Monday, September 25, 2006

CENTCOM Stories

We have been discussing the story of Lauro Chavez, a former Army Sergeant who apparently worked at CENTCOM (although according to his DD-214 he did not serve in Afghanistan as he claimed). Now he is on the Alex Jones radio show, available here.








Chavez talks about working at the SCIF on the morning of 9/11, where he supposedly overheard orders to standdown NORAD. Conveniently he doesn't remember the names of any of the people involved. He also mentions the former commander of the US Army Corps of Engineers (his good buddy), which he identifies as a Lieutenant General, but refuses to name. I am not sure of the point of that, the only 3 star in CENTCOM would be the deputy commander, it is just a matter of looking it up and seeing who had that job in September 2001. Hint: It was Lieutenant General Michael P. DeLong, who most likely was never head of the Army Corp of Engineers, based on the fact that he was a MARINE. I suppose next we will hear that this 3 star was just passing through to say "hi" to SGT Chavez...

Anyway, the command center part, is all vague speculation, but then he starts talking about his (supposed) overseas service, here it gets rather bizarre, at the 57:30 mark:



Chavez: Yeah, I was deployed to Afghanistan for 8 months. About 2 weeks after 9/11 happened. I was there in support of the United States SOCOM, which if everybody has played the game SOCOM they are actually a real entity, located all at MacDill Airforce Base, and I provide them with communications, for the special ops teams. We flew into Kabul Airport, we were actually under fire as we flew in.

Yeah, I would think you would be, considering in September, 2001, the Kabul Airport was firmly in the hands of the Taliban. The war would not even start for another two weeks.

Anyway, he continues:



Chavez: Yeah, and I thought I was going to hunt bin Laden, and that was clearly not the objective of that war. I still don't know what the objective is. Other than to subliminally condition the people.

Alex Jones: Can you say 400 billion in opium a year coming out of there?

Chavez: Exactly, or the pipeline. A lot of people are like, "what pipeline?"

Alex Jones: Unoco

Chavez: I had to pull roving guard to make sure nobody blew up that pipeline. That was where our billions of dollars for the war went. (unintelligible) pull patrols.

Oh really. Well that seems like it would be a rather hard thing to do, considering the pipeline hasn't been built yet!



Chavez: You know, you got soldiers over there, that are using live depleted uranium in their tanks, in all the mortars, and all the howitzers. And DU is horrible, not only does it kill people, and that's fine, but its technically against the Geneva Conventions because it provides like an after effect, it's a radioactive material.

Uhh, how many tanks are we using in Afghanistan? I have never heard of any. But I guess this guy would know, he snuck into Afghanistan to repair computers with Delta Force and guard non-existent pipelines.

172 Comments:

At 25 September, 2006 20:14, Blogger shawn said...

And DU is horrible, not only does it kill people, and that's fine, but its technically against the Geneva Conventions because it provides like an after effect, it's a radioactive material.


People see "uranium" and think they're gonna be glowing green.

 
At 25 September, 2006 20:14, Blogger Alex said...

Oh god, that last part gave me a good giggle. I don't think I've ever seen that many mistakes crammed into two sentences.

You know, you got soldiers over there, that are using live depleted uranium

Let's start with "live depleted uranium". Now how in the hell can you have a "live" metal? That's rather like saying our rifle rounds contain "live lead penetrators".

in their tanks, in all the mortars

MORTARS?? Wow, this guy must be REALLY super-secret-special-forces, because a simple soldier like me can't even figure out why you'd WANT DU in a mortar round.

and all the howitzers

While I suppose a DU howitzer round might be somewhat useful in an anti-tank direct-fire role, I've certainly never heard of such ammo being produced.

And DU is horrible, not only does it kill people, and that's fine, but its technically against the Geneva Conventions because it provides like an after effect, it's a radioactive material.

Well he packed most of the mistakes into the first sentence. The only thing he got wrong in sentence number two is the fact that there is nothing in the Geneva Conventions prohibiting the use of DU.

I thought this guy was going to be a bit better than Jessie Macbeth, but it looks like he's equally clueless.

 
At 25 September, 2006 20:24, Blogger shawn said...

Jessie Macbeth

That was his name! From the first post about this winner, that twiggy antiwar poster child popped into my head.

 
At 25 September, 2006 21:13, Blogger jackhanyes said...

People see "uranium" and think they're gonna be glowing green

Well, shit shawn, get a big bowl of it and eat it for breakfest!

Don't you not know that birth defects are up 400-600% in Iraq? And lung cancer is up 500%?

Do some research on DU before you make such a stupid comment.

 
At 25 September, 2006 21:17, Blogger Alex said...

Don't you not know that birth defects are up 400-600% in Iraq? And lung cancer is up 500%?

This information brought to you by the authors of "Jewish Termites Demolished the WTC to Build a Pipeline in Afghanistan".

Sorry bub, I don't buy it. All my research on DU points to inflated statistics and poor science performed by the same people who scream about US atrocities whenever a US soldier accidentally squashes an ant.

 
At 25 September, 2006 21:50, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Sorry bub, I don't buy it. All my research on DU points to inflated statistics and poor science performed by the same people who scream about US atrocities whenever a US soldier accidentally squashes an ant.

I'm sorry, I don't recall hearing anyone screaming about a US soldier squashing an ant. Maybe the rest of your comment it as full of shit as that one.

Of course I do wonder where you get your DU is a-ok reports. Could you link me to one of your DU is a-okay reports? I would love to read it. Don't have any? Damn, that's a shame!

Let's put it this way, do you want DU dust in the air you breath? That a simple yes or no question. If it's no (but your stance would suggest yes you would) why would you not want it? Hmmm?

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:04, Blogger roger_sq said...

Could you link me to one of your DU is a-okay reports?

Don't worry, DOD has cleared it extensively, several military funded tests prove conclusively it is safe to drink, but not to eat. These are the same people who brought you th all clear on agent orange, and still refute that there is any such thing as gulf war syndrome.

The assclowns here believe everything is exactly as it seems until they are officially told otherwise, and one will be along any moment to link you to a dod affiliated thumbs up paper on DU.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:12, Blogger default.xbe said...

the russians used DU since the 70s, anyoen want to complain about them? im sure they conducted alot more invasions with it than bush is planning

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:14, Blogger nesNYC said...

People see "uranium" and think they're gonna be glowing green.

So is "uranium" ever really "safe" then? Duh..

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:17, Blogger nesNYC said...

All my research on DU points to inflated statistics and poor science performed by the same people who scream about US atrocities whenever a US soldier accidentally squashes an ant.

So are all the "Gulf War Illness" vets liars then?

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:17, Blogger Alex said...

I'm sorry, I don't recall hearing anyone screaming about a US soldier squashing an ant. Maybe the rest of your comment it as full of shit as that one.

If your comprehension abilities are truly that bad, you have my pity.

Of course I do wonder where you get your DU is a-ok reports. Could you link me to one of your DU is a-okay reports? I would love to read it. Don't have any? Damn, that's a shame!

Hold on there tiger! How about this little factoid:

Uranium was widely used as a coloring matter for porcelain and glass in the 19th century. The practice was believed to be a matter of history, however in 1999 concentrations of 10% depleted uranium were found in "jaune no.17" a yellow enamel powder that was being produced in France by Cristallerie de Saint-Paul, a manufacturer of enamel pigments. The depleted uranium used in the powder was sold by Cogéma's Pierrelatte facility. Cogema has since confirmed that it has made a decision to stop the sale of depleted uranium to producers of enamel and glass. [5]

Uranium (and other radioactive substances) has historically been used for all sorts of civilian applications. Chances are your parents ate dinner every day from plates containing trace quantities of uranium. Yet cancer rates are higher today!

There's plenty of studies available on the amount of alpha, beta, and gamma radiation released by DU. The consensus is that DU certainly is dangerous, but that it's chemical properties are more dangerous than the level of gamma radiation given off by it. In other words, it's nothing to be overly concerned about, no more so than lead or tungsten rounds. Now, I'm not going to do all your work for you! Look for some reputable websites instead of your usual conspiracy nonsense.

Let's put it this way, do you want DU dust in the air you breath?

No, but I also don't want gasoline fumes in the air I breathe. Does that mean we should all stop driving?

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:19, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

I don't recall anybody saying that DU is harmless. However, this is from Wikipedia.

By contrast, other studies have shown that DU ammunition has no measurable detrimental health effects, either in the short or long term. The International Atomic Energy Agency reported in 2003 that, "based on credible scientific evidence, there is no proven link between DU exposure and increases in human cancers or other significant health or environmental impacts," although "Like other heavy metals, DU is potentially poisonous. In sufficient amounts, if DU is ingested or inhaled it can be harmful because of its chemical toxicity. High concentration could cause kidney damage."

There is also the fact that depleted uranium is much less radioactive then regular Uranium. Also the primary type of radiation emitted by Uranium will not even penetrate skin. It's primary danger is that of a heavy metal all of which are poisonous.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:20, Blogger nesNYC said...

the russians used DU since the 70s, anyoen want to complain about them? im sure they conducted alot more invasions with it than bush is planning

They only invaded Afghanistan since the 70's and BTW they are no more. The purpose of DU is to kill the soldiers as well as the soldier’s targets. In the NWO there will be no armies and those of you who did the deed will meet their demise eventually. That's simply the plan. Too bad you’ll have to find out the hard way.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:22, Blogger nesNYC said...

I don't recall anybody saying that DU is harmless. However, this is from Wikipedia.

Wiki is under Jewish censorship so most of the articles there are skewed.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:24, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

Ok so I click on the audio of this interview and it begins with the superman theme.

BTW did Alex Jones copy his schtick from Wally George?

WOW Alex you are sooooo original.

Douchebag

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:25, Blogger nesNYC said...

BTW "depleted" is only a cover name for the same ole, same ole..

Uranium!

There's nothing "depleted" about it. The only thing that can "deplete" uranium is about a million years of half life.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:27, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

Wiki is under Jewish censorship so most of the articles there are skewed.

Typical moronic response. If it refutes your worldview, then it is becaues the Jooooos have corupted it. Truly pathitic.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:28, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

HOW LONG has this total douchebag POS loser said "we are going to bring them to justice".

And WTF is with all of these sheep that blindly follow this asshat?
After awhile would a follower or 2 perhaps say "uh ok Alex so name some names and lets bring them to justice"

OR is this tired old man just making a name for himself by ranting over and over and over "we are going to bring them to justice"

OK A QUESTION YOU PSYCHO DOUCHEBAG:
WHO AND WHEN?

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:29, Blogger Alex said...

This kid is amazing :) Truly makes me wonder just how far out of whack it's possible for the human mind to go. He could keep a team of shrinks busy for the rest of their lives!

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:33, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

There's nothing "depleted" about it. The only thing that can "deplete" uranium is about a million years of half life.

