Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-14 Thread Jon Spencer
Actually, I believe that we had six bombs.  But that is beside the point,  I
think.  Two seemed to be enough.

Jon

Gary Smith wrote:

 Also, they only had the two bombs. To make more would take months of
 refining the ore and building the bombs. To use one in an ineffective way
 would have been a waste of precious resources that could finish the war
 quickly and with fewer casualties.

 K'aya K'ama,
 Gerald/gary  Smithgszion1 @juno.comhttp://www
 .geocities.com/rameumptom/index.html
 No one is as hopelessly enslaved as the person who thinks he's free.  -
 Johann Wolfgang von Goethe



 At 05:33 AM 11/9/2002 -0700, Steven wrote:
 Stephen,
 
 Perhaps you're right, but I still fail to see how the United States
 maintained the moral high ground by bombing civilians. I think a
 demonstration about 5 miles offshore might have accomplished the same
 purpose.

 This is an excellent question.  The rationale at the time was that a
 demonstration of nuclear power would also demonstrate an unwillingness
 to
 use that power against people - thus negating its effectiveness.  It was
 obviously a difficult decision either way.  I find it hard to support
 second quessing the men who had to make it without our 50 years of
 hindsight.

 Rick Mathis

 
 Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
 Only $9.95 per month!
 Visit www.juno.com



//
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///


/




//
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-12 Thread Rick Mathis
At 08:00 PM 11/8/2002 -0700, Steven wrote:

Prior to the Civil War noncombatants were traditionally and legally by the 
laws of nations left alone. The concept of total war (targeting civilians 
as well as combatants) had its roots in the Civil War (when war would be 
poured out upon all nations) beginning with General Sherman's march to the sea.

Hogwash! Traditionally, raping and looting were the means by which the 
troops were paid.   War is Hell did not originate with Sherman.

Rick Mathis

//
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



RE: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-12 Thread Rick Mathis
At 05:33 AM 11/9/2002 -0700, Steven wrote:

Stephen,

Perhaps you're right, but I still fail to see how the United States 
maintained the moral high ground by bombing civilians. I think a 
demonstration about 5 miles offshore might have accomplished the same 
purpose.

This is an excellent question.  The rationale at the time was that a 
demonstration of nuclear power would also demonstrate an unwillingness to 
use that power against people - thus negating its effectiveness.  It was 
obviously a difficult decision either way.  I find it hard to support 
second quessing the men who had to make it without our 50 years of hindsight.

Rick Mathis

//
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-12 Thread Marc A. Schindler
You're both right, but are talking about different periods of history. After the
Treaty of Westphalia in the 17th century, military battles, which until then had
been as Rick characterizes them, took on a more civilized manner. It lasted maybe
about a century.

Rick Mathis wrote:

 At 08:00 PM 11/8/2002 -0700, Steven wrote:
 Prior to the Civil War noncombatants were traditionally and legally by the
 laws of nations left alone. The concept of total war (targeting civilians
 as well as combatants) had its roots in the Civil War (when war would be
 poured out upon all nations) beginning with General Sherman's march to the sea.

 Hogwash! Traditionally, raping and looting were the means by which the
 troops were paid.   War is Hell did not originate with Sherman.

 Rick Mathis

 //
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

//
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-12 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 01:43 PM 11/12/2002, you wrote:

At 08:00 PM 11/8/2002 -0700, Steven wrote:

Prior to the Civil War noncombatants were traditionally and legally by 
the laws of nations left alone. The concept of total war (targeting 
civilians as well as combatants) had its roots in the Civil War (when war 
would be poured out upon all nations) beginning with General Sherman's 
march to the sea.

Hogwash! Traditionally, raping and looting were the means by which the 
troops were paid.   War is Hell did not originate with Sherman.

Rick Mathis

I was talking about civilized nations here. Internationally, beginning 
about the 1600's or so, there were several treaties which detailed nations 
conduct during war. Somewhat similar to the Geneva Convention for example, 
which proscribes signatories from bombing hospitals and outlines proper 
procedures for handling the captured (POW's).



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

//
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-12 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 08:00 PM 11/12/2002, you wrote:

After much pondering, Steven Montgomery favored us with:

I was talking about civilized nations here. Internationally, beginning 
about the 1600's or so, there were several treaties which detailed 
nations conduct during war. Somewhat similar to the Geneva Convention for 
example, which proscribes signatories from bombing hospitals and outlines 
proper procedures for handling the captured (POW's).

So how successful have these rules been that attempt to make civilized 
that which cannot be civilized?  --JWR

Not very I have to admit.


--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

HTML
BODY
a href=http://www.getusout.org;img border=0 
src=http://www.getusout.org/images/guolink.gif;/a
PPBR
/BODY
/HTML

//
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-12 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 08:00 PM 11/12/2002, you wrote:

After much pondering, Steven Montgomery favored us with:

I was talking about civilized nations here. Internationally, beginning 
about the 1600's or so, there were several treaties which detailed 
nations conduct during war. Somewhat similar to the Geneva Convention for 
example, which proscribes signatories from bombing hospitals and outlines 
proper procedures for handling the captured (POW's).

So how successful have these rules been that attempt to make civilized 
that which cannot be civilized?  --JWR

According to President Benson, one of the purposes of the Book of Mormon is 
so that armies will know how to conduct themselves during war. I can't find 
the reference right off hand but I remember the statement.



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

//
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-11 Thread John W. Redelfs
After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:

But my whole point is that it is SO easy to sit back and second
guess what might have been or could have been or whatever 57 years ago.  But
all those who do this are not in the position that President Truman was.


Truman fired MacArthur.  It is unlikely that he did anything else 
right.  All MacArthur wanted was permission to win the Korean War.  He 
should have quit before Truman fired him.  But Truman was a first class 
villain.  My feelings about Truman are 180 degrees out of phase with those 
I feel for Washington, Reagan, etc.

John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
A liberal in the Church is merely one who does not have
a testimony.  --President Harold B. Lee
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-11 Thread Elmer L. Fairbank
At 09:31 11/9/2002 -0700, M Marc wrote:


I was in one of the classrooms at Parirenwatwa Hospital (formerly Sir Sanford
Fleming Hospital) in Harare, Zimbabwe, about 7 or 8 years ago, and saw a 
display
of what happened when a janitor picked up a small vial of caesium powder 
and put
it in his pocket (it was a lesson on the need for proper storage security 
-- this
kind of incident would be unthinkable in an OECD country's hospital. One would
hope, anyway). He only had it for a day before he gave it to a doctor,

sparing of details

How comforting.  My office is sandwiched between a plant growth room and 
Cesium storage.

Till the glow-worm

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-11 Thread Elmer L. Fairbank
At 12:45 11/9/2002 -0700, Steven wrote:



The primary target was Kokura, a major munitions manufacturing center. 
Kokura was obscured by clouds and smoke (leftover from an earlier raid on 
a nearby city) so the bombadier couldn't get an exact target despite three 
separate passes. The secondary target was Nagasaki which was also obscured 
by clouds but after a couple of passes the clouds parted, and the rest is 
history.



As though precision was really necessary.  Hindsight is always very good.

Till the ever watchful

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-11 Thread Marc A. Schindler
It's not hard to shield against caesium; I wouldn't worry if I were her. The energy
is less than 1 MEV by a long shot; only a few hundred thousand KEV, if I recall
correctly. Enough to ionize upon contact, but it doesn't require much more than a
lead-lined room to keep it shielded.

Elmer L. Fairbank wrote:

 At 09:31 11/9/2002 -0700, M Marc wrote:

 I was in one of the classrooms at Parirenwatwa Hospital (formerly Sir Sanford
 Fleming Hospital) in Harare, Zimbabwe, about 7 or 8 years ago, and saw a
 display
 of what happened when a janitor picked up a small vial of caesium powder
 and put
 it in his pocket (it was a lesson on the need for proper storage security
 -- this
 kind of incident would be unthinkable in an OECD country's hospital. One would
 hope, anyway). He only had it for a day before he gave it to a doctor,

 sparing of details

 How comforting.  My office is sandwiched between a plant growth room and
 Cesium storage.

 Till the glow-worm

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





RE: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Stephen Beecroft
-Steven quotes _The New American Magazine_-
 This current display, therefore, repeats the notion that the
 dropping of the bombs by the U.S. brought Japan to the peace
 table and saved countless lives on both sides. But this
 historical view, like the original commentary intended for the
 exhibit, is not supported by the facts.

Just to be clear: If the net effect of dropping two atomic bombs was to 
kill 100,000 of the enemy and thereby save _one_ American life, it would 
have been the moral duty of the commander-in-chief to do so. I doubt you 
can convince me that Americans would not have died had the bombs not 
been dropped; therefore, in my moral calculus, at least, dropping the 
bombs was the only moral decision Truman could have made.

 But in fact the Japanese had sent peace feelers to the West as
 early as 1942, only six months after the December 1941 attack
 on Pearl Harbor. More would come in a flood long before the
 fateful use of the atomic bombs.

I see. So, the enemy starts asking about peace twenty or so weeks 
after taking out your strategic harbor, and therefore you're supposed to 
believe they're sincere. Do I have that right?

 Here was an enemy who had been trying to surrender for almost
 a year before the conflict ended.

Um, that would have been 1944. What happened to six months after Pearl 
Harbor?

 In her book, Brown supplied abundant evidence about the
 immense perfidy that kept the Japanese from surrendering until
 such time as the Soviets were ready to enter the war against
 Japan and the American forces had dropped the atomic bombs on
 civilian populations.

Yes, Mark presented a web site detailing this same evidence a few years 
back. Interesting reading, perhaps with some truth to it. But in the 
end, it's bogus. All Japan had to do was to broadcast their 
unconditional surrender and they would have been spared. Blockade or no, 
Japan struck first and picked the fight, committing unspeakable 
atrocities in the warfare. If they didn't want to lose face by open 
surrender, that is their own fault, no the US's.

 Toshikasu Kase, an official of the Japanese Foreign Office,
 delivered a highly confidential message to the interned
 British ambassador, Sir Robert Craigi. It contained a
 discreet hint regarding the eventual restoration of peace.
 Emanating from Japanese Foreign Minister Togo, this message
 stated, Should it happen that the British Government became
 desirous of discussing or negotiating peace they would find
 the Japanese Government ready to be helpful.

Yet we mannerless Americans, with no grasp whatsoever of the subtle 
nuances of civilized etiquette, just went on ahead and bombed them, all 
because of a little misunderstanding over a Hawaiian naval base. Yes, I 
see your point.

 In his 1952 book Fleet Admiral King, Admiral Ernest J. King
 reported President Roosevelt's 1942 understanding that by
 the application of sea power, Japan could be forced to
 surrender without an invasion of her home islands. This
 attitude, shared by most of our military leaders, would
 quickly be abandoned by the President. Instead, the costly
 island-by-island advance of U.S. forces northward through
 the Pacific continued.

Hmmm. Might that be because Admiral King perhaps didn't witness the 
attempted taking of Italian peninsula, an Axis ally that actually had a 
lot of population who secretly sided with the Allies, and who in any 
case didn't plan to fight -- and that still resulted in a bloody 
campaign starting from the south and spanning the length of the country, 
a country roughly the size of Japan? If a comparatively friendly foe 
like Italy would be untakeable by naval forces alone and require 
extensive, bloody infantry warfare, why should the commander-in-chief 
have supposed that Japan, the original aggressor, a country whose pilots 
willingly sacrificed themselves to mess up carrier decks, would lay down 
and become docile under a similar situation?

 The only unwavering stipulation sought by anyone in the
 Japanese peace party was the retention of the Emperor and
 the continuance of the monarchy.

Perhaps the Japanese leaders ought to have realized that unconditional 
meant just that, and that they had long ago (say, 7 Dec 1941) forfeited 
any right to name the conditions of their surrender.

This sort of post facto second-guessing lies somewhere between silly and 
offensive. If my son were fighting in the Pacific theater, I would 
demand his (and my) commander-in-chief to protect his life, even at the 
cost of the enemy's lives. That's the CIC's job, second in priority only 
to winning the war. As far as I can tell, nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki 
achieved both ends. To repeat: Japan could have broadcast their 
surrender at any time, even six months after Pearl Harbor. They could 
have broadcast an unconditional surrender in July 1945. They could have 
broadcast it after Hiroshima. They chose to wait. Whose fault is that?

Stephen


RE: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Steven Montgomery
Stephen,

Perhaps you're right, but I still fail to see how the United States 
maintained the moral high ground by bombing civilians. I think a 
demonstration about 5 miles offshore might have accomplished the same 
purpose.

--
Steven Montgomery


At 01:01 AM 11/9/2002, you wrote:
-Steven quotes _The New American Magazine_-
 This current display, therefore, repeats the notion that the
 dropping of the bombs by the U.S. brought Japan to the peace
 table and saved countless lives on both sides. But this
 historical view, like the original commentary intended for the
 exhibit, is not supported by the facts.

Just to be clear: If the net effect of dropping two atomic bombs was to
kill 100,000 of the enemy and thereby save _one_ American life, it would
have been the moral duty of the commander-in-chief to do so. I doubt you
can convince me that Americans would not have died had the bombs not
been dropped; therefore, in my moral calculus, at least, dropping the
bombs was the only moral decision Truman could have made.

 But in fact the Japanese had sent peace feelers to the West as
 early as 1942, only six months after the December 1941 attack
 on Pearl Harbor. More would come in a flood long before the
 fateful use of the atomic bombs.

I see. So, the enemy starts asking about peace twenty or so weeks
after taking out your strategic harbor, and therefore you're supposed to
believe they're sincere. Do I have that right?

 Here was an enemy who had been trying to surrender for almost
 a year before the conflict ended.

Um, that would have been 1944. What happened to six months after Pearl
Harbor?

 In her book, Brown supplied abundant evidence about the
 immense perfidy that kept the Japanese from surrendering until
 such time as the Soviets were ready to enter the war against
 Japan and the American forces had dropped the atomic bombs on
 civilian populations.

Yes, Mark presented a web site detailing this same evidence a few years
back. Interesting reading, perhaps with some truth to it. But in the
end, it's bogus. All Japan had to do was to broadcast their
unconditional surrender and they would have been spared. Blockade or no,
Japan struck first and picked the fight, committing unspeakable
atrocities in the warfare. If they didn't want to lose face by open
surrender, that is their own fault, no the US's.

 Toshikasu Kase, an official of the Japanese Foreign Office,
 delivered a highly confidential message to the interned
 British ambassador, Sir Robert Craigi. It contained a
 discreet hint regarding the eventual restoration of peace.
 Emanating from Japanese Foreign Minister Togo, this message
 stated, Should it happen that the British Government became
 desirous of discussing or negotiating peace they would find
 the Japanese Government ready to be helpful.

Yet we mannerless Americans, with no grasp whatsoever of the subtle
nuances of civilized etiquette, just went on ahead and bombed them, all
because of a little misunderstanding over a Hawaiian naval base. Yes, I
see your point.

 In his 1952 book Fleet Admiral King, Admiral Ernest J. King
 reported President Roosevelt's 1942 understanding that by
 the application of sea power, Japan could be forced to
 surrender without an invasion of her home islands. This
 attitude, shared by most of our military leaders, would
 quickly be abandoned by the President. Instead, the costly
 island-by-island advance of U.S. forces northward through
 the Pacific continued.

