Re: More on the environmental movement

[Julia Thompson]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
>  >Julia wrote-
> >
> >wondering how much each trip up the stairs carrying a baby counts on the
> >"exercise" bit
> 
> There are some people who structure their activities so
> they do stay aerobic with their ADLs (Activities of Daily
> Living) for a minimum of 20-30 min daily.  We have talked
> in the past about heart rate monitors and they are really
> coming down in price (at work we see prices about
> 50% what they used to be for "no frills" models).
> The other way to generally measure your heart rate
> (we use especially with elderly on heart rate limiting
> drugs) is perceived exertion, or the talk-sing test.
> Perceived exertion is 0-20 range with research
> showing people are pretty aware of their
> exertion (20= highest exertion, 13=130 beats
> per minute roughly)**.  The talk-sing test is that
> you are aerobic if you can talk, but can't sing
> (discounting if you couldn't sing in the first place).

The second trip up the stairs with a baby, I can talk but not sing.
 
> I would tend to think that your aerobic activity
> with your ADLs is way more than mine
> (trick might not be going into the anaerobic
> range above >.80-.85 chasing youngsters

At this point, only one of them can move faster than I can walk
quickly.  :)  Of course, at times we run into the problem of two of them
screaming to be picked up, and at that point the only thing to do is to
sit down with both of them for a bit, which doesn't work for the aerobic
activity.

Pushing a twin stroller for a mile or two, on the other hand  (And
they enjoy the ride, it calms them down, at least until we stop to talk
with neighbors, then someone will start fussing.)

Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Dan Minette]

- Original Message - 
From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: Disturbing evidence of torture


> Mike Lee wrote:
>
> > What our MPs did to those prisoners in Iraq sucked. Whether it
technically
> > violated the conventions, I don't know or care. I'm proud of how the
Bushies
> > have sucked it up and taken their lumps. No, they haven't been perfect.
Bush
> > didn't say the A-word timely. Rumsfeld was a little defensive the first
time
> > he was confronted about it. But what the Chappaquiddick Kid did today
was
> > beyond shameful, and Rumsfeld was spot on, only losing his temper at
> > stupidity a couple of times today. If you think the dog and pony show
that
> > went on today is going to play well with the voters, please keep
thinking
> > that. As a great man once said, Bring it on!

> I missed what happened today.  What did Kennedy do?

Not really all that much...he speachifed through much of his
questioning...as did some of the Republicans.  There were a handful on both
sides who did this, but I thought that most actually asked questions...see
my list of questions.

There were a few critical things that came out today I think.  The most
important is that there is a pile of radioactive documentation on this
which will make what we've seen so far tame.  Rumsfeld seemed genuinely
shaken by this. One Republican Senator said the worst may be yet to come.
I cannot imagine the story dying while there are all sorts of known
unknowns about what happened.

A second critical thing is that, although the initial report details
tremendous problems with MI, the investigation into MI only started in the
last 10 days or so.  What were they thinking?

The third critical thing was the fact that the Red Cross report detailed at
least some of these abuses well before the Army report came out.  Anyone in
the chain of command who read that report should have had their hair on
fire. Why they didn't is very disturbing.

I'm starting to put together a tentative picture of what happened, and it
isn't pretty.  Everything indicates that this will be a summer long story,
coming out in dribs and drabs every few days.  As Dee Dee Myers said, the
best thing is for all the bad stuff to come out as soon as possible, so we
can start on the clean up, but I don't think it will happen.



Dan M.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: More on the environmental movement

[Kanandarqu]

 >Julia wrote-
>
>wondering how much each trip up the stairs carrying a baby counts on the
>"exercise" bit

There are some people who structure their activities so 
they do stay aerobic with their ADLs (Activities of Daily 
Living) for a minimum of 20-30 min daily.  We have talked
in the past about heart rate monitors and they are really
coming down in price (at work we see prices about
50% what they used to be for "no frills" models).
The other way to generally measure your heart rate
(we use especially with elderly on heart rate limiting
drugs) is perceived exertion, or the talk-sing test.
Perceived exertion is 0-20 range with research
showing people are pretty aware of their
exertion (20= highest exertion, 13=130 beats
per minute roughly)**.  The talk-sing test is that
you are aerobic if you can talk, but can't sing
(discounting if you couldn't sing in the first place).

I would tend to think that your aerobic activity
with your ADLs is way more than mine
(trick might not be going into the anaerobic
range above >.80-.85 chasing youngsters

Dee

** generally (220-age) X .65 (or up to .80ish)  is 
considered aerobic
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Julia Thompson]

Mike Lee wrote:

> What our MPs did to those prisoners in Iraq sucked. Whether it technically
> violated the conventions, I don't know or care. I'm proud of how the Bushies
> have sucked it up and taken their lumps. No, they haven't been perfect. Bush
> didn't say the A-word timely. Rumsfeld was a little defensive the first time
> he was confronted about it. But what the Chappaquiddick Kid did today was
> beyond shameful, and Rumsfeld was spot on, only losing his temper at
> stupidity a couple of times today. If you think the dog and pony show that
> went on today is going to play well with the voters, please keep thinking
> that. As a great man once said, Bring it on!

I missed what happened today.  What did Kennedy do?

Julia

but I can tell you in irritating detail what he did one day in February
1980 way too close to rush hour
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Mike Lee]

Nick said:

> Besides, we Christians, as a group, really don't need *any* 
> help at this sort of thing.  But perhaps I'm just being silly.

Silly Christian. Chick's are for kids!

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Mike Lee]

Gary, still in not-getting-it mode:

> > If it's been a big talking point for you l&l's for so long, 
> why shut up now?
> > Where are the demonstrations organized by ANSWER in front of the UN 
> > building? Where's Michael Whoore or John Kerry talking 
> about it every 
> > damn day?
> 
> Uh, because the problem which occurred in the past is being 
> investigated?  Why aren't billionaires for Bush leading 
> marches in front of the UN or going on quiche strikes?  Could 
> some have made money off of it?

Oh. I see. As a card-carrying member of the liberal conspiracy, you're fine
with the job the UN is doing on the investigation.

Now, you've just suggested that Bushies or Bushie cronies are on the list of
PPOS (Pricks Paid Off by Saddam). Who?

But you do raise an interesting point. Why hasn't Bush been going nuts on
the UN about this? Certainly, this is vindication for his ignoring the UN,
and demonstrates the unprincipled heart of darkness in the Security Council.
It's called "not piling on." I think it's hilarious to hear all the rabid
Democrats bitching about the so-called Republican attack machine. I loved it
when Kerry got on GMA last week and said that it's wrong to go after him for
something that happened 30 years ago when they should be going after Bush
for something that happened 30 years ago. The Democratic rhetoric is 10.5 on
the hydrophobic scale, and they only stop foaming and snarling when they're
drawing a breath and sniveling about how everyone else is so mean to them.

> LOL, NK unlike Iraq actually has a half-decent or 
> quarter-decent army and really has WMDs.

Maybe. Time will tell if they're bluffing.

> > Stalin and Mao don't count, I guess? At least the right 
> supports itty 
> > bitty dictators, unlike you leftists who say that as soon as a 
> > dictator kills 10 million he's no longer a cult but a church.
> 
> Compared to the GOP that arranges for one of the most 
> powerful cult leaders, but a strong financial and media 
> supporter, to have himself crowned Messiah in the capital?

I don't quite get what your point is here. Somewhere in there, I supposed
you think that the GOP is worse than Stalin, but other than that, I'm
baffled.

> > But you make an interesting, if deranged, point: what exactly is it 
> > about what's going on that's unconstitutional and destroying the 
> > separation of powers?
> 
> This administration.
> 
> They have made repeated prolonged assault on the separation 
> of powers, elevating executive power and classifying secret 
> public meetings with private citizens.  They have detained US 
> citizens without charges and without access to an attorney 
> and communication. They have expounded a right to collect any 
> and all information from any source about anyone in the 
> United States without revealing a reason.

And the Supreme Court has ruled against them when? And they have ignored the

Court after that ruling when? And the administration implemented the Patriot
Act despite Congress not passing it?

> > By the way, Bush just used the word "apologize"
> > but it still won't make you happy. What he did was gutsy 
> and difficult 
> > and you don't care.
> 
> Bush calls treatment of Iraqi prisoners 'abhorrent,' but 
> doesn't apologize 
> http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/Iraq/2004/05/05/448149-ap.html
> 
> You have low standards for gutsy and difficult.

You like to move the goalposts a lot. 

Notice, that I was right. You don't care. You got what you want and you
still aren't happy. What are you, a 23 year old hot chick? 

> Maybe. Except for a couple public moments for a couple months after
> 9/11 he has been pretty much a miserable, dangerous excuse 
> for a president.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion. I think you're a miserable, dangerous
excuse for a citizen.

