9/11 victims deserved their fate

[Odin]

This guy is a jack@ss.

The amout of radiation from DU is to small to be much of a danger, I bet the Carbon-14 and potassium-40 in our bodies is more damading than DU. Uranium is only toxic if breathed in or ingested, not because of the radioactivity, but because it is a heavy metal, making it no diferent than lead in that respect.

[laurentius]

Originally posted by DaShi
Cite, please. Then prove that DU is the direct cause, please.

I didnt find this on the internet so I'm not sure I can give you one. Reading through some medical journals, particularly German ones will give you the proof.

There is also a shocking documentary made about the findings of Dr. Siegwart-Horst Günther and his team in Iraq, Bosnia and Kosovo.

http://www.traprockpeace.org/depleted_uranium_iraq.html

Here is another link where you might find the proof your government as well as German and Canadian ones denie from you.

http://www.umrc.net/

This page is a must read to all you who dont believe DU is dangerous

http://www.umrc.net/facts_and_fictions.aspx

[laurentius]

Originally posted by Cruddy
I'm not saying DU ammunition is a totallysafe weapon of war but;

1) It's only toxic when powderized, and then it tends to hang around the target (high density = short distance travalled). Yes, battlefields should be (and these days, are) sanitized as soon as possible to stop the locals climbing around old hulks and getting contaminated.

2) Everybody uses it, not just the US. Why not go haranuge some Russians about Chechnya?

1) Fiction: DU weapons dust soon dissipates and does not travel far from the explosion site

Fact: The smaller the particles of DU, the greater the danger. Particles less than 5 microns can be inhaled and deposited in the lungs where they can remain for years. A study found DU particles 42 km away from the source. However, there is reason to suspect that DU particles can travel many times that distance (see L. Dietz: "Contamination of Persian Gulf War Veterans and others by Depleted Uranium").

Also the battlefields are usually NOT sanitized in anyway in Iraq for example go around Baghdad with a geiger-meter and you'll sees ome astonishing figures.

2) This is not about Russia. They have their own threads.

[laurentius]

Originally posted by Odin
This guy is a jack@ss.

The amout of radiation from DU is to small to be much of a danger, I bet the Carbon-14 and potassium-40 in our bodies is more damading than DU. Uranium is only toxic if breathed in or ingested, not because of the radioactivity, but because it is a heavy metal, making it no diferent than lead in that respect.

Fiction: Uranium usage and levels are too low to be a concern or merit investigation.

Fact: It is estimated that 300 - 800 metric tons of DU were deposited in the battlefield in Iraq and Kuwait in 1991. Dr. Doug Rokke (DU expert and former US army physicist) estimated that 120 to 480 million grams of DU would be aerosolized if 40% of the DU were burnt up.

Compare these numbers to the allowable limits for radiation releases in the US. The National Lead Industry Plant in Colonie, NY was closed down for violating a New York state court order which limited the amount of radiation released to 387 gram of DU metal per month. The plant closed down in February of 1980 for exceeding this limit and closed permanently in 1983. The area has been decontaminated. The engineering report states that the soil from 53 of the 56 nearby properties was beyond the radiation limits and had to be removed to a low-level radiation storage site. The cost was over 100 million USD. The cleanup cost was 1000 USD per cubic meter.

DU in the US must be processed in a facility that is licensed to handle radioactive material. The military has rules to handle radioactive emissions when they store or handle radioactive rounds. However, there are no controls whatsoever and no rules for cleaning up after a cannon round is fired and the danger is far greater when the Uranium becomes aerosolized.

More than 100,000 DU shells were fired during the Gulf War. More than 30,000 rounds were fired by NATO forces during the 1999 Kosovo conflict, most of them by US tank-busting A10 ground support crafts. Around 10,000 rounds were fired in operations around Sarajevo, in the latter stages of allied operations in Bosnia.

Fiction: There are no serious effects from low-level exposure to Uranium

Fact: The effects of internal contamination with Uranium have been well documented. For a review of 200 years of scientific literature on the medical effects of internal contamination with Uranium see Dr. Durakovic's review paper "Medical Effects of Internal Contamination with Uranium" CMJ 1999, Vol 40, No 1.

Serious long-term effects include: Compromised immune system, metabolic, respiratory and renal diseases, tumours, leukemia, and cancer.

A 1998 study conducted by Dr. Livengood showed that DU contamination transforms normal bone cells into tumorous ones.

