Re: Technically reality
On 9/20/07, Dan Minettte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you stand by the assertion that the technicality is the only reality? In this case, yes, of course. What other reality is there? Martin ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
On 20/09/2007, at 12:17 PM, jon louis mann wrote: depends on if it is done in a condescending manner... pointing out rules be a benefit to other newbies. other things have been pointed out to me in e-mail that would have embarrassed me if posted to the list, when it served no purpose to do so. i deliberate format the way i do to make it easier to read, and am open to suggestion how to make it better, such as using quotes, or citing who said what, etc. Possibly use a gmail account, POP mail delivery and Mail on your Mac. I reckon you'd find life a lot easier. Drop me a line offlist if you'd like a mail invite and I'll help you through it. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Technically reality
Do you stand by the assertion that the technicality is the only reality? In this case, yes, of course. What other reality is there? The one illustrated by my examples: the highly probable empirically observable effects. For example, Jim Crow laws didn't, technically, address the civil rights of blacks...just those people whose ancestors were black. The fact that there is a 100% correlation between the two is irrelevant, in a technical sense. It's an interesting way of looking at things. I just don't think it is a helpful way of understanding empirical phenomenon. It doesn't help us model present observations and predict future observations. If that isn't your goal, then using the most technical sense is reasonable, but I think it was Ronn's goal. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Netiquette
i deliberately format the way i do to make it easier to read, but i am open to suggestion how to make it better, such as using quotes, or citing who said what, etc. Possibly use a gmail account, POP mail delivery and Mail on your Mac. I reckon you'd find life a lot easier. Drop me a line offlist if you'd like a mail invite and I'll help you through it. Charlie thanks for the kind offer, charlie. you have given me some excellent suggestions before that i have tried to implement, but not always successfully. part of the problem is i have difficulty with the electronic interface, in general. i did get a gmail account, [EMAIL PROTECTED] and have a difficult time with the way e-mail is bundled. i gave up on using the mail function on my mac, but i am starting to get a handle on using a mac, after three years. jon Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re:Nettiquette
Hello List -- Although I don't post much, I still read this list almost every day, and when you start discussing 'rules of engagement' I can't help but respond =+)). John Louis wrote: depends on if it is done in a condescending manner... pointing out rules be a benefit to other newbies. other things have been pointed out to me in e-mail that would have embarrassed me if posted to the list, when it served no purpose to do so. Absolutely -- it's all about playing nice and being considerate of others' feelings. Think about saying things out loud to the other peoples face, and then post. This list hasn't always played nice, IMO, but things have been quite civil for some time. Good work at keeping it that way. Quick update: I now have TWO (count 'em, 2) grandchildren. Finn is 2 and Freyja is 4 months. Both are smart, fun and beautiful, and life doesn't get much better than this. The Engineer is fine, but looking for a new job. I'm still trying to get my life under control. Amities, all. Jo Anne [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
holy war
We are not talking about holy war, but unholy alliance. Why didn't Bush invade Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? i was not arguing that the government of saudia arabia or pakistan was involved in (either) attack against the wtc, just making the point that it was just as ridiculous for bush to base his invasion of iraq that saddam was in cahoots with al qaeda. they are an international terrorist organization and has recruits from many islamic countries. i never suggested we should a country which is on our side. bin laden renounced the saudi government partly because they allowed american troops in during the gulf war. i personally know that when turkey denied the us military a staging post, they secretly used jordan to base their A-10 (warthog) tank killers. pakistan is a different case, musharraf is caught in a delicate balancing act between pressure from bush and fighting his own insurgency. They both have weapons of mass destruction. The Saudies have WMD? actually the us has been supplying the saudis with high tech weapons for decades, saddam also. pakistan has agreed to stop exporting nuclear technology. no one guessed that Hussein was hiding, the fact that he _didn't_ have an active WMD program. not true, i read a pentagon report, before the invasion, that said just the opposite and predicted many of the problems that would result if we attempted to occupy iraq. it is likely that some of the wmd were in syria, but we didn't invade syria, based on unconfirmed intelligence. yes, one can conclude that there are large error bars concerning secret nuclear programs. There were no Iraqis among the hijackers!