The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-26-2012, 11:11 AM   #251
broncocalijohn
Famer of Rings
 
broncocalijohn's Avatar
 
I said Do It!

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lake Forest, Orange County, Calif.
Posts: 22,413

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Simon Fletcher
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkemical View Post
Sorry man, it's the 'mentality' of the free market. If you don't want to compete, then stop b****ing about it. Is the goal of a company to pay workers less than they want, so you maintain high margins?

If you don't like it...start your own company and hire mexicans and compete that way.

"I'm not working for $10/hr less" - well, that's entitlement mentality right there.
I do own my own business and refuse to break the law on hiring by taking in illegals. I might be against Unions for the most part but I support them over illegal alien hiring anyday.

Where is the main sarcasm in that post, btw?
broncocalijohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2012, 11:20 AM   #252
alkemical
Guerrilla Ontologist
 
alkemical's Avatar
 
rorrim|mirror

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Future
Posts: 43,078

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Prima Materia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broncocalijohn View Post
I do own my own business and refuse to break the law on hiring by taking in illegals. I might be against Unions for the most part but I support them over illegal alien hiring anyday.

Where is the main sarcasm in that post, btw?

I've been in the IT sector for a while BCJ - and when you have IBM tell you that you're competing with wages in India...it hits you that the idea of "not working for less than $X" sort of goes out the window. If you believe in "the free market", but do not like to compete...well that's where it gets interesting with Americans and the cake/eat it dilemma.
alkemical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2012, 01:28 PM   #253
broncocalijohn
Famer of Rings
 
broncocalijohn's Avatar
 
I said Do It!

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lake Forest, Orange County, Calif.
Posts: 22,413

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Simon Fletcher
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkemical View Post
I've been in the IT sector for a while BCJ - and when you have IBM tell you that you're competing with wages in India...it hits you that the idea of "not working for less than $X" sort of goes out the window. If you believe in "the free market", but do not like to compete...well that's where it gets interesting with Americans and the cake/eat it dilemma.
I totally agree. You are either in Macro economy or go home with micro economy. We are global and we don't compete in many areas. I can't change the wage laws in other countries but we have a "go for the minimum" attitude in some business owners and then the unions want the "Give me as much as possible" wages.
broncocalijohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2012, 02:38 PM   #254
alkemical
Guerrilla Ontologist
 
alkemical's Avatar
 
rorrim|mirror

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Future
Posts: 43,078

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Prima Materia
Default

bingo. i've really been thinking about the subject of unions, public sector workers & capitalism:

in today's understanding in capitalism is: get as much as you can while you can. So, why the hate for gov't & union workers, being capitalists? If it's all about making $, the system is working. It's just that if you don't have 1% $, you aren't able to play. (serf)

I've worked for fed, state & fortune 1000 companies, as well as small startups. i even picked up dead rats, unloaded coal from coal cars, cut grass w/mexicans, day labor jobs.

Most unions don't even have labor (their constituents) as a concern: it's about the union, not the workers.

there is incompetence in gov't. there is ****ty greed in corporate.

but what we're lacking is common sense. not some stupid marketed idelogies whom promote and endorse failing solutions. but real solid solutions, based out of the concern for americans.

that's why i find this whole r vs d thing, and the whole 99% v 1% thing silly. everyone needs everyone, and we better figure out how to share, play nice...it'll make it much easier...and everyone will profit.

i know i'm off tangent, but i think we're closer on some topics. I really think we, as a nation need to grow the #uck up and figure it out.
alkemical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2012, 02:53 PM   #255
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,851
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkemical View Post
bingo. i've really been thinking about the subject of unions, public sector workers & capitalism:

in today's understanding in capitalism is: get as much as you can while you can. So, why the hate for gov't & union workers, being capitalists? If it's all about making $, the system is working. It's just that if you don't have 1% $, you aren't able to play. (serf)

I've worked for fed, state & fortune 1000 companies, as well as small startups. i even picked up dead rats, unloaded coal from coal cars, cut grass w/mexicans, day labor jobs.

Most unions don't even have labor (their constituents) as a concern: it's about the union, not the workers.

there is incompetence in gov't. there is ****ty greed in corporate.

but what we're lacking is common sense. not some stupid marketed idelogies whom promote and endorse failing solutions. but real solid solutions, based out of the concern for americans.

that's why i find this whole r vs d thing, and the whole 99% v 1% thing silly. everyone needs everyone, and we better figure out how to share, play nice...it'll make it much easier...and everyone will profit.

