members of the pack then most people.

We both are still members of society and must function within the limit of human society.

A few humans are able to both function and survive alone in a wildness but I question if either you or I are one of that very small group.

After a hurricane hit my home town and the normal services was knock out for a time period of weeks I without even thinking about it join with my neighbors to address the problems that needed to be address.

That included clean up and emergent repairs and even taking turns on being part of an arm night patrol to keep looters at bay.

In other word when the main pack/society were not working in my area we natural formed small groups to deal with the needs of the moment.




talk72000
 
  0  
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2011 07:36 pm
Quote:
Throughout 1996, these videos sat on a shelf, while U.S. soldiers continued to use and work with depleted uranium munitions. In June 1997, Bernard Rostker, The Department of Defense (DoD) principle spokesperson for their investigation of Gulf War hazardous exposures, stated that the depleted uranium safety training program would begin to be shared by a limited number of servicemen and women in July 1997.

STILL TODAY the vast majority of servicemen and women in the U.S. military, and likely in the armed forces of other countries which are developing or have obtained depleted uranium munitions, are unaware of the use and dangers of depleted uranium munitions, or of the protective clothing and procedures which can minimize or prevent serious short-term exposures.




None of the soldiers have been wearing masks as the fine radioactive dust swirl around with each gust of wind.

Note: ...the vast majority of servicemen and women in the U.S. military...are unaware of the use and dangers of depleted uranium munitions...
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2011 07:46 pm
@talk72000,
Quote:
Note: ...the vast majority of servicemen and women in the U.S. military...are unaware of the use and dangers of depleted uranium munitions...


Quote:
How is DoD Monitoring Possible Exposures to Depleted Uranium (DU)?

As DU munitions penetrate armor or when DU burns, DU oxide dust is created. DU exposure may occur from inhalation or ingestion of DU dust, contamination of wounds with DU dust, or from embedded DU munitions or armor fragments in the body. To address these risks, DoD has formal policies in place to monitor its Service members for potential DU exposure, and refers exposed Service members to a medical follow-up program. DoD also has training programs for personnel who could be exposed to the metal. The 2003 Health Affairs' Policy, Operation Iraqi Freedom DU Medical Management, offers every Service member the opportunity to confirm possible exposure to DU. This was supplemented in 2004 by the DoD Deployment Biomonitoring Policy. Exposure evaluation of personnel who served in the Gulf War or Operation Iraqi Freedom is initiated based upon participation in an event (such as a friendly fire incident) or with a unit that would place the individual at risk of DU exposure, or positive patient responses to the Post-Deployment Health Assessment, DD Form 2796.

Potentially exposed Service members complete a DU Exposure Questionnaire, which is reviewed to assess the risk level. Those at greatest risk undergo urine testing for uranium. Personnel at lower risk may also undergo testing based on concerns of either the patient or the medical provider. The most recent data on the results of urine testing for depleted uranium are summarized in the attached report. Service members with confirmed positive results are offered a referral to the VA's DU Follow-Up Program in Baltimore.


http://fhp.osd.mil/du/

fhpr.osd.mil is the official Web site of Force Health Protection & Readiness Policy & Programs
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2011 08:10 pm
@talk72000,
Quote:
None of the soldiers have been wearing masks as the fine radioactive dust swirl around with each gust of wind.


Fool what radioactive dust this is once more depleted uranium that is very very very mildly radioactive. .

The percent of radioactive uranium isotopes in military grade DU is .37 percent or so of the total mass of the DU.

You could not come near to being able to power a nuclear plant with this material anymore then you could power such a plant with an equal amount of lead

This does not mean that you should breathe in this dust as it is very unhealthy in a chemistry sense but not in a radioactive sense and you could not breathe in enough of this dust to harm you by radioactive without killing yourselves many times over by being chemistry poison.

People stop thinking when the word uranium is used in a sentence.
talk72000
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2011 08:19 pm
@BillRM,
I hope you send your son/grandson to Iraq and all places where DU is used to help the President secure the world's oil.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2011 08:46 pm
@talk72000,
Quote:
I hope you send your son/grandson to Iraq and all places where DU is used to help the President secure the world's oil.


Well it is far more likely that people would be dying in the states from exposure to the cold due to lack of heating oil then soldiers would be dying due to being exposed to DU battling around the middle east oils fields.

I know that you had no use for facts or logical but for the others on this thread the metals used in none DU anti tanks rounds are known to cause cancer so replacing DU shells with the next best high energy ant tank shell is not going to be healthier and are more likely to get the tanks crew kill in combat when their enemies are not knock out by the second best shells.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 03:05 am
@BillRM,
DAVID wrote:
I 've usually been a loner; I don 't think that 's unnatural.
BillRM wrote:
I share that characteristic of being a loner with you however that just mean
that we are both slightly less a members of the pack then most people.
I have created my own packs, when advisable, e.g. the O.M. Special Interest Group.
As a kid, I also established some political groups, or packs.





BillRM wrote:
We both are still members of society and must function within the limit of human society.
We can work to change the limits.




BillRM wrote:
A few humans are able to both function and survive alone in a wildness but I question if either you or I are one of that very small group.

After a hurricane hit my home town and the normal services was knock out for a time period of weeks I without even thinking about it join with my neighbors to address the problems that needed to be address.

That included clean up and emergent repairs and even taking turns on being part of an arm night patrol to keep looters at bay.
Those looters included the local police, in uniform.



BillRM wrote:
In other word when the main pack/society were not working in my area we natural formed small groups
to deal with the needs of the moment.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
U were a de facto well regulated militia.