> I agree he is a right wing moron.  I cannot see Kerry doing 
> anything as bad as this gang has managed to do and Kerry was 
> way down on my list of candidates.  

Well, that's what happens when you let Mr. Mole vote. Kerry has said he'll
kiss Eurabian/UN ass in the war on terror. He'll out-Chamberlain Spain.

Also, let's not forget, it wasn't just 30 years ago today that Sgt. Kerry
threw his medals away. Since then, he's been about the most consistently
leftist member of Congress. Even if he had reformed, I wouldn't care.
Really, there's something wrong with you if you buy into this shit even when
you're 20.


> Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld has insisted from the 
> beginning, however, "They will be handled not as prisoners of 
> war, because they're not, but as unlawful combatants. 
> Technically unlawful combatants do not have any rights under 
> the Geneva Convention.
> 
> "We have indicated that we do plan to, for the most part, 
> treat them in a manner that is reasonably consistent with the 
> Geneva conventions, to the extent they are appropriate."

I've already conceded your point in another post on this: Rumsfeld said it,
I believe it, and that settles it.

You mig

RE: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Mike Lee]

When Gary's right, he's right (vis a vis Rumsfeld declaring that the Geneva
Convention doesn't apply to most of the assholes we have in jail in Iraq).

But Rumsfeld is right too, on the law. The Geneva Conventions do not apply
to everyone who picks a fight with us, especially if they violate the rules
defined in the conventions. You can argue that we should observe the Geneva
Conventions, regardless of whether we are legally bound to do so, but that's
different from arguing we're violating them. 

 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary Denton
> Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 12:24 AM
> To: Killer Bs Discussion
> Subject: Re: Disturbing evidence of torture
> 
> On Fri, 7 May 2004 02:20:34 -0500, Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote: 
> 
> > Washington Post -
> > 
> > The lawlessness began in January 2002 when Mr. Rumsfeld publicly 
> > declared that hundreds of people detained by U.S. and 
> allied forces in 
> > Afghanistan "do not have any rights" under the Geneva Conventions.
> > That was not the case: At a minimum, all those arrested in the war 
> > zone were entitled under the conventions to a formal hearing to 
> > determine whether they were prisoners of war or unlawful combatants.
> > No such hearings were held, but then Mr. Rumsfeld made 
> clear that U.S.
> > observance of the convention was now optional. Prisoners, he said, 
> > would be treated "for the most part" in "a manner that is 
> reasonably 
> > consistent" with the conventions -- which, the secretary breezily 
> > suggested, was outdated.
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5840-2004May5.html
> 

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: March for Women's Lives

[Julia Thompson]

Jim Sharkey wrote:
> 
> Mike Lee misattributed to me:
> >>As my brother-in-law (a stay at home dad*) put it having one
> >>kid is a hobby, adding a second makes it a career.  It
> >> definitely gets exponentially harder with the second one.
> >
> >That is so dumb. It does not.
> 
> You're the only person I've ever encountered who thinks so.
> 
> I don't remember who quoted this to you, but it wasn't me.  None of
> my brothers-in-law even have kids.  I understand that your bizarre
> hard-on for me makes you *want* me to engage you further, but I
> weasn't.  In any case, I can be fairly accused of various
> shortcomings, but a lack of parenting experience is not among them.

Actually, in the original post, that poster misattributed something to
Mr. Lee, something that was mine.  Maybe he's just spreading the joy. 
Or maybe he misread "jmh" as "Jim".

Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

New Material Grabs More Solar Energy

[Robert Seeberger]

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/trn_photovoltaic_040507.html


http://tinyurl.com/yszeg

One way to make solar cells more efficient is to find a material that
will capture energy from a large portion of the spectrum of
sunlight -- from infrared to visible light to ultraviolet.

Energy transfers from photons to a photovoltaic material when the
material absorbs lightwaves that contain the same amount of energy as
its bandgap. A bandgap is the energy required to push an electron from
a material's valence band to the conduction band where electrons are
free to flow.

Most photovoltaic materials absorb a relatively narrow range of light
energy, however. The most efficient silicon solar cells capture only
about 25 percent. Multijunction solar cells made from several
different materials boost efficiency as high as 36 percent, but are
relatively difficult to make and therefore expensive.

Researchers from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the University
of California, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have
engineered a single material that contains three bandgaps and is
capable of capturing more than 50 percent of the sun's energy. The
researchers made the material by forcing oxygen into a
zinc-manganese-tellurium crystal. The oxygen split the crystal's band
gap and formed a third one of its own.

The material could lead to relatively inexpensive, highly-efficient
solar cells that would be much simpler to make than today's high-end
multijunction solar cells.

It will take to three years to assess the technical feasibility of the
multiband solar cell, according to the researchers. The work appeared
in the December 12, 2003 issue of Physical Review Letters.



xponent

Betterer Maru

rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Baseball idea

[Dan Minette]

I originally sent this to just one list member, but I think it might be a
good list question. I think I may be seeing another case where a sacrifice
is a decent percentage play...  Adam Everett, the Astro's second hitter,
bunted in the 7th, with no outs Houston having a 4-1 lead.  He ended up
getting a hit on it.  He is fast enough...and a good enough bunter, so one
has to include a reasonable percentage of hits in his sacrifice numbers.

Dan M.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: March for Women's Lives

[Jim Sharkey]

Mike Lee misattributed to me:
>>As my brother-in-law (a stay at home dad*) put it having one
>>kid is a hobby, adding a second makes it a career.  It
>> definitely gets exponentially harder with the second one.
>
>That is so dumb. It does not.

You're the only person I've ever encountered who thinks so.  

I don't remember who quoted this to you, but it wasn't me.  None of 
my brothers-in-law even have kids.  I understand that your bizarre hard-on for me 
makes you *want* me to engage you further, but I 
weasn't.  In any case, I can be fairly accused of various 
shortcomings, but a lack of parenting experience is not among them.

Jim

___
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Today's hearings

[Dan Minette]

I was able to watch most of today's hearings while I was working and I had
a few observations and questions:

1) Sen. Clinton asked a very good question: if normal procedures required
general ignorance of what happened until it worked up the chain of command,
why wasn't that true in the case of the Army chaplain who had charges
preferred for dealing with the enemy and then dropped?

2) How much worse are the rest of the pictures and the film?

3) Is there any chance that they will stay confidential?

4) Why was it constantly referred to as "only six involved" when one of the
published pictures clearly had 10 people in it?

5) Why was the fact that the pictures had made the rounds before being
shown on CBS ignored?  Rumsfeld seemed to think that the only way they
could have been leaked is that a perp. sent them to the media.  Yet, people
at the home base of the unit had at least some of the pictures for a while.

6) The denial inherent in the top brass was actually kinda sad.

7) The insistence that the problems mentioned in the Red Cross report
(leaked to the WSJ) were fixed as they came up was amazing.  The Red Cross
listed some of the actions that were pictured.  How can Rumsfeld not have
know?

Dan M.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Julia Thompson]

"Ronn!Blankenship" wrote:
> 
> At 04:31 PM 5/7/04, Julia Thompson wrote:
> >
> > Julia
> >
> >who got cheesed off on the whole "you're going to hell" bit in college
> >due to one particularly vocal individual (and I'll spare the details
> >unless pressed for them)
> 
> Sorry . . . Debbi already used the "Don't throw me into that brier patch"
> strategy this afternoon.  Just share . . .

I think I went into it already awhile back.  Maybe twice, even.

But

Well, there was this guy in college, on my floor (co-ed floor, but each
section of hallway was monogendered), who was something of a
fundamentalist, I guess.

His criteria for where you were going to go after you died was, had you
publically confessed to be a Christian at some point in your life?  So,
Hitler was going to Heaven, and Gandhi was going to Hell.

This didn't sit well with me, not at all.

And the last year I was in the dorm, he had a roommate who was from
Israel, and a Jew.

Every day, this cad would inform his roommate that he was going to Hell
because he was a Jew.

I didn't like him very much.

Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: March for Women's Lives

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 05:58 PM 5/7/04, Robert Seeberger wrote:
--===1639037804==

- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 5:06 PM
Subject: RE: March for Women's Lives
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 4:57 PM
> > To: Killer Bs Discussion
> > Subject: Re: March for Women's Lives
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 2:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: March for Women's Lives
> >
> >
> > > As a new member can I ask if he is always like this?
> >
> > Every single post.
> >
> >
> > >Is this supposed
> > > to be satire?
> > >
> > >
> > More like trollery.
>
> "Trollery" is not an english word, and the use of such is an act of
> "trollery".
>
>
I invite you to prove that it is beyond my ability to create a new and
descriptive word that follows common English rules. 
Question:
Is there anyone here who did not understand my use of the word
"trollery"?




