Everyone has an agenda. That any of those associations really care
about public health is as big a myth as one can't be fat and healthy! (Or everyone is fat because of overeating). On the other hand, there is usually something in it for "preachers" of all kind, whether they be Rev Jerry F. or Marion Nestle/Michael Jacobson. Informing is one thing, nagging, moralizing and sermonizing indicate a need for control! I don't listen to ANY of them, whether they preach for profit or power!!!
"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there would still be time."
YouTube ? To me this tube looks like an MRI scanner...
Alexander Litvinenko's poisoning with Polonium 210 led to new series of articles on the presence of this radioactive component in cigarettes, including this interesting "Puffing on Polonium" by Professor Robert N. Proctor in The New York Times on December the 1st, 2006 (also in the International Herald Tribune*).
As early as in 1968, the American Tobacco Company "found that smokers inhale an average of about 0.04 picocuries of polonium 210 per cigarette".... which may now sound very spicy (even if Curie is involved), but means "Pack-and-a-half smokers are dosed to the tune of about 300 chest X-rays". So after all, YouTube's videos didn't kill the radio stars.
Talking about this spy's death, I think it could mean the invention of the "dirty murder" by Putin. Just like "dirty bombs" leave nasty traces compared to your usual no nonsensical "clean bomb", this Death of a former KGB Salesman represents a major disruption just a few weeks after the classic in your face shooting of journalist Anna Politkovskaya.
From Magnum .57 to Polonium 210...
______________________________________________________________________________________
Stephane MOT -
http://e-blogules.blogspot.com
Now I understand why Gunshine State's rulers were so eager to use their brand new black boxes... Amortization, amortization...
Thanks to Jeb and Katherine they definitely have strange ways of casting a ballot or a bullet* in Florida, and I hope Christine Jennings can fix it.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Stephane MOT ______________________________________________________________________________________
* remember shootfirstlaw ? (http://e-blogules.blogspot.com/2005/10/red-blogule-to-gunshine-state.html)
When I first heard Bush (and Australian PM, John Howard) dismiss the report out of hand as "not credible", simply on the grounds that it <em>couldn't</em> be true, surely, (because it didn't <em>feel</em> right?), I remembered the textbook on how to discredit a report and it was in the BBC-TV comedy, <em>Yes Minister</em>'s "The Greasy Pole" episode.
<a href="http://www.yes-minister.com/polterms.htm" target="blank">The strategy to suppress a document</a> was explained by Sir Humphrey:
<blockquote>- Stage One: You list reasons in terms of the public interest:
•Security considerations;
•Results could be misinterpreted;
•Better to wait for a wider and more detailed study over a longer timescale.
- Stage Two: Discredit the evidence you are not publishing (using press leaks):
•The evidence leaves some important questions unanswered (presumably the ones that were not asked);
•Much of the evidence in inconclusive;
•The figures are open to other interpretations;
•Certain findings are contradictory;
•Some of the main conclusions have been questioned (if not, then question them and then they have).
- Stage Three: You undermine the recommendations:
•Not really a basis for long-term decisions;
•Not enough information on which to base a valid assessment;
•Not really a need for a rethink of existing policies;
•Broadly speaking, it endorses current practice.
- Stage Four: Discredit the writer of the report (of course off the record):
•The writer is harbouring a grudge against the government;
•The writer is a publicity seeker;
•The writer used to be (or wants to be) a consultant for a multinational company;
•The writer is trying to get a knighthood, chairmanship, vice-chancellorship, etc. </blockquote>
It's not only that it couldn't be true "surely", but that it <em>mustn't</em> be true because what Prime Minister or President could live with themselves if it were proved they were responsible for the deaths of so many innocent civilians. The "unavoidable" casualties must be moderate for the action to be defensible as "collateral" and the numbers in the Lancet report were very immoderate indeed.
I <a href="http://www.valuesaustralia.com/blog/" target=blank">refer</a> to casualty numbers from time to time and even I understate the probable numbers because, frankly, I fear that readers will discount everything else I say because they think I am an exaggerator.
So I think Sheldon is right. There ought to be another survey done as soon as possible.
CMD Editors (if there are any)
Paul Moran was not employed by the Rendon Group at the time of the Haideri interview, nor was the Rendon Group involved with the Iraqi National Congress at any time after 1995.
At the time of the interview, the INC Information Collection Program was funded by the US Dept. of State, as has been investigated and reported on by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
I should know; I ran the program.
Francis Brooke
Everyone has an agenda. That any of those associations really care
about public health is as big a myth as one can't be fat and healthy! (Or everyone is fat because of overeating). On the other hand, there is usually something in it for "preachers" of all kind, whether they be Rev Jerry F. or Marion Nestle/Michael Jacobson. Informing is one thing, nagging, moralizing and sermonizing indicate a need for control! I don't listen to ANY of them, whether they preach for profit or power!!!
"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there would still be time."
YouTube ? To me this tube looks like an MRI scanner...
Alexander Litvinenko's poisoning with Polonium 210 led to new series of articles on the presence of this radioactive component in cigarettes, including this interesting "Puffing on Polonium" by Professor Robert N. Proctor in The New York Times on December the 1st, 2006 (also in the International Herald Tribune*).
As early as in 1968, the American Tobacco Company "found that smokers inhale an average of about 0.04 picocuries of polonium 210 per cigarette".... which may now sound very spicy (even if Curie is involved), but means "Pack-and-a-half smokers are dosed to the tune of about 300 chest X-rays". So after all, YouTube's videos didn't kill the radio stars.
Talking about this spy's death, I think it could mean the invention of the "dirty murder" by Putin. Just like "dirty bombs" leave nasty traces compared to your usual no nonsensical "clean bomb", this Death of a former KGB Salesman represents a major disruption just a few weeks after the classic in your face shooting of journalist Anna Politkovskaya.
From Magnum .57 to Polonium 210...
______________________________________________________________________________________
Stephane MOT -
http://e-blogules.blogspot.com
______________________________________________________________________________________
* on IHT : http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/12/01/opinion/edproctor.php
Pages