,
that John Mueller must be obviously referencing .
Do I understand you correctly?
Thanks
- Original Message -
From: micha...@midcoast.com
To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 11:26:47 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [cia-drugs] Atomic
: Re: [cia-drugs] Atomic Obsession
Homepulse,
Sorry, when I get to this stuff I am so tired and don’t express myself
well. It is a complex subject not because of the logic but because of the
programming.
continues here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/48468
@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 11:26:47 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [cia-drugs] Atomic Obsession
It has been admitted that real nuclear attack is becoming more probable
than ever before. During most of the Cold War there were secret
agreements.
Most 'terrorists
Atomic Obsession
video 09.11.11:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/id/216291
John Mueller argues that our decades-long fear of a nuclear attack has been
unwarranted and that the likelihood of a terrorist obtaining a nuclear
device and using it against the U.S. is far smaller than most
It has been admitted that real nuclear attack is becoming more probable
than ever before. During most of the Cold War there were secret
agreements.
Most 'terrorists' are major intel groups concocted. 'Rogue states' would
be dumped on in a heartbeat if they even thought of a nuke. But real