Ding, Ding, Ding Goes The Trollery Maru



-- Ronn!  :)


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Screensavers, Call For Help - RIP

[Robert Seeberger]

- Original Message - 
From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: Screensavers, Call For Help - RIP


> Robert Seeberger wrote:
> >
> > http://leo.typepad.com/tlr/2004/05/comcast_fires_t.html
> >
> > The entire staff of Tech TV has been fired by Comcast.
> >
> > Pretty well sucks since Tech TV was actually a very good cable
channel
> > and its competition G4 (owned by Comcast who recently bought
TechTV)
> > pretty well sucked.
> >
> > That's one way to get over the competition.
>
> Damn.  Are they dropping showing Robot Wars as well?
>

It remains to be seen I believe.
They are moving the studios from tech laden San Francisco to hype
laden Los Angeles. How it will effect programming (beyond the firing
of the complete staff) has not been revealed.

xponent
We Want A Trollery Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: More on the environmental movement

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 04:36 PM 5/7/04, Julia Thompson wrote:
The Fool wrote:
>
> --
> From: Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> The Fool wrote:
> >
> > --
> > From: Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Deborah Harrell wrote:
> >
> > > While the numbers are smaller, the result of folate
> > > supplementation is reduction of spina bifida and other
> > > neural tube defects (SB frequently results in
> > > paralysis).  And the lack of iodine is potentially
> > > devastating, with mental retardation of varying
> > > degrees the result of prenatal/infantile deficiency.
> > > [I believe that "cretinism" was the former term for
> > > these unfortunate children; don't have the time right
> > > now but ought to look that up.]
> >
> > My handy dictionary tells me that cretinism is caused by a deficiency
> of
> > thyroid hormone during prenatal development.  (Not sure just how this
> > ties in with iodine, and my uncle is no longer alive to explain it to
> > me)
> >
> > ---
> > Iodine regulates thyroid function.
>
> Thank you.  :)
>
> > Coincidentally Flouride interferes with thyroid function.
>
> I didn't know that.  All I knew was, a certain amount would help in
> tooth formation, but too much would cause teeth to be very dark.
>
> ---
>
> A tube of toothpaste can kill a child.  In fact I see no need for
> children without permanent teeth to use fluoridated toothpaste or
> fluoridated water at all.  Those teeth will fall out anyway.  Distilled
> water is the way to go.
Developing teeth in the gums need it.  I lived in an area where the
water was not fluoridated when I was young, and I was taken off of the
fluoride tablets prescribed for me when I was 10 or 12 or so.
A baby developing in its mother's wombs grab the fluoride it needs from
her.
I don't plan on using fluoridated toothpaste with any of my children for
awhile.  The oldest is eating the non-fluoridated fruit-flavored stuff
off the toothbrush sometimes.  I'm not using any sort of paste with the
babies, just brushing their unbroken gums every evening for them to get
used to having something in their mouths doing that sort of thing.
(They like it, too, especially if the teething has been making them feel
miserable during the day.)
> As far as I am concerned thyroid function is more important than tooth
> hardness.
Yes, but if you can provide just a little bit of fluoride to help with
the teeth and there's plenty of iodine in the diet, having both would be
nice.


Why do I get the feeling that there is no useable compound which contains 
both and can be used as a supplement . . .



-- Ronn!  :)


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: March for Women's Lives

[Robert Seeberger]

- Original Message - 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 5:06 PM
Subject: RE: March for Women's Lives


>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 4:57 PM
> > To: Killer Bs Discussion
> > Subject: Re: March for Women's Lives
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 2:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: March for Women's Lives
> >
> >
> > > As a new member can I ask if he is always like this?
> >
> > Every single post.
> >
> >
> > >Is this supposed
> > > to be satire?
> > >
> > >
> > More like trollery.
>
> "Trollery" is not an english word, and the use of such is an act of
> "trollery".
>
>

I invite you to prove that it is beyond my ability to create a new and
descriptive word that follows common English rules. 

Question:
Is there anyone here who did not understand my use of the word
"trollery"?


xponent
Not A Static Language Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 05:00 PM 5/7/04, Robert Seeberger wrote:
--===1477119760==

- Original Message -
From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out
> From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> But I think that if one says "Christians" one is speaking most
> generally, unless one uses modifiers to specify a certain group of
> christians.
> Southern Baptists and their beliefs do not on the whole typify
> Christianity.
But when one describes themselves as a "Christian" without any other
qualifier or asks if you are a "Christian" without any other
qualifier, more than likely they are Southern Baptist or other
fundamentalist types.
*
Untrue John.
Christian describes a multitude of varying forms of belief.
Southern Baptists are just one brand on the shelf.
Frex...and correct me if I am wrong, but Catholics are a larger
set of Christians in America than Southern Baptists.
Though I will grant you that Southern Baptists may be louder
concerning their beliefs and more forceful in regards to making their
environment conform to their religious beliefs.
But in no way do I see Southern Baptists as the stereotype for all
Christians.
Fundamentalists perhaps..
xponent
Cruciform Inquisitions Maru
rob


But it wasn't a Catholic who asked¹ me "Are you Baptist or are you heathen?"



_
¹Clearly in jest.
-- Ronn!  :)

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 04:31 PM 5/7/04, Julia Thompson wrote:
"Ronn!Blankenship" wrote:
>
> At 07:07 PM 5/6/04, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> >
> >
> >It seems to me that the vast majority of christians never give thought
> >to who (other than themselves) might be going to hell,
>
> You must not live in Southern Baptist territory.
>
> The local fish wrapper (I think it may have been a Sunday morning edition)
> once (within the past 5± years) had the above-the-fold front page headline
> "Baptists release list of who is going to Hell"
I think I'm surrounded by Southern Baptist territory, but there's a
limit as to what the Statesman is going to print.  Bad enough they have
to report on the doings of the state legislature  ;)
Julia

who got cheesed off on the whole "you're going to hell" bit in college
due to one particularly vocal individual (and I'll spare the details
unless pressed for them)


Sorry . . . Debbi already used the "Don't throw me into that brier patch" 
strategy this afternoon.  Just share . . .



-- Ronn!  :)

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

The Barbie Experiment

[Robert Seeberger]

http://www.cindyjackson.com/my_surgery.php


Did not use Michael Jackson's advice.



xponent
Early Transhuman Studies Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Screensavers, Call For Help - RIP

[Julia Thompson]

Robert Seeberger wrote:
> 
> http://leo.typepad.com/tlr/2004/05/comcast_fires_t.html
> 
> The entire staff of Tech TV has been fired by Comcast.
> 
> Pretty well sucks since Tech TV was actually a very good cable channel
> and its competition G4 (owned by Comcast who recently bought TechTV)
> pretty well sucked.
> 
> That's one way to get over the competition.

Damn.  Are they dropping showing Robot Wars as well?

Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Screensavers, Call For Help - RIP

[Robert Seeberger]

http://leo.typepad.com/tlr/2004/05/comcast_fires_t.html


The entire staff of Tech TV has been fired by Comcast.

Pretty well sucks since Tech TV was actually a very good cable channel
and its competition G4 (owned by Comcast who recently bought TechTV)
pretty well sucked.

That's one way to get over the competition.


xponent
Bummed Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: March for Women's Lives

[ChadCooper]

 

> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 4:57 PM
> To: Killer Bs Discussion
> Subject: Re: March for Women's Lives
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 2:57 PM
> Subject: Re: March for Women's Lives
> 
> 
> > As a new member can I ask if he is always like this?
> 
> Every single post.
> 
> 
> >Is this supposed
> > to be satire?
> >
> >
> More like trollery.

"Trollery" is not an english word, and the use of such is an act of
"trollery". 


Nerd From Hell



> 
> 
> 
> xponent
> Unmodified Baseline Maru
> rob
> 
> 
> 

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Robert Seeberger]

- Original Message - 
From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out


> From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> But I think that if one says "Christians" one is speaking most
> generally, unless one uses modifiers to specify a certain group of
> christians.
> Southern Baptists and their beliefs do not on the whole typify
> Christianity.

But when one describes themselves as a "Christian" without any other
qualifier or asks if you are a "Christian" without any other
qualifier, more than likely they are Southern Baptist or other
fundamentalist types.

*
Untrue John.
Christian describes a multitude of varying forms of belief.
Southern Baptists are just one brand on the shelf.