-) They didn't need to leave their country to fight the US, they just had to work with Hussein. of course, but point is iraq was not responsible for 9/11. we can discuss whether the gulf war was even justified. The company I work for does a lot of government contracts and flew members of the royal family out of the US after 9/11. That was a good think, IMHO. We didn't need a mob incident based on stupid associations of the Royal family with the actions of their enemies. true, but they were extremely arrogant and demanding passengers the entire flight to both crews. Then there is the famous quote in The Formula (1980) ... in which ArAmCo (Arab American Company) wants to suppress the formula for synthetic oil, and Brando replies... WE ARE THE ARABS! Ah, the magic of cinema. :-) You do know that movie is based on a magical view of chemistry, right? of course. but i do not doubt that corporate industry has impeded progress in research and develop of more competitive products, or bought the rights. Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=listsid=396545469 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Memo to self; re dead opossum
Here something I learned today. If you find a dead, rotting, stinky opossom behind your garage, then shovel it into a plastic bag and seal the bag tightly, then put it in the garbage can... DON'T put the garbage can just outside the window to your office where the fan blows allegedly fresh air inside. Doesn't matter how tightly that bag is sealed, the odor of rotting opossum gets through. Ugh. Think I'll go... anywhere but here... for a while. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
On Sep 19, 2007, at 2:05 PM, Charlie Bell wrote: On 20/09/2007, at 3:58 AM, Dave Land wrote: I'm not sure what this means. I thought you wanted to discuss the ettiquette of online communication? Why do you have to repeatedly resort to these ad hominems? I sincerely apologize for this and other ad-hominem attacks that I have resorted to, including calling you a twit. That's not an ad hominem, that's just abuse. Ad hominem is when you argue that the person is wrong because of some character of that person, instead of engaging the argument. I think I sense a trend here: Non-sequitur used and spelled incorrectly, leading to griping. Ad-hominem used incorrectly, leading to correction. Perhaps we would all do well to stick with English? Dave Illegitimi non carborundum Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Netiquette
I think I sense a trend here: Non-sequitur used and spelled incorrectly, leading to griping. Ad-hominem used incorrectly, leading to correction. Perhaps we would all do well to stick with English? Dave Illegitimi non carborundum Maru translation: for those who don't know the latin - don't let the bastards wear you down... jlm - Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
On 9/20/07, Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think I sense a trend here: Non-sequitur used and spelled incorrectly, leading to griping. Ad-hominem used incorrectly, leading to correction. Perhaps we would all do well to stick with English? English is, after all, the lingua franca of the Internet. And, ipso facto, the sina qua non for this group. Semper fidelus, Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
On 21/09/2007, at 6:52 AM, Dave Land wrote: Ad-hominem used incorrectly, leading to correction. Perhaps we would all do well to stick with English? It *is* English. It may be a Latin-rooted description, but many technical words are. Would you say that using scientific or legal terminology incorrectly (again mostly Latin or Greek rooted) is a good thing? Probably not. So why is using grammatical (litotes, zeugma for example) or logical descriptions incorrectly any better? Did my correction offend you? (I note that both you *and* Martin were using it incorrectly). Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
On Sep 20, 2007, at 2:21 PM, Charlie Bell wrote: On 21/09/2007, at 6:52 AM, Dave Land wrote: Ad-hominem used incorrectly, leading to correction. Perhaps we would all do well to stick with English? It *is* English. It may be a Latin-rooted description, but many technical words are. Would you say that using scientific or legal terminology incorrectly (again mostly Latin or Greek rooted) is a good thing? Probably not. So why is using grammatical (litotes, zeugma for example) or logical descriptions incorrectly any better? Did my correction offend you? (I note that both you *and* Martin were using it incorrectly). Heck no. I appreciate the fact that people on this list want things said well, and words used correctly. Neither did this correction. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
Nick said: And, ipso facto, the sina qua non for this group. Semper fidelus, As we're all being so exact, that should be sine and fidelis. Rich ROU Pedant ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Memo to self; re dead opossum
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007, Nick Arnett wrote: Here something I learned today. If you find a dead, rotting, stinky opossom behind your garage, then shovel it into a plastic bag and seal the bag tightly, then put it in the garbage can... DON'T put the garbage can just outside the window to your office where the fan blows allegedly fresh air inside. Doesn't matter how tightly that bag is sealed, the odor of rotting opossum gets through. Ugh. Think I'll go... anywhere but here... for a while. Nick 3 bags, the outer 2 very carefully checked zipper-seal plastic bags. Ziploc and Glad both make some very good products along those lines. (Single bag does the trick for diapers with stinky contents.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
On 21/09/2007, at 7:40 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: English is, after all, the lingua franca of the Internet. And, ipso facto, the sina qua non for this group. Semper fidelus, Nick Damn you! LOL Charlie Sultana Bran On My Keyboard Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