My GOD are you stupid. Have you not even taken a basic science course? Or is science corrupted by the Jooooos too? Natural Uranium has 3 isotopes. When you remove the 2 most radioactive isotopes (a process called enrichment- you should have heard of that, your hero in Iran is doing it, or is he a joooo too?) What you have left is Depleted Uranium. Open a book sometime instead of you neo Nazi websites.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:38, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

The only thing that can "deplete" uranium is about a million years of half life.

BTW the half life of DU is 4.5 Billion years. This makes DU one of the least radioactive substances existing.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:43, Blogger Alex said...

Wait for it, now he's going to come back and say that a 4.5 billion year half life makes it more dangerous. After all, if it's radioactive for that long, it's GOT to be dangerous stuff, right? ;)

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:46, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

LOL, I was really was expecting that from him!

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:49, Blogger nesNYC said...

DU one of the least radioactive substances existing.

Keep telling that to your chromosomes.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:52, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

I have worked with and handled both DU and enriched Uranium. My Chromosomes are fine, thank you

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:53, Blogger default.xbe said...

They only invaded Afghanistan since the 70's

and where did all their weapons end up afterward? oh thats right, iraq and afghanistan and some others got them

and BTW they are no more. The purpose of DU is to kill the soldiers as well as the soldier’s targets. In the NWO there will be no armies and those of you who did the deed will meet their demise eventually. That's simply the plan. Too bad you’ll have to find out the hard way.

how ive missed your warped world view :)

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:54, Blogger jackhanyes said...

No, but I also don't want gasoline fumes in the air I breathe. Does that mean we should all stop driving?

Don't you love the "this subject is kicking my ass so I'm going to try to do a switch-a-roo to cover my big fat dumb ass" tactic by the weak minded chronicly wrong fool.

I confronted alex on his DU comment and and all he could do is question my "comprehension abilities", post a comment from an unknown source about how DU was found in 19th century, and how some company stop selling it to the public (I wonder why? Maybe because of safety?! naw, couldn't be!), and then he tired a switch-a-roo. Lame ass.

And yes, we should stop driving gasoline power vehicles and invest in electric, fuel cell, or hydro power vehicles.

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:54, Blogger James B. said...

Isn't thermite a key component for depleted uranium? ;-)

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:56, Blogger nesNYC said...

My Chromosomes are fine, thank you

Hey, the guys that handled agent orange said the same thing until...

 
At 25 September, 2006 22:58, Blogger nesNYC said...

Isn't thermite a key component for depleted uranium? ;-)

Yes! You will symmetrically collapse in due time ;)

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:02, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

Hey, the guys that handled agent orange said the same thing until...

I have met Vets who sprayed the stuff, and used to come back to base covered in it head to toe. They are all fine. There has never been one credible study that has linked agent orange to any human ailment.

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:04, Blogger jackhanyes said...

how ive missed your warped world view

Think about it for a second. It there is a one world government, who would the army fight?

Answer: The public who resists.

You can see it today coming around the corner. Bush has all the laws in place to label anyone a terrorist for any reason on the weakest evdience.

The government right now, today, could pick you up at the airport, take you away send you to some CIA secert camp, torture you for a year in god knws manners, and then release you with no charges ever be filed. Don't believe me? Go ask Maher Arar.

All thanks to 9/11......

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:09, Blogger default.xbe said...

Think about it for a second. It there is a one world government, who would the army fight?

think about it for a second, if there ISNT one world govt, what medication should you be on?

Answer: The public who resists.

such a public will always exist, thus nessies assertion that there will be no army under the NWO is flawed

You can see it today coming around the corner. Bush has all the laws in place to label anyone a terrorist for any reason on the weakest evdience.

and this is different from any other period in history because? face it, bush is no worse than any other presidents weve had

The government right now, today, could pick you up at the airport, take you away send you to some CIA secert camp, torture you for a year in god knws manners, and then release you with no charges ever be filed. Don't believe me? Go ask Maher Arar.

sounds like mccarthyism, but that cant be, bush wasnt around then...

All thanks to 9/11......

all thanks to paranoia that will always exist everywhere, from the top of the govt to the depths of your brain

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:12, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

The government right now, today, could pick you up at the airport, take you away send you to some CIA secert camp, torture you for a year in god knws manners, and then release you with no charges ever be filed. Don't believe me? Go ask Maher Arar.

That is simply a lie. There is nothing at all in the Patriot act that allows this, period. Please take your meds to ease those paranoid delusions.

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:18, Blogger nesNYC said...

such a public will always exist, thus nessies assertion that there will be no army under the NWO is flawed

You guys of all people should understand what separates actual military and ex-military men from the "public."

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:19, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

you guys are pathetic. everyone knows DU is an issue, whether or not he got the exact facts straight.

you wanna go handle some? bet you will not be too happy to ...

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:23, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

Would any of you be willing to go on the record (with your real names) dissing this guy and his concerns for DU?

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:23, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Isn't thermite a key component for depleted uranium?

I think you're trying to be sarcasic, but you coming across as an insecure dim witted fool lacking true reasoning faculties who must prop himself up with the insults of others else he is face with his own short comings.

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:26, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

you wanna go handle some? bet you will not be too happy to ...

I *have* handled it. There is nothing dangerous about it at all...as long as it stays outside your body.

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:29, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"I *have* handled it. There is nothing dangerous about it at all...as long as it stays outside your body."

I'm sorry

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:29, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

BRITISH and American coalition forces are using depleted uranium (DU) shells in the war against Iraq and deliberately flouting a United Nations resolution which classifies the munitions as illegal weapons of mass destruction.
Gulf War 2

incisive coverage
detailed analysis
video reports
breaking news

click



DU contaminates land, causes ill-health and cancers among the soldiers using the weapons, the armies they target and civilians, leading to birth defects in children.

Professor Doug Rokke, ex-director of the Pentagon's depleted uranium project -- a former professor of environmental science at Jacksonville University and onetime US army colonel who was tasked by the US department of defence with the post-first Gulf war depleted uranium desert clean-up -- said use of DU was a 'war crime'.

Rokke said: 'There is a moral point to be made here. This war was about Iraq possessing illegal weapons of mass destruction -- yet we are using weapons of mass destruction ourselves.' He added: 'Such double-standards are repellent.'

The latest use of DU in the current conflict came on Friday when an American A10 tankbuster plane fired a DU shell, killing one British soldier and injuring three others in a 'friendly fire' incident.

According to a August 2002 report by the UN subcommission, laws which are breached by the use of DU shells include: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the Charter of the United Nations; the Genocide Convention; the Convention Against Torture; the four Geneva Conventions of 1949; the Conventional Weapons Convention of 1980; and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, which expressly forbid employing 'poison or poisoned weapons' and 'arms, projectiles or materials calculated to cause unnecessary suffering'. All of these laws are designed to spare civilians from unwarranted suffering in armed conflicts.

DU has been blamed for the effects of Gulf war syndrome -- typified by chronic muscle and joint pain, fatigue and memory loss -- among 200,000 US soldiers after the 1991 conflict.

It is also cited as the most likely cause of the 'increased number of birth deformities and cancer in Iraq' following the first Gulf war.

'Cancer appears to have increased between seven and 10 times and deformities between four and six times,' according to the UN subcommission.

The Pentagon has admitted that 320 metric tons of DU were left on the battlefield after the first Gulf war, although Russian military experts say 1000 metric tons is a more accurate figure.

In 1991, the Allies fired 944,000 DU rounds or some 2700 tons of DU tipped bombs. A UK Atomic Energy Authority report said that some 500,000 people would die before the end of this century, due to radioactive debris left in the desert.

The use of DU has also led to birth defects in the children of Allied veterans and is believed to be the cause of the 'worrying number of anophthalmos cases -- babies born without eyes' in Iraq. Only one in 50 million births should be anophthalmic, yet one Baghdad hospital had eight cases in just two years. Seven of the fathers had been exposed to American DU anti-tank rounds in 1991. There have also been cases of Iraqi babies born without the crowns of their skulls, a deformity also linked to DU shelling.

A study of Gulf war veterans showed that 67% had children with severe illnesses, missing eyes, blood infections, respiratory problems and fused fingers.

Rokke told the Sunday Herald: 'A nation's military personnel cannot wilfully contaminate any other nation, cause harm to persons and the environment and then ignore the consequences of their actions.

'To do so is a crime against humanity.

'We must do what is right for the citizens of the world -- ban DU.'

He called on the US and UK to 'recognise the immoral consequences of their actions and assume responsibility for medical care and thorough environmental remediation'.

He added: 'We can't just use munitions which leave a toxic wasteland behind them and kill indiscriminately.

'It is equivalent to a war crime.'

Rokke said that coalition troops were currently fighting in the Gulf without adequate respiratory protection against DU contamination.

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:31, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

I'm sorry but all your credibilty just went down the toilet!

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:31, Blogger nesNYC said...

as long as it stays outside your body.

So how did you tell the exploded dust particles to stay away from your lungs? Wow! You guys are marvelous!!

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:32, Blogger nesNYC said...

I think you're trying to be sarcasic

Yeah, that was directed at me... private joke I guess, tee hee ..

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:33, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

what will your "experts" say now. will you go crying to popular mechanics to "debunk" this?

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:45, Blogger jackhanyes said...

think about it for a second, if there ISNT one world govt, what medication should you be on?

Clearly you don't understand. There isn't today a OWG, it's in the process. Did you fail to understand what "coming around the corner" means? That means it is not here yet, but it coming. Duh.

such a public will always exist, thus nessies assertion that there will be no army under the NWO is flawed

Would they? Here's a choice. Live life the way you do today or live on the run in a dirt hole, in caves, eating 30 day old mold invested bread. Would you trade your life today to be hunted like a dog for "freedom"? You won't fight today for freedom, so why you do it when life is harder to fight for it?


and this is different from any other period in history because? face it, bush is no worse than any other presidents weve had

Protection method. By reasoning in your mind that bush is no worst then others you turn a blind eye to the things he's doing. I course, I didn't read in history book about washington blowing frogs with firecrackers or be repermeded for be to rough on college peldges.

sounds like mccarthyism, but that cant be, bush wasnt around then...

Bush is puppet. He isn't in control. He just som dumb talking talking head that is feed a daily dose of bullshit. Dick Cheny and Rove are the brains of the group.

all thanks to paranoia that will always exist everywhere, from the top of the govt to the depths of your brain

Paranoia is a term called a "stop-think" word. It has been used in public cluture to label people who highlight the elites plots in an effort to create "stop think" effect. We can see it here. In the above comment the stop think method was used to prevent the subject from thinking further into the item presented to him. These items piose a real danager to him because of the awareness of the turth of the topic. By labeling it paranioa, the subject no longer needed to think about the topic brought forth, and thus protected from the danagers of the truth. To him, in his mind, all things are settled as simply paranoia, no more thinking is require.

Thus that is why paranioa has been developed as a stop think word.

 
At 25 September, 2006 23:58, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Yeah, that was directed at me... private joke I guess, tee hee ..

Yep. To be good at sarcasim, you must be about to link words well, but not thoughts. If you're the other way around, the correction mechanism (turth seeking) in the mind gets in the way of being sarcasic.

