"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
John Edwards

Please tell me he's not that sissy psychic guy on television?

crosspost snipped

Actually, Edwards is probably the best candidate the Democrats have,
which makes it all the more interesting that he is running at or near
the bottom of the pack. The primaries seem almost designed to produce
the worst choice. I still can't imagine how anyone could think that
Bush was more qualified than McCain.


On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 19:52:36 GMT, "Chris"
wrote:


"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
John Edwards

Please tell me he's not that sissy psychic guy on television?

No, and he's not that bad, but that's what people are calling him.

"Chris" wrote in message
. com...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
John Edwards

Please tell me he's not that sissy psychic guy on television?

Martin,

Are you having posting problems... all you seem to
do is post the same as what someone else sent.

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:27:50 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote:

John Edwards

"Chris" wrote in message
. com...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
Well, he's better than the Breck Girl.

Who's the Breck Girl?




--
Martin

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:06:37 GMT, felton wrote
this crap:

crosspost snipped

Actually, Edwards is probably the best candidate the Democrats have,
which makes it all the more interesting that he is running at or near
the bottom of the pack. The primaries seem almost designed to produce
the worst choice. I still can't imagine how anyone could think that
Bush was more qualified than McCain.

George W. Bush was govenor of Texas. McCain was what?




This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Donal
wrote:

How many died because sanctions prevented vital drugs reaching Iraqi
hospitals?

Lots. Who was responsible for not complying with the sanctions for PR
reasons? The then Iraqi Govt. Blaming the USA for this is infantile.

Is it?
I can understand that sanctions would prohibit the export of munitions,
various raw materials, industrial goods, and high tech equipment. I don't
understand why medicines should be included in the list of prohibited items.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that it is unusual for a country to be
subjected to sanctions which include medical supplies.



Did you know that birth defects have risen 10 fold since depleted
uranium
was used by Bush senior?

Cite please. Did *you* know that chemical weapons and the resultant
pollution are proven teratogenic and carcinogenic agents while DU
isn't?

Yes, I know that. However, the increases in birth defects, and cancers,
correlate with the use of DU. They do NOT correlate with Saddam's use of
chemical weapons.

Most of the evidence that is used to support your theory is based on the
radioactivity of depleted uranium. However, DU is an extremely toxic
substance in its own right. Lead and aluminium are bad for you. DU is also
bad for you.


My wife is one of Australia's leading paediatric biochemists,
specialises in genetic disorders.

I get a cup of tea in bed every morning.



I suspect you've been following Pilger

I admit that I recognise that name. You'll have to accept my word for the
fact that I am not aware of his significance. I did a Google yesterday, and
I think that I saw his name. It is possible that some of my previous post
used his information.

..

Cancer and Leukemia rates have also gone through the roof!

True but see above.

Donal, I think you're backing a loser with this line of argument.
Better stick to the lack of WMD and personal observations WRT
'intelligence'.

That isn't fair!

You seem to be suggesting that only the rednecks should be allowed to use
whacko arguements.



Regards

Donal
--

A US Senator and a war hero.... what a dufus.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:06:37 GMT, felton wrote
this crap:

crosspost snipped

Actually, Edwards is probably the best candidate the Democrats have,
which makes it all the more interesting that he is running at or near
the bottom of the pack. The primaries seem almost designed to produce
the worst choice. I still can't imagine how anyone could think that
Bush was more qualified than McCain.

George W. Bush was govenor of Texas. McCain was what?




This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:15:31 -0500, Horvath
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:06:37 GMT, felton wrote
this crap:

crosspost snipped

Actually, Edwards is probably the best candidate the Democrats have,
which makes it all the more interesting that he is running at or near
the bottom of the pack. The primaries seem almost designed to produce
the worst choice. I still can't imagine how anyone could think that
Bush was more qualified than McCain.

George W. Bush was govenor of Texas. McCain was what?

