Dave wrote:
4. because likely benefits in saving lives were thought to outweigh possible
risks?

If that were the case, then why not rely on the anti-gas measures
already in use, with equipment already tested, and the men already
trained in it's use?




I realize, of course, that you might find it difficult to accept the
possibility that a Republican administration might act in good faith in
making a judgment.

Once in a while, sure. But in this case... no. Not even close. The whole
thing stinks... and the cover-up doesn't help.

DSK