I mean, how can you mislink a statement if you seek the truth? Saying anything other then a true statement is the same as lieing, right? And if your truthful to yourself first, then you must be truthful to other, else you're not truthful to yourself.

 
At 26 September, 2006 00:00, Blogger jackhanyes said...

what will your "experts" say now

Btw... the next phase is character attacking

Then it's acceptance as self evidencing.

 
At 26 September, 2006 00:02, Blogger nesNYC said...

him, in his mind, all things are settled as simply paranoia, no more thinking is require.

That reminds me "conspiracy theory" is also a "stop-think" phrase often used to achieve this goal.

 
At 26 September, 2006 01:05, Blogger JPSlovjanski said...

I KNEW that dude was a fake. Someone should find what his REAL MOS was. This guy doesn't know jack shit about anything.

 
At 26 September, 2006 01:20, Blogger Alex said...

Jack:

Don't you love the "this subject is kicking my ass so I'm going to try to do a switch-a-roo to cover my big fat dumb ass" tactic by the weak minded chronicly wrong fool.

No, dumbass, it's called an analogy. You can call it a comparison if you can't pronounce "analogy". If you're going to take away my DU because you don't want people breathing it in, I'm certainly justified in taking away your car so I don't have to breathe the fumes. I definitely need our pilots using DU rounds more than I need you cruising around trying to pick up little boys.

You won't fight today for freedom, so why you do it when life is harder to fight for it?

You've obviously never studied history or sociology.

Hell, you might not even need to study those subject if you were at the very least able to look at the world around you without seeing NWO agents around every corner. Where do you see people fighting against their governments these days? Prosperous democratic nations? Or third world shitholes?

I course, I didn't read in history book about washington blowing frogs with firecrackers or be repermeded for be to rough on college peldges.

Unless you're talking about French people, I fail to see the relevance.

Pick up a history book and read about Lincoln some time. The things he did make Bush look like a saint, yet today most people consider him to have been a great president.

Paranoia is a term called a "stop-think" word.

Yes, your paranoia certainly does lead you to do that.

Thus that is why paranioa has been developed as a stop think word.

By the Jews, right?




911:

BRITISH and American coalition forces are using depleted uranium (DU) shells in the war against Iraq and deliberately flouting a United Nations resolution which classifies the munitions as illegal weapons of mass destruction.

That's as far as I bothered going with your "article" because the above statement is an outright lie. There is no such UN resolution, nor is there anything in the Geneva Conventions prohibiting the use of depleted uranium. And DU is DEFFINITELY not classified as a "illegal weapon of mass destruction". In fact, the use of that phrase alone tells me that the author is absolutely clueless about prohibited weapons classification and weaponry in general. I challenge you to go out and find this UN resolution that supposedly bans DU. That premise is almost as silly as the uproar over the use of white phosphorous munitions a few years back.

I'm sorry but all your credibilty just went down the toilet!

Why, because you quoted some goofball who knows nothing about the subject at hand? That's not how rational discourse works, boy.

you wanna go handle some? bet you will not be too happy to ...

I've got no problem with it whatsoever. You'll absorb more harmful radiation from your CRT screen than I will from "handling" DU.

Would any of you be willing to go on the record (with your real names) dissing this guy and his concerns for DU?

Absolutely, if I thought there was any point to it. As it is, my name would just be added to your "list of CIA shills to be liquidated after the revolution". And while I don't have much fear of bodily harm, I'd really rather not have 16 year old potheads crank calling me in the middle of the night.



Nesnyc:

So how did you tell the exploded dust particles to stay away from your lungs? Wow! You guys are marvelous!!

If you're ingesting DU, you've got bigger problems than radiation. As we've pointed out several times now, the chemical properties of DU are more harmful than it's radioactive properties. It's not a good idea to ingest "dust particles" of lead or tungsten either. If we were to follow your argument to it's logical conclusion we'd have to ban sharp sticks too because some kid might get a splinter from a discarded stick, and develop gangrene.

 
At 26 September, 2006 02:40, Blogger Good Lieutenant said...

Man - SLC puts up damning evidence that one of the new idols of the Truthers is a lying crank, and look at the sheer volume of batsh*t crazy that comes oozing in!

I don't think the truthers realize how completely entertaining they are to us - kind of like rats that keep taking the electrified food pellets over and over again.

 
At 26 September, 2006 05:20, Blogger Pepik said...

Wow, breathing and eating DU must be really bad. Except that every one of us, and all out parents, even the jooos, has ingested and breathed uranium every day of their lives. Uranium is naturally occurring, it is in the soil and water everywhere. And naturally occurring uranium is more dangerous than depleted uranium, because it is not depleted as explained above.

So if DU was so dangerous we'd all be dead.

Of course it HAS been studied. Anyone who wants to read 300+ page reports on the impact on DU in Bosnia, etc. can go to this site: http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications.php?prog=du. Alternatively, hide from the real science and think whatever alex jones tells you to think, good old alex who thinks DU is fired out of mortars.

 
At 26 September, 2006 05:47, Blogger JPSlovjanski said...

DU is dangerous and the amount you breathe if DU rounds have landed near you is a HELL of a lot more than the "background" stuff we may have all breathed.

However, it SURE as hell isn't fired from F#$#%ING MORTARS!! JESUS!

 
At 26 September, 2006 06:32, Blogger telescopemerc said...

However, it SURE as hell isn't fired from F#$#%ING MORTARS!! JESUS!

Yeah, no kidding. Its an anti-armor round. Putting it in a mortar round is useless, and IIRC you need muzzle velocities for the stuff to work the way it is supposed to. This means that even if howitzers could score perfect hits on the Tank armies of the Taliban (?) they wouldn't have enough velocity to work.

I remember the DU scaremongers were pointing to a couple of Italian soldiers in the Balkans had a Luekemia. They were oh so quick to blame the big bad USA and their depleted Uranium. Turns out those soldiers hadn't been in the Balkans long enough for the incubation period for Luekemia, and when someone did some research they found that their soldier's hometown had an industry pollution level that could be described as 'Stalinesque'.

No, I wouldn't want to breath DU dust, but the stuff is heavy and unlikely to stay in the air long. I would wash my hands after handling the stuff. But this is all because of its chemical properties, not its nuclear ones. Nesync and 911mysteries show they have no science knowledge whatsoever beyond scaremongering and claiming anything that disagrees with them is run by jews.

 
At 26 September, 2006 07:18, Blogger James B. said...

Would any of you be willing to go on the record (with your real names) dissing this guy and his concerns for DU?



His opinions on the dangers of DU is a minor point. The fact that he is lying and has never been to Afghanistan is the major point of this post, and something none of the conspiracy theorists here will even come close to addressing.

 
At 26 September, 2006 07:19, Blogger AbrashTX said...

There's an even more easily falsifible claim than the DU one: the fact that there is no pipeline in Afghanistan, and no plans to build a pipeline in Afghanistan. The country is so unstable right now that no company wants to invest in the infrastructure. Plus, the only plans in the works anyway weren't for oil, but for natural gas from Turkmenistan--which would have ended up going to the former Soviet republics anyway.

Pipeline claim demolished thanks to yet another helpful lefty media source:
"No War for Oil"

 
At 26 September, 2006 07:55, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"His opinions on the dangers of DU is a minor point"

Not really, it goes to show that you will stoop to new lows to carry out your debunking. If I was a soldier and I was told about the possibility of DU, I would be concerned. And you pick at him for it.

 
At 26 September, 2006 07:59, Blogger James B. said...

I am not picking at him for his "concerns" I am picking at him for lying. I am a soldier, and it offends me greatly when people lie about their service, especially when they are doing it to smear their country.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:01, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"I've got no problem with it whatsoever. You'll absorb more harmful radiation from your CRT screen than I will from "handling" DU."

It's not a one-off exposure that's the problem. It's the continual exposure (over years) that causes problems. Would you like having some in your backyard?

Also, come the problem with shrapnel. If you're hit by radioactive shrapnel you're obviously in big doo-doo.

Also if you were fired upon with radioactive ammunition, that coud be considered 'poison or poisoned weapons' and thus against the Geneva conventions.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:07, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"I am not picking at him for his "concerns" I am picking at him for lying."

Some of you certainly did.

"I am a soldier, and it offends me greatly when people lie about their service"

Why don't you write a letter to him to get confirmation? There could be mix up in the paper work? Or some other factor. To purport you know more about his service than he does is something.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:16, Blogger James B. said...

I already did. I posted about that in the comments of a previous thread. He refused to answer my questions. There is no way his paperwork could be that screwed up, and his lies about events that could have never taken place only serve to undermine his credibility even further.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:20, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

A few more tidbits for y'all:

The first 2 stories that NORAD submitted to the 9/11 comission painted them in a worse light. Why would they lie to make themsevles look worse?

Why would a couple of military officers risk they careers to say they saw Atta only to be proved wrong by the official report (Able danger) Why was 1.5 TB of data then destroyed?

Why was the anthrax said to have some from US military and then that statement withdrawn? Why was the whitehouse on Cipro? Why would Islamists target sentators? More likely would be the administration.

Why was a dentist who informed the FBI about 3 hijackers poisoned? and his claims refuted. (Did he lie too?)

Why was the EPA whistleblower SWAT teamed?

Why does the USG not care in following up the Pakistan lead? Why would they then meet the same ISI and treat them with respect?

How was Building 7's collapse predicted? Were there any outward signs that it would collapse? You may say they building was damaged and on fire, but many other buildings were damaged and on fire (some were damaged far more severely) Why was the fire alarm switched off that very morning?

Also, you telling me that Mineta lied? If he didn't have an exact timeframe why would he specify one?

What's the likelihood of having 5 war game exercises occur on that very day, some imitating the actual attack?

Would you have admitted the possibility that the Bush admin had some prior knowlegde of the fact if it weren't for the PDB?

Would you have admitted that the JCS would sign off on a false flag against their people if it weren't for Northwoods?

Why did Bush show no reaction when told of the news. (Not even a casual question?) Why was he holding a book upside down? Why did he refuse to testify on the record for the 9/11 comission?

Why has the bin Laden tape not been confirmed by the CIA as to authenticity? Why is the picture quality so poor? Why does the FBI think he's left handed when the video shows him to be right handed? Why haven't the FBI officially charged him with 9/11? Why did the FOIA request for the facts surrounding the tape turn up nothing (I mean this is an important tape, are they that disorganized to not keep track of this info?)

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:35, Blogger Good Lieutenant said...

Why don't you write a letter to him to get confirmation? There could be mix up in the paper work? Or some other factor.

James did.

You failed, predictably, to address James' last point before you resumed cut-and-pasting the latest batch of CT dung.

Respond to his proof that this clown started off with a slew of lies about his service. We dare you.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:36, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

Atta: What of reports that he trained at a US mil base? Why did one FAA employee identify him as wearing a suit yet the pic (with no timestamp, and blurry, I could not make a positive Id) show him to not have a suit jacket on? Why was he going to take his last will and testament with him on the plane? What of his drinking, drug and lap-dance habits. Do you think he was really ready to die after all that?