Fiction: Uranium is ubiquitous in nature and we are exposed daily. There is no cause for concern.

Fact: Uranium is present in nature in trace amounts, about 3 parts per million (ppm) by weight. It takes about 5 tonnes of dry soil or rock to produce 1 teaspoon of what is called ”natural uranium”. It is “natural” in that is has the isotopic proportions that exist in nature. However, what is “unnatural” is when uranium is presented in concentrated quantities. In these concentrations of radioactivity its effect on human health and the environment become dangerous.

When uranium is exposed to the natural chemical action of the environment it can become solublized and can then migrate into the water supply. Uncontained uranium waste is a problem when left in the open as it oxidizes. This is the case all over the world in nuclear waste repositories.

Uranium is most dangerous when it burns and is aerosolized as happens when it is used in weapons.

Fiction: DU is “depleted” in the amount of U235 and is therefore less radioactive than the uranium in our natural environment.

Fact: The term “depleted uranium" is a misnomer. DU is “depleted” only in the isotopes U234 and U235 which constitute less that 1% of the total uranium. The fact is that both “depleted” uranium and “natural” Uranium are over 99% composed of uranium-238. Depleted uranium is almost as highly concentrated as pure uranium and may contain plutonium in trace amounts.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by laurentius



Educate yourself about this, then come back. The leukemia cases alone are 8 times as high now in Baghdad than before 2003. When mother used to ask the doctors "Is it he or she" now they as "Is it normal or abnormal" These genetic mutations will pass to the next generations causing cancer, miscarriage and deformations for many many many years to come. Tens of millions of people will die.

Do you have any idea how long a 8x leukemia rate would have to run to kill even 10m people in a country of 26m?

Now, it's going to fall off steeply, since the vast majority of leukemia-inducing mutations aren't passed on to the next generation.

[Odin]

Originally posted by laurentius

Fact: The smaller the particles of DU, the greater the danger. Particles less than 5 microns can be inhaled and deposited in the lungs where they can remain for years. A study found DU particles 42 km away from the source. However, there is reason to suspect that DU particles can travel many times that distance (see L. Dietz: "Contamination of Persian Gulf War Veterans and others by Depleted Uranium").

any particulate matter has the potential to be dangerous, but I don't see everyone wearing dust masks.

[DaShi]

Thank you laurentius, I found those links very enlightening. Still not entirely convinced, but also I'm not about to just dismiss it.

[Sava]

It's debateable whether or not America deserved to be attacked for it's actions regarding foreign policy... but the people who died on 9-11 DID NOT deserve to die. They were innocent people minding their own business.

[laurentius]

Last Conformist:

I'm not talking about IOraq alone. This concernes the 52 000 former British soldiers suffering from Gulf War Syndrome as well as about 100 000 US and Canadian ones. Then there are the civilians in BOsnia and Kosovo. In all these cases the genetic mutations pass on to the next generation, over time these people and their offspring might contaminate tens of millions of people by having chidren with them. And then there is the cumulative infant death toll in Iraq for example where some women have given birth to up to three deformed babies wich have all died soon, their husbands have divorced them blaming them for this.

This directly kills tens of million in due time and contaminates the gene pools for ages to come.

[Dis]

Re: 9/11 victims deserved their fate

Originally posted by DinoDoc

CU prof's essay sparks dispute
Ward Churchill says 9/11 victims were not innocent people

By John C. Ensslin, Rocky Mountain News
January 27, 2005

A University of Colorado professor has sparked controversy in New York over an essay he wrote that maintains that people killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks were not innocent victims.

Students and faculty members at Hamilton College in Clinton, N.Y., have been protesting a speaking appearance on Feb. 3 by Ward L. Churchill, chairman of the CU Ethnic Studies Department.

They are upset over an essay Churchill wrote titled, "Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens."

The essay takes its title from a remark that black activist Malcolm X made in the wake of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Malcolm X created controversy when he said Kennedy's murder was a case of "chickens coming home to roost."

Churchill's essay argues that the Sept. 11 attacks were in retaliation for the Iraqi children killed in a 1991 U.S. bombing raid and by economic sanctions imposed on Iraq by the United Nations following the Persian Gulf War.

The essay contends the hijackers who crashed airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11 were "combat teams," not terrorists.

It states: "The most that can honestly be said of those involved on Sept. 11 is that they finally responded in kind to some of what this country has dispensed to their people as a matter of course."