i know i'm off tangent, but i think we're closer on some topics. I really think we, as a nation need to grow the #uck up and figure it out.
Dude when I was about 25 I worked rebricking crematories. I doubt anyone here has done something as disgusting. The guy who runs the business hires all illegals now because they do it cheaper. He used to pay us about 20 bucks an hr, now he gets it for 10.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 11:57 AM   #256
mosca
grand pubah
 
mosca's Avatar
 
honest optimism

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,951

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Bubby Brister
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkemical View Post
I've been in the IT sector for a while BCJ - and when you have IBM tell you that you're competing with wages in India...it hits you that the idea of "not working for less than $X" sort of goes out the window. If you believe in "the free market", but do not like to compete...well that's where it gets interesting with Americans and the cake/eat it dilemma.
yup - the sooner one realizes that the economy is truly, truly global - the better off you will be. we are competing on a global scale with everyone - that is, unless you want to enter a market that is exclusively local - such as working a trade.
mosca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 12:01 PM   #257
mosca
grand pubah
 
mosca's Avatar
 
honest optimism

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,951

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Bubby Brister
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkemical View Post
I've worked for fed, state & fortune 1000 companies, as well as small startups. i even picked up dead rats, unloaded coal from coal cars, cut grass w/mexicans, day labor jobs.
i'm in nearly the same boat - and to be honest, the smaller the company you can work for, the better. the larger the organization, the more risk you face of just being ****ed over on a faceless level.

in this way, working at a landscaping service with mexicans is almost preferable to corporate america / political workplace bollsheat. people just treat you better, on a more one-on-one level.
mosca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 02:39 PM   #258
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,991

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default


http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...co?ft=1&f=1001
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 02:53 PM   #259
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

Violent Deaths in Mexico: Everything Is Not as it Seems



In recent months the debate about violence in Mexico has heated up significantly. Most news channels and newspapers have been giving a broad coverage on the facts of crime, which are usually focused on the issue of combating organized crime.

When it comes to human lives, it is always difficult to speak coldly about figures. But when we need to know what really is going on, in terms of crime, we can do nothing but refer to them.

The indicator that measures the violence in a country is the number of violent deaths per 100,000 people. It has the advantage of allowing comparisons among countries’ figures with different population sizes and it is highly reliable since in all countries it is necessary to produce death certificates to account for a death caused for any reason whatsoever. Therefore, in the case of violent deaths, there is no possibility that this indicator, unlike others, could observe significant levels of sub report given that violent deaths are registred by law in all countries.

According to available indicators, Mexico as a country has a general level of 13.3 violent deaths per 100.000 inhabitants, making it one of the safest countries in Latin America. Levels in Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela surprised us since they are at high as 16.8, 36.7 and 44.9 deaths per 100,000 population, respectively. Brazil and Venezuela are two and almost three times more violent than Mexico, respectively.

Moreover, if we compare this indicator with some U.S. cities we will see that our country is much better than we would expect to imagine. Comparing Mexico to Washington DC, New Orleans or Detroit the difference is very big, violence is a tangible problem in those cities. And without going too far, Mexico City has 9.8 violent deaths per 100,000 people, far below of other major cities like Houston, with 12.5, Phoenix, witn 12.6, and Los Angeles, with 17.1. It is true that there is a big problem in Ciudad Juarez and three other municipalities, which altogether sum up to more than 50% of violent deaths in Mexico. The rest of the 2,396 municipalities which form the country have relatively low violence levels.

According to figures provided by the Mexican Government, the battle against organized crime has caused 24,826 violent deaths in the last four years. As it is continuosly said, inside and outside the country, it has turned Mexico in an extremely dangerous country to live. A country that sadly some have said is in “civil war” and that is a “failed state.” This is definitely not true.

Although a number like 24,826 seems pretty high, it is time to put it in context. This number represents a little over 6,000 deaths per year on average. Each year, 20,000 people die in Mexico in road accidents and more than 50,000 because of diabetes. If we look at violent deaths to compare, in the U.S. 6,000 veterans commit suicide every year. So, during the same period, the same amount of persons have died as a consecuence of the U.S. post-war trauma, as the war on drugs in Mexico.

And while there is some exposure about this phenomenon in the U.S. media, it does not reach the same exposure as in Mexico. Here we are in a frenzy of daily information that the only thing that portaits is the presence of violence. Our conversations with family, friends, at office, in restaurants, are all about violence. We enroll ourselves and enroll others, including foreigners, in the idea that violence in Mexico has reached unsuspected levels. And there’s no evidence to support that. It is only our perception. We find ourselves filtering and searching all events and news, looking for those that speak of violence. And likewise, those are the news we speak about. It is a conversation, just a conversation.

This has affected the levels of tourism, investment and economic prospects for the country, and it is not supported by real figures, data and facts, it is only a perception. The good news is that we have the power to change that perception. It just takes to take a look at the data and facts.

Ultimately, the best way to combat violence is to leave behind the fear that generates in ourselves and do something that makes us feel safe. We have to realize that by enrolling ourselves and others in a violence conversation we end up being paralyzed. What would be possible if we focus on facts and data to make us and others see that we can be responsible for creating an environment to grow and prosper instead of creating a violent space with our everyday conversations? You have this power, do it for North America and in the end you will be doing something positive for yourself and for others.