Governor of Texas has only slightly more prestige than Grand Marshal
of the Rose Bowl Parade, and fewer responsibilities. The only thing
required of the Governor of Texas is to routinely deny stays of
execution and tell colorful stories. Ann Richards was a much better
Governor as her stories were far more entertaining. The Lt Governor
runs the show.

McCain may be one of the true statesmen in Washington, who doesn't toe
the party line.





This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe

In article , Donal
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Donal
wrote:

How many died because sanctions prevented vital drugs reaching Iraqi
hospitals?

Lots. Who was responsible for not complying with the sanctions for PR
reasons? The then Iraqi Govt. Blaming the USA for this is infantile.

Is it?
I can understand that sanctions would prohibit the export of munitions,
various raw materials, industrial goods, and high tech equipment. I don't
understand why medicines should be included in the list of prohibited items.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that it is unusual for a country to be
subjected to sanctions which include medical supplies.

Hmmm. My understanding was that there were restrictions on oil sales as
a sanction for not complying with UN resolutions WRT disclosure/access
for WMD searches, causing a drop in revenue, feeding back into
purported inability to purchase medical supplies et al. I could be
wrong, but I think that's how it played. That's why I said that Iraq
was responsible and there's no doubt they used it for PR purposes. I
regarded it as a crude attempt at moral blackmail.



Did you know that birth defects have risen 10 fold since depleted
uranium
was used by Bush senior?

Cite please. Did *you* know that chemical weapons and the resultant
pollution are proven teratogenic and carcinogenic agents while DU
isn't?

Yes, I know that. However, the increases in birth defects, and cancers,
correlate with the use of DU. They do NOT correlate with Saddam's use of
chemical weapons.

Cite, please. I have seen a report showing that there was an extermely
good correlation with Iraq's use of CW and a huge rise in cancers &
birth defects some years later.

Most of the evidence that is used to support your theory is based on the
radioactivity of depleted uranium. However, DU is an extremely toxic
substance in its own right. Lead and aluminium are bad for you. DU is also
bad for you.

Yes but are they teratogenic? Is DU teratogenic? CW are *known*
teratogens & carcinogens. DU isn't all that toxic, it's a ******* to
machine and burns well, but I wouldn't worry about handling it.

BTW, who says aluminium is bad for you? Except some weak evidence
linking Al oxides with Alzheimers (IIRC) this is just another rumour
put about by the lunatic fringe.

My wife is one of Australia's leading paediatric biochemists,
specialises in genetic disorders.

I get a cup of tea in bed every morning.

Lucky you. I get to design & build elaborate databases for mine so she
can keep track of all her patient data :-(

I suspect you've been following Pilger

I admit that I recognise that name. You'll have to accept my word for the
fact that I am not aware of his significance. I did a Google yesterday, and
I think that I saw his name. It is possible that some of my previous post
used his information.

Pilger is a notorious left-wing conspiracy theorist & liar. He produced
a report blaming the DU munitions used in the Gulf War for a rise in
cancers & birth defects. Only problem was the timing was wrong; there
couldn't have been that effect in the time frame. OTOH the timing was
about perfect for it to have occurred following the use of CW during
the Iraq-Iran war when CW which are known & proven teratogens and
carcinogens were used freely. A fact that Pilger totally ignored as it
didn't support his thesis.

He also, some years ago, managed to blame everyone except the Khmer
Rouge for the massacres in Cambodia following their victory. Etc etc.


.

Cancer and Leukemia rates have also gone through the roof!

True but see above.

Donal, I think you're backing a loser with this line of argument.
Better stick to the lack of WMD and personal observations WRT
'intelligence'.

That isn't fair!

You seem to be suggesting that only the rednecks should be allowed to use
whacko arguements.

The lefties seem to muster at least their fair share. I do my best to
ignore both sides and treat all claims with skepticism.

Whatever, I don't really care. You seem to be falling into the trap of
believing everything bad about the USA in Iraq on the basis that some
of it is true, and that's as big an error as dickheads like Simon who
believe none of it.

Peter Wiley

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Donal
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Donal
wrote:


Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that it is unusual for a country
to be
subjected to sanctions which include medical supplies.