Frex...and correct me if I am wrong, but Catholics are a larger
set of Christians in America than Southern Baptists.
Though I will grant you that Southern Baptists may be louder
concerning their beliefs and more forceful in regards to making their
environment conform to their religious beliefs.
But in no way do I see Southern Baptists as the stereotype for all
Christians.
Fundamentalists perhaps..

xponent
Cruciform Inquisitions Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: More on the environmental movement

[Julia Thompson]

The Fool wrote:
> 
> --
> From: Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> The Fool wrote:
> >
> > --
> > From: Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Deborah Harrell wrote:
> >
> > > While the numbers are smaller, the result of folate
> > > supplementation is reduction of spina bifida and other
> > > neural tube defects (SB frequently results in
> > > paralysis).  And the lack of iodine is potentially
> > > devastating, with mental retardation of varying
> > > degrees the result of prenatal/infantile deficiency.
> > > [I believe that "cretinism" was the former term for
> > > these unfortunate children; don't have the time right
> > > now but ought to look that up.]
> >
> > My handy dictionary tells me that cretinism is caused by a deficiency
> of
> > thyroid hormone during prenatal development.  (Not sure just how this
> > ties in with iodine, and my uncle is no longer alive to explain it to
> > me)
> >
> > ---
> > Iodine regulates thyroid function.
> 
> Thank you.  :)
> 
> > Coincidentally Flouride interferes with thyroid function.
> 
> I didn't know that.  All I knew was, a certain amount would help in
> tooth formation, but too much would cause teeth to be very dark.
> 
> ---
> 
> A tube of toothpaste can kill a child.  In fact I see no need for
> children without permanent teeth to use fluoridated toothpaste or
> fluoridated water at all.  Those teeth will fall out anyway.  Distilled
> water is the way to go.

Developing teeth in the gums need it.  I lived in an area where the
water was not fluoridated when I was young, and I was taken off of the
fluoride tablets prescribed for me when I was 10 or 12 or so.

A baby developing in its mother's wombs grab the fluoride it needs from
her.

I don't plan on using fluoridated toothpaste with any of my children for
awhile.  The oldest is eating the non-fluoridated fruit-flavored stuff
off the toothbrush sometimes.  I'm not using any sort of paste with the
babies, just brushing their unbroken gums every evening for them to get
used to having something in their mouths doing that sort of thing. 
(They like it, too, especially if the teething has been making them feel
miserable during the day.)
 
> As far as I am concerned thyroid function is more important than tooth
> hardness.

Yes, but if you can provide just a little bit of fluoride to help with
the teeth and there's plenty of iodine in the diet, having both would be
nice.

Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Julia Thompson]

"Ronn!Blankenship" wrote:
> 
> At 07:07 PM 5/6/04, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> >
> >
> >It seems to me that the vast majority of christians never give thought
> >to who (other than themselves) might be going to hell,
> 
> You must not live in Southern Baptist territory.
> 
> The local fish wrapper (I think it may have been a Sunday morning edition)
> once (within the past 5± years) had the above-the-fold front page headline
> "Baptists release list of who is going to Hell"

I think I'm surrounded by Southern Baptist territory, but there's a
limit as to what the Statesman is going to print.  Bad enough they have
to report on the doings of the state legislature  ;)

Julia

who got cheesed off on the whole "you're going to hell" bit in college
due to one particularly vocal individual (and I'll spare the details
unless pressed for them)
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Warhorses (was: What America Does with its Hegemony)

[Damon Agretto]

> I'll try to find some on-line pix of the various
> riding styles (knight vs. Moor) etc.

The reason why I inquired is because, as you may know, I have a history
degree, and would tenatively describe myself as a military historian. I have
plenty of source material on the subject. But when you say that Arabians
"revolutionized" cavalry, you must be very careful to define specifically
what you mean. For example, I'm a big proponent of the Late Medieval
military revolution of using fully mounted armies. This revolution was
strategic, rather than tactical (most of the troops would ride to the
battlefield, but dismount to actually come to grips with the enemy). So
obviously our terms differ.

For more information, I would highly reccommend looking at medieval history
books. In particular, Michael Prestwich in _Armies and Warfare in the Middle
Ages: The English Experience_ has some good info on warhorses in medieval
England (which would probably be applicable to other areas of Europe,
especially as the English busily imported breeding stock from Spain during
the 14th C).

> Don't Throw Me Into That Briar-patch Maru  ;)

We all have our briar patches...

Damon.

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: More on the environmental movement

[Julia Thompson]

Gautam Mukunda wrote:
> 
> --- Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The 'state nannyism' came up in a discussion of
> > taking
> > a pill vs. actually getting off one's tushie and
> > getting some exercise WRT coronary artery disease -
> > the latter position mine, the former Gautam's.  I'm
> > not sure how 'an educational program' morphed into
> > 'state nannyism' as exemplified by the examples
> > above.
> 
> No, my position is that people might actually do the
> former, while the evidence suggests that they don't do
> the latter.  Lipitor and similar drugs save lots and
> lots of lives, and if more people took it it would
> save many more.

Yes, but Lipitor et al. do more if used in conjunction with regular
exercise and a reasonable diet than by themselves.

Lipitor and similar drugs are great, but there's a limit as to how much
they can do alone.  There's a limit as to how much diet can do alone. 
There's a limit as to how much exercise can do alone.  All three put
together, though, pack a nice punch.  So we don't have a miracle pill
yet, but we do have a pill that does something, and does a lot more when
combined with more healthy behavior.

Julia

wondering how much each trip up the stairs carrying a baby counts on the
"exercise" bit, and didn't do that great on the "diet" part this
afternoon, and is cautious about taking drugs due to various side
effects experienced with a variety of different drugs
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: More on the environmental movement

[Julia Thompson]

Dan Minette wrote:
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: More on the environmental movement
> 
> >
> > I didn't know that.  All I knew was, a certain amount would help in
> > tooth formation, but too much would cause teeth to be very dark.
> >
> 
> Its also the first step on the road to communism. :-)
> 
> Dan M. POE Maru

So, it's just rainwater and pure grain alcohol for you?  :)

Julia

love that movie, BTW
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Sock-puppet (was: Disturbing evidence of torture)

[Deborah Harrell]

>Robert Seeberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: "Deborah Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Dan Minette wrote:
> > > > From: "Robert Seeberger"

> > > > Wl...if it was good for you,
> then I guess it's good enough for the world court.

> > > A whole new way to look at "put a sock on it."

> > Meant to say 'thanks' for the clarification of
> >what a 'sock puppet' is -- I was sorta right, but 
> >knowing is always better than 'thinking so.'

> Reading this response created an instant visual
> image:
> A penis in a ski mask.
> 
> Further contemplation decided that this is an apt
> description of an internet sock puppet.


Ooh, you've infected the lot of us with your meme, Rob
- we're going to have hysterics from now on when a
sock-puppet comes up...!

Debbi
Argyle Or Yellow-Striped? Maru




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Warhorses (was: What America Does with its Hegemony)

[Deborah Harrell]

> Damon Agretto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [I wrote:]

> > Arabian horses, of course!  ;)
> > I'm being a little over-the-top, but since at the
> >time horses were the best overland transport and
> military
> > assets, the impact of the introduction of Arabian
> >and Barb horses, along with style-of-riding, was 
>  huge.  As
> > anyone who has worked with heavy/draft horses vs.
> > Arabs & their cousins can tell you, the
> responsiveness
> > of the light horse is remarkable; they changed
> >cavalry tactics -- perhaps not, in retrospect, a
> > thing for the better...
 
> Can you put this in historical context? Medieval
> warhorses were not
> clydesdales, or draft horses. They were larger, yes,
> but according to my
> sources this meant they had larger chests and
> hindquarters.

I'm going to answer from the books I've read, but will
check out 'net sources later -- because I've spotted
at least one error in _The Encyclopedia Of The Horse_,
which is generally a very good sourcebook put out by
the British Riding Club (or Association?).

The drafts Shire, Belgian and probably the Percheron
were all descendents of what is called either the
Great Horse of Flanders or the Great Medieval Warhorse
(when crossed with native mares in England, it became
the Great English Black Horse -> eventually the
Shire).  These horses carried roughly 400# of man,
armor, tack and horse-armor, IIRC; as a horse cannot
easily carry more than a quarter of its bodyweight for
significant periods of time, that would make these
animals need to be 1600#, which puts them in the
drafter category.  The Friesian-type, a lighter draft,
goes back for at least 1000 years (it was modified by
the addition of Andalusian blood centuries ago, they
in turn a result of the crossing of Moorish Barbs and
other oriental horses with the Spanish native
jennets), and would be less bulky and more nimble than
the other drafters (of course the Percheron also was
influenced by the introduction of Arabian blood after
-IIRC- the Battle of Tours, and they too are a bit
lighter and nimbler than the Shire).

Interestingly, there were 'clydesdale-type' horses in
some prehistoric European cave paintings, as well as
Exmoor pony-types and tarpan-types (the latter typical
of the Assyrian charioteer horses).

However, the modern German Holsteiner (now greatly
lightened by the addition of Thoroughbred and other
blood) did descend from the German medieval warhorse,
and those were more of a carriage-type build than
draft-type -- I recall seeing some woodcuts of German
knights who appeared to be less heavily-armored, and
on lighter horses such as you describe.