Hmmm. Might that be because Admiral King perhaps didn't witness the
attempted taking of Italian peninsula, an Axis ally that actually had a
lot of population who secretly sided with the Allies, and who in any
case didn't plan to fight -- and that still resulted in a bloody
campaign starting from the south and spanning the length of the country,
a country roughly the size of Japan? If a comparatively friendly foe
like Italy would be untakeable by naval forces alone and require
extensive, bloody infantry warfare, why should the commander-in-chief
have supposed that Japan, the original aggressor, a country whose pilots
willingly sacrificed themselves to mess up carrier decks, would lay down
and become docile under a similar situation?

 The only unwavering stipulation sought by anyone in the
 Japanese peace party was the retention of the Emperor and
 the continuance of the monarchy.

Perhaps the Japanese leaders ought to have realized that unconditional
meant just that, and that they had long ago (say, 7 Dec 1941) forfeited
any right to name the conditions of their surrender.

This sort of post facto second-guessing lies somewhere between silly and
offensive. If my son were fighting in the Pacific theater, I would
demand his (and my) commander-in-chief to protect his life, even at the
cost of the enemy's lives. That's the CIC's job, second in priority only
to winning the war. As far as I can tell, nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki
achieved both ends. To repeat: Japan could have broadcast their
surrender at 

RE: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Jim Cobabe

Steven Montgomery wrote:
---
Perhaps you're right, but I still fail to see how the United States 
maintained the moral high ground by bombing civilians. I think a 
demonstration about 5 miles offshore might have accomplished the same 
purpose.
---

I don't know who was morally right or wrong in WWII, but I do understand 
the philosophy of war.  The primary objective is to kill people and 
break things, with more success than the enemy.  Morality aside, this is 
the reality of warfare.

---
Mij Ebaboc

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
It's *not* that simple. You can't just shower off caesium particles, which get
absorbed into the skin, and get breathed in to the lungs.  Cobalt 60 dust is even
worse, but harder to obtain since the way it normally comes for medical use is in
tiny cylinders 1 mm long and about .2 mm across, packed into a triple-welded
cylinder about 3.5 cm long and 1.5 - 2 cm across.

I was in one of the classrooms at Parirenwatwa Hospital (formerly Sir Sanford
Fleming Hospital) in Harare, Zimbabwe, about 7 or 8 years ago, and saw a display
of what happened when a janitor picked up a small vial of caesium powder and put
it in his pocket (it was a lesson on the need for proper storage security -- this
kind of incident would be unthinkable in an OECD country's hospital. One would
hope, anyway). He only had it for a day before he gave it to a doctor, but it ate
away most of his genitals and lower abdomen skin. Very gruesome.

If you get it in your lungs there's no immediate problem, but your chance of
getting lung cancer skyrockets.

Jon Spencer wrote:

 Actually, dirty bombs are not a big deal from a radioactivity point of view.
 If one is exposed to a dirty nuke, one only has to get to a complete shower
 (at home will do just fine) within a couple of hours, and there will be no
 long term effects.  The cleanup will be a pain to be sure, but not a really
 big deal either.

 Of course, with all the hysteria over nuclear power that the envirowackos
 have stirred up, the emotional damage would be much greater.

 But that's a topic for another thread, one that I have begun doing detailed
 and extensive research on.  You will be the first to see the fruits of that
 research - sort of a test market!

 Jon

 Marc A. Schindler wrote:
 I think the most imminent threat isn't from a conventional nuke but from
 so-called dirty bombs, which are conventional explosives packed with a messy
 radioactive substance such as caesium (which is a powder in natural form).

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





RE: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Stephen Beecroft
-Steven-
 Perhaps you're right, but I still fail to see how the United
 States maintained the moral high ground by bombing civilians.

Like Jim, I don't know what constitutes moral high ground in a war. 
Note that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both industrial cities, and thus 
legitimate targets, just like Dresden. If the US was going for 
demoralizing civilian casualties, why didn't they nuke Tokyo?

Since 1945, there has been a moratorium in usage of nuclear weapons 
during war, one which the US has scrupulously observed, and in fact has 
even taken a lead role in carving out such international law. In 1945, 
no such law existed. It's anachronistic (and worse) to try to hold the 
US of 1945 to a code of conduct that didn't exist at the time.

 I think a demonstration about 5 miles offshore might have
 accomplished the same purpose.

Maybe, or maybe not. In either case, I think this suggestion is naive at 
best. Developing nuclear weapons was hugely expensive -- so now the US 
is supposed to give up its advantage of surprise by openly announcing to 
the enemy its secret weapon, giving them a demonstration, no less? 
That's simply not how it's done. I doubt any intelligent and honest 
military commander would have done any such thing.

To repeat: Japan was the aggressor. They killed many of our men and 
women in battle, and tortured and killed many other POWs. They committed 
atrocities that are even now being discovered, disclosed, and rued. At 
any time, they could have openly surrendered and been spared the further 
consequences of war. They chose not to. That is not the US' fault, no 
matter how you slice it.

Stephen

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Paul Osborne
Perhaps you're right, but I still fail to see how the United States 
maintained the moral high ground by bombing civilians. I think a 
demonstration about 5 miles offshore might have accomplished the same 
purpose.


Stephen was right, Steven. Your demonstration idea is too risky. We had
to do what we did when we had the opportunity. A proper demonstration was
given to the Japanese and they reacted in the only responsible way they
could--they surrendered. I'm grateful that the American leaders of that
era had the courage to do what had to be done. Once again, American
military intelligence (top secret) unknown to the rest of us civilians
including church leaders was a deciding factor in carrying out a duty
that must be performed. 

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Paul Osborne
The primary objective is to kill people and 
break things, with more success than the enemy.  Morality aside, this is

the reality of warfare.


Amen. Kill the enemy!!

That is what I learned when I served in the US Army for a brief period.

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
There's a difference, Stacy, between a true thermonuclear bomb and a so-called
dirty bomb. A dirty bomb uses conventional explosives to spread radioactive
material around. Depending on the circumstances, this can be quite deadly, and is
hard to clean up after, and its effects can be pernicious, but are relatively
small-scale, and the structural damage is largely confined to the initial
conventional explosion. Thermonuclear bombs, which come roughly in two types --
fission-based and the more powerful fusion-based -- actually obtain their very
destructive power from nuclear chain reactions, to oversimplify a bit. But the
point is they are far more destructive to property, to those in the blast zone,
and in the long run, to many others. The type of material used in true
thermonuclear devices has a longer half-life (remains radioactive longer), and
also gives off more energetic gamma radiation (which is more dangerous), and can
contaminate clouds which carry it long distances, where it falls as part of the
rain (so-called fallout).

Thermonuclear devices depend a lot on the extremely powerful shock wave they
create (the explosion is more intense), so are often detonated while still in
the air, so the shock wave can travel further, not inhibited by horizontal vector
barriers like buildings. OTOH, ground-detonated bombs cause more fallout.  One
interesting variant is the so-called neutron bomb which doesn't have much of a
shockwave, but unleashes a spray of  ionizing (very energetic) neutrons. So it
spares the buildings but kills the people. It's the ultimate clean bomb so to
speak.

The two bombs used over Japan were small and crude by today's standards, and used
conventional explosives to drive two pieces of carefully-shaped radioactive metal
(uranium, plutonium) together, causing a fission chain reaction, which is highly
exothermic (releases a lot of energy in a short period of time). Fusion bombs
use the same fuel process as the sun: hydrogen is fused together by another,
initial explosion, to form helium, which is even more exothermic than fission
reactions.

One substance that's unlikely to be used in dirty bombs, incidentally, is
plutonium. Plutonium is actually not that toxic (IF -- and naturally this is a big
if) you ignore its radioactivity; mercury, lead and cadmium are far more toxic.
You could actually eat food with plutonium, and it would just pass through your
body. The problem is when it's in tiny particle form (as in fallout) and you
breathe it in. It sort of turns your lungs into radioactive organs, which can, of
course, be very destructive to body tissue, either in the short term (radiation
burns, which can be fatal if they're extensive enough) or cancer in the medium to
long term. The problem with plutonium, as far as terrorists are concerned, is that
it's a very rare metal and hard to come by, and even harder to handle without
damage to yourself. It requires very expensive facilities to treat, such as a
research or military reactor. Canada, just as an example, was a pioneer in atomic
technology*, supplying the uranium that went into the Manhattan Project, which
produced the bomb. The best known Canadian in the field was Ernest Rutherford
(although I don't think he worked on the Manhatten Project per se -- but I think
he was still at McGill by then, and might have acted as an advisor; I'd have to
check). But while we have a lot of power reactors (especially in Ontario, Quebec
and New Brunswick), the only research reactors we have that are capable of
handling plutonium are at Chalk River ON and Whiteshell MB. The former I've been
to. It's upriver of Ottawa, and I once gave a lecture there on the medical
applications of Cobalt 60. The latter is NE of Winnipeg on the edge of the
Canadian (or Laurentian) Shield.

Incidentally, one little irony that I'm not sure has been brought up, although I'm
sure Mark especially knows this, and probably many others here, is that Nagasaki
wasn't the first choice for the second bomb. The original target was clouded over
that day, so Nagasaki got hit. The irony is that Nagasaki is the historical centre
of Japan's Christian community.  So I guess today's trivia question is: what was
the original target?

*we invented the cobalt machine, long a mainstay in radiation therapy in cancer,
for instance, and the world's largest supplier of medical isotopes is still a
Canadian company, Nordion, in Kanata ON (a suburb of Ottawa). They're part of MDS,
a large Canadian medical services company based in Toronto. If you hang around
Ottawa, you can see Nordion's white trucks rushing isotopes to the airport so they
can be flown on private jets directly to big tertiary care hospitals around the
world, but especially the US (many of these isotopes, made of very exotic
materials like molybdenum (molly for short)  have very short halflifes so have
to be used within a few days).  I used to watch technicians working behind
metre-thick glass (filled with mineral oil), working with 

Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Stacy Smith
Thanks for answering.  I guess I'm worried for a couple of reasons.  Even 
though nuclear bombs are probably hard to maintain probably undetonated, 
there's always a supply out there.  Not only that, but many terrorists love 
to come to us through Canada.  They take up residence here like normal 
ordinary citizens.  We could have many of them living with us 
undetected.  We could have them guarding our nuclear facilities, etc.

Then there's also the chemical and biological variations combined with 
nuclear capability.

Stacy.

At 11:34 AM 11/09/2002 -0700, you wrote:

There's a difference, Stacy, between a true thermonuclear bomb and a so-called
dirty bomb. A dirty bomb uses conventional explosives to spread radioactive
material around. Depending on the circumstances, this can be quite deadly, 
and is
hard to clean up after, and its effects can be pernicious, but are relatively
small-scale, and the structural damage is largely confined to the initial
conventional explosion. Thermonuclear bombs, which come roughly in two 
types --
fission-based and the more powerful fusion-based -- actually obtain their very
destructive power from nuclear chain reactions, to oversimplify a bit. But the
point is they are far more destructive to property, to those in the blast 
zone,
and in the long run, to many others. The type of material used in true
thermonuclear devices has a longer half-life (remains radioactive longer), and
also gives off more energetic gamma radiation (which is more dangerous), 
and can
contaminate clouds which carry it long distances, where it falls as part 
of the
rain (so-called fallout).

Thermonuclear devices depend a lot on the extremely powerful shock wave they
create (the explosion is more intense), so are often detonated while 
still in
the air, so the shock wave can travel further, not inhibited by horizontal 
vector
barriers like buildings. OTOH, ground-detonated bombs cause more fallout.  One
interesting variant is the so-called neutron bomb which doesn't have 
much of a
shockwave, but unleashes a spray of  ionizing (very energetic) neutrons. So it
spares the buildings but kills the people. It's the ultimate clean bomb 
so to
speak.

The two bombs used over Japan were small and crude by today's standards, 
and used
conventional explosives to drive two pieces of carefully-shaped 
radioactive metal
(uranium, plutonium) together, causing a fission chain reaction, which is 
highly
exothermic (releases a lot of energy in a short period of time). Fusion 
bombs
use the same fuel process as the sun: hydrogen is fused together by another,
initial explosion, to form helium, which is even more exothermic than fission
reactions.

One substance that's unlikely to be used in dirty bombs, incidentally, is
plutonium. Plutonium is actually not that toxic (IF -- and naturally this 
is a big
if) you ignore its radioactivity; mercury, lead and cadmium are far more 
toxic.
You could actually eat food with plutonium, and it would just pass through 
your
body. The problem is when it's in tiny particle form (as in fallout) and you
breathe it in. It sort of turns your lungs into radioactive organs, which 
can, of
course, be very destructive to body tissue, either in the short term 
(radiation
burns, which can be fatal if they're extensive enough) or cancer in the 
medium to
long term. The problem with plutonium, as far as terrorists are concerned, 
is that
it's a very rare metal and hard to come by, and even harder to handle without
damage to yourself. It requires very expensive facilities to treat, such as a
research or military reactor. Canada, just as an example, was a pioneer in 
atomic
technology*, supplying the uranium that went into the Manhattan Project, which
produced the bomb. The best known Canadian in the field was Ernest Rutherford
(although I don't think he worked on the Manhatten Project per se -- but I 
think
he was still at McGill by then, and might have acted as an advisor; I'd 
have to
check). But while we have a lot of power reactors (especially in Ontario, 
Quebec
and New Brunswick), the only research reactors we have that are capable of
handling plutonium are at Chalk River ON and Whiteshell MB. The former 
I've been
to. It's upriver of Ottawa, and I once gave a lecture there on the medical
applications of Cobalt 60. The latter is NE of Winnipeg on the edge of the
Canadian (or Laurentian) Shield.

Incidentally, one little irony that I'm not sure has been brought up, 
although I'm
sure Mark especially knows this, and probably many others here, is that 
Nagasaki
wasn't the first choice for the second bomb. The original target was 
clouded over
that day, so Nagasaki got hit. The irony is that Nagasaki is the 
historical centre
of Japan's Christian community.  So I guess today's trivia question is: 
what was
the original target?

*we invented the cobalt machine, long a mainstay in radiation therapy in 
cancer,
for instance, and the world's largest supplier of medical isotopes is still a
Canadian 

RE: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Jim Cobabe

Jon Spencer wrote:
---
Of course, with all the hysteria over nuclear power that the 
envirowackos have stirred up, the emotional damage would be much 
greater.
---

Creating terror is the real objective of terrorism, isn't it?  What does 
it matter that dirty bombs are ineffective at inflicting casualties, if 
it puts your enemy in a panic crises?  Everyone knows that any level of 
radiation will kill us all instantly, or cause us to die of cancer 
within a few months.  Even the people who live in the neighborhood of 
the Three Mile Island reactor disaster are still trying to sue because 
they all have cancer.  The recently completed study indicating that 
there is no greater risk of cancer in that area means nothing.

Spreading fear and panic was also the point of the anthrax attacks last 
year.  Of course it is seldom recognized that anthrax is a common 
organism in nature.  Many of us have fairly frequent contact with 
anthrax vectors.  There are even occasional infections.  But nobody 
seems to feel too scared about that.  Probably because, as with dirty 
bomb contamination, the most effective prophylactic measure is 
attention to regular bathing habits.

I remember when the Denver airport was shut down last year because 
someone discovered a white powder leaking from a package.  It turned out 
to be vanilla pudding mix.