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:39, Blogger telescopemerc said...

Also if you were fired upon with radioactive ammunition, that coud be considered 'poison or poisoned weapons' and thus against the Geneva conventions.

That would be a point...if DU were radioactive.

You seem to be ignoring that little deatil.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:39, Blogger Good Lieutenant said...

9-11 mysteries -

Respond to James' proof that this clown sarted off his "truth" campaign with a slew of demonstrable lies about his service.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:43, Blogger telescopemerc said...

What of his drinking, drug and lap-dance habits. Do you think he was really ready to die after all that?

Martyrdom in Islam promises and forgives a whole lot. In fact it doesn't matter what you do beforehand. Why should a few strippers matter?

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:49, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"if DU were radioactive"

if it's not then what is it?

"Respond to James' proof that this clown sarted off his "truth" campaign with a slew of demonstrable lies about his service"

If it's a lie, that is inexcusable.

I don't think 911blogger was too hot on this guy to begin with anyway ... mostly everyone suspected it was a hoax. Turns out he does have army experience ... but how would lying help him? Following each person's personal history is onerous ... although it does bring up the issue of credibility. What was his response exactly when you asked him about his overseas tour?

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:52, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"Martyrdom in Islam promises and forgives a whole lot. In fact it doesn't matter what you do beforehand. Why should a few strippers matter?"

If he so looked forward to martydom, why ruin his chances of being being held in high regard (to God) by not following his faith?

BTW: I'm not saying Atta was not the hijacker. I'm just saying, it's once inconsistency in a sea of many.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:53, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

What of his drinking, drug and lap-dance habits. Do you think he was really ready to die after all that?

WELL THERE YOU GO!!!!!
FINALLY PROOF AT LAST!!!
THE TRUTH HAS FINALLY BEEN EXPOSED!!
SOMEONE PLEASE GET THAT STIPPERS TESTIMONY!!

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:54, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"before you resumed cut-and-pasting the latest batch of CT dung"

It's not CT, cause I am not making any claims. I'm looking to you for answers.

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:55, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

I'm not saying Atta was not the hijacker

Thank god 911 is on the case!!

 
At 26 September, 2006 08:57, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

Also, re lap-dancing ... if he hated Americans, would he lap dance with one? I mean, these are people you are going to kill.

Maybe he justified it in some crazy psycho way in own mind. But it's in no way typical.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:07, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also, re lap-dancing ... if he hated Americans, would he lap dance with one?

You're my new favorite thing on the internet 911 mysteries. Please let me know about each and every forum you post to. I think your stuff is hilarious.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:10, Blogger Dog Town said...

911 dumbass is geggy at jref.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:14, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"I think your stuff is hilarious"

I'm glad you like it. But it's an important question, nonetheless.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:19, Blogger telescopemerc said...

If he so looked forward to martydom, why ruin his chances of being being held in high regard (to God) by not following his faith?

Because when you are martyred in a holy war, it really doesn't matter what your previous behavior was, get it?

Try reading some of the accounts of the 'Holy Wars' of the Ottoman Empire sometimes. Loads of discipline trouble with the ones promised heaven if they died in battle. They kinda knew that in a few weeks they'd be charging into walls of greek fire and other fun things. The only hope the Ottoman leaders sometimes had was to execute a few of the worst cases and then have it explained that being killed en route was not a path to heaven.

Atta didn't have that limitation.

Also remember this: Fanatcism does not mean you are going to follow all the tenets of your religion. In fact, many fanatics start making convenient exceptions for themselves. Look up Jimmy Swaggart or Jim Bakker sometime.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:19, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm glad you like it. But it's an important question, nonetheless.

Dear God, I'm still laughing about it.

Sadly, the 9/11 truth movement now hinges on a lap dance. Erm... Personally, I can think of at least 12 women I really, really hate that I'd be happy to get a lap dance from.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:22, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"Nesync and 911mysteries show they have no science knowledge whatsoever beyond scaremongering and claiming anything that disagrees with them is run by jews"

funny how the jews keep popping up. theiy're kind of your equivalent of GWB's bin laden. I have never mentioned jews in any of the posts. FYI, I am Jewish.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:22, Blogger telescopemerc said...

Also, re lap-dancing ... if he hated Americans, would he lap dance with one? I mean, these are people you are going to kill.

Sex is sex. Remember one little thing: The goal of Al Queda is not to exterminate Americans, it is to convert us to Islam.

Maybe he justified it in some crazy psycho way in own mind. But it's in no way typical.

People flying planes into buildings are not typical, even among the religious.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:26, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"Sadly, the 9/11 truth movement now hinges on a lap dance."

It's one oddity among many. That's all. No hinges :)

"Erm... Personally, I can think of at least 12 women I really, really hate that I'd be happy to get a lap dance from"

I think you confuse the word hate. Hating enough to kill, is much different from casual dislike (aka "hate") And this is not an anger thing. This is cold, calculated, deep rooted hate.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:31, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"The goal of Al Queda is not to exterminate Americans, it is to convert us to Islam"

But this kind of sex is forbidden in Islam. There's no good way to justify this one.

I see three possibilities:

1. The reports about lap dances are wrong (funny you didn't go after this one)

2. Atta was wacked in a way non typical to an Islamic radical.

3. Atta was framed

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:32, Blogger telescopemerc said...

funny how the jews keep popping up. theiy're kind of your equivalent of GWB's bin laden. I have never mentioned jews in any of the posts. FYI, I am Jewish.

One of your points was countered by a reference.

Nesync countered with the claim that said reference was 'run by jews'.

I didn't see you type a single word in protest to that assertion.

Clean your house before you complain.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:37, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you confuse the word hate. Hating enough to kill, is much different from casual dislike (aka "hate") And this is not an anger thing. This is cold, calculated, deep rooted hate.

Trust me, nobody hates strippers that much. Anyway, why does it matter?

At some point you have to realize that all the pieces aren't going to fit together neatly. The fact that these oddities pop up isn't proof of any conspiracy, it's proof that the world is a messy place.

This isn't some James Bond movie, it's real life. In real life buildings don't collapse exactly the way we expect. People mishear things, misunderstand things, misquote things.

The fact that you can't connect all these oddities you keep coming up with into a coherent conspiracy should say something to you. You're being taken advantage of by people who could care less about 9/11 truth and more about fame. Don't be their pawn, man.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:38, Blogger telescopemerc said...

I see three possibilities:

That's the problem. That is all you see.

In Christianity, being baptized and accepting jeebus is considered good enough to wash away old sins. It doesn't matter what you did before.

In Islam, being a martyr in a holy war is a ticket to paradise. It does not matter what you did before. Since it is an act that requires mostly physical action combined with only modest faith (accepting jeebus is a lot more 'subjective') you can pretty much live it up in sin since your slate gets cleaned when you die.

If you know your slate is going to be cleaned, you might as well have fun dirtying in up.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:49, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

To tell you the truth, I don't beleive in CD (of the twin towers at least) I still like to push the theory, and hear opposing arguments.

I don't think CD is disprovable either. Assuming a bomb really did go off in the basement, for eg, do you think the effects would be discerable in all the rubble?

However, although I think pancaking (of the twin towers at least) is more likely, I don't beleive it is provable. Proving these from physical evidence alone requires complex modelling that I don't have access to. However, I don't think NIST's modelling is complete, for they only went to collapse initiation. If this says anything, it is that this kind of analysis may even be beyond NIST with its current budget.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:50, Blogger Manny said...

I'm glad you like it. But it's an important question, nonetheless.

Because a lap dance is so much better when the stripper is cryin'.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:51, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"It does not matter what you did before"

Well, ok, seems like you know a lot about Islam. Are you an authority on the subject? (just curious)

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:56, Blogger telescopemerc said...

However, I don't think NIST's modelling is complete, for they only went to collapse initiation. If this says anything, it is that this kind of analysis may even be beyond NIST with its current budget.

Its not a matter of budget. Most computer modeling programs just can't handle things beyond the point of failure. You increase the number of variables exponentially and that will create problems.

Some industries, like the auto industry, have their own programs that run past the failure point. But these are specialized and unsuited for buildings.

Its not a matter of just leaving the computer on running the program fora longer time either. These programs can crash, especially when they increase the variables so much. When they crash you lose all the data you've gotten up until that point.

So please, stop talking like you know what can and should be done.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:56, Blogger telescopemerc said...

However, I don't think NIST's modelling is complete, for they only went to collapse initiation. If this says anything, it is that this kind of analysis may even be beyond NIST with its current budget.

Its not a matter of budget. Most computer modeling programs just can't handle things beyond the point of failure. You increase the number of variables exponentially and that will create problems.

Some industries, like the auto industry, have their own programs that run past the failure point. But these are specialized and unsuited for buildings.

Its not a matter of just leaving the computer on running the program fora longer time either. These programs can crash, especially when they increase the variables so much. When they crash you lose all the data you've gotten up until that point.

So please, stop talking like you know what can and should be done.

 
At 26 September, 2006 09:59, Blogger telescopemerc said...

Well, ok, seems like you know a lot about Islam. Are you an authority on the subject? (just curious)

I know enough. I know the effects martyrdom has had in warefare and terrorism. What you complain about with Atta is nothing new in the Islamic world.

I am not an authority on Islam. I know what a lot of Americans should know. I know perhaps a bit more than that. I know other things about it from sutdying history. Specialization is for insects.

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:01, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"Most computer modeling programs just can't handle things beyond the point of failure"

Well then you affirmed my point that pancaking is not provable. That was all I was trying to put accross.

"So please, stop talking like you know what can and should be done"

I didn't say it should be done.

I implied it could be done, and with an infinite amount of money, anything can done.

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:03, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

Anyway, I'd best be going now, for I only get on your nerves.

One thing though, debating everything ad-nauseum is pointless. If there isn't a give and take in the debate, it is pointless.

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:13, Blogger telescopemerc said...

One thing though, debating everything ad-nauseum is pointless. If there isn't a give and take in the debate, it is pointless.

That would imply that you have something to give beyond the usual mythmaking.

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:24, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"That would imply that you have something to give beyond the usual mythmaking."

You guys are so high and mighty, you might as well found your own elitist society. Your attitude is what stinks, and with that attitude you will never accept anything beyond your set of beliefs.

Many topics disucssed are not CT related. (like the uranium) but you still continue on your high horse like your word is golden.

You cannot answer any of the questions I set to you. And just go onto namecalling and slander. You make up other theories but cannot prove anything either. I mean what do you really know about Atta? If anything, what you say is a guess, a theory - unless you knew him personally. Don't act like you're better than thou cause you ain't

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:40, Blogger Pepik said...

"It's not a one-off exposure that's the problem. It's the continual exposure (over years) that causes problems. Would you like having some in your backyard?"

I have natural uranium in my backyard. It is more radioactive than depleted uranium.

"Also, come the problem with shrapnel. If you're hit by radioactive shrapnel you're obviously in big doo-doo."

And if you get hit with a lead bullet, can't you get lead poisoning? You're not thinking this through.