I'll try to find some on-line pix of the various
riding styles (knight vs. Moor) etc.

Debbi
Don't Throw Me Into That Briar-patch Maru  ;)




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Nick Arnett]

Mike Lee wrote:

Sometimes I
think Jack Chick is really a minion of Satan sent to make Christians look
silly.
I don't think Satan makes Christians look silly.  I think Satan makes 
Christians look self-righteous, which would leave making Christians look 
silly up to God... and I can see how that could fit into God's plan.

Besides, we Christians, as a group, really don't need *any* help at this 
sort of thing.  But perhaps I'm just being silly.

Nick

--
Nick Arnett
Director, Business Intelligence Services
LiveWorld Inc.
Phone/fax: (408) 551-0427
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Confrontational style (was: More on the environmental movement)

[Deborah Harrell]

Yesterday I inappropriately (as Dan gently pointed
out) tacked-on to the end of a post:

"Perhaps I am a bit piqued at what I see as an
underlying assumption Gautam makes when he attributes
bad intentions or stupidity to those who disagree with
him on certain issues -- You've assumed that people
I've never heard of, or at best marginally so
(Chomsky, frex, or that Karen person), represent *my*
viewpoints and thoughts.  I think I'll contemplate
things a bit before responding further in this
thread."

It is unfortunate that I finally snapped at a time
when Gautam is understandably angry over external
affairs; in fact I share in that outrage, having been
an 'Army brat' with the personal experience of the
basic decency of the officers I knew.  What happened
to those Iraqi prisoners was horrible, and unfairly
tars the entire service.

I've had the bones of a post on confrontational
discussion for some time now, and decided to flesh it
out a bit.

General
The impression that Southerners are more polite and
Northeasterners more "in yer face" when discussing
volatile topics is, I think, having lived and worked
in both cultures, generally true.  Problem: those used
to more subtle disputation find direct attack boorish
and uncouth, while those used to flat-out
confrontation find such subtlety cowardly and
manipulative.  Even when both parties are arguing in
good faith, and make their versions of a
peace-offering, misunderstanding occurs frequently,
leading both to be genuinely offended.

Specific
By upbringing, faith#, gender* and training, I am a
non-confronter; adjusting my argument/discussional
style to the "in-yer-facers" on the List has
been...challenging [waves cheerily to Erik ;) ].  In
spite of trying to keep in mind that the other person
doesn't _really_ mean to insult the doody out of me, I
find that after sending the equivalents of a flat
stare, next wrinkled muzzle and then flattened ears to

what seems an oblivious debater, I finally snarl and
snap.  The lack of actual body language and
tone-of-voice, which I find so important to
conversation and understanding, is an additional
stumbling-block; words convey emotional overtones
quite poorly in comparison, and it would be easy for
me to miss a written 'open palm' when I'm at the
pinned-ears point.

While I often use humor as a defuser, it apparently
can be misinterpreted as frivolous or even
patronizing; from my standpoint, when someone ignores
a humorous offering, I usually jump straight from
'flat stare' to 'snap.' Conversely, humor combined
with an otherwise brash and arrogant statement
inclines me to at least listen more carefully and take
little-to-no-offense, but more usually to be
entertained as well [waves cheerily to Travis ;) ]. 
Of course, humor too varies regionally, with degrees
of subtlety and abrasiveness -  and that too can
offend people unintentionally.

So I'll continue to attempt to adjust to you brash
fellows - just remember that I truly don't want to be
in a biting frame of mind!  

"Was that subtle enough, Master?" said Jeannie, in an
episode whose storyline I've forgotten.

#The Lutheran Eleventh Commandment (Unwritten) is Thou
Shalt Not Confront.

*My girlfriends and I have often noted that in dealing
with boyfriends, not only do they 'just not get it,'
they so don't see the signals of a rising storm that
they are shocked to find out how truly angry we are,
when after a long series of thunder rumblings,
lightning strikes.  While there was a lot of hoohah in
the book _Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus_,
the generalization that 'men negotiate, women
cooperate' is valid, IMO, and that carries over into
debate.

Umm, and in case you missed it, this was a complement
-- albeit a rather left-handed one.  :)

Debbi
You Southern Boys And Married Men, By Virtue Of Your
Genteel Upbringing And Superior Training, I Presume
Did Not Miss It Maru  ;)




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[William T Goodall]

On 7 May 2004, at 8:30 pm, Mike Lee wrote:

The Fool has his knickers in a twist:

Subject: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

This is indescribable:

<>

Homophobe apologists (like JDG), only empower people like Chick.
Oh, for Christ's sake. I love Chick comics. They're a hott. I've been
running across them since I was a kid. If you want to do something to 
help
build tolerance for gays, hand this one out to high schoolers. 
Sometimes I
think Jack Chick is really a minion of Satan sent to make Christians 
look
silly.
They need help?

--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
"It is our belief, however, that serious professional users will run 
out of things they can do with UNIX." - Ken Olsen, President of DEC, 
1984.

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Mike Lee]

The Fool has his knickers in a twist:

> Subject: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out
> 
> This is indescribable:
> 
> <>
> 
> Homophobe apologists (like JDG), only empower people like Chick.

Oh, for Christ's sake. I love Chick comics. They're a hott. I've been
running across them since I was a kid. If you want to do something to help
build tolerance for gays, hand this one out to high schoolers. Sometimes I
think Jack Chick is really a minion of Satan sent to make Christians look
silly.

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Horn, John]

> From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> But I think that if one says "Christians" one is speaking most
> generally, unless one uses modifiers to specify a certain group of
> christians.
> Southern Baptists and their beliefs do not on the whole typify
> Christianity.

But when one describes themselves as a "Christian" without any other
qualifier or asks if you are a "Christian" without any other
qualifier, more than likely they are Southern Baptist or other
fundamentalist types.

 - jmh
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: - Darn this is annoying.....

[Dan Minette]

- Original Message - 
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 9:47 PM
Subject: Re:  - Darn this is annoying.


> On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 06:39:46PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> > One needs to ask why our armed services changed procedures and
> > techniques that had worked so well for decades.
>
> The Bush administration has been leading by example with that sort of
> thing ever since 9/11.

As you see from my other posts, that's my working hypothesis too.  I asked
it as a question to see if other working hypotheses would emerge. So far,
they haven't as far as I knowwith the exception of the opinion
expressed by Mr. Hyde.


Dan M.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: March for Women's Lives

[Dan Minette]

- Original Message - 
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 12:53 AM
Subject: Re: March for Women's Lives



> The bromadrosis from this particular sock is rather severe though, don't
> you think?  Open that particular drawer and you're likely to pass out
from
> the accumulated putrescence.
>

Sure, and I think that's deliberate.  This particular sock puppet's owner
has mused on the usefulness of such techniques as a technique in
understanding people.  I am treating it as an experiment in how rational
people respond to a nasty crackpot in their midst.  If it were a real
human, I'd probably get upset, but why get upset at a moldy piece of wool?

Dan M.

Dan M.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Julia Thompson]

Pardon me for jumping in on this, but Mr. Lee seems not to have had time
to read and post yet this morning

Gary Denton wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:33:41 -0700, Mike Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > By the way, Bush just used the word "apologize"
> > but it still won't make you happy. What he did was gutsy and difficult and
> > you don't care.
> 
> Bush calls treatment of Iraqi prisoners 'abhorrent,' but doesn't apologize
> http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/Iraq/2004/05/05/448149-ap.html
> 
> You have low standards for gutsy and difficult.

That article was written on Wednesday.  My understanding is that there
were more words spoken by Bush on Thursday, and my best guess is that
this is what Mr. Lee is referring to.  Mr. Denton's response is with an
article older than the event I believe Mr. Lee is referring to, which
doesn't support his point with people in possession of the more recent
information.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1803&ncid=1803&e=3&u=/washpost/20040507/pl_washpost/a6866_2004may6
or
http://tinyurl.com/39bpt

Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 09:40 AM 5/7/04, Andrew Paul wrote:
You dont start wars.  Its always a stupid thing to do.


How about joining in when one is already in progress, whether it has been 
"declared" or not?



-- Ronn!  :)


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Gautam Mukunda]

--- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I feel that this lack of clarity as to why they are
> there feeds down to the people on the ground.
> They are not drones, they are people risking their
> lives.  The lack of a simple moral basis,
> which i feel stems from the rush with which Bush
> went into this war, not willing to wait for
> the support of the only body we have for making
> these decisions, namely the UN, lies at
> the heart of the problems in Iraq.

The UN which just re-elected the Sudan (currently
conducting a genocidal campaign against its Christian
minority) to the Human Rights Committee?