---
Mij Ebaboc

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




RE: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Stacy Smith
Yes, and for a while I was afraid to eat Hershey bars because I understood 
the company was in the vacinity of Three Mile Island.

Stacy.

At 07:08 PM 11/09/2002 +, you wrote:


Jon Spencer wrote:
---
Of course, with all the hysteria over nuclear power that the
envirowackos have stirred up, the emotional damage would be much
greater.
---

Creating terror is the real objective of terrorism, isn't it?  What does
it matter that dirty bombs are ineffective at inflicting casualties, if
it puts your enemy in a panic crises?  Everyone knows that any level of
radiation will kill us all instantly, or cause us to die of cancer
within a few months.  Even the people who live in the neighborhood of
the Three Mile Island reactor disaster are still trying to sue because
they all have cancer.  The recently completed study indicating that
there is no greater risk of cancer in that area means nothing.

Spreading fear and panic was also the point of the anthrax attacks last
year.  Of course it is seldom recognized that anthrax is a common
organism in nature.  Many of us have fairly frequent contact with
anthrax vectors.  There are even occasional infections.  But nobody
seems to feel too scared about that.  Probably because, as with dirty
bomb contamination, the most effective prophylactic measure is
attention to regular bathing habits.

I remember when the Denver airport was shut down last year because
someone discovered a white powder leaking from a package.  It turned out
to be vanilla pudding mix.

---
Mij Ebaboc

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/





---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 11:34 AM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:


Incidentally, one little irony that I'm not sure has been brought up, 
although I'm
sure Mark especially knows this, and probably many others here, is that 
Nagasaki
wasn't the first choice for the second bomb. The original target was 
clouded over
that day, so Nagasaki got hit. The irony is that Nagasaki is the 
historical centre
of Japan's Christian community.  So I guess today's trivia question is: 
what was
the original target?

The primary target was Kokura, a major munitions manufacturing center. 
Kokura was obscured by clouds and smoke (leftover from an earlier raid on a 
nearby city) so the bombadier couldn't get an exact target despite three 
separate passes. The secondary target was Nagasaki which was also obscured 
by clouds but after a couple of passes the clouds parted, and the rest is 
history.



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Jon Spencer
You know you have been hit because there is a great big explosion, and the
guys with the Geiger counters say pops!

That's how you know.

What are you talking about with the Japanese???  Do you actually know what a
dirty bomb is?

It is a conventional explosive with radioactive material surrounding it.  It
is not a nuclear explosion.

Jon

Stacy Smith wrote:
 Then why weren't the Japanese able to overcome the effects?  The key here,
 I believe, is how would we know we had been hit to take the showers?
Plus,
 what if they're laced with bioweapons?

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Jon Spencer
I noted on this list many years ago, that BH Liddell Hart wrote a book in
the late 60's or early 70's, I think, called A History of the Second World
War in which much of this was disclosed.  The Japanese tried to get to the
US by going through the Soviets, who, for their own imperialistic reasons,
decided not to forward the request.  And all that other stuff.

But this was a back channel from a single small point in the Japanese gov't,
not from those who were actually in power.  It is sort of like a
sub-diplomat in Stalin's gov't sending out a back-channel request.  It would
not have been successful.

Had the Japanese wanted to surrender, there were many ways that they could
have sent a secret message to Washington.  They did not.  They could have
contacted Switzerland or Sweden or Lichtenstein, for heavens sake, but they
did not.  If they wanted to surrender, why were they fighting so hard, and
continuing to commit atrocities against anyone they could find?

But my whole point is that it is SO easy to sit back and second
guess what might have been or could have been or whatever 57 years ago.  But
all those who do this are not in the position that President Truman was.
Tens of thousands of Americans had died, and he was viewing the possibility
of tens of thousands more dying.  He had a way to stop the war.  Why on
earth didn't the Japanese cry uncle after the first bomb if they were so
eager to stop the hostilities?  Those who want to fault the US for what we
did can just stuff it.  Those who in eternal ingratitude want to blame the
nasty old US for being so bad can stuff it as well.  The US is no where near
perfect, unless you consider all other nations in the world, in which case
we look pretty good.

Ingratitude is one of the biggest sins there is, so why should I be
surprised that it is so rampant, even on this list?  (I put on my flame
retardant suit before uttering this truth!)

Jon

 -Steven quotes _The New American Magazine_-
  This current display, therefore, repeats the notion that the
  dropping of the bombs by the U.S. brought Japan to the peace
  table and saved countless lives on both sides. But this
  historical view, like the original commentary intended for the
  exhibit, is not supported by the facts.

 Just to be clear: If the net effect of dropping two atomic bombs was to
 kill 100,000 of the enemy and thereby save _one_ American life, it would
 have been the moral duty of the commander-in-chief to do so. I doubt you
 can convince me that Americans would not have died had the bombs not
 been dropped; therefore, in my moral calculus, at least, dropping the
 bombs was the only moral decision Truman could have made.

  But in fact the Japanese had sent peace feelers to the West as
  early as 1942, only six months after the December 1941 attack
  on Pearl Harbor. More would come in a flood long before the
  fateful use of the atomic bombs.

 I see. So, the enemy starts asking about peace twenty or so weeks
 after taking out your strategic harbor, and therefore you're supposed to
 believe they're sincere. Do I have that right?

  Here was an enemy who had been trying to surrender for almost
  a year before the conflict ended.

 Um, that would have been 1944. What happened to six months after Pearl
 Harbor?

  In her book, Brown supplied abundant evidence about the
  immense perfidy that kept the Japanese from surrendering until
  such time as the Soviets were ready to enter the war against
  Japan and the American forces had dropped the atomic bombs on
  civilian populations.

 Yes, Mark presented a web site detailing this same evidence a few years
 back. Interesting reading, perhaps with some truth to it. But in the
 end, it's bogus. All Japan had to do was to broadcast their
 unconditional surrender and they would have been spared. Blockade or no,
 Japan struck first and picked the fight, committing unspeakable
 atrocities in the warfare. If they didn't want to lose face by open
 surrender, that is their own fault, no the US's.

  Toshikasu Kase, an official of the Japanese Foreign Office,
  delivered a highly confidential message to the interned
  British ambassador, Sir Robert Craigi. It contained a
  discreet hint regarding the eventual restoration of peace.
  Emanating from Japanese Foreign Minister Togo, this message
  stated, Should it happen that the British Government became
  desirous of discussing or negotiating peace they would find
  the Japanese Government ready to be helpful.

 Yet we mannerless Americans, with no grasp whatsoever of the subtle
 nuances of civilized etiquette, just went on ahead and bombed them, all
 because of a little misunderstanding over a Hawaiian naval base. Yes, I
 see your point.

  In his 1952 book Fleet Admiral King, Admiral Ernest J. King
  reported President Roosevelt's 1942 understanding that by
  the application of sea power, Japan could be forced to
  surrender without an invasion of her home islands. This
  attitude, shared by most of 

Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
We (aka the real world, the rest of the world, etc.) are not afraid that your
troops' military training isn't up to snuff*, we just hope your CiC knows that
it's ready, aim, fire, not ready, fire, aim. ;-)

*As I'm tempted to suggest to Jonah Greenberg, perhaps we really *do* need a good
invading up here. After all, you'd probably kill fewer of our troops if you were
actually trying.

(plus the usual Canuckistani comeback, which is that given what y'all are [not]
taught about geography in school, we have no need to fear, because we know you'd
have to find us first...)

Paul Osborne wrote:

 The primary objective is to kill people and
 break things, with more success than the enemy.  Morality aside, this is

 the reality of warfare.

 Amen. Kill the enemy!!

 That is what I learned when I served in the US Army for a brief period.

 Paul O
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today

 Only $9.95 per month!

 Visit www.juno.com

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler


Stacy Smith wrote:

 Thanks for answering.  I guess I'm worried for a couple of reasons.  Even
 though nuclear bombs are probably hard to maintain probably undetonated,
 there's always a supply out there.  Not only that, but many terrorists love
 to come to us through Canada.

This is misleading. Pat Buchanan, just to take the latest celebrity to express an
uninformed opinionon this, doesn't know what he's talking about. ALL of the
terrorists involved in the 9-11 attacks on NY and the Pentagon came directly to the
U.S., and not through Canada. Your INS was even giving green cards to dead people.
The reason the Canadian connection makes the news is sheer numbers. We have a
border that's thousands of kms long and which nobody could patrol adequately, so
it's relatively easy to cross, and far more people cross it than come in via ports
or airports from overseas -- only Mexico comes close.  We have far more terrorists
in Canada who have come here from the U.S., but of course you guys never hear that
on your news (and it's not in Buchanan's interests to tell you, pitched as he is to
the trailer park trash counterpart to Howard Stern's New York demographic).

The one difference we *do* have, besides having a much longer coastline than you
guys do, and one tenth the population density, is that we still welcome immigrants
more freely than the U.S. It's far easier to get a work permit here, and permanent
immigrant status, and also citizenship, than in the U.S. That also includes
refugees, and no screening system is perfect, so we end up probably letting in more
than our fair share of bad apples, proportionately speaking.

  They take up residence here like normal
 ordinary citizens.  We could have many of them living with us
 undetected.  We could have them guarding our nuclear facilities, etc.

 Then there's also the chemical and biological variations combined with
 nuclear capability.

 Stacy.


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
You should be more concerned about wax buildup ;-)

Stacy Smith wrote:

 Yes, and for a while I was afraid to eat Hershey bars because I understood
 the company was in the vacinity of Three Mile Island.

 Stacy.


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
Dresden was not an industrial city. You may be confusing it with Leipzig, which
got off relatively light. What Dresden was was a centre of transportation for
central Europe, a transfer point for many trains and highways. It was chockfull
of refugees when the RAF bombed it. What little heavy industry it had was out in
suburbs to the west and north. South and east the terrain is too mountainous.
Hamburg at least had a military point -- Dresden was pure terrorism in the
neutral sense of the word: we were trying to demoralize the German population and
force an overthrow of Hitler.

Trivia question: who was the first country to launch a raid on residential areas
in an enemy country in WWII, and what was the city involved?
Trivia question: who first broke neutrality in WWII?
Trivia question: what major Ally's naval assets were destroyed by another Ally,
and why?

Stephen Beecroft wrote:

 -Steven-
  Perhaps you're right, but I still fail to see how the United
  States maintained the moral high ground by bombing civilians.

 Like Jim, I don't know what constitutes moral high ground in a war.
 Note that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both industrial cities, and thus
 legitimate targets, just like Dresden. If the US was going for
 demoralizing civilian casualties, why didn't they nuke Tokyo?

 Since 1945, there has been a moratorium in usage of nuclear weapons
 during war, one which the US has scrupulously observed, and in fact has
 even taken a lead role in carving out such international law. In 1945,
 no such law existed. It's anachronistic (and worse) to try to hold the
 US of 1945 to a code of conduct that didn't exist at the time.


Except for one thing: the US has never accepted refusal of first right. Which
is to say, they have not promised never to be the first to use nuclear weapons in
a war.

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
Steven wins first prize! A one-week holiday in beautiful downtown Moose Jaw in
the second week of January.
Okay. Here's another question: what was the religious denomination of the pilot,
and after whom did he name the plane? (I'm thinking specifically of the Enola Gay
here)

Steven Montgomery wrote:

 At 11:34 AM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:

 Incidentally, one little irony that I'm not sure has been brought up,
 although I'm
 sure Mark especially knows this, and probably many others here, is that
 Nagasaki
 wasn't the first choice for the second bomb. The original target was
 clouded over
 that day, so Nagasaki got hit. The irony is that Nagasaki is the
 historical centre
 of Japan's Christian community.  So I guess today's trivia question is:
 what was
 the original target?

 The primary target was Kokura, a major munitions manufacturing center.
 Kokura was obscured by clouds and smoke (leftover from an earlier raid on a
 nearby city) so the bombadier couldn't get an exact target despite three
 separate passes. The secondary target was Nagasaki which was also obscured
 by clouds but after a couple of passes the clouds parted, and the rest is
 history.

 --
 Steven Montgomery
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
 selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
 politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today.
 --Steven W. Mosher

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Jon Spencer
Sorry, Marc, but you are wrong.  This information comes from several experts
in this field who deal with the actual (expected) contaminants.  Neither you
nor I are experts, so from my perspective, you lose.  Spreading hysteria
must be a Canadian sport, which has filtered down to the anti-nuke folks in
the US! :-)

Jon

Marc A. Schindler wrote:

It's *not* that simple. You can't just shower off caesium particles, which
get
absorbed into the skin, and get breathed in to the lungs.  Cobalt 60 dust is
even
worse, but harder to obtain since the way it normally comes for medical use
is in
tiny cylinders 1 mm long and about .2 mm across, packed into a triple-welded
cylinder about 3.5 cm long and 1.5 - 2 cm across.

I was in one of the classrooms at Parirenwatwa Hospital (formerly Sir
Sanford
Fleming Hospital) in Harare, Zimbabwe, about 7 or 8 years ago, and saw a
display
of what happened when a janitor picked up a small vial of caesium powder and
put
it in his pocket (it was a lesson on the need for proper storage security --
this
kind of incident would be unthinkable in an OECD country's hospital. One
would
hope, anyway). He only had it for a day before he gave it to a doctor, but
it ate
away most of his genitals and lower abdomen skin. Very gruesome.

If you get it in your lungs there's no immediate problem, but your chance of
getting lung cancer skyrockets.

Jon Spencer wrote:

 Actually, dirty bombs are not a big deal from a radioactivity point of
view.
 If one is exposed to a dirty nuke, one only has to get to a complete
shower
 (at home will do just fine) within a couple of hours, and there will be no
 long term effects.  The cleanup will be a pain to be sure, but not a
really
 big deal either.

 Of course, with all the hysteria over nuclear power that the envirowackos
 have stirred up, the emotional damage would be much greater.

 But that's a topic for another thread, one that I have begun doing
detailed
 and extensive research on.  You will be the first to see the fruits of
that
 research - sort of a test market!

 Jon

 Marc A. Schindler wrote:
 I think the most imminent threat isn't from a conventional nuke but from
 so-called dirty bombs, which are conventional explosives packed with a
messy
 radioactive substance such as caesium (which is a powder in natural form).



/
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///


/


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will
pick
himself up and continue on - Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the
author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's
employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///

/

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^









Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Jon Spencer
If any level of radiation will kill us, then you need to move near a nuclear
power plant and stay away from beer.  it seems that there is 13 times more
radiation in beer than there is in the cooling water coming out of the Nuke
power plant I can see from my house.

So you see, the word of wisdom was clearly correct in warning us against
beer but not against nuke power plants.

Jon

- Original Message -
From: Jim Cobabe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 2:08 PM
Subject: RE: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan



 Jon Spencer wrote:
 ---
 Of course, with all the hysteria over nuclear power that the
 envirowackos have stirred up, the emotional damage would be much
 greater.
 ---

 Creating terror is the real objective of terrorism, isn't it?  What does
 it matter that dirty bombs are ineffective at inflicting casualties, if
 it puts your enemy in a panic crises?  Everyone knows that any level of
 radiation will kill us all instantly, or cause us to die of cancer
 within a few months.  Even the people who live in the neighborhood of
 the Three Mile Island reactor disaster are still trying to sue because
 they all have cancer.  The recently completed study indicating that
 there is no greater risk of cancer in that area means nothing.