On 21/09/2007, at 7:49 AM, Dave Land wrote: Heck no. I appreciate the fact that people on this list want things said well, and words used correctly. Yep. Language is one of the defining characters of our species, and it's good to use it well. Better than my friend Allison's lorikeet Ned does, anyway... :-) (Who does know the names of at least three people, and demonstrates some funny connections in his bird brain - he used to be punished with a water pistol, and when Allison's brother's dog was being told off for being too close to Ned's cage, Ned joined in with No! No! and then a perfect rendition of a squirt squirt squirt noise...). Neither did this correction. Cool. Can I offend you now then? Please? Charlie Spoiling For A Fight Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
While we're on other languages, Eres tarde, Frodo. Los Estados Unidos tiene el Uno Anillo y está usándolo http://idiotgrrl.livejournal.com/ __ God does not play dice with the Universe -Albert Einstein Albert, quit telling God what to do with His dice. -Niels Bohr From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Re: Netiquette Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:48:33 -0700 On 9/20/07, Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nick said: And, ipso facto, the sina qua non for this group. Semper fidelus, As we're all being so exact, that should be sine I knew that. and fidelis. And that. My fingers don't listen to me any more. It's astonishing what they type sometimes. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Netiquette
On 9/20/07, Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nick said: And, ipso facto, the sina qua non for this group. Semper fidelus, As we're all being so exact, that should be sine I knew that. and fidelis. And that. My fingers don't listen to me any more. It's astonishing what they type sometimes. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Anime on Adult Swim
DeathNote will debut on Adult Swim starting October 20. DeathNote is something of a sensation, spawning 2 Japanese movies and an Americanized version is being planned. China complained to Japan because Chinese students were making their own deathnotes and it was felt to be an unhealthy obsession. The series runs 35 or so episodes and is something quite different. xponent Recommending Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
US suport of Saudi, non-support of Iraq
actually the us has been supplying the saudis with high tech weapons for decades, High tech weapons are not inherently WMD. The traditional understanding of WMD encompasses nuclear weapons, biological weapons and chemical weapons. Fighter planes, which are most useful in defense, are not WMD. saddam also. That's a left wing myth. It's a companion piece to the right wing myth that Hussein was behind 9-11. We see at: http://www.fas.org/man/gao/gao9498.htm quote Since 1980, U.S. policy has been to deny export licenses for commercial sales of defense items to Iraq, and the Pentagon has not made any foreign military sales to Iraq since 1967. end quote Now, one might argue that the GAO is a government agency and they are probably covering up the truth. So, lets look at another site. The Stockholm Peace Institute has a database of arms sales. http://www.sipri.org/contents/webmaster/databases From it, I compiled the following percentages for the top 10 countries: 1 USSR68.3% 2 France 12.0% 3 China 11.2% 4 Brazil 2.3% 5 Czechoslovakia 1.1% 6 Egypt 0.8% 7 Poland 0.6% 8 Denmark 0.5% 9 USA 0.5% 10 South Africa0.4% It's true that the US sales are not zero over the time, but they are less than a quarter of Brazil's. Alberto, I see _you're_ responsible for Hussein. :-) And, I did check if the name was a phonythe director is appointed by the government of Sweden, and it's home page states: quote The task of our Institute is to conduct research on questions of conflict and cooperation of importance for international peace and security, with the aim of contributing to an understanding of the conditions for peaceful solutions of international conflicts and for a stable peace. end quote The Wikipedia article states that it was originally proposed in 1965 by the Prime Minister of Sweden to commemorate 150 years of unbroken peace in Sweden. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_International_Peace_Research_Institut e I think we can trust those numbers, at least to first order. Hussein was not a creation of the US. He was not supported by the US. US firms had some minimal trade of arms with Hussein, but Denmark, by these numbers, did more to arm Hussein than did the US. no one guessed that Hussein was hiding, the fact that he _didn't_ have an active WMD program. not true, i read a pentagon report, before the invasion, that said just the opposite and predicted many of the problems that would result if we attempted to occupy iraq. it is likely that some of the wmd were in syria, but we didn't invade syria, based on unconfirmed intelligence. I read numerous reports and didn't see that. If you could give me a reference to a Pentagon report that stated something on the order of: The evidence indicates that Hussein has no WMD, and is hiding that fact to keep Iran from invading before the war, I'd be very interested in seeing it. I've seen one that said that (within paraphrasing) after the war, of course, but that's different. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Memo to self; re dead opossum