Last edited by baja; 05-04-2012 at 03:15 PM..
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 03:26 PM   #260
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

This is an article printed in the Latitude 38
a sailors magazine from San Francisco.
Thanks for the permission to publizise it.
http://www.hacienda-sol.com/Latitude.html

Latitude 38

Cruise Notes:

When you hear cruisers say they feel safer in Mexico than they do in the United States,
you shouldn't roll your eyes. Despite the fear-mongering, fact-ignoring stories by the
New York Times, the L.A. Times, and CNN, there is good reason for cruisers to feel the
way they do. For yes, despite the highly-publicized narco violence in certain well-
known areas of Mexico, the rate of death by firearms is actually higher — often much
higher — in the United States.

For Mexico as a whole, the death by firearms rate for the first half of ‘10 was 5.36 per
100,000. For the United States as a whole, it was 10.2 per 100,000 — or nearly twice as
high! Not exactly common knowledge, is it? If the U.S. media truly want to warn
American travelers about going to dangerous places, where are their warnings about
the U.S. Virgin Islands, 'America's Caribbean Paradise'? In ‘07, the U.S. Virgin Islands'
death by firearm rate was 37.6 per 100,000 — more than six times as great as the rate in
Mexico. Let’s not kid ourselves, as there are some very dangerous places in Mexico,
too. The northern state of Chihuahua, where notoriously violent Ciudad Juarez is
located, is the worst of them all. But even it has a lower rate of death by firearms than
do the U.S. Virgins.

Going to cruise to Puerto Vallarta this winter? You have reason to feel safe. So far this
year, Jalisco, the Mexican state in which P.V. is located, has had a death by firearm rate
of just 2.92 per 100,000, which is about 40% of the rate in California, about 30% of the
rate in the southwestern United States, and about 8% of the rate in the U.S. Virgins.
Going to Baja Sur, there is absolutely nothing. Would anyone like to offer any theories
on why the U.S. press so greatly exaggerates the violent death story in Mexico, and so
under-reports it in the United States?


No matter if you’re in the States or in Mexico, the key to safety is staying away from the
well-known dangerous areas, not looking for drugs, and not flashing wealth. In other
words, don't be an idiot. To the best of our knowledge, the only narco violence along
the Pacific Coast of Mexico has been in the megalopolis of Acapulco, where there has
been some terrible narco-on-narco violence. Nonetheless, we wouldn't avoid Acapulco
any more than we'd avoid San Francisco or Oakland because of their drug violence.
We'd be particularly careful, to be sure, but we wouldn't avoid them. So as we're about
to cast off for another season in Mexico, from the bottom of our hearts, we believe that
we’re going to a safer place than the United States. And the facts support our belief.

Last edited by baja; 05-04-2012 at 03:28 PM..
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 03:49 PM   #261
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

Finally, someone who will tell it like it is. Mexico’s violence, although problematic for the country as a whole, is not a war-torn country, nor one that is suffering from non-stop violence. The jobs of journalists should be to report their findings in an objective manner. However, it seems that with some major-media corporations, objectiveness is far too often pushed aside and replaced with personal opinions and, possibly, agendas. According to many of the articles and news reports I have seen, this just may be the case with the media both north and south of the border being equally guilty.

Very few people hear that facts (mostly because they don’t get reported and because of it) even less people are able to separate fact from the reported news. It seems that only those who are deeply interested or invested in the subject of Mexico’s drug-related violence are the ones that are able to produce hard facts and back up their findings. Some of these people include respected researchers from the University of San Diego and Vanderbilt University. Not just people who have merely read, seen or heard something in the news, or on the streets, only to later post it on the internet.

So the question remains, what is being said and not heard and are what are some the hearty facts that we can we really say to perspective travelers? First, Mexico (like the United States) is a country made up of many different states, each one having its own characteristics, cultures, and people.

Some Facts that many, if not most people are unaware of?

‘The state with the lowest murder rate is Yucatán, the Gulf of Mexico state known for its beaches and Mayan ruins. Its murder rate of 2 per 100,000 was comparable to Wyoming and Montana. ‘Now there’s some food for thought. Haven’t heard any reports of tourist bulletins on “Big Sky Country lately”. Just maybe there is some sensationalism going on here. Huh? (check out the map which identifies the violence prone areas. Red is Bad, and Green is Good).

Next door to the state of Yucatan is the state of Quintana Roo, the state famous for all-inclusive resorts, the island of Cozumel and so much more. It is a state equally as safe as Yucatan. These are the places that the Cruise Ships visit, as well as families and couples flock to whenever they can get a few days away from the salt-mine grind back home routine!

‘The horrific violence that is jacking up the national death toll is largely confined to nine of Mexico’s thirty one states’. A fact that most news articles or news spots fail to mention altogether.

Also important to note; is that All of these states either border the United States (now there’s a surprise) or are situated in the extreme western region of the country. None of these states include the Yucatan Peninsula, a region that is roughly the size of Oklahoma.

“There exists a distinct disconnect between the statistics and the public’s perception.”

This statement in itself may be an indication that all of us should start using our critical thinking skills and always ask for facts before jumping to conclusions. It is also important to remember that those who are being targeted by the violence are those that have ties to the drug trade or unfortunately got caught in the crossfire in a region that they happened into the wrong place at the wrong time. A situation that could also very easily present itself near where I live (like say) in downtown Phoenix Arizona. While we don’t hear or read about travelers advisories, there are places you won’t catch me out in at nighttime. A simple but unfortunate fact that I am sure exists in almost all major cities and very likely within close proximity to most everyone who happens to read this article. Sad, but I suspect true.