Or the UN which stole, and helped Saddam steal,
billions of dollars from the people of Iraq through
the Oil-for-Fraud program?

Or the UN currently headed by a man who actively
inhibited people from stopping the Rwandan genocide? 
Whose son was employed by one of the major companies
running the Iraqi Oil program, incidentally.

> You dont start wars.  Its always a stupid thing to
> do.
>  
> Andrew

Really?  Always?  If Britain and France had acted
against Germany in 1936 or 1937 Hitler would have
fallen.  Would that have been a stupid thing to do?

How about Kosovo?  NATO (meaning, chiefly the United
States and Britain) started a war there to stop
genocide.  It did so without UN approval, and over the
far _stronger_ objections of Russia and China.  In
fact under international law there's _no question_
that Kosovo was illegal, while there's at least a
plausible argument that Iraq was sanctioned by UN
Security Council resolutions.

How about Bosnia?  We started a war there as well.

In 1993, the Clinton Administration invaded Haiti to
put Jean-Bertrand Aristide in power.  How about that? 
Was that a stupid thing to do (arguably, yes, but why
aren't you upset about it?)

Would it have been a stupid thing to do to intervene
in Rwanda to stop the genocide?  That would have been
starting a war without UN sanction.  

=
Gautam Mukunda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Freedom is not free"
http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Dan Minette]

- Original Message - 
From: "Andrew Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 9:40 AM
Subject: RE: Disturbing evidence of torture



> I still stand by my original postion on this war.
> You dont declare war and invade countries without absolute moral clarity.
> It didn't exist, and that seems to becoming more and more obvious.
> And if the leaders dont have it, you cant expect the troops too.
>
> You dont start wars.  Its always a stupid thing to do.

Lets look at that general statement.  You would be opposed, then, to
stopping the genocide in the Sudan?  You would have thought it wrong to
stop the genocide in Rwanda? You think that the UN's actions in the Balkans
were better defendable than the US's?

I'm not asking questions to say what you think.  But, if you write a
general statement like that, it obviously invites questions to see if you
really hold with such a strong generality.

Dan M.





___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Andrew Paul]

From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

>--- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yea, we cant have the horrible truth of war coming
>> out can we.
>> 
>> Andrew

>Well, the _truth_ of war includes all the people whose
>lives are saved and made better.  The truth of war is
>not the same thing as the costs of war.  So I'm
>comfortable with the truth of this war coming out.
>For all the bad that was done - and we're seeing the
>worst of it right now - there's no doubt that Iraq is
>a better place to live.

>Are you?

To be honest, I dont know.
I am sure, that,  if the full flower of western secular democracy
takes root in Iraq, it will be. For now I wait and hope.
 
If I felt clearer about what the true motivation of Bush and Co were for the invasion,
I may feel more confident. I dont want to distrust them, and I dont want it to go 
wrong.
But the reasons are not clear, and the moral basis for invading an independent nation 
uncertain.
Was it to do with terrorism? How, why, on what basis?
 
I feel that this lack of clarity as to why they are there feeds down to the people on 
the ground.
They are not drones, they are people risking their lives.  The lack of a simple moral 
basis,
which i feel stems from the rush with which Bush went into this war, not willing to 
wait for
the support of the only body we have for making these decisions, namely the UN, lies at
the heart of the problems in Iraq.
 
I still stand by my original postion on this war. 
You dont declare war and invade countries without absolute moral clarity.
It didn't exist, and that seems to becoming more and more obvious.
And if the leaders dont have it, you cant expect the troops too.
 
You dont start wars.  Its always a stupid thing to do.
 
Andrew
 
 
 
 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Gautam Mukunda]

--- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yea, we cant have the horrible truth of war coming
> out can we.
>  
> Andrew

Well, the _truth_ of war includes all the people whose
lives are saved and made better.  The truth of war is
not the same thing as the costs of war.  So I'm
comfortable with the truth of this war coming out. 
For all the bad that was done - and we're seeing the
worst of it right now - there's no doubt that Iraq is
a better place to live.

Are you?

=
Gautam Mukunda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Freedom is not free"
http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Andrew Paul]

From: Mike Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

>Prove it. Seriously. Dead Iraqis (and dead anybodys) look like hell after
>they die. If the American military is in any widespread way tacitly or
>otherwise condoning and encouraging such abuses, I'll go maddog on them
>instead of just on you stupid liberals. The last thing the last defenders of
>Western civilization need to do is to give free ammunition to you liberal
>slackers.

Yea, we cant have the horrible truth of war coming out can we.
 
Andrew
 
 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Andrew Paul]

From: Mike Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

>> and those regulars would - I'm guessing - never do anything
>> so unimaginably stupid and vile) and normal group dynamic
>> behaviors - ones that we see in experimental psychology all
>> the time - promptly asserted themselves, until you got the
>> atrocity that we saw here.

>It wasn't an atrocity. It was Boys and Girls Behaving Badly.

I am inclined to agree. Its not an excuse, and its cleary a public relations disaster,
but I dont think its anything new or unexpected. But its what happens in wars.
I am intrigued by the fact that it seems to be fans of the war who are most upset by 
this.
Perhaps those of us who thought it was a stupid idea to begin with were expecting this 
anyway.
 
Andrew
 


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

How ReptiliKlans win Elections

[The Fool]

<>

VANISHING VOTES by Greg Palast
 
On October 29, 2002, George W. Bush signed the Help America Vote Act
(HAVA). Hidden behind its apple-pie-and-motherhood name lies a nasty
civil rights time bomb.


First, the purges. In the months leading up to the November 2000
presidential election, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, in
coordination with Governor Jeb Bush, ordered local election supervisors
to purge 57,700 voters from the registries, supposedly ex-cons not
allowed to vote in Florida. At least 90.2 percent of those on this
"scrub" list, targeted to lose their civil rights, are innocent. Notably,
more than half--about 54 percent--are black or Hispanic. You can argue
all night about the number ultimately purged, but there's no argument
that this electoral racial pogrom ordered by Jeb Bush's operatives gave
the White House to his older brother. HAVA not only blesses such purges,
it requires all fifty states to implement a similar search-and-destroy
mission against vulnerable voters. Specifically, every state must, by the
2004 election, imitate Florida's system of computerizing voter files. The
law then empowers fifty secretaries of state--fifty Katherine
Harrises--to purge these lists of "suspect" voters.



The purge is back, big time. Following the disclosure in December 2000 of
the black voter purge in Britain's Observer newspaper, NAACP lawyers sued
the state. The civil rights group won a written promise from Governor Jeb
and from Harris's successor to return wrongly scrubbed citizens to the
voter rolls. According to records given to the courts by ChoicePoint, the
company that generated the computerized lists, the number of Floridians
who were questionably tagged totals 91,000. Willie Steen is one of them.
Recently, I caught up with Steen outside his office at a Tampa hospital.
Steen's case was easy. You can't work in a hospital if you have a
criminal record. (My copy of Harris's hit list includes an ex-con named
O'Steen, close enough to cost Willie Steen his vote.) The NAACP held up
Steen's case to the court as a prime example of the voter purge evil.



The state admitted Steen's innocence. But a year after the NAACP won his
case, Steen still couldn't register. Why was he still under suspicion?
What do we know about this "potential felon," as Jeb called him? Steen,
unlike our President, honorably served four years in the US military.
There is, admittedly, a suspect mark on his record: Steen remains an
African-American.



If you're black, voting in America is a game of chance. First, there's
the chance your registration card will simply be thrown out. Millions of
minority citizens registered to vote using what are called motor-voter
forms. And Republicans know it. You would not be surprised to learn that
the Commission on Civil Rights found widespread failures to add these
voters to the registers. My sources report piles of dust-covered
applications stacked up in election offices.



Second, once registered, there's the chance you'll be named a felon. In
Florida, besides those fake felons on Harris's scrub sheets, some 600,000
residents are legally barred from voting because they have a criminal
record in the state. That's one state. In the entire nation 1.4 million
black men with sentences served can't vote, 13 percent of the nation's
black male population.



At step three, the real gambling begins. The Voting Rights Act of 1965
guaranteed African-Americans the right to vote--but it did not guarantee
the right to have their ballots counted. And in one in seven cases, they
aren't.



Take Gadsden County. Of Florida's sixty-seven counties, Gadsden has the
highest proportion of black residents: 58 percent. It also has the
highest "spoilage" rate, that is, ballots tossed out on technicalities:
one in eight votes cast but not counted. Next door to Gadsden is
white-majority Leon County, where virtually every vote is counted (a
spoilage rate of one in 500).



How do votes spoil? Apparently, any old odd mark on a ballot will do it.
In Gadsden, some voters wrote in Al Gore instead of checking his name.
Their votes did not count.