Hmmm. My understanding was that there were restrictions on oil sales as
a sanction for not complying with UN resolutions WRT disclosure/access
for WMD searches, causing a drop in revenue, feeding back into
purported inability to purchase medical supplies et al. I could be
wrong, but I think that's how it played. That's why I said that Iraq
was responsible and there's no doubt they used it for PR purposes. I
regarded it as a crude attempt at moral blackmail.

I did a Google on "Iraq sanctions medicines". Here are the first three
hits.

A story about a man who was prosecuted for taking medicines to Iraq.
"My objection is we are using (sanctions) as a lethal tool of coercion to
try and have a regime change. How in the world do cough syrup, aspirin and
antibiotics endanger the national security of the United States?"
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0618-01.htm

"more than 1.25 million Iraqis have reportedly died from the massive
escalation in the mortality rate since sanctions were imposed in 1990
(Reuters, 12/29/99). "

http://www.fair.org/extra/0003/crossette-iraq.html


"The effect of this situation on Iraq's infant and child population is
especially severe. From 1991 to 1998, children under 5 died from
malnutrition-related diseases in numbers ranging from a conservative 2,690 a
month to a more realistic 5,357 per month. "
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/iraq/effects.shtml

It looks like sanctions caused the deaths of 4,000 children a month for 10
years.

One can take two views on the sanctions issue. One view is that they
failed, so war became necessary.
In this case the childrens' deaths were totally unnecessary.

The other(cynical) view is that the sanctions were used to soften up
Saddam's military machine, and they were very successful indeed. In this
case, the children were colateral damage.

In either case, at least 480,000 children died for no good reason. You
cannot claim that Saddam killed them. They wouldn't have died if Saddam was
allowed to rule Iraq as he saw fit.





Did you know that birth defects have risen 10 fold since depleted
uranium
was used by Bush senior?

Cite please. Did *you* know that chemical weapons and the resultant
pollution are proven teratogenic and carcinogenic agents while DU
isn't?

Yes, I know that. However, the increases in birth defects, and cancers,
correlate with the use of DU. They do NOT correlate with Saddam's use
of
chemical weapons.

Cite, please. I have seen a report showing that there was an extermely
good correlation with Iraq's use of CW and a huge rise in cancers &
birth defects some years later.

Statistics, and reports, prove nothing more than what their author's want
you to believe. I've seen reports that said that said that Saddam had WMD
that could be used against us in 45 minutes!!

I like to play on a level playing field. So, I will not acquiese to your
request for a citation while you use a vague "report".


Most of the evidence that is used to support your theory is based on the
radioactivity of depleted uranium. However, DU is an extremely toxic
substance in its own right. Lead and aluminium are bad for you. DU is
also
bad for you.

Yes but are they teratogenic? Is DU teratogenic? CW are *known*
teratogens & carcinogens. DU isn't all that toxic, it's a ******* to
machine and burns well, but I wouldn't worry about handling it.

BTW, who says aluminium is bad for you? Except some weak evidence
linking Al oxides with Alzheimers (IIRC) this is just another rumour
put about by the lunatic fringe.

Hmmmmm! You remind me of the scientists who said that it was safe to eat
beef because there was no proven link between BSE and CJD.



My wife is one of Australia's leading paediatric biochemists,
specialises in genetic disorders.

I get a cup of tea in bed every morning.

Lucky you. I get to design & build elaborate databases for mine so she
can keep track of all her patient data :-(

I'd recommend MySql and PHP.


snip

The lefties seem to muster at least their fair share. I do my best to
ignore both sides and treat all claims with skepticism.


So do I, usually. However, I fancied a bit of Redneck fishing.
Unfortunately, they weren't attracted to the lure.


Whatever, I don't really care. You seem to be falling into the trap of
believing everything bad about the USA in Iraq on the basis that some
of it is true,

That is a bit unfair. Consider my earlier response to your Pilger
accusation.

and that's as big an error as dickheads like Simon who
believe none of it.

I'll ignore that comment.


Regards


Donal
--