At 02:53 PM Thursday 9/20/2007, Nick Arnett wrote: Here something I learned today. If you find a dead, rotting, stinky opossom behind your garage, then shovel it into a plastic bag and seal the bag tightly, then put it in the garbage can... DON'T put the garbage can just outside the window to your office where the fan blows allegedly fresh air inside. That is good advice even if your garbage is only normally stinky. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
magic formula
Ah, the magic of cinema. :-) You do know that movie is based on a magical view of chemistry, right? of course. but i do not doubt that corporate industry has impeded progress in research and develop of more competitive products, or bought the rights. Could you give me some example patents of revolutionary inventions that were bought up and buried? That's a risky strategy, because it could result, from the teaching required of every patent, new independent inventions that were developed by people who gained insight from the patent. Workaround patents are fairly standard fare. At best, from the company's point of view, there would be two decades of protection Even that is not available for dominant companies in a field. They would be required to license their ideas (usually for the standard 5% of revenues.) Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Memo to self; re dead opossum
On 9/20/07, Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 3 bags, the outer 2 very carefully checked zipper-seal plastic bags. Ziploc and Glad both make some very good products along those lines. I'd have had excess opossum. And I wasn't about to do any sort of stuffing it into a bag. Ugh! Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Memo to self; re dead opossum
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007, Nick Arnett wrote: On 9/20/07, Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 3 bags, the outer 2 very carefully checked zipper-seal plastic bags. Ziploc and Glad both make some very good products along those lines. I'd have had excess opossum. And I wasn't about to do any sort of stuffing it into a bag. Ugh! Nick They make some pretty big bags. :) But I guess you don't have a bunch of them lying around. (We've got pretty much every size bag you can get, quart and larger.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Car free London?
- Original Message - From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 4:21 PM Subject: Re: Car free London? On 18/09/2007, at 12:34 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Julia Thompson wrote: Question: How much does a good bike (good for riding around London) cost? (Wondering how good a selling point this is; if it pays for itself in 2 years, that's a good deal, IMO.) I don't think this is the correct reasoning. It's part of the reasoning, and it's the part most people get. How much biofuel does a human being consume, when we compare to a car? It certainly makes no sense to use a car to go to work and back, and then spend a couple of hours in the gym, but most people already do enough physical exercise not to need that extra time. I certainly don't need to go to the gym for my cardio workout, as I do 60-90mins on a bike most days (25 mins to work, but I take the long way home). Somewhat relevant to the discussion: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/09/wasting_away_in_1.php I leave home at 5:15 AM and get home around 4:30 PM. xponent 8 Hour Days Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
magic formula
Could you give me some example patents of revolutionary inventions that were bought up and buried? Dan M. good grief dan, i don;t have time for that! it should be self-evident, anyway. why do you think the world is still dependant on oil? if you are going to put me through that, you win!-) jon m. Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mailp=summer+activities+for+kidscs=bz ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
US support of Saudi, non-support of Iraq
actually the us has been supplying the saudis with high tech weapons for decades, High tech weapons are not inherently WMD. The traditional understanding of WMD encompasses nuclear weapons, biological weapons and chemical weapons. Fighter planes, which are most useful in defense, are not WMD. if you want to be technical, but other countries in the world, including arab countries, have wmd and we don't invade them. just like in the cold war, we choose our battles... saddam also. That's a left wing myth. It's a companion piece to the right wing myth that Hussein was behind 9-11. We see at: http://www.fas.org/man/gao/gao9498.htm quote Since 1980, U.S. policy has been to deny export licenses for commercial sales of defense items to Iraq, and the Pentagon has not made any foreign military sales to Iraq since 1967. end quote sorry, dan, that is a right wing myth!~) do you really think everything the us spends of weapons is reported too the GAO, or anywhere else for that matter? arms dealing is a global phenomenon, think of it as private enterprise in action. the us operates both covert and overt methods, as do other countries, and corporations. the bottom line is that saddam was singled out for reasons i will get into when i have more time. jon Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more! http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: magic formula