 Spreading fear and panic was also the point of the anthrax attacks last
 year.  Of course it is seldom recognized that anthrax is a common
 organism in nature.  Many of us have fairly frequent contact with
 anthrax vectors.  There are even occasional infections.  But nobody
 seems to feel too scared about that.  Probably because, as with dirty
 bomb contamination, the most effective prophylactic measure is
 attention to regular bathing habits.

 I remember when the Denver airport was shut down last year because
 someone discovered a white powder leaking from a package.  It turned out
 to be vanilla pudding mix.

 ---
 Mij Ebaboc



/
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///


/




/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
I just thought of something else, in addition to my original response. I should
actually give in on this. For 3 reasons:

1. I was wrong when I said AECL Med Prods (now known as Theratronics, and along
with Nordion, part of MDS) was one of the few sources of radioactive caesium
isotopes. I was in a time warp when I wrote that. They no longer supply it and
haven't for some time. Therein lies part of the problem, as it happens. In my day
we had replaced caesium units with the far superior Co60 units, but were still
maintaining old caesium units, but except for a few small private clinics in the
US, caesium was, in the late 80s/early 90s, when I was in the biz, only used in
3rd world countries. And therein, as I say, lies part of the problem, because 3rd
world disposal standards aren't exactly up to snuff, meaning the stuff's
relatively easy -- too easy -- to get, and it's also easier to shield against, so
easier to get through gamma ray detectors at ports (whose budget -- the
inspection division -- incidentally and highly ironically, has, at least at the
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey -- been drastically cut back by the
Bush administration but I digress).

2. For reason #3, you are in spirit correct in the sense that it's highly
unlikely caesium would be used in a dirty bomb, so the more I warn against it,
the more I am, in fact, guilty of fearmongering, as you say.

3. For reasons I won't get into in public* there are better alternatives
available to terrorists**, alternatives which are easier to handle, more
productive, and easier to package, deliver and hard to detect (although not
impossible -- let's hope that your new cabinet ministry doesn't suffer from the
usual rule of bureaucracy, which tends to dumb down to a low, if not lowest,
common denominator. Here's to hoping they listen to their science and military
advisors and get some proper detection equipment at cargo-handling facilities.
X-ray detectors and some basic AI software go a long ways).

* The NSA is way behind in their efforts to read everybody's email, and I stick
to the international English spelling of caesium in the vain hope that their
filters are set for the US spelling, but in any case, if I start mentioning some
of the isotopes that are far better for terrorist use in dirty bombs there is a
chance I'd get a friendly visit from our local CSIS officer, as they work with
the NSA. We have free speech, too, in theory -- as you do (in theory) -- but
there's no sense asking for trouble.

** As I mention from time to time, people who read my emails would normally have
no indication I am suffering from a neurological disorder (unless you consider
liberalism to be a mental illness[don't answer that]), but I always look over
my posts relatively carefully since in speech I often make substitutions for
words, because there's some rewiring going on in my brain, to make a long story
short. But I actually wrote tourists instead of terrorists in the first draft
of my post. I thought that was pretty funny -- it's like suffering from
spoonerism (sputtering from soonerisms?)

Jon Spencer wrote:

 Sorry, Marc, but you are wrong.  This information comes from several experts
 in this field who deal with the actual (expected) contaminants.  Neither you
 nor I are experts, so from my perspective, you lose.  Spreading hysteria
 must be a Canadian sport, which has filtered down to the anti-nuke folks in
 the US! :-)

 Jon

 Marc A. Schindler wrote:

 It's *not* that simple. You can't just shower off caesium particles, which
 get
 absorbed into the skin, and get breathed in to the lungs.  Cobalt 60 dust is
 even
 worse, but harder to obtain since the way it normally comes for medical use
 is in
 tiny cylinders 1 mm long and about .2 mm across, packed into a triple-welded
 cylinder about 3.5 cm long and 1.5 - 2 cm across.

 I was in one of the classrooms at Parirenwatwa Hospital (formerly Sir
 Sanford
 Fleming Hospital) in Harare, Zimbabwe, about 7 or 8 years ago, and saw a
 display
 of what happened when a janitor picked up a small vial of caesium powder and
 put
 it in his pocket (it was a lesson on the need for proper storage security --
 this
 kind of incident would be unthinkable in an OECD country's hospital. One
 would
 hope, anyway). He only had it for a day before he gave it to a doctor, but
 it ate
 away most of his genitals and lower abdomen skin. Very gruesome.

 If you get it in your lungs there's no immediate problem, but your chance of
 getting lung cancer skyrockets.

 Jon Spencer wrote:

  Actually, dirty bombs are not a big deal from a radioactivity point of
 view.
  If one is exposed to a dirty nuke, one only has to get to a complete
 shower
  (at home will do just fine) within a couple of hours, and there will be no
  long term effects.  The cleanup will be a pain to be sure, but not a
 really
  big deal either.
 
  Of course, with all the hysteria over nuclear power that the envirowackos
  have stirred up, the emotional 

Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 03:46 PM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:

Trivia question: who was the first country to launch a raid on residential 
areas
in an enemy country in WWII, and what was the city involved?

Great Britain, May 11, 1940. They bombed the quiet peaceful town known as 
Westphalia which was miles from any front. The historian J. F. P. Veale 
notes in his book, _Advance To Barbarism_, that Great Britain's bombing of 
Westphalia was the first deliberate breach of the fundamental rule of 
civilized warfare that hostilities must only be waged against the enemy 
combatant forces.



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 03:46 PM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:


Trivia question: who first broke neutrality in WWII?


Great Britain, September 3, 1940, ostensibly to guarantee the territorial 
integrity of Poland. However after the war Poland was divvied up to the 
Soviets--so what the heck was WWII fought for?

Interestingly enough, President Roosevelt urged the military combatants on 
both sides to refrain from bombing cities or civilian populations. 
Churchill and the French promised that only strictly military targets would 
be bombed by their air forces.



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 03:46 PM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:


Trivia question: what major Ally's naval assets were destroyed by another 
Ally,
and why?

This was a harder one, but I think I remember it was the Germans who 
scuttled Italy's ships to prevent them from falling into Allied hands. Am I 
right?



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Paul Osborne
(plus the usual Canuckistani comeback, which is that given what y'all
are [not]
taught about geography in school, we have no need to fear, because we
know you'd
have to find us first...)


Hey Marc; would you mind stepping out of my cross hairs as you are
blocking my vision. ;-)

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Paul Osborne
Jon wisely said:
Those who want to fault the US for what we
did can just stuff it.  Those who in eternal ingratitude want to blame
the
nasty old US for being so bad can stuff it as well.  


And let all the congregation say AMEN! Dropping the bombs on Japan was
wise and the making of more nuclear weapons was even wiser. Thank
goodness we have a government that wants to protect us against our
enemies and thank goodness President Truman was not a coward. Thank
goodness there is a separation between church and state!! 

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Steven Montgomery
LDS, and the plane was named after his mother. What do I win now?

--
Steven Montgomery

At 03:49 PM 11/9/2002, you wrote:

Steven wins first prize! A one-week holiday in beautiful downtown Moose Jaw in
the second week of January.
Okay. Here's another question: what was the religious denomination of the 
pilot,
and after whom did he name the plane? (I'm thinking specifically of the 
Enola Gay
here)

Steven Montgomery wrote:

 At 11:34 AM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:

 Incidentally, one little irony that I'm not sure has been brought up,
 although I'm
 sure Mark especially knows this, and probably many others here, is that
 Nagasaki
 wasn't the first choice for the second bomb. The original target was
 clouded over
 that day, so Nagasaki got hit. The irony is that Nagasaki is the
 historical centre
 of Japan's Christian community.  So I guess today's trivia question is:
 what was
 the original target?

 The primary target was Kokura, a major munitions manufacturing center.
 Kokura was obscured by clouds and smoke (leftover from an earlier raid on a
 nearby city) so the bombadier couldn't get an exact target despite three
 separate passes. The secondary target was Nagasaki which was also obscured
 by clouds but after a couple of passes the clouds parted, and the rest is
 history.

 --
 Steven Montgomery
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
 selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
 politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today.
 --Steven W. Mosher

 
/
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 
/


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he 
will pick
himself up and continue on ­ Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's 
employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Stacy Smith
And I think you may be a bloodthirsty man.  I will not say definitely, 
however, because I am not supposed to judge mankind, Jesus is.  You may 
very well have good motives, but I think you should watch them closely.

Stacy.

At 05:54 PM 11/09/2002 -0600, you wrote:

Jon wisely said:
Those who want to fault the US for what we
did can just stuff it.  Those who in eternal ingratitude want to blame
the
nasty old US for being so bad can stuff it as well.


And let all the congregation say AMEN! Dropping the bombs on Japan was
wise and the making of more nuclear weapons was even wiser. Thank
goodness we have a government that wants to protect us against our
enemies and thank goodness President Truman was not a coward. Thank
goodness there is a separation between church and state!!

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/





---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
This from the guy who wants to elect President Hinckley and curse with him a
politician's job?  ;-)

Paul Osborne wrote:

 Jon wisely said:
 Those who want to fault the US for what we
 did can just stuff it.  Those who in eternal ingratitude want to blame
 the
 nasty old US for being so bad can stuff it as well.

 And let all the congregation say AMEN! Dropping the bombs on Japan was
 wise and the making of more nuclear weapons was even wiser. Thank
 goodness we have a government that wants to protect us against our
 enemies and thank goodness President Truman was not a coward. Thank
 goodness there is a separation between church and state!!

 Paul O
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today

 Only $9.95 per month!

 Visit www.juno.com

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
Very good! Another week in Moose Jaw for our boy genius :-)

(You realize, of course, that Moose Jaw is our equivalent of a Fargo joke -- you
know, first prize is one week, second prize is two weeks. Actually, it's also the
site of an airbase where our military pilots are trained. My cousin's husband,
who was a SARtech out of Gander, NF, is now there learning to fly C-130's. He's
tired of rotary wing and wants to switch to fixed wing. Flying Hercs will get him
to more exotic locations, too, besides his annual simulator training trip to
California. We put the base there because there's nothing to hit that's higher
than a grain elevator)

Incidentally, I'm going from memory, but I believe Westphalia was or is an outer
suburb of Berlin, but I could be confusing it with another raid. (It's a little
confusing because it's also the name of a German province, known in German as
Westfalen, but the term Westphalia is used sometimes, too, because it's from
the Latin form of the name; that's how we got our English form of many German
names).

ObPersonal: speaking of the modern-day province of Rheinland-Westfalen (Rhineland
- Westphalia) my sister was born in a British military hospital in Iserlohn, near
Dortmund, in 1957, while the occupation zones were still delineated (Canadians
were part of the British zone). Some years ago my Dad gave me his remaining
British military occupation money, which was pre-decimal, for a collection of
bank notes I put together. It was kind of funny to see this stuff -- notes for as
low as sixpence, but that could buy a pair of nylons at the military store in
those days. We lived for two years at Möhnesee, where my father, who was fluent
in German and was in the Provost Corps Special Investigations Group, among other
things did debriefing of people who survived a famous incident which is not
well-known today in Germany, but is very widely known in the West because of a
Hollywood movie that was made about it. Anybody know what happened at Möhnesee?
Hint: a see (pronounced zay)  is a lake, but can also refer to an artificial
lake.

My Mom says it was an idyllic place, incidentally. Close to the first modern
ogilopolis, the Ruhr Valley, via autobahn, but up in the foothills of the
Rothaargebirge (an Appalachian-like area with a similar climate as the
mid-Appalachians in the US, say around Virginia or E. Pennsylvania or so).

Steven Montgomery wrote:

 At 03:46 PM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:
 Trivia question: who was the first country to launch a raid on residential
 areas
 in an enemy country in WWII, and what was the city involved?

 Great Britain, May 11, 1940. They bombed the quiet peaceful town known as
 Westphalia which was miles from any front. The historian J. F. P. Veale
 notes in his book, _Advance To Barbarism_, that Great Britain's bombing of
 Westphalia was the first deliberate breach of the fundamental rule of
 civilized warfare that hostilities must only be waged against the enemy
 combatant forces.

 --

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
It's not your crosshairs that worry me as long as you can't read a map

Kill-a-watts? Is that a light bulb or a target? I want gas, not leeders...
How come all these up-and-down liney things on the map crowd so close together
up here?

Paul Osborne wrote:

 (plus the usual Canuckistani comeback, which is that given what y'all
 are [not]
 taught about geography in school, we have no need to fear, because we
 know you'd
 have to find us first...)

 Hey Marc; would you mind stepping out of my cross hairs as you are
 blocking my vision. ;-)

 Paul O
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
Actually I was thinking of Norway. Poland was considered (wrongly, of course) a
combatant and was, of course, invaded by Germany which started the war. Britain
had not guaranteed their neutrality, but had said it would declare war if Germany
invaded, which is what happened. Britain occupied Norway to forestall the Nazis
invading it. All to no avail as we now know. Again, this is all just from memory
and for fun, so I stand to be corrected.

Steven Montgomery wrote:

 At 03:46 PM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:

 Trivia question: who first broke neutrality in WWII?

 Great Britain, September 3, 1940, ostensibly to guarantee the territorial
 integrity of Poland. However after the war Poland was divvied up to the
 Soviets--so what the heck was WWII fought for?

 Interestingly enough, President Roosevelt urged the military combatants on
 both sides to refrain from bombing cities or civilian populations.
 Churchill and the French promised that only strictly military targets would
 be bombed by their air forces.


Hmm, which reminds me of my other trivia question that I'm not sure I phrased
properly. I was trying to bring out that the French fleet had been taken to
French West Africa (Algiers?) for protection when France was invaded. The British
scuttled the entire French fleet at one fell swoop, to prevent them from falling
into German hands and/or for fear that the Vichy French would use them in
cooperation with the Germans, much to DeGaulle's consternation.

All of this isn't for the purpose of defaming Churchill, incidentally. But it
does show why secular history can be so confusing, and why true history
sometimes has to be written differently. As Churchill himself put it, sometimes a
truth is so vital that it has to be shored about with lies to protect it. In the
end we rightly remember Churchill as a truly valiant figure, and choose to forget
his foibles and his miserable disasters as a peacetime PM, and his crossing of
party lines, the fact that the reason his famous speeches were given by an actor
was probably because Churchill was too drunk, etc., etc.

(The actor, incidentally, whose name escapes me, was best known at the time for a
kind of Canadian connection, too, in a back-handed way -- he played the voice of
Winnie the Pooh in a children's program on the BBC).

My favourite portrait of him is by Karsh, who died this last year, incidentally.
At the time he wasn't too well known -- just an Armenian immigrant living in
Ottawa trying to make a go as a photographer. Churchill was running on a tight
schedule and didn't like posing for portraits as it was. Karsh was nervous, he
related in his memoirs, and was fussing with the camera, when Churchill started
to growl a bit, in impatience. On impulse, Karsh snatched the omnipresent cigar
out of Churchill's mouth and immediately opened the shutter -- and that's how he
captured that famous scowl.

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Paul Osborne
And I think you may be a bloodthirsty man.  I will not say definitely, 
however, because I am not supposed to judge mankind, Jesus is.  You may 
very well have good motives, but I think you should watch them closely.