"Well then you affirmed my point that pancaking is not provable. That was all I was trying to put accross."

In that case we can't actually prove that a controlled demolition would cause pancaking either.

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:43, Blogger CHF said...

We flew into Kabul airport - in SEPTEMBER 2001!!!

What a hoot!

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:44, Blogger Safe-Keeper said...

Sorry bub, I don't buy it. All my research on DU points to inflated statistics and poor science performed by the same people who scream about US atrocities whenever a US soldier accidentally squashes an ant.
"Accidentally"... Yeah, right.
(:p)

The purpose of DU is to kill the soldiers as well as the soldier’s targets.
Oh, you mean since the US's been losing so few troops in Iraq recently?

Wiki is under Jewish censorship so most of the articles there are skewed.
Anyone want to contribute some money for my planned TV series? It's to be called "Nazis say the darndest things".

A few more tidbits for y'all:
To which I add: What on Earth does that have to do with this thread?

No, [I don't want DU fumes in the air I breathe]
Thank you for admitting that.

(...) but I also don't want gasoline fumes in the air I breathe. Does that mean we should all stop driving?
On the surface, that sounded logical. But beneath the surface, the logic fails.

a. OK, so gasoline fumes aren't good either. So the Heck what? Two wrongs make a right now?

b. Do you seriously believe that stopping all driving of all gasoline-powered vehicles will have the same impact on the world as the stopping of the use of DU? Do you really think that's a good analogy?

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:51, Blogger CHF said...

I'm not claiming to know a lot about DU, but as I understand it the areas in Iraq with high cancer rates and/or birth defects corresponds with the areas where chemical weapons were used in the 1980-88 Iraq-Iran war.

 
At 26 September, 2006 10:58, Blogger Alex said...

Also if you were fired upon with radioactive ammunition, that coud be considered 'poison or poisoned weapons' and thus against the Geneva conventions.

Now you're just being excessively obtuse. Is LEAD not considered a poison in your world? By your definition, regular lead-core-copper-jacket rounds would be considered "poison or poisoned weapons" as well.

Also, you've selectively quoted that". convention. The full text of the sentence you're looking for is "poison or poisoned weapons' and 'arms, projectiles or materials calculated to cause unnecessary suffering'"

In other words, the poison or material has to intentionally cause unnecessary suffering. In the case of DU that's simply not the case. Even if we assumed that you were right about how dangerous it is, the fact is that such effects would be secondary and unintentional. The PRIMARY function, or the CALCULATED effect, is the penetrating power of the DU slug. Secondary actions don't disqualify weapons under this convention.

"Well then you affirmed my point that pancaking is not provable. That was all I was trying to put across."

Well, we did sorta, SEE IT HAPPEN. Not to mention that it's basically what occurs in a controlled demo too, just without explosives this time.

 
At 26 September, 2006 11:03, Blogger Alex said...

a. OK, so gasoline fumes aren't good either. So the Heck what? Two wrongs make a right now?

b. Do you seriously believe that stopping all driving of all gasoline-powered vehicles will have the same impact on the world as the stopping of the use of DU? Do you really think that's a good analogy?


Fine, if you want to be a dick about it, it's a crappy analogy when taken to an extreme, as most analogies are. All I was trying to point out is that DU has benefits which outweigh the concern about pollution. DU rounds help keep me and my buddies alive. If using them means I have to breathe some in occasionally, I'm willing to take any associated risk because the immediate benefit is much greater. Ditto with cars. I know all those gasoline fumes aren't good for me, but the benefit of having a set of wheels to get me around from place to place outweighs any long term risk of lung cancer.

We on the same page now?

 
At 26 September, 2006 11:29, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

'Depleted' Uranium weaponry is illegal under the terms and conditions of the Geneva Convention. Under the Geneva Convention, it is illegal to leave harmful materials on a battlefield after the conflict has ceased. They call it "Depleted" uranium. That is Orwellian double-speak. You see the term "Depleted" refers to the removal of uranium-235, but the process for its removal is called "Enrichment." It is Enrichment because what remains is uranium-238, a highly potent radioactive carcinogen that emits alpha particles. Once in our body, either inhaled, or in a flesh wound, or even ingested in contaminated food or water --- you get cancer in your lungs bones, blood or kidneys (Caldicott, 2002). There is one more way, the Uranium is Enriched. Uranium-236 and Uranium-238, otherwise know as Plutonium is laced into the so-called "Depleted" uranium weaponry. So let us be real. Stop saying "Depleted Uranium, and call it what it is, "Enriched Uranium." One third of U.S. tanks in Desert Storm were armed with Enriched Uranium-238. Because this Orwellian double-speak has a purpose, to make it hard for the public to discern that this is a Nuclear War, not a Depleted Uranium War, it is an Enriched Uranium Nuclear War. And it is a Nuclear War that is in violation of the Geneva Convention. It causes congenital malformations, babies born with one eyes, no arms, or no brain. And it not also affects Iraqi civilians, it affects American veterans who excrete it in their urine and semen a decade later (Caldicott, 2002). For more on Enriched Uranium studies see Boje, 2003 c).

The aggression against Iraq during the Gulf War with Enriched Uranium weapons and debris strewn along the infamous "Highway of Death" did exactly this, making that weapon deployment illegal under international law (Boje, 2003 a, b, c). The toxic effects last 4.5 billion years. The material used in Depleted Uranium weaponry is created inside nuclear reactors with uranium-238 laced into Depleted Uranium munitions. "Three hundred and twenty tons of DU were shot into Iraq and Kuwait in the 1991 bombardment; three tons into Bosnia in 1995; and 10 tons into Kosovo in 1999" (LaForge, 2003). U-238 emits alpha radiation, that affects critical organs (kidneys, lung, & liver); it is only created in nuclear reactors, and is found in great quantity along the Highway of Death in Iraq. It is found in the bodies of children of veterans of the Gulf War. It is to be found in the bodies of many of the 10,324 deployed Gulf War vets who have died since 1991 (See Gulf War DU Statistics from PeaceAware.com). Of the 696,778 U.S. troops who served in Gulf War I (1990-1991), 436,000 were exposed for months to areas of DU contamination. As mentioned after 12 years of U.S. sanctions, 1.2 million Iraqi civilians died; 500,000 are children under 12.

 
At 26 September, 2006 11:29, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

and besides, who the hell cares about legality. how about it just ain't right?

 
At 26 September, 2006 11:31, Blogger Good Lieutenant said...

"You guys are so high and mighty, you might as well found your own elitist society. Your attitude is what stinks, and with that attitude you will never accept anything beyond your set of beliefs."

Hey - you are the "truth seekers." If you are going to make incendiary suggestions, malavolent implications, or the like, YOU have to present the indisputable evidence. We're just asking questions.

After all, SLC is just asking question of the truthers. Why don't any of you have any answers? Why do your purported "answers" turn to dust under even the most rudimentary scrutiny? Why do you have an incessant obsession with "the neocons" and the "Jews"? Why do you engage in chicken-wire experiments and toliet-paper tube "science," and then claim you've got "evidence" of something? Why do your sources always turn out to be people who reside on the fringes of culture and academia who have little or no experience or expertise in any scientific or logistic field that can be associated with real 9-11 research? Why can't you seem to find any 9-11 first responders to go on record with your "truth movement?"

I'll help you out - you are all full of crap. Plain and simple. It has been demonstrated on this site on a daily basis. The answers you seek can be found in the videos of planes flying into the Twin Towers on 9-11, and al-Qaeda's own statements and history prior to and after that. The end. You merely need the courage to see it.

You got another theory with some evidence? Bring it. Suggestions, questions and malavolent implications of your political enemies are not "evidence" of anything but your desperation.

 
At 26 September, 2006 11:49, Blogger Alex said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 26 September, 2006 11:52, Blogger Alex said...

'Depleted' Uranium weaponry is illegal under the terms and conditions of the Geneva Convention. Under the Geneva Convention, it is illegal to leave harmful materials on a battlefield after the conflict has ceased.

Wrong again. Try and cite that. Come on! I dare ya!

You see the term "Depleted" refers to the removal of uranium-235, but the process for its removal is called "Enrichment." It is Enrichment because what remains is uranium-238, a highly potent radioactive carcinogen that emits alpha particles.

NO YOU IDIOT! GAH! It's "enrichment" because it's PRIMARY PURPOSE is to produce ENRICHED URANIUM! The DEPLETED uranium is a waste product! Your above sentence is like saying that the primary purpose of internal combustion engines is to generate carbon!

And U-238 is NOT "highly potent". It has a halflife of 4.4 BILLION years! Do you know what that means? It means that the radiation produced by it escapes at such a slow rate that 4.4 billion years from now it will be half as radioactive as it is today. Do you have any concept of how slow that is?? For comparison, U-234 has a halflife of 244,500 years. Now THERE is a "potent" radioactive material.

In addition, you say "emits alpha particles" as if it were some horrid thing. Alpha and Beta particles are weak enough to be stopped by skin! It's gamma radiation that's the real danger, and U-238 produces it in VERY low quantities.

GAH! Why can't you CT dirtbags at least be EDUCATED and insane. This combination of ignorant and insane is truly aggrivating.

Stop saying "Depleted Uranium, and call it what it is, "Enriched Uranium.

Idiot. I'd sooner stop calling you retarded and refer to you as an "ultra intellectual braniac".

and besides, who the hell cares about legality. how about it just ain't right?

That's only your opinion, and it's based on poor information and preconceived biases. As such, we're certainly not going to let it guide the way we conduct warfare.

 
At 26 September, 2006 11:59, Blogger Alex said...

Goddamit, I just realized I didn't adress even a quarter of the lies in that bullshit post of yours. I have NEVER seen an "article" that full of lies and misinformation. And trust me, I've come across a LOT of nonsense "research" on DU from the usual anti-America crowd. You've just set a new record.

 
At 26 September, 2006 12:01, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"Hey - you are the "truth seekers." If you are going to make incendiary suggestions, malavolent implications, or the like, YOU have to present the indisputable evidence."

Actually, I agree.

"We're just asking questions. After all, SLC is just asking question of the truthers."

Well, you do kind of go out of your way to slander.

"Why don't any of you have any answers?"

That would be the lack of sub-poena power and the intense resitance to these ideas. Also, you may just be right!

"Why do your purported "answers" turn to dust under even the most rudimentary scrutiny?"

Some turn to dust. But that's inevitable, no scientist gets it right the first time.

"Why do you have an incessant obsession with "the neocons""

Well, maybe because they have done America great harm in the last 6 years (even without considering 9/11)

"and the "Jews"?"

These are mostly made up by you to slander.

"Why do you engage in chicken-wire experiments and toliet-paper tube "science,""

Nah, that is pushing it. What experiments are you referring to? Jones's? If anything is wrong with his work, it's the asumption (where the sulphur comes from) and not the science.

"and then claim you've got "evidence" of something"

preponderance of evidence is used in court. it has and can be used to convict.