David
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 09:30 am
@talk72000,
I have served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and have been exposed to DU. I am healthy, with none of the supposed side effects that you believe are happening.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 09:42 am
@mysteryman,
I'm pleased to hear that you're heathy MM and hope you stay that way, but do you think that there's been enough research on the topic? Asbestos wasn't seen as that toxic until people started falling ill 20+ years after exposure. How would you rate your exposure to DU, light, medium or heavy? Have you any idea how would that square with scientist's views? People are still trying to work out what caused Gulf War Syndrome which, I'm sorry to say, has still not been regarded as a proper illness by the MOD in the UK.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 09:42 am
@mysteryman,
You are a lucky man.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 09:48 am
@izzythepush,
Since I was a combat medic, I would say my exposure to DU was heavy.
I have no reason This think it is anymore toxic or dangerous than any of the other hazards one is exposed to on a battlefield, and I know it is less toxic than many.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 09:52 am
@mysteryman,
Well I'll keep my fingers crossed for you anyway. As you're a medic you probably know a lot more about this than most of us.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 10:45 am
I'm not sure if anyone is doing a long-term study on the long-term effects of DU, so it's difficult to arrive at any conclusion. Look what agent orange did in Vietnam.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  0  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 03:08 pm
@mysteryman,
You were aware of the dangers so you probably wore masks and coats to ward of the dust. I am not sure of the half-life of the DU. Radioactivity dies out in thousands of years i.e. DU becoming lead in the end.

All bombs used to penetrate walls, bunkers armor have DU as it is very dense and explode on impact thus becoming very effective in destroying targets. However, it is the dust that comes out affects everyone. DU doesn't discriminate.
Ceili
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 04:44 pm
Apparently, there's a big radioactive cloud floating over Europe at the moment. Another little surprise from Etna latest episode...
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 05:22 pm
@talk72000,
No, I did not wear a mask and coat while in Iraq or Afghanistan.
I was dressed the same as the infantrymen, the only difference being I carried a medical bag.
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Oct, 2011 11:41 pm
@mysteryman,
Found the following at another forum. This is the end of a lengthy interview. Interesting and chilling at the same time. Thoughts, people?

http://rt.com/news/uranium-birth-defects-fallujah-729/



RT: Could you connect this with the battles in 2004?

C.B.: Yes. We did something clever. Uranium is excreted into hair and hair grows at a known rate: 1 centimeter per month. We obtained very long hair samples from some women and measured the uranium along the lengths of the hair, which gave us historic levels back as far as 2005. In one woman, whose hair was 80 centimeters, the uranium concentration went up toward the tip of the hair, showing very high exposures in the past.

RT: Very high relative to what? Could this have been from a local uranium deposit or from drinking water?

C.B.: The levels were compared with measurements made in many countries, but specifically with Israel and Sweden. They were significantly higher now and massively higher in the past. The measurements in soil and water could not explain these levels in the hair, and in any case, the uranium was manmade, it was enriched uranium. Not natural.

RT: So where is the enriched uranium from? Why use it?

C.B.: We are not sure. We believe these results prove the existence of a new secret uranium weapon. We have found some US patents for thermobaric and directed charge warheads which employ uranium powder to increase their effect. It seems clear these uranium weapons have moved on from the simple anti-tank penetrators used in the first Gulf War, which were basically lumps of metal. Since 2003, it seems the military has been using something else entirely. Something quite scary.

RT:But why enriched uranium? Isn’t that expensive?

C.B.: Well, war is expensive. A cruise missile is expensive. The cost of using slightly enriched uranium would make very little difference, a marginal cost, and there will be a lot of it about from the decommissioning of nuclear weapons, which would cost a lot of money to dispose of. We don’t really know the answer. One suggestion is that it could cover their tracks, so they could truthfully say they didn’t use depleted uranium, and save themselves from any war crimes litigation that might emerge when the civilians began to die. And they almost got away with that one. It is only the development of these modern sophisticated measuring systems that enabled us to find it. Another suggestion is that there is an entirely new weapon, a neutron bomb, which employs enriched uranium with heavy hydrogen to produce cold fusion and a neutron blast which would kill people only.

RT: Do you have any supporting evidence?

C.B.: We investigated bomb craters in Lebanon in 2006 after the Israeli attacks and found one which was radioactive and which contained enriched uranium. We found enriched uranium in car air filters from Lebanon and also from Gaza. Others have found evidence of its use in Afghanistan and possibly also in the Balkans.

RT: So what is the overall importance of these findings? What comes next?

C.B.: This is an astonishing discovery with many global implications.

We have to reexamine the health of the Gulf War veterans, especially those from the second Gulf War. They are having children with congenital anomalies and are themselves suffering ill health. They were found to have high levels of uranium in urine tests, but because the uranium was not depleted, the findings were dismissed. This has to be revisited, since we now know why this is.

It is clear that the military has a secret uranium weapon of some sort. It causes widespread and terrifying genetic defects, causing cancer and birth anomalies and poisoning the gene pool of whole populations. This is a war crime and must be properly investigated.

The focus of activists and parliaments on depleted uranium is misplaced. All uranium weapons must be banned as weapons of indiscriminate effect, like poison gas.

This material from the Gulf Wars is slowly contaminating the whole planet. It is poisoning the human gene pool, leading to increases in cancer, congenital anomalies, miscarriages and infertility. We must stop the military from using it. It has probably been employed in Libya, so we must wait and see what levels of cancer and congenital disease appears there.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Oct, 2011 02:46 am
@Builder,
Quote:
We are not sure. We believe these results prove the existence of a new secret uranium weapon. We........Interesting and chilling at the same time. Thoughts, people?




BULLSHIT...............

Nonsense right up there with we never land on the moon or Obama is not a US citizen.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 08:16:02