Hey, at least I know how to win a war and that is the purpose of fighting
a war. Can you imagine paying tribute to Japan today? You should count
your lucky stars the bombs were dropped. I am.

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 08:12 PM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:


Hmm, which reminds me of my other trivia question that I'm not sure I phrased
properly. I was trying to bring out that the French fleet had been taken to
French West Africa (Algiers?) for protection when France was invaded. The 
British
scuttled the entire French fleet at one fell swoop, to prevent them from 
falling
into German hands and/or for fear that the Vichy French would use them in
cooperation with the Germans, much to DeGaulle's consternation.

I knew somebodies fleet was scuttled, i just forgot who the actors were.



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
Yet another week in Moose Jaw, but in early February this time. Maybe we'll allow a
side-trip to Medicine Hat, the 40-40 city (where it's either plus 40 or minus 40 o
C; nothing in between).

Steven Montgomery wrote:

 LDS, and the plane was named after his mother. What do I win now?

 --
 Steven Montgomery

 At 03:49 PM 11/9/2002, you wrote:
 Steven wins first prize! A one-week holiday in beautiful downtown Moose Jaw in
 the second week of January.
 Okay. Here's another question: what was the religious denomination of the
 pilot,
 and after whom did he name the plane? (I'm thinking specifically of the
 Enola Gay
 here)
 
 Steven Montgomery wrote:
 
   At 11:34 AM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:
  
   Incidentally, one little irony that I'm not sure has been brought up,
   although I'm
   sure Mark especially knows this, and probably many others here, is that
   Nagasaki
   wasn't the first choice for the second bomb. The original target was
   clouded over
   that day, so Nagasaki got hit. The irony is that Nagasaki is the
   historical centre
   of Japan's Christian community.  So I guess today's trivia question is:
   what was
   the original target?
  
   The primary target was Kokura, a major munitions manufacturing center.
   Kokura was obscured by clouds and smoke (leftover from an earlier raid on a
   nearby city) so the bombadier couldn't get an exact target despite three
   separate passes. The secondary target was Nagasaki which was also obscured
   by clouds but after a couple of passes the clouds parted, and the rest is
   history.
  
   --
   Steven Montgomery
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
   Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
   selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
   politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today.
   --Steven W. Mosher
  
  
  /
   ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
   ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
  
  /
  
 
 --
 Marc A. Schindler
 Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
 
 Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he
 will pick
 himself up and continue on ­ Winston Churchill
 
 Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
 solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's
 employer,
 nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
 
 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /
 

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Steven Montgomery
At least when the temperature gets cold here (Cedar City area) in February 
I can jump in the car and in 40 minutes be in short sleeve weather.

--
Steven Montgomery

At 08:19 PM 11/9/2002, you wrote:
Yet another week in Moose Jaw, but in early February this time. Maybe 
we'll allow a
side-trip to Medicine Hat, the 40-40 city (where it's either plus 40 or 
minus 40 o
C; nothing in between).

Steven Montgomery wrote:

 LDS, and the plane was named after his mother. What do I win now?

 --
 Steven Montgomery

 At 03:49 PM 11/9/2002, you wrote:
 Steven wins first prize! A one-week holiday in beautiful downtown 
Moose Jaw in
 the second week of January.
 Okay. Here's another question: what was the religious denomination of the
 pilot,
 and after whom did he name the plane? (I'm thinking specifically of the
 Enola Gay
 here)
 
 Steven Montgomery wrote:
 
   At 11:34 AM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:
  
   Incidentally, one little irony that I'm not sure has been brought up,
   although I'm
   sure Mark especially knows this, and probably many others here, is 
that
   Nagasaki
   wasn't the first choice for the second bomb. The original target was
   clouded over
   that day, so Nagasaki got hit. The irony is that Nagasaki is the
   historical centre
   of Japan's Christian community.  So I guess today's trivia 
question is:
   what was
   the original target?
  
   The primary target was Kokura, a major munitions manufacturing center.
   Kokura was obscured by clouds and smoke (leftover from an earlier 
raid on a
   nearby city) so the bombadier couldn't get an exact target despite 
three
   separate passes. The secondary target was Nagasaki which was also 
obscured
   by clouds but after a couple of passes the clouds parted, and the 
rest is
   history.
  
   --
   Steven Montgomery
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
   Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a 
standard of
   selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which 
American
   politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today.
   --Steven W. Mosher
  
  
  
/
   ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
   ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
  
  
/
  
 
 --
 Marc A. Schindler
 Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
 
 Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he
 will pick
 himself up and continue on ­ Winston Churchill
 
 Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the 
author
 solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's
 employer,
 nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
 
 /// 
//
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /// 
//
 

 
/
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 
/


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he 
will pick
himself up and continue on ­ Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's 
employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
Well, you're a pretty good student of the war, that's for sure.

Steven Montgomery wrote:

 At 08:12 PM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:

 Hmm, which reminds me of my other trivia question that I'm not sure I phrased
 properly. I was trying to bring out that the French fleet had been taken to
 French West Africa (Algiers?) for protection when France was invaded. The
 British
 scuttled the entire French fleet at one fell swoop, to prevent them from
 falling
 into German hands and/or for fear that the Vichy French would use them in
 cooperation with the Germans, much to DeGaulle's consternation.

 I knew somebodies fleet was scuttled, i just forgot who the actors were.

 --
 Steven Montgomery
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
 selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
 politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today.
 --Steven W. Mosher

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-09 Thread Marc A. Schindler
snort We visited my brother-in-law in St. George, just south of you, in February
2000, and they had to turn the air-conditioning on at night for us. I am not making
this up.

Steven Montgomery wrote:

 At least when the temperature gets cold here (Cedar City area) in February
 I can jump in the car and in 40 minutes be in short sleeve weather.

 --
 Steven Montgomery

 At 08:19 PM 11/9/2002, you wrote:
 Yet another week in Moose Jaw, but in early February this time. Maybe
 we'll allow a
 side-trip to Medicine Hat, the 40-40 city (where it's either plus 40 or
 minus 40 o
 C; nothing in between).
 
 Steven Montgomery wrote:
 
   LDS, and the plane was named after his mother. What do I win now?
  
   --
   Steven Montgomery
  
   At 03:49 PM 11/9/2002, you wrote:
   Steven wins first prize! A one-week holiday in beautiful downtown
  Moose Jaw in
   the second week of January.
   Okay. Here's another question: what was the religious denomination of the
   pilot,
   and after whom did he name the plane? (I'm thinking specifically of the
   Enola Gay
   here)
   
   Steven Montgomery wrote:
   
 At 11:34 AM 11/9/2002, Marc wrote:

 Incidentally, one little irony that I'm not sure has been brought up,
 although I'm
 sure Mark especially knows this, and probably many others here, is
  that
 Nagasaki
 wasn't the first choice for the second bomb. The original target was
 clouded over
 that day, so Nagasaki got hit. The irony is that Nagasaki is the
 historical centre
 of Japan's Christian community.  So I guess today's trivia
  question is:
 what was
 the original target?

 The primary target was Kokura, a major munitions manufacturing center.
 Kokura was obscured by clouds and smoke (leftover from an earlier
  raid on a
 nearby city) so the bombadier couldn't get an exact target despite
  three
 separate passes. The secondary target was Nagasaki which was also
  obscured
 by clouds but after a couple of passes the clouds parted, and the
  rest is
 history.

 --
 Steven Montgomery
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a
  standard of
 selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which
  American
 politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today.
 --Steven W. Mosher


   
  /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///

   
  /

   
   --
   Marc A. Schindler
   Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
   
   Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he
   will pick
   himself up and continue on ­ Winston Churchill
   
   Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the
  author
   solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's
   employer,
   nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
   
   ///
  //
   ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
   ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
   ///
  //
   
  
  
  /
   ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
   ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
  
  /
  
 
 --
 Marc A. Schindler
 Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
 
 Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he
 will pick
 himself up and continue on ­ Winston Churchill
 
 Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
 solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's
 employer, nor
 those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
 
 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /
 

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the 

Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Paul Osborne
After much pondering, Paul Osborne favored us with:
The President of the United States and US intelligence has determined
that he is guilty. Case closed.
 
Just hope they don't find you guilty of anything without evidence. 
--JWR


The US government is not that broken John. It is without a doubt the
smartest entity on earth.

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Paul Osborne
Actually he admitted it on a videotape played on Al-Jezeera television,
out of
Doha, Qatar, the day after. He'd prepared the video ahead of time, so
there's not
much doubt.


Right. And, I'm in favor of nuclear strikes if necessary--if that's what
it takes to knock out those people that support terrorism. And, I'm not
kidding either. We should have just nuked those mountains instead of
wasting time going up there to shoot them. We should demonstrate that an
attack on US soil will be met with the greatest of force. Then, these
punky nations will learn to fear us and police themselves a little
better.

Bomb em, nuke em-- and let em have it! And, I predict that Iraq is about
to get it really good. You'll see. They deserve it too. 

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
Again, you fail to answer the question.  Why do you say that we have left
the job half done?  What evidence do you have that nothing is happening
against the Taliban.  I see plenty happening.  What in the world are you
talking about  I gave you several options to choose from and you didn't
answer any of them, saying whether they were right or wrong, and you didn't
offer any other answer.  You just keep repeating that the job isn't done.

What are you saying or implying?

Jon

Stacy Smith wrote:

 I am implying that we have only left the job half done if we leave the
 Taliban any room to start over again and form another government anywhere.

 Stacy.

 At 09:42 AM 11/07/2002 -0500, you wrote:

 You must be much more clear than you have been.  Again, I ask, what do
you
 mean by moving on.  I can make lots of guesses, but you should know
best
 what you mean.  As an example of your lack of clarity, do you mean that
we
 are turning our backs to the Taliban and assuming that they no longer
pose
 any threat?  If that is what you mean, then you are clearly incorrect.
Or
 perhaps you mean that addressing the Taliban would utilize all of our
 resources.  Again, sadly, you would be incorrect.  Or perhaps you mean
that
 al Qaeda and the Taliban are one, and that it was the Taliban who killed
our
 people, and not al Qaeda.  Yet again, you would be wrong.
 
 And since I must assume that you are positing a carefully thought our
 opinion, I must assume that I do not understand what you are saying or
 implying.
 
 Jon
 
 Stacy Smith wrote:
 
   We are moving to other targets as if we have the Taliban licked.  We
 don't.
  
   Stacy.
  
   At 07:30 AM 11/07/2002 -0500, you wrote:
  
   OK, I'll bite.  What should we do?  And why do you think we are
moving
 on
   (could you define that please?)?
   
   Jon
   
   Stacy Smith wrote:
   
   My point still holds even if they are no longer in Afghanistan.  Why
are
 we
   moving on?

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
Yes, but cocky people are very proud of their deeds.  I don't have any doubts.

Stacy.

At 07:13 AM 11/08/2002 -0900, you wrote:


After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:

Actually he admitted it on a videotape played on Al-Jezeera television, 
out of
Doha, Qatar, the day after. He'd prepared the video ahead of time, so 
there's not
much doubt.

Can we be sure he was telling the truth when he admitted to the 9-11 
attack?  I'm sure an evil man like Osama is also a liar.  Would such a man 
lie to enhance his prestige?  Often when murder is committed, the police 
have to sort through false confessions.  It sounds perfectly stupid to a 
well balanced individual, but it happens.


John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
Laurie got offended that I used the word puke. But to
me, that's what her dinner tasted like. --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/







---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
John, you seem to have a really blind spot on this issue.  This is really
not like you - it has given you Alzheimer disease, I think.  The video of
USB claiming responsibility and talking about the plans ahead of time was
played ad nauseum on the TV rag outlets.  And while we do have an obligation
to not just accept things blindly, we also need to use our judgment and not
paint all politicians with the same broad brush.  Bush et al did have
evidence, quite a bit in fact.

I can respect your opposition to the way things are going, and part of me
agrees with you - but only part.  I hope, along with you, that your
prognostications are not correct. But PLEASE don't go so far over the edge
in stating the reasons for your opposition.  It scares me!  You are supposed
to be one of the sane ones.

Jon

John W. Redelfs wrote:

 After much pondering, Paul Osborne favored us with:
 The President of the United States and US intelligence has determined
 that he is guilty. Case closed.

 Just hope they don't find you guilty of anything without evidence.  --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Marc A. Schindler
You weren't attacked by a nation. That's the problem.

Paul Osborne wrote:

 Actually he admitted it on a videotape played on Al-Jezeera television,
 out of
 Doha, Qatar, the day after. He'd prepared the video ahead of time, so
 there's not
 much doubt.

 Right. And, I'm in favor of nuclear strikes if necessary--if that's what
 it takes to knock out those people that support terrorism. And, I'm not
 kidding either. We should have just nuked those mountains instead of
 wasting time going up there to shoot them. We should demonstrate that an
 attack on US soil will be met with the greatest of force. Then, these
 punky nations will learn to fear us and police themselves a little
 better.

 Bomb em, nuke em-- and let em have it! And, I predict that Iraq is about
 to get it really good. You'll see. They deserve it too.

 Paul O
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 
 Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
 Only $9.95 per month!
 Visit www.juno.com

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
And, to add to Marc's comments (don't faint, Marc :-), we would suffer
greatly in both the short and the long run were we to so over-react.

I believe that sometime soon, someone will use a tactical nuke to take out a
carrier battlegroup - they have no other way of doing it.  If we were to use
nukes now, then we would create a situation where we had sowed the seeds of
our own loss.  We would have the moral low ground when that event occurs.

We need to always take the high road, so that, if and when the time comes
that we have to respond in kind, we can do with honor.

Jon

Marc A. Schindler wrote:

You weren't attacked by a nation. That's the problem.

Paul Osborne wrote:

 Actually he admitted it on a videotape played on Al-Jezeera television,
 out of
 Doha, Qatar, the day after. He'd prepared the video ahead of time, so
 there's not
 much doubt.

 Right. And, I'm in favor of nuclear strikes if necessary--if that's what
 it takes to knock out those people that support terrorism. And, I'm not
 kidding either. We should have just nuked those mountains instead of
 wasting time going up there to shoot them. We should demonstrate that an
 attack on US soil will be met with the greatest of force. Then, these
 punky nations will learn to fear us and police themselves a little
 better.

 Bomb em, nuke em-- and let em have it! And, I predict that Iraq is about
 to get it really good. You'll see. They deserve it too.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Marc A. Schindler
To be sure, but it seems the videotape was prepared ahead of time and delivered to
al-Jazeera on condition they not play it until after the 11th of September, from
what I recall. That would at least imply foreknowledge, if not guilt as such.

John W. Redelfs wrote:

 After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
 Actually he admitted it on a videotape played on Al-Jezeera television, out of
 Doha, Qatar, the day after. He'd prepared the video ahead of time, so
 there's not
 much doubt.

 Can we be sure he was telling the truth when he admitted to the 9-11
 attack?  I'm sure an evil man like Osama is also a liar.  Would such a man
 lie to enhance his prestige?  Often when murder is committed, the police
 have to sort through false confessions.  It sounds perfectly stupid to a
 well balanced individual, but it happens.

 John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ===
 Laurie got offended that I used the word puke. But to
 me, that's what her dinner tasted like. --Jack Handy
 ===
 All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Marc A. Schindler
If it's so smart, then you won't mind giving it all your money. Obviously it
knows what to do with it better than you do. ;-)

Paul Osborne wrote:

 After much pondering, Paul Osborne favored us with:
 The President of the United States and US intelligence has determined
 that he is guilty. Case closed.