Without rattling off a bunch of statistics, I have been living in greater Phoenix metropolitan area for nearly 10 years and I am connected in a large way to the Travel Industry, and see that this scare frenzy the media has promulgated on the American readers is not being accurately portrayed and I finally feel the need to speak up.

I moved from the East coast to within four hours of the Mexican border, and as many know Arizona has been quite the hot bed of negative sentiment towards Mexicans, and most all things south of the border of late. I have gone to Mexico and will continue to go to Mexico. I feel Mexico is just as safe now as it was then, yet everyone on the Northern side of the border seems to be in an uproar about whether vacationing in Mexico is safe or not.

While browsing several social media boards and venues lately, I couldn’t help but notice the preponderance that one question was asked (in one form or another) which was “Is it safe to travel to Mexico? I keep hearing terrible things on the news.” While plenty of horrendous things occur here in our own country that manage to get onto our news. Interestingly enough, they don’t include them on the news in Cancun and officials don’t discourage Mexicans from visiting the United States.(Except for warnings about getting “profiled” if you travel to Arizona). However, when something happens in Mexico it seems to go viral and travelers are warned, and in some cases just assume, that all travel to Mexico is dangerous. Would you consider denying your family a visit to Disney World in Orlando, simply because there is danger and violence in certain parts of South Miami? Of course you wouldn’t.

To help put this issue into proper perspective, I would like to offer an opinion that was recently expressed from a very well-respected Cancun resident and fellow blogger Kelly McLaughlin (Cancun Canuck) who is a transplant from Canada.

“So, is Cancun safe for tourists? Yes. Crime happens here, sure, pick pockets, thefts from hotel rooms, etc., etc., but violent crime against tourists, no. The type of crime that happens here occurs in every city around the world, tourist attraction or not. Use your common sense and street smarts and you’ll be fine. I would venture to say that Cancun is safer than most big cities around the world. I don’t feel any different here than I did in Toronto or New York or Los Angeles. In fact, I probably feel safer. I am far from naive, I read the local and national Mexican papers daily so I know exactly what is going on, but it does not fill me with fear. I don’t associate with the bad guys, nor do I try to impede what they are doing, I don’t have any money nor do I involve myself with dangerous activities. I live my life the same way I did in Toronto, eyes open, head up and aware of my surroundings. If I felt that tourists were in any way in danger, I would shout it from the rooftops. I have no interest in lying about this, people’s safety is of far greater concern to me than the economy of the city of Cancun. If I felt that Cancun was THAT dangerous, I certainly wouldn’t continue to live here with my small child.”

We should all try to analyze what we read in the paper and see on the news, not just take it all in as absolute truth. Cancun, the Riviera Maya, Playa del Carmen and most of the other popular vacation destinations in Mexico are safe for tourists. Maybe even safer there, than you are in your hometown. I truly hope that this has helped to put some perspective on the issues. Hope to see you on the white sand beach in Cancun soon!

One Mexican City that has become a travel media frenzie of late is Mazatlan. This city has been the recent focus of departure by most all of the major cruise lines which cruise the Mexican Riviera. But is this city’s violence really tourist related, or like Miami Florida is prone to drug and gang related violence. Be sure to see my Mexican Travel Facts update (see post here) which also includes a video by some local residents who are speaking out, about the media coverage and their city. Another resource to view has some facts about Drug Related Violence and its impact on Mexican Travel here is the link http://wp.me/p1foVW-JN
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 04:28 PM   #262
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,991

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

The numbers are meaningless. It's the horror that counts. The methodology. You know why I think the Anastazi built those cliff dwellings? To hide from roving bands of Aztec cannibals, the leftover renegades of a dead empire. And still, the Aztec sensibility lives in Mexico. It's one thing to die by a bullet in an American ghetto. Quite another to be placed in an oil drum and burned alive. Or sliced into ribbons and then hung from a bridge. Or decapitated. I can't think of another country, outside of a few places in Africa, that engages is such primitive butchery.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 05:10 PM   #263
Dr. Broncenstein
Ring of Famer
 
Dr. Broncenstein's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sterile Fields
Posts: 13,635

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Trey Gowdy
Default

Popcorn
Dr. Broncenstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 05:41 PM   #264
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
The numbers are meaningless. It's the horror that counts. The methodology. You know why I think the Anastazi built those cliff dwellings? To hide from roving bands of Aztec cannibals, the leftover renegades of a dead empire. And still, the Aztec sensibility lives in Mexico. It's one thing to die by a bullet in an American ghetto. Quite another to be placed in an oil drum and burned alive. Or sliced into ribbons and then hung from a bridge. Or decapitated. I can't think of another country, outside of a few places in Africa, that engages is such primitive butchery.
Of course it's horrible it's a war. Here's one you might be familiar with;

Horror Of US Depleted
Uranium In Iraq Threatens World
American Use Of DU is "A crime against humanity which may, in
the eyes of historians, rank with the worst atrocities of all time."
US Iraq Military Vets "are on DU death row, waiting to die."
By James Denver
4-29-5

"I'm horrified. The people out there - the Iraqis, the media and the troops - risk the most appalling ill health. And the radiation from depleted uranium can travel literally anywhere. It's going to destroy the lives of thousands of children, all over the world. We all know how far radiation can travel. Radiation from Chernobyl reached Wales and in Britain you sometimes get red dust from the Sahara on your car."