Why do your sources always turn out to be people who reside on the fringes of culture and academia who have little or no experience or expertise in any scientific or logistic field that can be associated with real 9-11 research?"

Due to the nature of the subject, it is "too hot to handle"

Why can't you seem to find any 9-11 first responders to go on record with your "truth movement?"

There are some. Some don't have info. Some are not sure. Many fear for their jobs. Some (or many) may agree with you.

"I'll help you out - you are all full of crap. Plain and simple."

There have been crazy theories put forward. There are many unexplained answers as yet. Maybe asking for an explanation for everything is too much to ask. However, the list of questions provided has my current concerns.

"It has been demonstrated on this site on a daily basis."

All this site does is slander and debunk the most obvoious errors. Can you answer any of the questions I laid out earlier?

"The answers you seek can be found in the videos of planes flying into the Twin Towers on 9-11"

No, we aleready agreed pancacing is not provable.

"and al-Qaeda's own statements and history prior to and after that."

actually, they denied it. and the CIA won't ratify the "confession tape" where does that leave us?

"The end."

Whew!

"You merely need the courage to see it."

Or the will to not care.

"You got another theory with some evidence? Bring it."

Well, what we have is preponderance. Maybe there will be a whistleblower in the future. Maybe not.

"Suggestions, questions and malavolent implications of your political enemies are not "evidence" of anything but your desperation."

It's more stubbornness than desperation :)

 
At 26 September, 2006 12:08, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

actually Alex your post on DU was quite good (for a change from the usual slander)

however, let me put it to you this way:

would you use DU on American soil, if an enemy attacked.

 
At 26 September, 2006 12:14, Blogger telescopemerc said...

would you use DU on American soil, if an enemy attacked.

If they attacked with armor, you betcha.

 
At 26 September, 2006 12:15, Blogger Alex said...

Absolutely, since I'm not American :D

To answer your question the way you intended it though, yes I would absolutely use DU over Canadian soil if we were invaded.

Oh, and about this part:

All this site does is slander and debunk the most obvoious errors. Can you answer any of the questions I laid out earlier?

You do realize that we get the exact same phrase all the time from every nutbar out there, don't you? Then we answer their questions, they disappear into the woodwork, and some new twerp pops out and proceeds to complain that all the questions we've answered were "obviously wrong", but he bets we can't answer HIS questions. It's a never ending cycle, man! I could spend the rest of my life answering CT questions, and STILL get accused of only answering the "easy ones".

 
At 26 September, 2006 12:41, Blogger Pepik said...

I have to say, even by the standards of truther science, 911mysteries is posting some real garbage here.

 
At 26 September, 2006 12:44, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"You do realize that we get the exact same phrase all the time from every nutbar out there, don't you? Then we answer their questions, they disappear into the woodwork, and some new twerp pops out and proceeds to complain that all the questions we've answered were "obviously wrong", but he bets we can't answer HIS questions. It's a never ending cycle, man! I could spend the rest of my life answering CT questions, and STILL get accused of only answering the "easy ones""

I hear ya.


I do disagree with y'all on DU tho. I wouldn't contaminate the environment, no matter how insignificant the effects may seem (given that they last so long) for short term gain, especially on American soil. I would only use it if it were the only way to win the war. But that's me. And you have every right to your opinion. I just wonder what a poll might produce as results.

 
At 26 September, 2006 12:48, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"I have to say, even by the standards of truther science, 911mysteries is posting some real garbage here"

Thanks for the update :) Always good to know!

 
At 26 September, 2006 13:01, Blogger telescopemerc said...

I do disagree with y'all on DU tho. I wouldn't contaminate the environment, no matter how insignificant the effects may seem (given that they last so long) for short term gain, especially on American soil. I would only use it if it were the only way to win the war. But that's me. And you have every right to your opinion. I just wonder what a poll might produce as results.

Here's the thing: Every day, companies, farms and people pollute via exhaust systems, trash, and other disposal, tons of stuff that is much harsher for the environment than DU.

Now consider your invasion. Truth to be told, DU is not fire willy-nilly. It is specifically an anti-armor shell. It might work against blockhouses, but I'm not certain about thaty. Either way, unless several dozen tank battallions magicly appear on US soil, there aren't going to be too many DU rounds fired.

Now consider this: DU rounds may not end a war, but using them can sure as heck make war shorter by defeating the enemy faster.

Do you think prolonging a war is good for the environment? War is exceptionally nasty on the environment. For the sake of an imaginary threat, you want to cause an even bigger threat to be extended.

This ignores the human suffering, BTW.

Your opinion is a classic example of penny-wise/pound-foolish, and your wisdom with the penny ain't that great.

 
At 26 September, 2006 13:01, Blogger Yatesey said...

I don't post much, I usually just read and observe.

I do have to say, without a shadow of a doubt, 911 Mysteries is far and away the most level headed of the Looser crew I've seen on here.

9-11, Someone made a good comment earlier(apologies for not naming, my head hurts).

Questions are good and necessary, but "the world isn't perfect, and this isn't a James Bond Movie". It's such a good point.

Lastly, as much as it seems this board goes on the attack and the posters are high and mighty, the other side is just as bad, if not worse, but i get the feeling you realize that.

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:00, Blogger jackhanyes said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:00, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Yeah, no kidding. Its an anti-armor round. Putting it in a mortar round is useless, and IIRC you need muzzle velocities for the stuff to work the way it is supposed to. This means that even if howitzers could score perfect hits on the Tank armies of the Taliban (?) they wouldn't have enough velocity to work.

Alliant Techsystems makes depleted uranium shells for use in U.S. tanks, armored personnel carriers, and howitzers. The use of these rounds is the subject of great controversy because of their impact on the environment and human health, both in the long and short term.

That would be a point...if DU were radioactive.

As a toxic and radioactive waste product that requires long term storage as low level nuclear waste, depleted uranium is costly to keep but relatively inexpensive to obtain.

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:04, Blogger shawn said...

Jack, are you really that dumb?

Lead will kill you just as much from poisoning as depleted uranium. Nobody made a big deal when we were firing lead at people.

You all tend to miss that key word "depleted".

Don't you not know that birth defects are up 400-600% in Iraq?

You gonna show babies with harlequin ichthyosis and pass it off as DU birth defects? Because that's what the people holding the signs and David Icke try.

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:06, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Fine, if you want to be a dick about it, it's a crappy analogy when taken to an extreme, as most analogies are.

Bull shit, you were backed into a corner and wanted to do a switch-a-roo to change the subject.

All I was trying to point out is that DU has benefits which outweigh the concern about pollution. DU rounds help keep me and my buddies alive. If using them means I have to breathe some in occasionally, I'm willing to take any associated risk because the immediate benefit is much greater.

Ah the truth! You don't give a damn about the danagers or the polloution, or the effect it has on the people who live on the land you're bombing! You'll kept believing that DU is keeping you and you buddy alive.

Just wait until your son is born with one working eye, haft an arm, six toes, and a slit for a mouth. Maybe then you will reconsider your statements.

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:11, Blogger shawn said...

Think about it for a second. It there is a one world government, who would the army fight?

You'd have a hard time keeping dozens, if not hundreds, of rebel groups suppressed.

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:12, Blogger shawn said...

Just wait until your son is born with one working eye, haft an arm, six toes, and a slit for a mouth. Maybe then you will reconsider your statements.


DEPLETED uranium.

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:32, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Jack, are you really that dumb?

Hey shawn, can't state an debate without tossing out an insult or two can you! Being insecure sucks doesn't it. You're always trying to boost yourself up by putting another man down.

Let me tell you a secert: the highest man is the has lowered himself by humbling himself.

Lead will kill you just as much from poisoning as depleted uranium. Nobody made a big deal when we were firing lead at people.

Ummm, hello? Anyone home? Du is radioactive. Lead is not.


You all tend to miss that key word "depleted".

Depleted uranium is approximately 40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium.

You gonna show babies with harlequin ichthyosis and pass it off as DU birth defects? Because that's what the people holding the signs and David Icke try.

Nope. I'm going to ask you to think and connects the fact.

Here are the facts (add more if you want, but don't waste my time debunking them):

US drops 800 tons of DU on iraq in 1991 during the first gulf war.

Birth defects goes up 400-600% after the war.

Lung cancer rates sky rockets after the war.

67% of the service man who served in the gulf war have childern with birth defects.


Now connect the facts. WHat happened?


http://www.fpx.de/fp/WebLog/2003/iraq-du.html

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:34, Blogger jackhanyes said...

DEPLETED uranium.

STFU

Natural uranium is a mix of three major isotopes, U-238 (99.2%), U-235 (0.7%) and U-234 (0.05%). For use reactors or bombs, uranium has to be enriched, meaning the concentration of the fissible U-235 isotope. Nuclear reactors require a concentration of at least 3% U-235, while the isotope must be as pure as possible for use in an atomic bomb. During the enrichment process, uranium is separated into amounts with higher and lesser U-235 content. The result is enriched uranium on one side and depleted uranium on the other. Depleted uranium contains about 99.8% of U-238, 0.2% of U-235 and 0.01% of U-234. All isotopes are radioactive, but U-234, despite its small quantity, is the most worrying because of its short half life.

http://www.fpx.de/fp/WebLog/2003/iraq-du.html

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:36, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Uranium-238 (U-238), is the most common isotope of uranium found. When hit by a neutron, it becomes uranium-239 (U-239), an unstable element which decays into neptunium-239 (Np-239), which then itself decays, with a half-life of 2.355 days, into plutonium-239 (Pu-239).

Around 99.284% of natural uranium is uranium-238, which has a half-life of 1.41 × 1017 seconds (4.46 × 109 years, or 4.46 billion years). Depleted uranium consists mainly of the 238 isotope, and enriched uranium has a higher-than-natural quantity of the uranium-235 isotope.

 
At 26 September, 2006 15:38, Blogger jackhanyes said...

You'd have a hard time keeping dozens, if not hundreds, of rebel groups suppressed.

Kinda like the US in Iraq right?

 
At 26 September, 2006 16:09, Blogger telescopemerc said...

Alliant Techsystems makes depleted uranium shells for use in U.S. tanks, armored personnel carriers, and howitzers. The use of these rounds is the subject of great controversy because of their impact on the environment and human health, both in the long and short term.

Straight from wikipedia. Now please tell us which howitzer system uses these alleged shells.

Also please tell me what links in wikipedia support DU howitzers. The only one I see is discussing tank cannon shells.

67% of the service man who served in the gulf war have childern with birth defects.

Bull.

Do you even *know* any Gulf War vets who had kids? I've known plenty and if 2/3 of them were having birth defects you think they'd show somwhere.

The rest of your DU crap is laughable. You really have no clue about science except what the scare sites tell, do you?

 
At 26 September, 2006 16:33, Blogger shawn said...

Bingo, buddy.

So why bring up your little one-world government nonsense?

 
At 26 September, 2006 16:34, Blogger shawn said...

Now connect the facts. WHat happened?

Saddam had a fondness for chemical and nerve agents.

 
At 26 September, 2006 16:36, Blogger shawn said...