 Just hope they don't find you guilty of anything without evidence.
 --JWR

 The US government is not that broken John. It is without a doubt the
 smartest entity on earth.

 Paul O
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 
 Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
 Only $9.95 per month!
 Visit www.juno.com

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Steven Montgomery
Not only that but what about the innocents who would undoubtedly lose their 
lives in such an attack?

--
Steven Montgomery

At 10:09 AM 11/8/2002, you wrote:
You weren't attacked by a nation. That's the problem.

Paul Osborne wrote:

 Actually he admitted it on a videotape played on Al-Jezeera television,
 out of
 Doha, Qatar, the day after. He'd prepared the video ahead of time, so
 there's not
 much doubt.

 Right. And, I'm in favor of nuclear strikes if necessary--if that's what
 it takes to knock out those people that support terrorism. And, I'm not
 kidding either. We should have just nuked those mountains instead of
 wasting time going up there to shoot them. We should demonstrate that an
 attack on US soil will be met with the greatest of force. Then, these
 punky nations will learn to fear us and police themselves a little
 better.

 Bomb em, nuke em-- and let em have it! And, I predict that Iraq is about
 to get it really good. You'll see. They deserve it too.

 Paul O
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 
 Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
 Only $9.95 per month!
 Visit www.juno.com

 
/
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 
/


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he 
will pick
himself up and continue on ­ Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's 
employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
I agree, but no matter what we do we will be overrun.  I don't know if I 
agree with the prevailing LDS sentiment that we will prevail, either.  I 
suppose one has to ask what is meant by prevail.  If you mean win but 
only with a tiny fraction of people left, I don't really call that winning.

Stacy.

At 10:04 AM 11/08/2002 -0900, you wrote:

After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:

I can respect your opposition to the way things are going, and part of me
agrees with you - but only part.  I hope, along with you, that your
prognostications are not correct. But PLEASE don't go so far over the edge
in stating the reasons for your opposition.  It scares me!  You are supposed
to be one of the sane ones.


It is not a political issue.  It is a moral issue.  America is the 
aggressor because Afghanistan and Iraq are on the other side of the 
world.  How is that for being concise?

Your friend and brother,
John W. Redelfs, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/







---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread John W. Redelfs
After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:

I believe that sometime soon, someone will use a tactical nuke to take out a
carrier battlegroup - they have no other way of doing it.  If we were to use
nukes now, then we would create a situation where we had sowed the seeds of
our own loss.  We would have the moral low ground when that event occurs.

We need to always take the high road, so that, if and when the time comes
that we have to respond in kind, we can do with honor.


We already have the moral low ground.  --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread John W. Redelfs
After much pondering, Stacy Smith favored us with:

I agree, but no matter what we do we will be overrun.  I don't know if I 
agree with the prevailing LDS sentiment that we will prevail, either.  I 
suppose one has to ask what is meant by prevail.  If you mean win but 
only with a tiny fraction of people left, I don't really call that winning.

The Book of Mormon clearly teaches--citations available on demand--that if 
the voice of the people should ever choose wickedness, their destruction is 
imminent.  It also teaches that our nation will serve the God of this land 
or it will be swept off.

Judging from how close the last election was, the voice of the people is on 
the verge of choosing wickedness.  I think they did it when they elected 
Clinton to his second term.  I think they did it when they upheld that 
notorious Supreme Court decision in 1973.

What this nations needs most in its War on Terrorism is widespread, 
national repentance.  Have any of you seen signs of this 
happening?  Statistically has sexual immorality gone down?  Is church 
attendance way up?  Has there been any rush to marry live in partners.  Is 
there a growing clamor for repealing those laws that allow state sponsored 
gambling?  Is the liquor in a deep slump from falling sales?

If there is not widespread national repentance, the USA will be 
destroyed.  Further, it will deserve it.

John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
Laurie got offended that I used the word puke. But to
me, that's what her dinner tasted like. --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
I do not believe that you can use the WWII use of nukes as a precedent for
any action today, unless we were again at that decision point.  It is quite
clear that the use of nukes in WWII saved many lives, both Japanese and
American.

When did we ever issue a real threat to use nukes since WWII?  As far as I
know, other than some rumored clandestine close calls, the only serious
threat of using nukes occurred in the 60's in the Cuban missile showdown.
Our dear friend Castro, the same one how was recently cheered in Harlem,
demanded that the Soviet commander use the tactical nukes.  He supposedly
almost did, but obviously they were not used.

This brings up an interesting point, namely, if al Qaeda gets a nuke from
some rogue country, or one of the floating Soviet nukes, and uses it, whom
would we retaliate against?  My best guess is that we would not retaliate
(at least President Bush wouldn't, nor would anyone else currently likely to
occupy the Presidency).

This is one of the reasons it is so important to (1) get rid of Saddam, (2)
bring North Korea into line, (3) assist he Russians to make a major effort
to find all their nukes, (4) aggressively protect our borders, and (5)
aggressively pursue any and all international terrorist threats.  We do not
have the luxury of sitting around playing peace.  All of this can be done
without trampling on what both John and I consider to be inalienable rights.

I also disagree with your last statement about war.  The Church stays out of
things like that.  We are obligated to protect ourselves.  We do not need
direction in all things.  I see nothing in the scriptures which says that we
should not preemptively defend ourselves, and one has a very difficult time
comparing Nephites situations to our current situations.  Yes, war is a
serious issue.  But I will promise you, if there were a group of thugs in
Cary (the next town over from Apex, where I live), and they were making
plans to attack me in a manner that I could not defend against, I would
preemptively move against them.  I fell sorry for anyone who would not.

Jon

Mark Gregson wrote:


  I believe that sometime soon, someone will use a tactical nuke to take
out a
  carrier battlegroup - they have no other way of doing it.  If we were to
use
  nukes now, then we would create a situation where we had sowed the seeds
of
  our own loss.  We would have the moral low ground when that event
occurs.

 Once the nukes start getting tossed around it won't matter who was the
first to use them because everyone will be using them as just another
conventional weapon.  There won't be any moral high ground, just as there is
no moral high ground right now in the use of tanks, planes, ships,
artillery, grenades, rifles and so on.

 Anyway, the US has already used nukes in war and has also threatened
further use so the precendent is set.  Anyone using nukes in battle will
justify themselves on the US precedent.  It won't matter if you agree with
them or not, they will use that justification.  Not that justification has
much to do with anything.  The nukes will kill lots of people with or
without it and the response will be extremely hard to limit.  The genie came
out of the bottle in about 1939 when the US decided to work on the bomb.

 (Well, of course the moral high ground is to not wage war except as
specified by scripture and revelation.)

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
When logic fails, attack!  :-)

Jon

Marc A. Schindler wrote:

If it's so smart, then you won't mind giving it all your money. Obviously it
knows what to do with it better than you do. ;-)

Paul Osborne wrote:

 After much pondering, Paul Osborne favored us with:
 The President of the United States and US intelligence has determined
 that he is guilty. Case closed.

 Just hope they don't find you guilty of anything without evidence.
 --JWR

 The US government is not that broken John. It is without a doubt the
 smartest entity on earth.

 Paul O

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
My sentiments exactly.  Do you really call that winning, for the few of 
us that are left?  I suppose in some ways it is.  At least those of us who 
are left will deserve to be left.  But for a while we will have to go 
through torment, and don't ask me to look forward to that.

Stacy.

At 10:41 AM 11/08/2002 -0900, you wrote:

After much pondering, Stacy Smith favored us with:

I agree, but no matter what we do we will be overrun.  I don't know if I 
agree with the prevailing LDS sentiment that we will prevail, either.  I 
suppose one has to ask what is meant by prevail.  If you mean win but 
only with a tiny fraction of people left, I don't really call that winning.

The Book of Mormon clearly teaches--citations available on demand--that if 
the voice of the people should ever choose wickedness, their destruction 
is imminent.  It also teaches that our nation will serve the God of this 
land or it will be swept off.

Judging from how close the last election was, the voice of the people is 
on the verge of choosing wickedness.  I think they did it when they 
elected Clinton to his second term.  I think they did it when they upheld 
that notorious Supreme Court decision in 1973.

What this nations needs most in its War on Terrorism is widespread, 
national repentance.  Have any of you seen signs of this 
happening?  Statistically has sexual immorality gone down?  Is church 
attendance way up?  Has there been any rush to marry live in partners.  Is 
there a growing clamor for repealing those laws that allow state sponsored 
gambling?  Is the liquor in a deep slump from falling sales?

If there is not widespread national repentance, the USA will be 
destroyed.  Further, it will deserve it.

John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
Laurie got offended that I used the word puke. But to
me, that's what her dinner tasted like. --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/







---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Mark Gregson

 It is quite
 clear that the use of nukes in WWII saved many lives, both Japanese and
 American.

I've already explained on this list some years ago that the nukes did not end the war. 
 You can disbelieve it, but it's best not to read what actually happened in Japan if 
you want to maintain that belief.

 When did we ever issue a real threat to use nukes since WWII? 

Korean War and Gulf War.  

(Unless you consider a real threat to be only a case where the US was minutes away 
from pulling the trigger.)

 This brings up an interesting point, namely, if al Qaeda gets a nuke from
 some rogue country, or one of the floating Soviet nukes, and uses it, whom
 would we retaliate against?  My best guess is that we would not retaliate

Yes, I've wondered about that, too.  When (not if) Manhatten is nuked, what will the 
US response be?  I assume that it will be by terrorists.

 I also disagree with your last statement about war.  The Church stays out of
 things like that.  

No, as already posted on this list the Church leaders have made statements about the 
rightness of specific wars.

As to what the scriptures say about it, well, that's been hotly deliberated for weeks 
on this list.  We will have to agree to disagree.

=  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =

   
-- 
___
Get your free email from http://mymail.operamail.com

Powered by Outblaze

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
Collateral damage would take on a whole new meaning!

Jon

Steven Montgomery wrote:

Not only that but what about the innocents who would undoubtedly lose their
lives in such an attack?

--
Steven Montgomery

At 10:09 AM 11/8/2002, you wrote:
You weren't attacked by a nation. That's the problem.

Paul Osborne wrote:

  Actually he admitted it on a videotape played on Al-Jezeera television,
  out of
  Doha, Qatar, the day after. He'd prepared the video ahead of time, so
  there's not
  much doubt.
 
  Right. And, I'm in favor of nuclear strikes if necessary--if that's what
  it takes to knock out those people that support terrorism. And, I'm not
  kidding either. We should have just nuked those mountains instead of
  wasting time going up there to shoot them. We should demonstrate that an
  attack on US soil will be met with the greatest of force. Then, these
  punky nations will learn to fear us and police themselves a little
  better.
 
  Bomb em, nuke em-- and let em have it! And, I predict that Iraq is about
  to get it really good. You'll see. They deserve it too.
 
  Paul O

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
Well, we know that at one point there will be seven sisters for each
brother.  So there will be at least 8 people left.  But wait!  There will be
two apostles, which means there must be at least on President, so that's 3
guys plus 21 gals - 28 people.

And remember, whoever gives his life for me will be saved.

Jon

Stacy Smith wrote:

 I agree, but no matter what we do we will be overrun.  I don't know if I
 agree with the prevailing LDS sentiment that we will prevail, either.  I
 suppose one has to ask what is meant by prevail.  If you mean win but
 only with a tiny fraction of people left, I don't really call that
winning.

 Stacy.

 At 10:04 AM 11/08/2002 -0900, you wrote:

 After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:
 I can respect your opposition to the way things are going, and part of
me
 agrees with you - but only part.  I hope, along with you, that your
 prognostications are not correct. But PLEASE don't go so far over the
edge
 in stating the reasons for your opposition.  It scares me!  You are
supposed
 to be one of the sane ones.
 
 It is not a political issue.  It is a moral issue.  America is the
 aggressor because Afghanistan and Iraq are on the other side of the
 world.  How is that for being concise?

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
And we're diggin' as fast as we can, right?  :-)

Jon

John W. Redelfs wrote:

 We already have the moral low ground.  --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
If I can't understand how eight people survived after the ark, how will I 
be able to understand only 28?  Suppose some of those 28 are handicapped?

Stacy.

At 04:27 PM 11/08/2002 -0500, you wrote:

Well, we know that at one point there will be seven sisters for each
brother.  So there will be at least 8 people left.  But wait!  There will be
two apostles, which means there must be at least on President, so that's 3
guys plus 21 gals - 28 people.

And remember, whoever gives his life for me will be saved.

Jon

Stacy Smith wrote:

 I agree, but no matter what we do we will be overrun.  I don't know if I
 agree with the prevailing LDS sentiment that we will prevail, either.  I
 suppose one has to ask what is meant by prevail.  If you mean win but
 only with a tiny fraction of people left, I don't really call that
winning.

 Stacy.

 At 10:04 AM 11/08/2002 -0900, you wrote:

 After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:
 I can respect your opposition to the way things are going, and part of
me
 agrees with you - but only part.  I hope, along with you, that your
 prognostications are not correct. But PLEASE don't go so far over the
edge
 in stating the reasons for your opposition.  It scares me!  You are
supposed
 to be one of the sane ones.
 
 It is not a political issue.  It is a moral issue.  America is the
 aggressor because Afghanistan and Iraq are on the other side of the
 world.  How is that for being concise?

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/





---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
Right.  Uh huh.  Sure.  I don't think so.  There was no credible threat of
the use nukes by the US in the Korean War, and no threat whatsoever, other
than accusations of such from the left, during the Gulf War.

Jon

Mark Gregson wrote:

  When did we ever issue a real threat to use nukes since WWII?

 Korean War and Gulf War.

 (Unless you consider a real threat to be only a case where the US was
minutes away from pulling the trigger.)


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
The Lord will restore them to perfect bodies if needed.  He's a really nice
guy, I hear.  Or perhaps they will have gifts or powers that renders their
disability irrelevant.

Jon

Stacy Smith wrote:

 If I can't understand how eight people survived after the ark, how will I
 be able to understand only 28?  Suppose some of those 28 are handicapped?

 Stacy.

 At 04:27 PM 11/08/2002 -0500, you wrote:

 Well, we know that at one point there will be seven sisters for each
 brother.  So there will be at least 8 people left.  But wait!  There will
be
 two apostles, which means there must be at least on President, so that's
3
 guys plus 21 gals - 28 people.
 
 And remember, whoever gives his life for me will be saved.
 
 Jon
 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
Yes, but merely in terms of numbers, I guess I was thinking that there 
wouldn't be too many desirables around to date, etc.  How about 
cooking?  We probably would all have to hunt as plant life would not 
survive nuclear attack.  Those were the kinds of things I was thinking 
about.  Or are you thinking we could have manna again?  I guess that's a 
possibility.  I guess I'm saying it wouldn't be a very desirable world.

Stacy.

At 04:52 PM 11/08/2002 -0500, you wrote:

The Lord will restore them to perfect bodies if needed.  He's a really nice
guy, I hear.  Or perhaps they will have gifts or powers that renders their
disability irrelevant.

Jon

Stacy Smith wrote:

 If I can't understand how eight people survived after the ark, how will I
 be able to understand only 28?  Suppose some of those 28 are handicapped?