Harvard law professor Christopher Edley Jr., a member of the Commission
on Civil Rights, didn't like the smell of all those spoiled ballots. He
dug into the pile of tossed ballots and, deep in the commission's
official findings, reported this: 14.4 percent of black votes--one in
seven--were "invalidated," i.e., never counted. By contrast, only 1.6
percent of nonblack voters' ballots were spoiled.



Florida's electorate is 11 percent African-American. Florida refused to
count 179,855 spoiled ballots. A little junior high school algebra
applied to commission numbers indicates that 54 percent, or 97,000, of
the votes "spoiled" were cast by black folk, of whom more than 90 percent
chose Gore. The nonblack vote divided about evenly between Gore and Bush.
Therefore, had Harris allowed the counting of these ballots, Al G

Republicans Vs Science: Shrub Blocks Over-Counter Morning-After Pill

[The Fool]

The Never ending fascist Republican assualt on human rights continues:

<>

U.S. Rules Morning-After Pill Can't Be Sold Over the Counter By GARDINER
HARRIS
 
ederal drug regulators yesterday rejected a drug maker's application to
sell a morning-after pill over the counter because of concerns about
whether young girls would be able to use it safely.

The Food and Drug Administration told the pill's maker, Barr
Pharmaceuticals, that before the drug could be sold without a
prescription the company must either find a way to prevent young
teenagers from getting it from store shelves or prove, in a new study,
that young girls can understand how to use it without the help of a
doctor. Company executives expressed confidence that they could clear
those hurdles, although it was unclear how long that would take. The
decision was a surprise because in December, a panel of independent
experts assembled by the Food and Drug Administration voted 23 to 4 to
recommend that the drug be sold over the counter. The majority concluded
that the drug was not only effective but that women could be trusted to
use it correctly without a doctor. The Food and Drug Administration
normally follows the recommendation of its advisory panels.

The drug, called Plan B, is presently available only by prescription. But
Barr's application to sell the medicine without a prescription has been
embroiled in a controversy that has now spilled into the presidential
campaign. Advocates say that making the pill more broadly available will
prevent unwanted pregnancies while opponents say it will encourage
promiscuity and risky sex.

"By overruling a recommendation by an independent F.D.A. review board,
the White House is putting its own political interests ahead of sound
medical policies that have broad support," said Phil Singer, a spokesman
for Senator John Kerry's presidential campaign. "This White House is more
interested in appealing to its electoral base than it is in protecting
women's health."

Wendy Wright, senior policy director at Concerned Women for America, a
conservative women's organization, said that the agency had ignored
political pressure and made its decision based on science.

"The F.D.A. is right to be cautious about having a potent drug that can
be harmful to women sitting next to candy bars and toothpaste," Ms.
Wright said. Broad availability of Plan B would allow people to slip the
medicine to women without their knowledge, Ms. Wright said. 

A spokesman for the Food and Drug Administration declined last night to
comment. 

The company said that the decision will delay the product's introduction
onto store shelves but not for long, said Bruce Downey, Barr's chief and
chairman.

"It's the kind of objection that can be addressed in weeks or months, not
years," Mr. Downey said. "We are committed to taking one or both of these
approaches."

Still, others pointed out that clinical trials usually take at least a
year to undertake, analyze and submit to the agency. And constructing a
system to prevent young girls from having access to an over-the-counter
medication could be difficult.

Plan B consists of two high-dose birth control pills that either
interfere with ovulation or prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. It
can be taken up 72 hours after unprotected sexual intercourse and may
prevent up to 89 percent of unplanned pregnancies.

When deciding whether to allow a product to be sold over the counter,
federal regulators ask three crucial questions: Can patients diagnose the
problem themselves; can they be trusted to treat the problem effectively;
and can they understand the drug's label — all without a physician's
intervention.

In a letter faxed yesterday evening to Barr Pharmaceuticals, the agency
said that Plan B's application failed to mount the final hurdle. It noted
that just 29 of the 585 women and girls in the company's
label-comprehension study were 16 years of age or younger.

"Based on the review of the data, we have concluded that you have not
provided adequate data to support a conclusion that Plan B can be used
safely by young adolescent women," the letter states. 

The agency wrote that Barr had two choices to get its application
approved. Either it can undertake a new study among girls 16 years old
and younger to show that they can use the drug safely without the help of
a doctor. Or the company must write a new label and construct a system
that would allow women older than 16 to buy the drug over the counter
while those younger than 17 would be forced to get a prescription.

James Trussell, director of the office of population research at
Princeton University and a member of the advisory board, said that the
agency never raised the issue of label comprehension among young
teenagers when it approved other products to be sold over the counter.
"The White House has now tak

Re: Pill-Popping Despicable Fool

[The Fool]

--
From: JDG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

At 06:39 PM 5/6/2004 -0500 Dan Minette wrote:

> One needs to ask why our armed services changed
>procedures and techniques that had worked so well for decades.

Do you include September 11th in working well for decades?

---
In what way does armed service prison procedures intersect with 911? 
They don't.  Why do you build straw men when you can't argue a point?

I notice you change subject lines that you disapprove of (ones that
expose right-wing hypocrisy / evil / fanaticism).  But how can you deny
that Rush is Pill-Popping Despicable Fool?  He clearly, hypocritically,
pops pills, and goes doctor shopping.  He clearly is a despicable Fool as
his own words illustrate.

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: More on the environmental movement

[Gary Denton]

On Fri, 7 May 2004 03:55:48 -0500, The Fool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> 
> 
> "Indeed, Neanderthal skeletons resemble cretins far
> more closely than they resemble healthy modern
> humans," Dobson wrote in the journal article.
> "Conversely, cretin skeletons resemble Neanderthals
> more closely than they resemble healthy modern
> humans..."
> 
> 
> Sorry but no.  They have sequenced the mitochondrial DNA from at least 3
> specimens.  They weren't human.  Period.  

I will add this is another case of a scientist wandering outside his
field.  He has no training in biology, medicine or anthropology.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: More on the environmental movement

[The Fool]

--
From: Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

The Fool wrote:
> 
> --
> From: Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> Deborah Harrell wrote:
> 
> > While the numbers are smaller, the result of folate
> > supplementation is reduction of spina bifida and other
> > neural tube defects (SB frequently results in
> > paralysis).  And the lack of iodine is potentially
> > devastating, with mental retardation of varying
> > degrees the result of prenatal/infantile deficiency.
> > [I believe that "cretinism" was the former term for
> > these unfortunate children; don't have the time right
> > now but ought to look that up.]
> 
> My handy dictionary tells me that cretinism is caused by a deficiency
of
> thyroid hormone during prenatal development.  (Not sure just how this
> ties in with iodine, and my uncle is no longer alive to explain it to
> me)
> 
> ---
> Iodine regulates thyroid function.

Thank you.  :)
 
> Coincidentally Flouride interferes with thyroid function.

I didn't know that.  All I knew was, a certain amount would help in
tooth formation, but too much would cause teeth to be very dark.

---

A tube of toothpaste can kill a child.  In fact I see no need for
children without permanent teeth to use fluoridated toothpaste or
fluoridated water at all.  Those teeth will fall out anyway.  Distilled
water is the way to go.

As far as I am concerned thyroid function is more important than tooth
hardness.

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: More on the environmental movement

[The Fool]

--
From: Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Further links, including to the articles footnoted,
are at the bottom of the site page.



"Indeed, Neanderthal skeletons resemble cretins far
more closely than they resemble healthy modern
humans," Dobson wrote in the journal article.
"Conversely, cretin skeletons resemble Neanderthals
more closely than they resemble healthy modern
humans..." 


Sorry but no.  They have sequenced the mitochondrial DNA from at least 3
specimens.  They weren't human.  Period.  Also over long periods of time
selection would eliminate the need for iodine in iodine deficient
populations, in the same way at least 3 separate high altitude human
populations independently evolved 3 separate adaptations to make up for
reduced oxygen.

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

The Oil Crunch

[Gary Denton]

Before the start of the Iraq war his media empire did so much to
promote, Rupert Murdoch explained the payoff: "The greatest thing to
come out of this for the world economy, if you could put it that way,
would be $20 a barrel for oil." Crude oil prices in New York rose to
almost $40 a barrel yesterday, a 13-year high.

Those who expected big economic benefits from the war were, of course,
utterly wrong about how things would go in Iraq. But the disastrous
occupation is only part of the reason that oil is getting more
expensive; the other, which will last even if we somehow find a way
out of the quagmire, is the intensifying competition for a limited
world oil supply.

Thanks to the mess in Iraq â including a continuing campaign of
sabotage against oil pipelines â oil exports have yet to recover to
their prewar level, let alone supply the millions of extra barrels
each day the optimists imagined. And the fallout from the war has
spooked the markets, which now fear terrorist attacks on oil
installations in Saudi Arabia, and are starting to worry about
radicalization throughout the Middle East. (It has been interesting to
watch people who lauded George Bush's leadership in the war on terror
come to the belated realization that Mr. Bush has given Osama bin
Laden exactly what he wanted.)