You're always trying to boost yourself up by putting another man down.

I do so hate this defense. It's just nonsense they teach you in grade school so the kids who get picked on feel better about themselves.

Du is radioactive. Lead is not.

Hmm didn't get my point. I was saying that both will poison you in the same fashion (as in it won't really harm you unless you get hit by bullets). Lead isn't exactly harmless, don't you know.

 
At 26 September, 2006 16:57, Blogger Alex said...

Bull shit, you were backed into a corner and wanted to do a switch-a-roo to change the subject.

Buddy, the day you manage to back me into a corner will be the day I accept forced retirement. You argue as if you've left half of your brain sitting on a shelf somewhere.

Ah the truth! You don't give a damn about the danagers or the polloution, or the effect it has on the people who live on the land you're bombing! You'll kept believing that DU is keeping you and you buddy alive.

Technically right. I know that the "dangers or the polloution [sic]" are almost non-existent, so no I really don't give a damn about them. Considering the number of middle-eastern people I see smoking, if they get cancer it won't be from DU.

Just wait until your son is born with one working eye, haft an arm, six toes, and a slit for a mouth. Maybe then you will reconsider your statements.

Yeah, if he turned out like you I really would start to worry.

Ummm, hello? Anyone home? Du is radioactive. Lead is not.

And the radiation is only dangerous if DU is ingested. And if it's ingested it's about as harmful as lead, because both are toxic, and the metal poisoning is more likely to cause adverse health effects than the radiation. You're really not getting this are you?


Now connect the facts. WHat happened?

You and your buddies invented a bunch of statistics?


And stop trying to sound like a bloody intelectual. I think Randy Milholland was talking about you when he said:

"Typos are very important to all written form. It gives the reader something to look for so they aren't distracted by the total lack of content in your writing."

 
At 26 September, 2006 17:03, Blogger Alex said...

Oh, BTW telescopemerc, I wouldn't be surprised if there really were DU shells for howitzers. That's why earlier I said that I could see how they'd be useful, but I've never heard of anyone making them. We do direct-fire shoots with howitzers on occasion. Dunno how familiar you are with military terminology so I'll dumb it down:

Indirect fire is what you normally think of when you think artillery. The shells are lobbed on a high trajectory, so they lose most of their muzzle velocity by the time they reach the target.

Direct fire if what you'd use against vehicles at close range, especially AFV's and tanks. Shells are launched on a low trajectory meaning they impact the target with a great deal of kinetic energy. Ofcourse, if you're doing this chances are you're already screwed, but it's better than nothing as a last line of defence. DU penetrators would be nice for direct fire. But like I said, I've never seen them nor have I heard of any western nation employing them.

 
At 26 September, 2006 17:38, Blogger telescopemerc said...

Thanks Alex, I didn't know they still used howitzers for direct fire. That was the only reason I could think of they would need DU. But nothing I know of mentioned direct fire usage by modern howitzers.

 
At 26 September, 2006 18:40, Blogger jackhanyes said...

I do so hate this defense. It's just nonsense they teach you in grade school so the kids who get picked on feel better about themselves.

Truth sucks doesn't it. Oh, and nice way of indirectly insulting me as a grade school kid. You really can't debate without insults can you?

Hmm didn't get my point. I was saying that both will poison you in the same fashion

Sure, but you forgot DU is a radioactive waste product. Hell shawn, you were almost acting like DU was almost safe since you scremed DE-PLET-ED! More then once. That was until I shoved some facts right up your ass and rotated it.

 
At 26 September, 2006 18:44, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Well, I checked the army site and i found this PDF called "Radiological Sources of Potential Exposure and/or Contamination"

There is no mention of mortar or howitzers DU rounds. Of course the document dates back to 1999. However, the document does list the danager of DU.

Basicly, if you read between the line, the milarty stance is "we don't live there so F it."

 
At 26 September, 2006 18:46, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Bull.

Do you even *know* any Gulf War vets who had kids? I've known plenty and if 2/3 of them were having birth defects you think they'd show somwhere.

The rest of your DU crap is laughable. You really have no clue about science except what the scare sites tell, do you?


Hey, I'm just repeating the facts experts. found while doing a study. I guess you folks only support experts that support you, huh?

 
At 26 September, 2006 18:51, Blogger shawn said...

Truth sucks doesn't it.

Yes, it'd suck if it were true. It isn't. I make fun of people because either A. they deserve it or B. it makes me laugh. It has nothing to do with my own self-esteem.

That was until I shoved some facts right up your ass and rotated it.

Jesus Christ do you just ignore everything in here? Lead is poisonous, too, if you eat it. Where are all the studies and hoopla about the lead bullets we've been using for years? You'd figure after World War II, Europe would be a poisonous hellhole using the logic you employ with the DU shells.

You don't understand that correlation does not imply causation. You're accepting that use of DU = increase cancer and birth defects. That ignores other factors like Saddam's aforemention affinity for chemical/biological/nerve agents and/or shoddy sampling.

 
At 26 September, 2006 19:33, Blogger Blind Avocado said...

Do you even *know* any Gulf War vets who had kids? I've known plenty and if 2/3 of them were having birth defects you think they'd show somwhere.
That is simply an outright lie. Gulf war vets are not any sicker then vets who did not go to the gulf, and two thirds of their children do not have birth defects. Is there any issue at all that you people do not lie through your teeth?

 
At 26 September, 2006 19:41, Blogger Alex said...

Hey, I'm just repeating the facts experts. found while doing a study. I guess you folks only support experts that support you, huh?

No, what you're doing is quoting "research" as interpreted by individuals who have a clear bias. How many experts actually agree with that conclusion? You approach to the study of DU illness is exactly the same as your approach to the 9/11 twoof movement: conclusion first, then misquote experts, make up facts, and invent statistics!

In late 2000 and early 2001, various news reports, mostly European, reported allegations of an increase in leukemia cases related to exposure to DU while serving in the Balkans. Subsequent independent investigations by the World Health Organization, European Commission, European Parliament, United Nations Environment Programme, United Kingdom Royal Society, and the Health Council of the Netherlands have all have discounted any association between depleted uranium and leukemia or other medical problems among Balkans veterans.

More light reading about DU

 
At 26 September, 2006 20:03, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Yes, it'd suck if it were true. It isn't. I make fun of people because either A. they deserve it or B. it makes me laugh. It has nothing to do with my own self-esteem.

Sadistic lier.

You know when you lie, it makes denying the turth that much easier.

Jesus Christ do you just ignore everything in here? Lead is poisonous, too, if you eat it. Where are all the studies and hoopla about the lead bullets we've been using for years? You'd figure after World War II, Europe would be a poisonous hellhole using the logic you employ with the DU shells.

Eating human shit can kill you too.

You don't understand that correlation does not imply causation.

Maybe. But it's clear that your pride simply can't accept the fact that you wonderful do no wrong country dropped over 4000 tons of radioactive waste on country where the people living in the country are getting sick from it.

You're accepting that use of DU = increase cancer and birth defects.

Radioactive waste has the tendency to increase cancer and birth defects.

That ignores other factors like Saddam's aforemention affinity for chemical/biological/nerve agents

Pass the buck. It wasn't the US army! It was that evil bastard Saddam.

There is only one problem. Saddam used most of his USA Band X WMD's before the gulf war and the increase cancer and birth defects happen after the gulf war where the US bombed and shelled with DU.

But who are you to look up this information. it's easier to pass the buck!

and/or shoddy sampling.

That's the ticket! Can't deny the results, deny the method used to get the results!!

 
At 26 September, 2006 20:15, Blogger jackhanyes said...

67% of the service man who served in the gulf war have childern with birth defects.

Sorry that should read:

67% increase in number of service men who served in the gulf war compare to other wars have childern with birth defects.

 
At 26 September, 2006 20:31, Blogger jackhanyes said...

In late 2000 and early 2001, various news reports, mostly European, reported allegations of an increase in leukemia cases related to exposure to DU while serving in the Balkans. Subsequent independent investigations by the World Health Organization, European Commission, European Parliament, United Nations Environment Programme, United Kingdom Royal Society, and the Health Council of the Netherlands have all have discounted any association between depleted uranium and leukemia or other medical problems among Balkans veterans.

It's okay-doky in my book then!

Shit I hate artical written like that. It list a butch of groups saying DU had no affect on the cacner rates, but does not supply any information, foot notes, or links about those stuides.

 
At 26 September, 2006 20:32, Blogger telescopemerc said...

67% increase in number of service men who served in the gulf war compare to other wars have childern with birth defects.

Evidence?

http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/veterans/default2b.htm

and

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/336/23/1650

Results During the study period, 33,998 infants were born to Gulf War veterans and 41,463 to nondeployed veterans at military hospitals. The overall risk of any birth defect was 7.45 percent, and the risk of severe birth defects was 1.85 percent. These rates are similar to those reported in civilian populations. In the multivariate analysis, there was no significant association for either men or women between service in the Gulf War and the risk of any birth defect or of severe birth defects in their children.

Conclusions This analysis found no evidence of an increase in the risk of birth defects among the children of Gulf War veterans.

 
At 26 September, 2006 20:32, Blogger shawn said...

before the gulf war

Oh, so depleted uranium (which you keep ignoring doesn't harm you unless you're shot by it or ingest it, just like lead) sits around forever hurting everyone but no chemical/biological/nerve agent residue sat around to harm anyone?

That's the ticket! Can't deny the results, deny the method used to get the results!!

See Kinsey, Lancet Iraq survey

 
At 26 September, 2006 20:36, Blogger shawn said...

But it's clear that your pride simply can't accept the fact that you wonderful do no wrong country dropped over 4000 tons of radioactive waste on country where the people living in the country are getting sick from it.

Hmm I don't deny dropping two atomic bombs or firebombing hundreds of thousands of people but I deny them shooting fairly harmless rounds (unless you're struck by them) sixty years later? Almost makes sense...

And yeah, they just got a bunch of sludge and poured it over the country. Again, jack, you're arguing as if DU is the same thing as you'd find in a reactor or a bomb. You still haven't picked up on the fact that they aren't the same.

 
At 26 September, 2006 20:42, Blogger telescopemerc said...

That is simply an outright lie.

I assume, B.A., rhat you were trying to reply to jack, and not me?

 
At 26 September, 2006 22:17, Blogger jackhanyes said...

Again, jack, you're arguing as if DU is the same thing as you'd find in a reactor or a bomb. You still haven't picked up on the fact that they aren't the same.

I post this:

Natural uranium is a mix of three major isotopes, U-238 (99.2%), U-235 (0.7%) and U-234 (0.05%). For use reactors or bombs, uranium has to be enriched, meaning the concentration of the fissible U-235 isotope. Nuclear reactors require a concentration of at least 3% U-235, while the isotope must be as pure as possible for use in an atomic bomb. During the enrichment process, uranium is separated into amounts with higher and lesser U-235 content. The result is enriched uranium on one side and depleted uranium on the other. Depleted uranium contains about 99.8% of U-238, 0.2% of U-235 and 0.01% of U-234. All isotopes are radioactive, but U-234, despite its small quantity, is the most worrying because of its short half life.