The speaker is not some alarmist doom-sayer. He is Dr. Chris Busby, the British radiation expert, Fellow of the University of Liverpool in the Faculty of Medicine and UK representative on the European Committee on Radiation Risk, talking about the best-kept secret of this war: the fact that, by illegally using hundreds of tons of depleted uranium (DU) against Iraq, Britain and America have gravely endangered not only the Iraqis but the whole world.

For these weapons have released deadly, carcinogenic and mutagenic, radioactive particles in such abundance that-whipped up by sandstorms and carried on trade winds - there is no corner of the globe they cannot penetrate-including Britain. For the wind has no boundaries and time is on their side: the radioactivity persists for over 4,500,000,000 years and can cause cancer, leukemia, brain damage, kidney failure, and extreme birth defects - killing millions of every age for centuries to come. A crime against humanity which may, in the eyes of historians, rank with the worst atrocities of all time.

These weapons have released deadly, carcinogenic and mutagenic, radioactive particles in such abundance that there is no corner of the globe they cannot penetrate - including Britain. Yet, officially, no crime has been committed. For this story is a dirty story in which the facts have been concealed from those who needed them most. It is also a story we need to know if the people of Iraq are to get the medical care they desperately need, and if our troops, returning from Iraq, are not to suffer as terribly as the veterans of other conflicts in which depleted uranium was used.

A Dirty Tyson

'Depleted' uranium is in many ways a misnomer. For 'depleted' sounds weak. The only weak thing about depleted uranium is its price. It is dirt cheap, toxic, waste from nuclear power plants and bomb production. However, uranium is one of earth's heaviest elements and DU packs a Tyson's punch, smashing through tanks, buildings and bunkers with equal ease, spontaneously catching fire as it does so, and burning people alive. 'Crispy critters' is what US servicemen call those unfortunate enough to be close. And, when John Pilger encountered children killed at a greater distance he wrote: "The children's skin had folded back, like parchment, revealing veins and burnt flesh that seeped blood, while the eyes, intact, stared straight ahead. I vomited." (Daily Mirror)

The millions of radioactive uranium oxide particles released when it burns can kill just as surely, but far more terribly. They can even be so tiny they pass through a gas mask, making protection against them impossible. Yet, small is not beautiful. For these invisible killers indiscriminately attack men, women, children and even babies in the womb-and do the gravest harm of all to children and unborn babies.

A Terrible Legacy

Doctors in Iraq have estimated that birth defects have increased by 2-6 times, and 3-12 times as many children have developed cancer and leukaemia since 1991. Moreover, a report published in The Lancet in 1998 said that as many as 500 children a day are dying from these sequels to war and sanctions and that the death rate for Iraqi children under 5 years of age increased from 23 per 1000 in 1989 to 166 per thousand in 1993. Overall, cases of lymphoblastic leukemia more than quadrupled with other cancers also increasing 'at an alarming rate'. In men, lung, bladder, bronchus, skin, and stomach cancers showed the highest increase. In women, the highest increases were in breast and bladder cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.1

On hearing that DU had been used in the Gulf in 1991, the UK Atomic Energy Authority sent the Ministry of Defense a special report on the potential damage to health and the environment. It said that it could cause half a million additional cancer deaths in Iraq over 10 years. In that war the authorities only admitted to using 320 tons of DU-although the Dutch charity LAKA estimates the true figure is closer to 800 tons. Many times that may have been spread across Iraq by this year's war. The devastating damage all this DU will do to the health and fertility of the people of Iraq now, and for generations to come, is beyond imagining.

The radioactivity persists for over 4,500,000,000 years killing millions of every age for centuries to come. This is a crime against humanity which may rank with the worst atrocities of all time.

We must also count the numberless thousands of miscarried babies. Nobody knows how many Iraqis have died in the womb since DU contaminated their world. But it is suggested that troops who were only exposed to DU for the brief period of the war were still excreting uranium in their semen 8 years later and some had 100 times the so-called 'safe limit' of uranium in their urine. The lack of government interest in the plight of veterans of the 1991 war is reflected in a lack of academic research on the impact of DU but informal research has found a high incidence of birth defects in their children and that the wives of men who served in Iraq have three times more miscarriages than the wives of servicemen who did not go there.

Since DU darkened the land Iraq has seen birth defects which would break a heart of stone: babies with terribly foreshortened limbs, with their intestines outside their bodies, with huge bulging tumors where their eyes should be, or with a single eye-like Cyclops, or without eyes, or without limbs, and even without heads. Significantly, some of the defects are almost unknown outside textbooks showing the babies born near A-bomb test sites in the Pacific.