 Stacy.

 At 04:27 PM 11/08/2002 -0500, you wrote:

 Well, we know that at one point there will be seven sisters for each
 brother.  So there will be at least 8 people left.  But wait!  There will
be
 two apostles, which means there must be at least on President, so that's
3
 guys plus 21 gals - 28 people.
 
 And remember, whoever gives his life for me will be saved.
 
 Jon
 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/





---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
In one sense -the temporal one - I agree with you.  I understand that you
are blind.  To me, that would be devastating at first.  I would hope that I
could learn to cope.

But I do believe that no matter how hard things were, it would be somehow
fulfilling to be a part of the final struggle, so long as I had a firm hold
on my testimony of the gospel, with a firm knowledge that I would be
rejoined with my family.  I wouldn't ask for it - I sort of like my
relatively cushy life (:-) - but I would do what the Lord asked (so long as
I didn't have to give up my French Shriner shoes - I have worn them and
nothing else now for about 24 years, even thought the brand name keeps
changing).

There is something very satisfying about fighting for what is right,
regardless of the consequences the world tries to give you.  If the Spirit
is there by your side, I know that you can accomplish anything the Lord asks
you to do.

Jon

Stacy Smith wrote:

 Yes, but merely in terms of numbers, I guess I was thinking that there
 wouldn't be too many desirables around to date, etc.  How about
 cooking?  We probably would all have to hunt as plant life would not
 survive nuclear attack.  Those were the kinds of things I was thinking
 about.  Or are you thinking we could have manna again?  I guess that's a
 possibility.  I guess I'm saying it wouldn't be a very desirable world.

 Stacy.

 At 04:52 PM 11/08/2002 -0500, you wrote:

 The Lord will restore them to perfect bodies if needed.  He's a really
nice
 guy, I hear.  Or perhaps they will have gifts or powers that renders
their
 disability irrelevant.
 
 Jon
 
 Stacy Smith wrote:
 
   If I can't understand how eight people survived after the ark, how
will I
   be able to understand only 28?  Suppose some of those 28 are
handicapped?
  
   Stacy.
  
   At 04:27 PM 11/08/2002 -0500, you wrote:
  
   Well, we know that at one point there will be seven sisters for each
   brother.  So there will be at least 8 people left.  But wait!  There
will
 be
   two apostles, which means there must be at least on President, so
that's
 3
   guys plus 21 gals - 28 people.
   
   And remember, whoever gives his life for me will be saved.
   
   Jon
   
 

///
//
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///

///
//
 
 
 
 
 
 ---
 Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
 Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
 Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002



/
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///


/




/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Dan R Allen



Stacy:
Yes, but merely in terms of numbers, I guess I was thinking that there
wouldn't be too many desirables around to date, etc.  How about cooking?
We probably would all have to hunt as plant life would not survive nuclear
attack.  Those were the kinds of things I was thinking about.  Or are you
thinking we could have manna again?

Dan:
MRE's

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
Yes, I've started getting those.

Stacy.

At 03:26 PM 11/08/2002 -0700, you wrote:





Stacy:
Yes, but merely in terms of numbers, I guess I was thinking that there
wouldn't be too many desirables around to date, etc.  How about cooking?
We probably would all have to hunt as plant life would not survive nuclear
attack.  Those were the kinds of things I was thinking about.  Or are you
thinking we could have manna again?

Dan:
MRE's

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/





---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread John W. Redelfs
After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:

There is no other side of the world anymore, or hadn't you noticed.  Of
course, it is probably easier to get to North Carolina from Baghdad than
from where you live, but I digress. :-)


This is a cliche.  Of course there is an other side of the world even 
today.  Does every nation have long distance bombers or ICBMs?  Can all 
nations afford virtually unlimited transportation technology?  Do they all 
have great navys?  Speaking as one who has had to severely limit his trips 
to the Lower Forty-eight because of exorbitant airfares, I can assure you 
that it is still a big world.  It is just somewhat smaller than it used to be.

John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine,
which I guess is why several of us died of tuberculosis.
--Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread John W. Redelfs
After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:
I see nothing in the scriptures which says that we should not preemptively 
defend ourselves, and ONE HAS A VERY DIFFICULT TIME COMPARING NEPHITES 
SITUATIONS TO OUR CURRENT SITUATIONS.
---

Any thoughts on this statement?  --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread John W. Redelfs
After much pondering, Stacy Smith favored us with:

Or are you thinking we could have manna again?  I guess that's a 
possibility.  I guess I'm saying it wouldn't be a very desirable world.

Maybe radioactive ravens could bring you morsels. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
Ouch!  If they were radioactive do you think I'd want that?  Unless the 
Lord intends everything that's brought by them to all of a sudden become 
free of radiation.  That may be a bigger miracle than any prophet has ever 
seen happen.

Stacy.

At 02:11 PM 11/08/2002 -0900, you wrote:

After much pondering, Stacy Smith favored us with:

Or are you thinking we could have manna again?  I guess that's a 
possibility.  I guess I'm saying it wouldn't be a very desirable world.

Maybe radioactive ravens could bring you morsels. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/







---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
Try buying one of those military special gliders that one runs on one's 
back or whatever.

Stacy.

At 01:55 PM 11/08/2002 -0900, you wrote:

After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:

There is no other side of the world anymore, or hadn't you noticed.  Of
course, it is probably easier to get to North Carolina from Baghdad than
from where you live, but I digress. :-)


This is a cliche.  Of course there is an other side of the world even 
today.  Does every nation have long distance bombers or ICBMs?  Can all 
nations afford virtually unlimited transportation technology?  Do they all 
have great navys?  Speaking as one who has had to severely limit his trips 
to the Lower Forty-eight because of exorbitant airfares, I can assure you 
that it is still a big world.  It is just somewhat smaller than it used to be.

John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine,
which I guess is why several of us died of tuberculosis.
--Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/







---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Marc A. Schindler


Jon Spencer wrote:

 I do not believe that you can use the WWII use of nukes as a precedent for
 any action today, unless we were again at that decision point.  It is quite
 clear that the use of nukes in WWII saved many lives, both Japanese and
 American.

 When did we ever issue a real threat to use nukes since WWII?

Since the Cuban crisis (which we've discussed before), I am not aware of the US
making any such threat, but there are two issues that Arab countries in
particular have. The first is one that all non-US countries share: the US's
refusal to forego the right to first strike, and the one that's unique to the
Middle East is the help that the US has given to Israel, which is a non-public
nuclear state.  Israel, too, has ignored a number of UN resolutions, and many
Arabs see the US as being hypocritical in this regard.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with them -- am just pointing out the concern.

 As far as I
 know, other than some rumored clandestine close calls, the only serious
 threat of using nukes occurred in the 60's in the Cuban missile showdown.
 Our dear friend Castro, the same one how was recently cheered in Harlem,
 demanded that the Soviet commander use the tactical nukes.  He supposedly
 almost did, but obviously they were not used.

 This brings up an interesting point, namely, if al Qaeda gets a nuke from
 some rogue country, or one of the floating Soviet nukes, and uses it, whom
 would we retaliate against?  My best guess is that we would not retaliate
 (at least President Bush wouldn't, nor would anyone else currently likely to
 occupy the Presidency).


I think the most imminent threat isn't from a conventional nuke but from
so-called dirty bombs, which are conventional explosives packed with a messy
radioactive substance such as caesium (which is a powder in natural form).


 This is one of the reasons it is so important to (1) get rid of Saddam, (2)
 bring North Korea into line, (3) assist he Russians to make a major effort
 to find all their nukes, (4) aggressively protect our borders, and (5)
 aggressively pursue any and all international terrorist threats.  We do not
 have the luxury of sitting around playing peace.  All of this can be done
 without trampling on what both John and I consider to be inalienable rights.

 I also disagree with your last statement about war.  The Church stays out of
 things like that.  We are obligated to protect ourselves.  We do not need
 direction in all things.  I see nothing in the scriptures which says that we
 should not preemptively defend ourselves, and one has a very difficult time
 comparing Nephites situations to our current situations.  Yes, war is a
 serious issue.  But I will promise you, if there were a group of thugs in
 Cary (the next town over from Apex, where I live), and they were making
 plans to attack me in a manner that I could not defend against, I would
 preemptively move against them.  I fell sorry for anyone who would not.

 Jon

 Mark Gregson wrote:

 
   I believe that sometime soon, someone will use a tactical nuke to take
 out a
   carrier battlegroup - they have no other way of doing it.  If we were to
 use
   nukes now, then we would create a situation where we had sowed the seeds
 of
   our own loss.  We would have the moral low ground when that event
 occurs.
 
  Once the nukes start getting tossed around it won't matter who was the
 first to use them because everyone will be using them as just another
 conventional weapon.  There won't be any moral high ground, just as there is
 no moral high ground right now in the use of tanks, planes, ships,
 artillery, grenades, rifles and so on.
 
  Anyway, the US has already used nukes in war and has also threatened
 further use so the precendent is set.  Anyone using nukes in battle will
 justify themselves on the US precedent.  It won't matter if you agree with
 them or not, they will use that justification.  Not that justification has
 much to do with anything.  The nukes will kill lots of people with or
 without it and the response will be extremely hard to limit.  The genie came
 out of the bottle in about 1939 when the US decided to work on the bomb.
 
  (Well, of course the moral high ground is to not wage war except as
 specified by scripture and revelation.)

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.


Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Mark Gregson

 Right.  Uh huh.  Sure.  I don't think so.  There was no credible threat of
 the use nukes by the US in the Korean War, and no threat whatsoever, other
 than accusations of such from the left, during the Gulf War.

I heard President George Bush state at the beginning of the Gulf War that the US had 
not ruled out the use of nukes in that war.  That is a credible threat in my opinion.  

The threat in the Korean War was even more direct:

http://www.centurychina.com/history/faq7.shtml

On May 19 1953, the Joint Chiefs recommended direct air and naval operations against 
China, including the use of nuclear weapons. The National Security Council endorsed 
the JCS recommendation the next day.

Dulles, the Secretary of State was visiting India and told Nehru to deliver a message 
to Zhou Enlai: if peace was not speedily attained, the United States would begin to 
bomb north of Yalu, and US had recently tested atomic shells. 

=  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =

   
-- 
___
Get your free email from http://mymail.operamail.com

Powered by Outblaze

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Marc A. Schindler
...with sarcasm. Not to be taken seriously.

Jon Spencer wrote:

 When logic fails, attack!  :-)

 Jon

 Marc A. Schindler wrote:

 If it's so smart, then you won't mind giving it all your money. Obviously it
 knows what to do with it better than you do. ;-)

 Paul Osborne wrote:

  After much pondering, Paul Osborne favored us with:
  The President of the United States and US intelligence has determined
  that he is guilty. Case closed.
 
  Just hope they don't find you guilty of anything without evidence.
  --JWR
 
  The US government is not that broken John. It is without a doubt the
  smartest entity on earth.
 
  Paul O

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Marc A. Schindler


Mark Gregson wrote:


  It is quite
  clear that the use of nukes in WWII saved many lives, both Japanese and
  American.

 I've already explained on this list some years ago that the nukes did not end the 
war.  You can disbelieve it, but it's best not to read what actually happened in 
Japan if you want to maintain that belief.

  When did we ever issue a real threat to use nukes since WWII?

 Korean War and Gulf War.


I won't disagree with you because I honestly don't know. But at what point in each of 
these conflicts was there a threat to use nukes?


 (Unless you consider a real threat to be only a case where the US was minutes away 
from pulling the trigger.)

  This brings up an interesting point, namely, if al Qaeda gets a nuke from
  some rogue country, or one of the floating Soviet nukes, and uses it, whom
  would we retaliate against?  My best guess is that we would not retaliate

 Yes, I've wondered about that, too.  When (not if) Manhatten is nuked, what will the 
US response be?  I assume that it will be by terrorists.


Personally I think they'll broaden their attacks. They won't be just against the U.S. 
anymore.


  I also disagree with your last statement about war.  The Church stays out of
  things like that.

 No, as already posted on this list the Church leaders have made statements about the 
rightness of specific wars.


In general ways. But you and I are, I think, in agreement about this, so I won't say 
anything more. I guess I've contaminated you, or were you always a pinko socialist 
isolationist Canuck? grin


 As to what the scriptures say about it, well, that's been hotly deliberated for 
weeks on this list.  We will have to agree to disagree.

 =  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick 
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; 
its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor those of 
any organization with which the author
may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Marc A. Schindler
Thanks for that -- I wasn't aware of this. I'm not surprised that it involved China, 
actually.

Mark Gregson wrote:


  Right.  Uh huh.  Sure.  I don't think so.  There was no credible threat of
  the use nukes by the US in the Korean War, and no threat whatsoever, other
  than accusations of such from the left, during the Gulf War.

 I heard President George Bush state at the beginning of the Gulf War that the US had 
not ruled out the use of nukes in that war.  That is a credible threat in my opinion.

 The threat in the Korean War was even more direct:

 http://www.centurychina.com/history/faq7.shtml

 On May 19 1953, the Joint Chiefs recommended direct air and naval operations 
against China, including the use of nuclear weapons. The National Security Council 
endorsed the JCS recommendation the next day.

 Dulles, the Secretary of State was visiting India and told Nehru to deliver a 
message to Zhou Enlai: if peace was not speedily attained, the United States would 
begin to bomb north of Yalu, and US had recently tested atomic shells. 

 =  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =


 --
 ___
 Get your free email from http://mymail.operamail.com

 Powered by Outblaze

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick 
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; 
its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor those of 
any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Paul Osborne
Not only that but what about the innocents who would undoubtedly lose
their 
lives in such an attack?


IMO, that's all part of the deal. War is hell but we must fight it to win
at minimal cost to our own side and if nuclear bombs will achieve that
end, I am all for it. Whoever attacks this country should be made to pay
the ultimate price and that will set the example for the rest of the
world and probably deter future wars. Nuclear explosions are merciful
because they vaporize a large part of the enemy quickly and get rid of
the problem right away. Everyone is so worried about the innocents.
THAT'S WAR! The Lord and Joshuah weren't worried about the innocents.
Slay them ALL! The object is to win and not take any chances of
loosing. It's dangerous for a bleeding heart liberal to lead troops in a
battle and expect victory. Take that wuss Jimmy Carter for example; Oh
blah! He sent some helicopters into Iran for a rescue and that was a big
fat joke. We should have bombed Iran and set the example back then and
declared the hostages war heros. Then we could have exacted tribute and
filled the coffers of American banks as a further punishment against our
enemies. You mark my words--Iran is going to be a real problem for us in
the not so distant future. We Americans will pay for our failure to bomb
them properly as we should have done. 

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 06:32 PM 11/8/2002, you wrote:

Not only that but what about the innocents who would undoubtedly lose
their
lives in such an attack?


IMO, that's all part of the deal. War is hell but we must fight it to win
at minimal cost to our own side and if nuclear bombs will achieve that
end, I am all for it. Whoever attacks this country should be made to pay
the ultimate price and that will set the example for the rest of the
world and probably deter future wars. Nuclear explosions are merciful
because they vaporize a large part of the enemy quickly and get rid of
the problem right away. Everyone is so worried about the innocents.
THAT'S WAR! The Lord and Joshuah weren't worried about the innocents.
Slay them ALL! The object is to win and not take any chances of
loosing. It's dangerous for a bleeding heart liberal to lead troops in a
battle and expect victory. Take that wuss Jimmy Carter for example; Oh
blah! He sent some helicopters into Iran for a rescue and that was a big
fat joke. We should have bombed Iran and set the example back then and
declared the hostages war heros. Then we could have exacted tribute and
filled the coffers of American banks as a further punishment against our
enemies. You mark my words--Iran is going to be a real problem for us in
the not so distant future. We Americans will pay for our failure to bomb
them properly as we should have done.