And you think I don't understand the different?

You're an ass.

 
At 26 September, 2006 22:59, Blogger mbats said...

I post this: ... And you think I don't understand the different?

You certainly don't grasp the difference.

 
At 27 September, 2006 04:08, Blogger Pepik said...

Jack, you're making a fool of yourself.

What you haven't picked up on is that there was already uranium all over Iraq. Uranium is a naturally occurring mineral - and more dangerous in its natural form than when it has been depleted. I mentioned this before, you quickly filed it in the "inconcenient information" bin.

"It list a butch of groups saying DU had no affect on the cacner rates, but does not supply any information, foot notes, or links about those stuides."

I gave you a link to a 300 page study. You ignored it and then a few posts later "Gosh, has anyone seen any studies?" What is the point of this?

But here you go - another report you can ignore. (Debunkers on the other hand - enjoy)

http://www.fumento.com/military/depleteduranium.html

Yes, in Japan it takes 15 years for radiation from an atomic bombs to cause cancer. Yet in Iraq, where most people live nowhere near where DU was used, apparently leukemia rates rose 600% immediately. Information courtesy of Saddam's Health Ministry, of course. Now who would be gullible enough to believe that.....?

 
At 27 September, 2006 04:22, Blogger Pepik said...

And by the way, here's a suggested code of conduct for truthers who don't want to get insulted:

1. Stay on topic. There's no excuse for "yeah but [random irrelevant comment]" here just because CTer was proved wrong.
2. If you are "just asking questions" make sure you looked for answers YOURSELF first. Otherwise you're going to get a RTFM type answer, and you're going to deserve it. This is not a question answering service for the lazy. Come here when you HAVE TRIED but can't find a satisfactory answer yourself. Have some courage to stand behind your questions, they shouldn't be disposable.
3. Do not post laundry lists of unanswered questions you copied from somewhere else. You will almost certainly violate rule 2. Especially do not do it as a way to distract from a successful debunking, as then you would be violating 1. and 3.
4. Being a debunker doesn't mean we voted for Bush, like Bush, or think Bush is honest. It doesn't mean we believe everything we read. It doesn't mean we accept whatever the MSM says. You can tell that to your buddies in the conspiracy forums, but here it the best way to burn the welcome mat. The knowledge here does not come from passively watching Fox News, it comes from a great deal of reading and debate.

Any other suggestions?

 
At 27 September, 2006 07:42, Blogger telescopemerc said...

5. Cut & Paste does not impress anyone. If you can't put the arguement in your own words, don't bother. trust us, we can tell when you are cutting and pasting. C&P is an annoyance and overwhelm tactic with the sole goal of trying to overwhelm the opposition.

6. Look at the arguements and tactics Creationsist (or Intelligent Design if you must) use in their 'arguements'. If you see any similarity between what you try and what they do its time to rethink your position.

7. Neo-Cons, Bush lovers, Conservatives. We've all been accused of being this. The truth is that only a few regualrs here like Bush and we span the political spectrum. We have one ting in common in that we don't like the lies being spread by 9/11 'truthers'

 
At 27 September, 2006 07:45, Blogger telescopemerc said...

Dang, my seven duped your four. How did I miss that?

 
At 27 September, 2006 07:47, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"Lead is poisonous, too, if you eat it"

Are lead bullets covered with a copper shell? If so, your argument about lead being poisonous is not valid.

 
At 27 September, 2006 08:10, Blogger telescopemerc said...

Are lead bullets covered with a copper shell? If so, your argument about lead being poisonous is not valid.

Then why is it that shooting ranges require so many environmental controls? Citizen shooters aren't firing DU rounds out of their shotguns and hunting rifles.

For the record: Military rounds are typcally jacketed in copper. This does make the lead go away. Fire a few rounds at a hard target and the copper jacketing will be smashed, letting the lead out.

 
At 27 September, 2006 08:13, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

yeah but we're talking about being hit by a DU round vs being hit by a lead/copper round ...

 
At 27 September, 2006 08:43, Blogger mbats said...

If you've been hit by a DU round, chemical & radiation poisoning ar the least of your worries. Those things are designed to penetrate tank armor. Think spaghetti sauce ... the lumpy kind.

 
At 27 September, 2006 08:46, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

so then your argument goes something like "War is bad so we need no rules" ?

 
At 27 September, 2006 09:49, Blogger telescopemerc said...

yeah but we're talking about being hit by a DU round vs being hit by a lead/copper round ...

Are we? Well, all right then:

Odds are, the DU round will go right through you. Its an armor piercing round. Its not the best choice for anti-personell work.

The copper round may or may not break its jacket when it hits you.

 
At 27 September, 2006 09:49, Blogger telescopemerc said...

so then your argument goes something like "War is bad so we need no rules" ?

No, where the heck did you get that? Try reading what we write for a change.

 
At 27 September, 2006 09:58, Blogger Pepik said...

Think of it this way - if it wasn't a DU round, it would have been an explosive one. In which case you would not have survived.

And by the way, there are studies of what happens to people with DU shrapnel permanently embedded in their bodies (pretty much the worst possible scenario): apparently nothing.

From: http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Features/DU/faq_depleted_uranium.shtml

"The most definitive study of DU exposure is of Gulf War veterans who have embedded DU shrapnel in their bodies that cannot be removed. To date none has developed any health abnormalities due to uranium chemical toxicity or radio toxicity."

Now how is it that you can have a chunk of it stuck permanently in your body with no effect a decade or more later, yet somehow Iraqis hundreds of miles away instantly develop leukemia (according to Saddam Hussein's Ministry of Health)? I wonder.

 
At 27 September, 2006 10:29, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

i get a 404 when i tried the IAEA link ... got another one?

 
At 27 September, 2006 10:33, Blogger Pepik said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 27 September, 2006 10:34, Blogger Pepik said...

add "leted_uranium.shtml" to the end of it.

What did you think of the UNEP PCAU report?

 
At 27 September, 2006 10:50, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

ok, so the IAEA says it's safe. I'll agree then, there is good possibility it's safe.

I wonder what you make of this:

---------
And then there's another separate soldier who we have interviewed here, Gerard Matthew, who after he came back from Iraq, he has been sick with illnesses that could not be diagnosed by the military. And then his wife becomes pregnant, and they have a child born with missing several fingers on one hand. And so, he was from a separate transportation company that was transporting destroyed or damaged tanks back from Iraq into Kuwait. And so, all the soldiers, eight of them in total, are involved in the lawsuit.

Taken from:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/07/1643226

It will be interesting to see the results of the court case.

 
At 27 September, 2006 10:51, Blogger Alex said...

yeah but we're talking about being hit by a DU round vs being hit by a lead/copper round ...

Have you ever SEEN what happens to someone hit by a 30mm slug? Whether it's lead, tungsten, or depleted uranium is pretty much irrelevant as far as "damage to soft target" goes. There's a video you can google of an Apache helicopter lighting up a couple vehicles...and the people around them. Now the whole thing is taped under IR so you can't see details too well, but what you CAN see is hat before they fire each burst, there's one big glowing blob in the center of the screen...and AFTER each burst, there are many, many small glowing blobs all over the screen. I'll leave the rest to your imagination.

 
At 27 September, 2006 11:00, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

I have another question for you military types ... how long back does the use of DU go? Were the amounts used, say 30-40 years ago comparable to the amounts used now? That will paint a clearer picture on to what extent the effects are fully understood.

 
At 27 September, 2006 12:27, Blogger Pepik said...

But as I keep saying, natural uranium, which is more dangerous, is already present in the environment and always has been.

 
At 27 September, 2006 12:58, Blogger 911 Mysteries said...

"But as I keep saying, natural uranium, which is more dangerous, is already present in the environment and always has been"

That's not really a good argument because every EPA protected substance is derived somehow from the environment ...

 
At 27 September, 2006 13:08, Blogger Alex said...

Well, first I'll show you how far back the use of uranium goes. Keep in mind uranium is MORE radioactive than depleted uranium:

The use of uranium, in its natural oxide form, dates back to at least AD 79, when it was used to add a yellow color to ceramic glazes (yellow glass with 1% uranium oxide was found near Naples, Italy).

As for Depleted Uranium:

In the 1970s, The Pentagon reported that the Soviet military had developed armor plating for Warsaw Pact tanks that NATO ammunition couldn't penetrate.
...
Thus, from the late 1970s, the U.S., the Soviet Union, Britain and France, began converting their stockpiles of depleted uranium into kinetic energy penetrators.
...
Photographic evidence of destroyed equipment suggests that DU was first used during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war.


So yeah, it's been around for a while. That's the official record, although there's some evidence to suggest DU munitions were initially researched and developed in the mid 60's. In any event they weren't actually used in war until 1973, and have been used fairly regularly since then.

 
At 27 September, 2006 18:43, Blogger jackhanyes said...

You certainly don't grasp the difference.

Why is that you feel the need to spin your lack of understanding onto someone else in a lame attempt to attack some that has a different view there your own?

Anyways, depleted uranium means less radioactive isotopes, not use up or empty out. The nasty stuff is still in there, just less of it.

Here, read this, for the third time:

Depleted uranium contains about 99.8% of U-238, 0.2% of U-235 and 0.01% of U-234. All isotopes are radioactive, but U-234, despite its small quantity, is the most worrying because of its short half life.

Do you know what alpha, beta, and gamma radiation is?

Alpha radiation can be block by paper.

Beta radiation can be block by clothes.

Gamma radiation is the nasty stuff that takes 15 feet of lead and concrete to contain.

U-234 produces gamma rays. While the content of it in DU is low, it's still there.

The main problem with DU is when it turns to dust. Let me explain. A DU round will "self sharpen" as it passes through a solid object as it burns at very high tempurates in excess of 6000F. A percentage of the round turns into a fine dust which is carried away by the wind and breath in by the civilian population.

This is where the statement "All isotopes are radioactive, but U-234, despite its small quantity, is the most worrying because of its short half life." comes in.

Now do you understand? The problem is that it's so much that it there, it's the fact that DU dust gets into the air and is breathed by the civilian population.

Of course, why would you care? It's on the other side of the world. The is only one problem. Cancer rates in the US has jumped in the recent years, just as predicted at the start of the iraq war.

I think this should be a concern for anyone who values their health, the health of their loved ones, and the health of our planet. Of course you must love to care, and most people lack love and fill the void with hate of themselves and/or others.

 
At 27 September, 2006 19:18, Blogger telescopemerc said...

U-234 produces gamma rays. While the content of it in DU is low, it's still there.

And there's more gamma sources just from standing in a field.

I think this should be a concern for anyone who values their health, the health of their loved ones, and the health of our planet. .

There are about a lots of other environmental concerns that should be concerned before we waste energy on a non-starter like DU.

Of course you must love to care, and most people lack love and fill the void with hate of themselves and/or others

No, we just realise that this is not one of the top million environmental concerns. But thanks for trying to poison the well.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home