Doctors report that many women no longer say 'Is it a girl or a boy?' but simply, 'Is it normal, doctor?' Moreover this terrible legacy will not end. The genes of their parents may have been damaged for ever, and the damaging DU dust is ever-present.

Blue on Blue

What the governments of America and Britain have done to the people of Iraq they have also done to their own soldiers, in both wars. And they have done it knowingly. For the battlefields have been thick with DU and soldiers have had to enter areas heavily contaminated by bombing. Moreover, their bodies have not only been assaulted by DU but also by a vaccination regime which violated normal protocols, experimental vaccines, nerve agent pills, and organophosphate pesticides in their tents. Yet, though the hazards of DU were known, British and American troops were not warned of its dangers. Nor were they given thorough medical checks on their return-even though identifying it quickly might have made it possible to remove some of it from their body. Then, when a growing number became seriously ill, and should have been sent to top experts in radiation damage and neurotoxins, many were sent to a psychiatrist.

Over 200,000 US troops who returned from the 1991 war are now invalided out with ailments officially attributed to service in Iraq-that's 1 in 3. In contrast, the British government's failure to fully assess the health of returning troops, or to monitor their health, means no one even knows how many have died or become gravely ill since their return. However, Gulf veterans' associations say that, of 40,000 or so fighting fit men and women who saw active service, at least 572 have died prematurely since coming home and 5000 may be ill. An alarming number are thought to have taken their own lives, unable to bear the torment of the innumerable ailments which have combined to take away their career, their sexuality, their ability to have normal children, and even their ability to breathe or walk normally. As one veteran puts it, they are 'on DU death row, waiting to die'.

Whatever other factors there may be, some of their illnesses are strikingly similar to those of Iraqis exposed to DU dust. For example, soldiers have also fathered children without eyes. And, in a group of eight servicemen whose babies lack eyes seven are known to have been directly exposed to DU dust.

They too have fathered children with stunted arms, and rare abnormalities classically associated with radiation damage. They too seem prone to cancer and leukemia. Tellingly, so are EU soldiers who served as peacekeepers in the Balkans, where DU was also used. Indeed their leukemia rate has been so high that several EU governments have protested at the use of DU.

The Vital Evidence

Despite all that evidence of the harm done by DU, governments on both sides of the Atlantic have repeatedly claimed that as it emits only 'low level' radiation DU is harmless. Award-winning scientist, Dr. Rosalie Bertell who has led UN medical commissions, has studied 'low-level' radiation for 30 years. 2 She has found that uranium oxide particles have more than enough power to harm cells, and describes their pulses of radiation as hitting surrounding cells 'like flashes of lightning' again and again in a single second.2 Like many scientists worldwide who have studied this type of radiation, she has found that such 'lightning strikes' can damage DNA and cause cell mutations which lead to cancer.

Moreover, these particles can be taken up by body fluids and travel through the body, damaging more than one organ. To compound all that, Dr. Bertell has found that this particular type of radiation can cause the body's communication systems to break down, leading to malfunctions in many vital organs of the body and to many medical problems. A striking fact, since many veterans of the first Gulf war suffer from innumerable, seemingly unrelated, ailments.

In addition, recent research by Eric Wright, Professor of Experimental Haematology at Dundee University, and others, have shown two ways in which such radiation can do far more damage than has been thought. The first is that a cell which seems unharmed by radiation can produce cells with diverse mutations several cell generations later. (And mutations are at the root of cancer and birth defects.) This 'radiation-induced genomic instability' is compounded by 'the bystander effect' by which cells mutate in unison with others which have been damaged by radiation-rather as birds swoop and turn in unison. Put together, these two mechanisms can greatly increase the damage done by a single source of radiation, such as a DU particle. Moreover, it is now clear that there are marked genetic differences in the way individuals respond to radiation-with some being far more likely to develop cancer than others. So the fact that some veterans of the first Gulf war seem relatively unharmed by their exposure to DU in no way proves that DU did not damage others.

The Price of Truth

That the evidence from Iraq and from our troops, and the research findings of such experts, have been ignored may be no accident. A US report, leaked in late 1995, allegedly says, 'The potential for health effects from DU exposure is real; however it must be viewed in perspective... the financial implications of long-term disability payments and healthcare costs would be excessive.'3

Clearly, with hundreds of thousands gravely ill in Iraq and at least a quarter of a million UK and US troops seriously ill, huge disability claims might be made not only against the governments of Britain and America if the harm done by DU were acknowledged. There might also be huge claims against companies making DU weapons and some of their directors are said to be extremely close to the White House. How close they are to Downing Street is a matter for speculation, but arms sales makes a considerable contribution to British trade. So the massive whitewashing of DU over the past 12 years, and the way that governments have failed to test returning troops, seemed to disbelieve them, and washed their hands of them, may be purely to save money.