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jon louis mann Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 10:37 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: magic formula Could you give me some example patents of revolutionary inventions that were bought up and buried? Dan M. good grief dan, i don;t have time for that! Let me get this straight. You claim that there are revolutionary inventions, that would allow us to economically obtain energy from, say, solar power, and they are well documented. Yet, none of the solar sites references the clearly established documentation for this invention...even though it is put on the internet by the US government? I asked you to look because I hoped you would find out that the rights to those inventions are myths. It is theoretically possible for there to be trade secrets in a field, such as solar energy. But, holding on to trade secrets and doing nothing with them is dangerous. One has absolutely no protection if someone else rediscovers this. To first order, an invention who's time has come can only be delayed a few years if the original inventor buries it. it should be self-evident, anyway. It is...those hidden inventions that would have transformed the world if it weren't for those evil companies are unverifiable stories. They are unverifiable because they have no basis in fact. why do you think the world is still dependant on oil? It's an extremely easy to obtain source of low entropy energy. Coal is another one, but it doesn't combust as compactly, so transportation tends to use oil instead of coal. Nuclear is a third, but the environmentalists have stifled nuclear power. Others, such as solar or nuclear fusion, are inherently much more difficult. One unfortunate thing about science fiction is that it makes engineering challenges something that can be overcome overnight. Sometimes it takes decades, or even centuries. Finally, chemical formulas cannot be the solution. You have to have a low entropy energy source to start with if you make a synthetic anything. Now, there might be some efficiency in bioengineering plant decay so we can harvest the low entropy in the plants...but that's not a trivial solution...but the consumption of half the US corn crop for a modest amount of ethanol shows that it will be just a minor contribution. if you are going to put me through that, you win. Jon, I don't think that data exist to back up your claims about companies buying up the rights to revolutionary inventions. That's what I hoped you realized when you lookedthose inventions just don't exist...so you can't find them if you spend 1 second or 1 year looking. I'm not interested in winning by simply having you stop posting on a subject. What I am interested in is a comparison of two (or more) theories with facts...so that the better/best theory wins out. I very much enjoy debating with Gautam (for example) because we both end up with a deeper understanding after we argue through an issue. What I find frustrating in this, and many discussions with others on a number of topics, is that I see many viewpoints on the left and the right and some in the middle that are immune to empirical falsification. Now, there are clearly some things, like ethics, that are not empirically based. But, the ones that frustrate me are theories about empirical events that exist apart from facts and seem immune from contradiction by data. I hope to have time tomorrow to extend my L3 series on empirical knowledge to engineering. The third step will be to extend it to questions that are not inherently technical in nature. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: US support of Saudi, non-support of Iraq
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jon louis mann Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 10:51 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: US support of Saudi, non-support of Iraq end quote sorry, dan, that is a right wing myth!~) do you really think everything the us spends of weapons is reported too the GAO, or anywhere else for that matter? Not everything no. But, the illegal sales of billions of dollars worth of weapons involves a lot of logistics that would be essentially impossible to keep secret. arms dealing is a global phenomenon, think of it as private enterprise in action. It is...and it is possible for companies to violate US laws. But, from the track record of modest sales being found out and prosecuted, the idea that, for example, McDonald Douglas sold 20 fighter jets to Iraq without anybody noticing strains credibility. That's what you're arguing, right? The USSR sold about 30 billion dollars worth of weapons to Iraq from 1967-90; France and China 5 billion. For the US to be a player, the sales would have to be in the 5 billion range. Finally, the US army fought the Iraq army in two wars. In both wars, the US found plenty of weapons made in Russia, France and China. But, very little that was made in the US was found...and that was mostly older stuff. For there to be a conspiracy, average GIs had to be part of it. Don't you think a tank gunner who inspected his kill would say $%, that's an M1 tank? if that's what he hit? After the invasion of Iraq, GIs were all over, looking for non-existent WMD. Don't you think that if there were tons upon tons of US weapons, some regular GIs might have noticed. Now, if you are arguing that we made some small key sales to Iraq during the '80s in order to ensure that Iran didn't overrun Iraq...then that's possible. But, if it were larger than that, it would be detectable. the us operates both covert and overt methods, as do other countries, and corporations. The US doesbut sales of big things like tanks and planes are really hard to keep secret. the bottom line is that saddam was singled out for reasons i will get into when i have more time. I have a hunch you will find some super secret reasons. Why not at least consider the obvious ones? Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