Paul Krugman, who has more
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/07/opinion/07KRUG.html

Unless their is a more active campaign by terrorists against oil
production around the world, possible, I expect lower gas prices by
November. The house of Saud should come through for the house of Bush
and start opening production late this summer.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: The Worst Thing Nixon Ever Did

[Gary Denton]

On Thu, 06 May 2004 20:06:54 -0700, Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote quoting > 
> http://www.techcentralstation.com/041504I.html
~~~

Doug,

DDT was banned in the United States for obvious reasons and all but a
few have hailed that decision. ÂThose few are now getting funding from
anti-government think tanks and some corporate sponsors. Tech Central
Station, a fake news and opinion outlet supported by corporations it
writes opinions for, is now paid to be against the DDT ban. ÂTCS
receives funding based on PR campaigns it undertakes for clients.

For more on Tech Central Station see Meet the Press - How James
Glassman reinvented journalism--as lobbying.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.confessore.html

DDT use was already in decline in the US because of increased insect
resistance.

DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichlorethane) killed many beneficial insects,
birds, and aquatic animals â not just malarial mosquitoes and it
presents a carcinogenic risk to humans, ÂDDT is a persistent chemical
it does not break down but increasing builds up, particularly as it
moves up the food chain.

During the 1950s and 1960s several species of birds, including osprey,
cormorant, brown pelican, bald eagle, prairie falcon, sparrow hawk,
and peregrine falcon, were severely effected the pesticide DDT. A
chemical derived from the DDT weakened the egg shells of these birds,
reducing their ability to reproduce.

>From a Bush government website:

How can DDT, DDE, and DDD affect my health? 
DDT affects the nervous system. People who accidentally swallowed
large amounts of DDT became excitable and had tremors and seizures.
These effects went away after the exposure stopped. No effects were
seen in people who took small daily doses of DDT by capsule for 18
months.

A study in humans showed that women who had high amounts of a form of
DDE in their breast milk were unable to breast feed their babies for
as long as women who had little DDE in the breast milk. Another study
in humans showed that women who had high amounts of DDE in breast milk
had an increased chance of having premature babies.

In animals, short-term exposure to large amounts of DDT in food
affected the nervous system, while long-term exposure to smaller
amounts affected the liver. Also in animals, short-term oral exposure
to small amounts of DDT or its breakdown products may also have
harmful effects on reproduction.

How likely are DDT, DDE, and DDD to cause cancer? 
Studies in DDT-exposed workers did not show increases in cancer.
Studies in animals given DDT with the food have shown that DDT can
cause liver cancer.

The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) determined that DDT
may reasonable be anticipated to be a human carcinogen. The
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) determined that DDT
may possibly cause cancer in humans. The EPA determined that DDT, DDE,
and DDD are probable human carcinogens.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts35.html

DDT is NOT banned now for control of malaria in most of the rest of
the world.  This recent campaign against regulation of DDT has
evidently been started by companies making DDT because the United
Nations has recently recommended a ban on all uses of DDT except for
malaria control.

This malaria organization wants to get rid of DDT, but not until a
cheap effective replacement is found and may clarify some issues.

http://www.malaria.org/DDTpage.html

#1 on google for liberal news
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Gary Denton]

On Fri, 7 May 2004 02:20:34 -0500, Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote: 

> Washington Post -
> 
> The lawlessness began in January 2002 when Mr. Rumsfeld publicly
> declared that hundreds of people detained by U.S. and allied forces in
> Afghanistan "do not have any rights" under the Geneva Conventions.
> That was not the case: At a minimum, all those arrested in the war
> zone were entitled under the conventions to a formal hearing to
> determine whether they were prisoners of war or unlawful combatants.
> No such hearings were held, but then Mr. Rumsfeld made clear that U.S.
> observance of the convention was now optional. Prisoners, he said,
> would be treated "for the most part" in "a manner that is reasonably
> consistent" with the conventions -- which, the secretary breezily
> suggested, was outdated.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5840-2004May5.html
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Disturbing evidence of torture

[David Land]

Mike Lee wrote:

Gary Denton, putting me in "Oh, Please!" mode:
Cool! Gary found a switch. Is there one marked "off" nearby?

Dave

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Disturbing evidence of torture

[Gary Denton]

On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:33:41 -0700, Mike Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Gary Denton, putting me in "Oh, Please!" mode:

It's a start.

> 
> > > Mike Lee
> > > Savior of the Masses writes:
> 
> Like all true Saviors, the masses loathe me.

Something else we might agree on.

> > The liberals and leftists you despise were pointing out the
> > corruption in the Food for Oil program since just after it
> > started.  For various reasons it is a big talking point for
> > conservatives now to use against those same liberals and leftists.  
> 
> If it's been a big talking point for you l&l's for so long, why shut up now?
> Where are the demonstrations organized by ANSWER in front of the UN
> building? Where's Michael Whoore or John Kerry talking about it every damn
> day?

Uh, because the problem which occurred in the past is being
investigated?  Why aren't billionaires for Bush leading marches in
front of the UN or going on quiche strikes?  Could some have made
money off of it?

>Ya'll went piranha on Martha Stewart. 

We all didn't take a bite out Martha.  I don't know what idealogical
side was after Stewart.  It looks like she, like Nixon, like Bush,
just started lying about a cover up and it got out of hand.  She does
provide an interesting lesson that when you are worth billions you
shouldn't break laws about a few thousand dollars and then start
digging deeper..

OK, Kofi is Bush's puppet.  If the U.S. didn't hold his purse strings
I am sure he would have kicked Bush and Powell's asses.. i'd buy RAW
tickets for that.

> > North Korea has always been a bigger threat, a worse mass murderer.
> 
> True enough, on the mass murderer side of it. No, they're not a bigger
> threat. They think they're a bigger threat, but then again they're run by a
> guy who thinks that haircut looks good.

LOL, NK unlike Iraq actually has a half-decent or quarter-decent army
and really has WMDs.

...
> Stalin and Mao don't count, I guess? At least the right supports itty bitty
> dictators, unlike you leftists who say that as soon as a dictator kills 10
> million he's no longer a cult but a church.

Compared to the GOP that arranges for one of the most powerful cult
leaders, but a strong financial and media supporter, to have himself
crowned Messiah in the capital?

http://www.gorenfeld.net/blog//2004_05_01_barchive.html#108362997653753669

> But you make an interesting, if deranged, point: what exactly is it about
> what's going on that's unconstitutional and destroying the separation of
> powers?

This administration.

They have made repeated prolonged assault on the separation of powers,
elevating executive power and classifying secret public meetings with
private citizens.  They have detained US citizens without charges and
without access to an attorney and communication. They have expounded a
right to collect any and all information from any source about anyone
in the United States without revealing a reason.
> By the way, Bush just used the word "apologize"
> but it still won't make you happy. What he did was gutsy and difficult and
> you don't care. 

Bush calls treatment of Iraqi prisoners 'abhorrent,' but doesn't apologize
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/Iraq/2004/05/05/448149-ap.html

You have low standards for gutsy and difficult.


>No matter what he does, you'll find some way to bitch about 
> it. 

Maybe. Except for a couple public moments for a couple months after
9/11 he has been pretty much a miserable, dangerous excuse for a
president.


> Bush will win this election. I'm not unconditionally thrilled about that.
> He's a right wing moron. He's made Howard Stern into a boring political
> scold. He's on the wrong side of every science issue. But this is a single
> issue election. John Kerry will very likely get millions of Americans and
> tens of millions of Muslims killed. I'll miss you, Howard.

I agree he is a right wing moron.  I cannot see Kerry doing anything
as bad as this gang has managed to do and Kerry was way down on my
list of candidates.  

> > Rumsfeld had previously said that the Geneva Conventions
> > didn't apply to his war.  I guess he didn't expect the photos
> > of what that meant disturbing Americans at dinner and
> > upsetting his boss.
> 
> Quote please. In context.

Washington Post - 

The lawlessness began in January 2002 when Mr. Rumsfeld publicly
declared that hundreds of people detained by U.S. and allied forces in
Afghanistan "do not have any rights" under the Geneva Conventions.
That was not the case: At a minimum, all those arrested in the war
zone were entitled under the conventions to a formal hearing to
determine whether they were prisoners of war or unlawful combatants.
No such hearings were held, but then Mr. Rumsfeld made clear that U.S.
observance of the convention was now optional. Prisoners, he said,
would be treated "for the most part" in "a manner that is reasonably
consistent" with the conventions -- which, the secretary breezily
suggested, was outdated.

>From way on yo