The possibility that financial considerations have led the governments of Britain and America to cynically avoid taking responsibility for the harm they have done not only to the people of Iraq but to their own troops may seem outlandish. Yet DU weapons weren't used by the other side and no other explanation fits the evidence. For, in the days before Britain and America first used DU in war its hazards were no secret.4 One American study in 1990 said DU was 'linked to cancer when exposures are internal, [and to] chemical toxicity-causing kidney damage'. While another openly warned that exposure to these particles under battlefield conditions could lead to cancers of the lung and bone, kidney damage, non-malignant lung disease, neuro-cognitive disorders, chromosomal damage and birth defects.5

A Culture of Denial

In 1996 and 1997 UN Human Rights Tribunals condemned DU weapons for illegally breaking the Geneva Convention and classed them as 'weapons of mass destruction' 'incompatible with international humanitarian and human rights law'. Since then, following leukemia in European peacekeeping troops in the Balkans and Afghanistan (where DU was also used), the EU has twice called for DU weapons to be banned.

Yet, far from banning DU, America and Britain stepped up their denials of the harm from this radioactive dust as more and more troops from the first Gulf war and from action and peacekeeping in the Balkans and Afghanistan have become seriously ill. This is no coincidence. In 1997, while citing experiments, by others, in which 84 percent of dogs exposed to inhaled uranium died of cancer of the lungs, Dr. Asaf Durakovic, then Professor of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine at Georgetown University in Washington was quoted as saying, 'The [US government's] Veterans Administration asked me to lie about the risks of incorporating depleted uranium in the human body.' He concluded, 'uranium does cause cancer, uranium does cause mutation, and uranium does kill. If we continue with the irresponsible contamination of the biosphere, and denial of the fact that human life is endangered by the deadly isotope uranium, then we are doing disservice to ourselves, disservice to the truth, disservice to God and to all generations who follow.' Not what the authorities wanted to hear and his research was suddenly blocked.

During 12 years of ever-growing British whitewash the authorities have abolished military hospitals, where there could have been specialized research on the effects of DU and where expertise in treating DU victims could have built up. And, not content with the insult of suggesting the gravely disabling symptoms of Gulf veterans are imaginary they have refused full pensions to many. For, despite all the evidence to the contrary, the current House of Commons briefing paper on DU hazards says 'it is judged that any radiation effects from possible exposures are extremely unlikely to be a contributory factor to the illnesses currently being experienced by some Gulf war veterans.' Note how over a quarter of a million sick and dying US and UK vets are called 'some'.

The Way Ahead

Britain and America not only used DU in this year's Iraq war, they dramatically increased its use-from a minimum of 320 tons in the previous war to at minimum of 1500 tons in this one. And this time the use of DU wasn't limited to anti-tank weapons-as it had largely been in the previous Gulf war-but was extended to the guided missiles, large bunker busters and big 2000-pound bombs used in Iraq's cities. This means that Iraq's cities have been blanketed in lethal particles-any one of which can cause cancer or deform a child. In addition, the use of DU in huge bombs which throw the deadly particles higher and wider in huge plumes of smoke means that billions of deadly particles have been carried high into the air-again and again and again as the bombs rained down-ready to be swept worldwide by the winds.

The Royal Society has suggested the solution is massive decontamination in Iraq. That could only scratch the surface. For decontamination is hugely expensive and, though it may reduce the risks in some of the worst areas, it cannot fully remove them. For DU is too widespread on land and water. How do you clean up every nook and cranny of a city the size of Baghdad? How can they decontaminate a whole country in which microscopic particles, which cannot be detected with a normal geiger counter, are spread from border to border? And how can they clean up all the countries downwind of Iraq-and, indeed, the world?

So there are only two things we can do to mitigate this crime against humanity. The first is to provide the best possible medical care for the people of Iraq, for our returning troops and for those who served in the last Gulf war and, through that, minimize their suffering. The second is to relegate war, and the production and sale of weapons, to the scrap heap of history-along with slavery and genocide. Then, and only then, will this crime against humanity be expunged, and the tragic deaths from this war truly bring freedom to the people of Iraq, and of the world.

References

1. The Lancet volume 351, issue 9103, 28 February 1998.

2. Rosalie Bertell's book Planet Earth the Latest Weapon of War was reviewed in Caduceus issue 51, page 28.

3. http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_tabl1
. htm#TAB L_Research Report Summaries

4. http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/...20117moret.htm
The secret official memorandum to Brigadier General L.R.Groves from Drs Conant, Compton and Urey of War Department Manhattan district dated October 1943 is available at the website http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/L...oret-Gen-Grove s21feb03.htm

5. http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_iitab11.
htm#tab L_research report summaries



The Low Level Radiation Campaign hopes to be able to arrange a limited number of private urine tests for those returning from the latest Gulf war. It can be contacted at: The Knoll, Montpelier Park, Llandrindod Wells, LD1 5LW. 01597 824771. Web: www.llrc.org

James Denver writes and broadcasts internationally on science and technology.
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 05:45 PM   #265
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

Incase that is too long a read for ya here's some pictures;

http://stgvisie.home.xs4all.nl/VISIE...formities.html
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 06:25 PM   #266
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

People do bad shiit to each other no matter where they are from.