The essay maintains that the people killed inside the Pentagon were "military targets."

"As for those in the World Trade Center," the essay said, "well, really, let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break."

The essay goes on to describe the victims as "little Eichmanns," referring to Adolph Eichmann, who executed Adolph Hitler's plan to exterminate Jews during World War II.

Churchill said he was not especially surprised at the controversy at Hamilton, but he also defended the opinions contained in his essay.

"When you kill 500,000 children in order to impose your will on other countries, then you shouldn't be surprised when somebody responds in kind," Churchill said.

"If it's not comfortable, that's the point. It's not comfortable for the people on the other side, either."

The attacks on Sept. 11, he said, were "a natural and inevitable consequence of what happens as a result of business as usual in the United States. Wake up."

A longtime activist with the American Indian Movement, Churchill was one of eight defendants acquitted last week in Denver County Court on charges of disrupting Denver's Columbus Day parade.

His pending speech at Hamilton has drawn criticism from professors and students, including Matt Coppo, a sophomore whose father died in the World Trade Center attacks.

"His views are completely hurtful to the families of 3,000 people," Coppo said.

A spokesman for Hamilton College released a statement noting that Hamilton is committed to "the free exchange of ideas. We expect that many of those who strongly disagree with Mr. Churchill's comments will attend his talk and make their views known."

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...501617,00.html

Suprised there wasn't a thread already.

I agree completely with chat this guy says.

the truth hurts, people are upset because they don't want to admit we aren't the good guys in this war.

[Dis]

Originally posted by laurentius
No, the argument is valid. Would have you condemned if some jew activist had blown up 10 000 people at Berlin during the WW2?

You kill people, they retaliate. You steal, you get punished. You approve killing, you still get punished.

The arguement Cunningham made is unworthy of some loner 25 year old cynical New Yorker imbecile.

Thats excatly the point, the onle ones who have illusions of intellectual or moral grandeur are Americans.

for once, a lefty is correct on something.

[BeBMan]

Yeah thx, but why didn't you quote my posts then?

[Boris Godunov]

Diss, so janitorial staff in the WTC were "little Eichmanns" who deserved to die?

I'm more and more begining to think you're just crazy. You've just justified Timothy McVeigh bombing the federal building in Oklahoma City.

The moral wrongness of certain actions of the U.S. government doesn't justify killing U.S. civilians. Collective guilt is bull****. Repeat after me: collective guilt is bull****.

And yeah, I would condemn a Jew who blew up 10,000 innocent people in Berlin during WW2, just as I condemn Allied targetting of civilian areas for bombing as well as the Nazis commiting massive atrocities. Hold the people who commited crimes accountable, sure. But that's a far cry from blowing up innocent.

[Dis]

actually I didn't read all 6 pages.

I think I should clarify. I'm against the killing of living life (except to provide sustanance).

The argument against the article states that there is no reason for these particular people to have died. As I've stated before terrorist do not have a conventional army. They have to use whatever means are at their disposal. All fair in love and war. as the saying goes.

While it is sad these particular people died. How does it differ if 3000 soldiers died?

I am taking a stand against this bull****. The life of a soldier is just the same as a civilian.

We pretend to live in a democracy. If we are really a democracy (or even representative republic) the citizens are responsible for the actions of its leaders. When the goverment of the U.S. oppress the entire world, they have to expext resistance.

It's time to own up to our actions. WE are responsible for the actions our leaders have done. Especially the actions we have done the past 60 years. We elected these misfits to office.

I would feel otherwise if we lived in a dictatorship. In that case we are not to blame for the actions of our leaders.

[laurentius]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Diss, so janitorial staff in the WTC were "little Eichmanns" who deserved to die?

And yeah, I would condemn a Jew who blew up 10,000 innocent people in Berlin during WW2, just as I condemn Allied targetting of civilian areas for bombing as well as the Nazis commiting massive atrocities. Hold the people who commited crimes accountable, sure. But that's a far cry from blowing up innocent.

I knew people would get caught up by the use of "Eichmann". Why dont you get over it and discuss the issues.

So you would condemn all those but killing innocent babies is ok? Interesting.

Part of democracy is that you are not isolated from the decision making or denied the right to protest, condemn and do something about it. This also comes with a moral responsibility. You CAN and WILL be held accountable for what has been done in your name.