Mexico does not have a lock on evil

Does it somehow make you feel better/safer that people are beheading people in Mexico?

The world is a pretty ugly place and your back yard is not exempt no matter where your back yard is.

The world is in need of a change I hope and believe that change is coming in the form of a shift in human Spirit. Contrary to the Mecks around here that like to accuse of being a doomsdayer, I believe an awakening is coming in 2012. Not the end of the world just the end of the horrid way we treat our fellow man. That is my prayer anyway.

At any rate this thread serves no purpose and I wish I had never created it. Our problems are with our species not with where they live...

Last edited by baja; 05-04-2012 at 06:29 PM..
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 11:20 PM   #267
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,851
Default

Hard to compare crime stats from the two countries because mexico has shoddy record keeping and many crimes don't get reported. I wouldn't feel safe jumping in a car and driving all the way through Mexico. I think most tourists would fee safe doing the same thing in America. Just stay out of Detroit.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 11:25 PM   #268
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,851
Default

Just think if FDR's heavy backing of Camacho i think his name was? in the 1940 Mexican election had not worked? The alternative was a fascist. With ww2 starting it could have led to war with mexico on the notion they were now part of the fascist movement. Hell they would be a US territory right now.

In any event the better Mexico could do now they better off we will be. No reason for them not to have a great country.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 10:36 AM   #269
Dr. Broncenstein
Ring of Famer
 
Dr. Broncenstein's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sterile Fields
Posts: 13,635

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Trey Gowdy
Default

Hey amigos, come down to Mexico and check out our newest collection of human pinatas!!!

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=893&sid=2852855
Dr. Broncenstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 12:25 PM   #270
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Broncenstein View Post
Hey amigos, come down to Mexico and check out our newest collection of human pinatas!!!

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=893&sid=2852855
Yep gang dirt bags killing other gang dirt bags makes an entire country some kind of evil place while also destroying the all important tourist trade of an entire country of mostly hard working good people. I guess that's collateral damage of war right. Tell me doctor does this tragedy somehow make you feel superior or safe. I thought doctors were empathetic, you know the reason for your calling. Just what are you trying to prove anyway?

Ever consider if Americans weren't a bunch of drug addicts there would be no drug wars in Mexico or any other place for that matter. Who created the problem? Couldn't be the failing American society's lust for drugs could it?

You are not exempt! This is a collective failure.

Last edited by baja; 05-05-2012 at 12:28 PM..
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 12:34 PM   #271
mosca
grand pubah
 
mosca's Avatar
 
honest optimism

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,951

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Bubby Brister
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baja View Post
You are not exempt! This is a collective failure.
Exactly - this includes everyone on the North American continent. I wish we could just accept the governmental line between the US and Mexico at the Rio Grande, but, fact is - there are just too many ties... between the ordinary citizens and families and also the drug cartels and actual agencies of the US government.

We are ALL responsible for what happens in terms of US - Mexico relations. Lets stop pretending that Mexico is "over there" because I personally know -plenty- of Mexicans who live here that are more respectable than any American. We are all human beings in this struggle. We either band together to do what needs to be done or we allow ourselves to be divided into arbitrary groups by those who would profit from our division.
mosca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 01:01 PM   #272
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mosca View Post
Exactly - this includes everyone on the North American continent. I wish we could just accept the governmental line between the US and Mexico at the Rio Grande, but, fact is - there are just too many ties... between the ordinary citizens and families and also the drug cartels and actual agencies of the US government.

We are ALL responsible for what happens in terms of US - Mexico relations. Lets stop pretending that Mexico is "over there" because I personally know -plenty- of Mexicans who live here that are more respectable than any American. We are all human beings in this struggle. We either band together to do what needs to be done or we allow ourselves to be divided into arbitrary groups by those who would profit from our division.
Finally, someone who gets it.

Thank you for your post mosca.

That's Fly for you white boys that think one language covers it.
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 01:21 PM   #273
Dr. Broncenstein
Ring of Famer
 
Dr. Broncenstein's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sterile Fields
Posts: 13,635

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Trey Gowdy
Default

See thread title. No, it's not. Guess how I know.
Dr. Broncenstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 01:33 PM   #274
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,013

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Broncenstein View Post
See thread title. No, it's not. Guess how I know.
I see what you did here, yes I do.

Oh and yes it is safer if you read the statistics I posted a few posts before your repost of Ro's post for the added sensationalism effect.

Last edited by baja; 05-05-2012 at 01:39 PM..
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 06:22 AM   #275
Dr. Broncenstein
Ring of Famer
 
Dr. Broncenstein's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sterile Fields
Posts: 13,635

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Trey Gowdy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baja View Post
I see what you did here, yes I do.

Oh and yes it is safer if you read the statistics I posted a few posts before your repost of Ro's post for the added sensationalism effect.
Statistics? Lol... Show me one example of gangs killing mayors and police chiefs in the US.
Dr. Broncenstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:42 PM.


Denver Broncos