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Very interesting, your approval of total warfare. I take it you also 
approved of the firebombing of Dresden, a non-important city strategically, 
where over 250,000 people, men, woman and children, including wounded who 
had been gathered there, lost their lives in two days?

Prior to the Civil War noncombatants were traditionally and legally by the 
laws of nations left alone. The concept of total war (targeting civilians 
as well as combatants) had its roots in the Civil War (when war would be 
poured out upon all nations) beginning with General Sherman's march to the 
sea.

At least one First Presidency member and noted Constitutional scholar, J. 
Reuben Clark has condemned total warfare. President Clark criticized the 
bombing of Dresden and other cities, even including Hiroshima and Nagasaki 
as unnecessary and barbaric. He stated on one occasion:

Quote
Is it not time in the world for a curb to be placed upon the narrow, 
fiendish concepts of militarists, and their evil lusts and passions by 
which they are constantly driven to plan and carry out ever increasing woe, 
misery, destruction, and slaughter of the aged, the infirm, the sick, the 
crippled? There are elements of good that must control the base in men, 
even in war. How long will their ears be deaf to the cries of the Christian 
conscience of the world, and to their own better instincts as men? How long 
will they challenge the eternal principle voiced by the Master two 
millenniums ago: 'With what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you 
again?' And again: 'Put up again thy sword into his place; for all they 
that take the sword shall perish with the sword. (J. Reuben Clark, 
Conference Report, October 1946, Afternoon Meeting)
/Quote

In addition he also criticized the United States for their role in 
perpetuating total war thusly:

Quote
Thus we in America are now deliberately searching out and developing the 
most savage, murderous means of exterminating peoples that Satan can plant 
in our minds. We do it not only shamelessly, but with a boast. God will not 
forgive us for this.
If we are to avoid extermination, if the world is not to be wiped out, we 
must find some way to curb the fiendish ingenuity of men who have 
apparently no fear of God, man, or the devil, and who are willing to plot 
and plan and invent instrumentalities that will wipe out all the flesh of 
the earth. And, as one American citizen of one hundred thirty millions, as 
one in one billion population of the world, I protest with all of the 
energy I possess against this fiendish activity, and as an American 
citizen, I call upon our government and its agencies to see that these 
unholy experimentations are stopped, and that somehow we get into the minds 
of our war-minded general staff and its satellites, and into the general 
staffs of all the world, a proper respect for human life.
(President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Conference Report, October 1946, Afternoon 
Meeting 89.)
/Quote





--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^

Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Paul Osborne
Steve,

I still stay that all out war is always on the table when it comes to
preserving ones country, religion, and liberties--notwithstanding what a
church leader has said on the subject from the not so distance past. I'm
not prepared to see my country go down for any reason even if it meant
the entire destruction of other countries. Whatever it takes to preserve
our rights and liberties must be considered. Now--you probably can guess
that I don't want to see civilians killed because I don't. I think
smaller tactical nuclear bombs are more prudent. But if that doesn't work
than I think the full size bombs could be dropped if that is what it
takes to save us from the destruction of American life and property. 

I'm quite disappointed to learn that any church leader from the WWII era
opposed the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan. 

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
Dropping currently powerful nuclear bombs could also mean our destruction 
as a nation, any way you see it.

Stacy.

At 11:42 PM 11/08/2002 -0600, you wrote:

Steve,

I still stay that all out war is always on the table when it comes to
preserving ones country, religion, and liberties--notwithstanding what a
church leader has said on the subject from the not so distance past. I'm
not prepared to see my country go down for any reason even if it meant
the entire destruction of other countries. Whatever it takes to preserve
our rights and liberties must be considered. Now--you probably can guess
that I don't want to see civilians killed because I don't. I think
smaller tactical nuclear bombs are more prudent. But if that doesn't work
than I think the full size bombs could be dropped if that is what it
takes to save us from the destruction of American life and property.

I'm quite disappointed to learn that any church leader from the WWII era
opposed the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan.

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/





---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Paul Osborne
Quote
Thus we in America are now deliberately searching out and developing the 
most savage, murderous means of exterminating peoples that Satan can
plant 
in our minds. We do it not only shamelessly, but with a boast. God will
not 
forgive us for this.
If we are to avoid extermination, if the world is not to be wiped out, we

must find some way to curb the fiendish ingenuity of men who have 
apparently no fear of God, man, or the devil, and who are willing to plot

and plan and invent instrumentalities that will wipe out all the flesh of

the earth. And, as one American citizen of one hundred thirty millions,
as 
one in one billion population of the world, I protest with all of the 
energy I possess against this fiendish activity, and as an American 
citizen, I call upon our government and its agencies to see that these 
unholy experimentations are stopped, and that somehow we get into the
minds 
of our war-minded general staff and its satellites, and into the general 
staffs of all the world, a proper respect for human life.
(President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Conference Report, October 1946,
Afternoon 
Meeting 89.)
/Quote



If we didn't develop the atomic bombs and make plenty of them isn't it
possible that we might not be here today to read this quote because the
Russians or some other country would have nuked us? I'm glad that the
above quote is in the archives only and is not quoted in our conferences
today. That would really depress me. 

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 10:42 PM 11/8/2002, you wrote:

Steve,

I still stay that all out war is always on the table when it comes to
preserving ones country, religion, and liberties--notwithstanding what a
church leader has said on the subject from the not so distance past. I'm
not prepared to see my country go down for any reason even if it meant
the entire destruction of other countries. Whatever it takes to preserve
our rights and liberties must be considered. Now--you probably can guess
that I don't want to see civilians killed because I don't. I think
smaller tactical nuclear bombs are more prudent. But if that doesn't work
than I think the full size bombs could be dropped if that is what it
takes to save us from the destruction of American life and property.

I'm quite disappointed to learn that any church leader from the WWII era
opposed the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan.

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Perhaps there is good reason why a member of the First Presidency was 
critical of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

JOHN F. MCMANUS

Why did the U.S. unleash its terrible weapon? Prevailing
wisdom concerning the August 1945 atomic bombings of the Japanese cities
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki holds that those twin horrors were undertaken
to force Japan to sue for peace. Had the bombs not been employed (so the
wisdom goes), an enormous number of American troops would have
perished in an inevitable amphibious operation against the Japanese
mainland.

During much of 1995, controversy engulfed plans by Washington, DC's
Smithsonian Institution to exhibit the Enola Gay, the B-29 bomber that
delivered the A-bomb over Hiroshima. Incredibly, the exhibit's original
commentary intended to empathize with Japan and portray the United
States as perpetrators of a war of vengeance. The planned text even
declared of the Pacific conflict, For most of the Japanese, it was a
war to defend their unique culture against Western imperialism.

Veterans groups, angry citizens, and some members of Congress eventually
forced the Smithsonian to rewrite the text for the exhibit. What finally
emerged, not surprisingly, is now being targeted by an assortment of
pacifists and anti-nuclear partisans. A wall panel now informs viewers:

[The atomic bombs] destroyed much of the two cities and caused many tens
of thousands of deaths. However, the use of the bombs led to the
immediate surrender of Japan and made unnecessary the planned invasion
of the Japanese home islands. Such an invasion, especially if undertaken
for both main islands, would have led to heavy casualties among
American, Allied, and Japanese armed forces and Japanese civilians.

This current display, therefore, repeats the notion that the dropping of
the bombs by the U.S. brought Japan to the peace table and saved
countless lives on both sides. But this historical view, like the
original commentary intended for the exhibit, is not supported by the
facts.

Immediately after the war had ended, President Harry Truman publicized
the view of wartime Army Chief of Staff General George C. Marshall that
an invasion of the Japanese mainland would have required a million men
for the landing and a million more to hold it, and ... half a million
casualties.

Much of the historical perspective on the era holds that the Japanese
were prepared to fight to their very last man, and that until the horror
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had been visited upon their homeland Japanese
leaders had no intention of surrendering. But in fact the Japanese had
sent peace feelers to the West as early as 1942, only six months after
the December 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. More would come in a flood
long before the fateful use of the atomic bombs.

In her 1956 book, The Enemy at His Back, journalist Elizabeth Churchill
Brown supplied overwhelming evidence to counter the inaccurate views
about the close of the war. Beginning in 1949, she plunged into dozens
of wartime memoirs and congressional hearings dealing with the conflict.
The wife of noted Washington Star columnist Constantine Brown, Mrs.
Brown had access to many of the men who were no longer 'under wraps,'
as she noted. She wrote, With this knowledge at hand, I quickly began
to see why the war with Japan was unprecedented in all history. Here was
an enemy who had been trying to surrender for almost a year before the
conflict ended.

In her book, Brown supplied abundant evidence about the immense perfidy
that kept the Japanese from surrendering until such time as the Soviets
were ready to enter the war against Japan and the American forces had
dropped the atomic bombs on civilian populations.

Divided Opinion Even before Japan started the war, its leadership was
divided into two sharply opposing factions. Those who never wanted any
hostilities between Japan and the United States were known as the peace
party. They counted among their number Emperor Hirohito and several
high officers in the navy.

The other faction, the militarists led by Army leader Tojo, was known 

Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
I was hoping for some.  Actually, I have given quite a bit of thought to
this question, and I have had a very difficult time with it.

Jon

 After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:
 I see nothing in the scriptures which says that we should not preemptively
 defend ourselves, and ONE HAS A VERY DIFFICULT TIME COMPARING NEPHITES
 SITUATIONS TO OUR CURRENT SITUATIONS.
 ---

 Any thoughts on this statement?  --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 11:00 PM 11/8/2002, you wrote:

Quote
Thus we in America are now deliberately searching out and developing the
most savage, murderous means of exterminating peoples that Satan can
plant
in our minds. We do it not only shamelessly, but with a boast. God will
not
forgive us for this.
If we are to avoid extermination, if the world is not to be wiped out, we

must find some way to curb the fiendish ingenuity of men who have
apparently no fear of God, man, or the devil, and who are willing to plot

and plan and invent instrumentalities that will wipe out all the flesh of

the earth. And, as one American citizen of one hundred thirty millions,
as
one in one billion population of the world, I protest with all of the
energy I possess against this fiendish activity, and as an American
citizen, I call upon our government and its agencies to see that these
unholy experimentations are stopped, and that somehow we get into the
minds
of our war-minded general staff and its satellites, and into the general
staffs of all the world, a proper respect for human life.
(President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Conference Report, October 1946,
Afternoon
Meeting 89.)
/Quote



If we didn't develop the atomic bombs and make plenty of them isn't it
possible that we might not be here today to read this quote because the
Russians or some other country would have nuked us? I'm glad that the
above quote is in the archives only and is not quoted in our conferences
today. That would really depress me.

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


It might depress you further to know that the United States was 
instrumental in turning over nuclear secrets to the Soviets. Major Racey 
Jordan wrote a book entitled, _Major Jordan's Diaries_, about his part, 
unbeknownst to him at the time, of delivering weapons grade uranium, plans, 
diagrams and other supplies to the Soviets.



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Explore Freedom: http://www.geocities.com/graymada

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
It may be a cliché to you, but it is not a cliché to me.  How did the Twin
Towers disappear?  How did the Pentagon get zapped?  How did the Twin Towers
get bombed?  How did all of the threats that were aborted without us ever
knowing get enabled?

Distance is a barrier only to major movements of arms.  It is not a barrier
to a suitcase nuke or a smallpox infected person.  From this perspective,
there is no far away place.

I have traveled around the world (literally, starting in Raleigh and going
west until I came back to Raleigh), and it was very easy.  No major city in
the relatively free world is more than 24 hours away, and most are far
closer.  This is much much closer than the Lamanites were to the Nephites.

Note, also, that I did not say It's a small world after all.  I would
never say that.  After ONE trip through that stupid Disneyland ride, I HATED
that stupid song.  I now have some concept of what hell must be like.

Jon

John W. Redelfs wrote:

 After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:
 There is no other side of the world anymore, or hadn't you noticed.  Of
 course, it is probably easier to get to North Carolina from Baghdad than
 from where you live, but I digress. :-)

 This is a cliche.  Of course there is an other side of the world even
 today.  Does every nation have long distance bombers or ICBMs?  Can all
 nations afford virtually unlimited transportation technology?  Do they all
 have great navys?  Speaking as one who has had to severely limit his trips
 to the Lower Forty-eight because of exorbitant airfares, I can assure you
 that it is still a big world.  It is just somewhat smaller than it used to
be.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
Only if it were a rationalization.  The Chinese are still suffering today
because of the biological weapons the Japanese used on them.  The Japanese
offensive was brutal and criminal beyond what I can comprehend.

That only a few Japanese died compared to the excesses of their war
campaigns should be considered a blessing by those people.  We have never
done anything like that, and while I live and breathe we never will.

No, it is no rationalization.

Jon

John W. Redelfs wrote:

 After much pondering, Jon Spencer favored us with:
 I do not believe that you can use the WWII use of nukes as a precedent
for
 any action today, unless we were again at that decision point.  It is
quite
 clear that the use of nukes in WWII saved many lives, both Japanese and
 American.

 The same rationalization could be used in any war. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Jon Spencer
Actually, dirty bombs are not a big deal from a radioactivity point of view.
If one is exposed to a dirty nuke, one only has to get to a complete shower
(at home will do just fine) within a couple of hours, and there will be no
long term effects.  The cleanup will be a pain to be sure, but not a really
big deal either.

Of course, with all the hysteria over nuclear power that the envirowackos
have stirred up, the emotional damage would be much greater.

But that's a topic for another thread, one that I have begun doing detailed
and extensive research on.  You will be the first to see the fruits of that
research - sort of a test market!

Jon

Marc A. Schindler wrote:
I think the most imminent threat isn't from a conventional nuke but from
so-called dirty bombs, which are conventional explosives packed with a messy
radioactive substance such as caesium (which is a powder in natural form).

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-08 Thread Stacy Smith
Then why weren't the Japanese able to overcome the effects?  The key here, 
I believe, is how would we know we had been hit to take the showers?  Plus, 
what if they're laced with bioweapons?

Stacy.

At 01:52 AM 11/09/2002 -0500, you wrote:

Actually, dirty bombs are not a big deal from a radioactivity point of view.
If one is exposed to a dirty nuke, one only has to get to a complete shower
(at home will do just fine) within a couple of hours, and there will be no
long term effects.  The cleanup will be a pain to be sure, but not a really
big deal either.

Of course, with all the hysteria over nuclear power that the envirowackos
have stirred up, the emotional damage would be much greater.

But that's a topic for another thread, one that I have begun doing detailed
and extensive research on.  You will be the first to see the fruits of that
research - sort of a test market!

Jon

Marc A. Schindler wrote:
I think the most imminent threat isn't from a conventional nuke but from
so-called dirty bombs, which are conventional explosives packed with a messy
radioactive substance such as caesium (which is a powder in natural form).

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/





---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/10/2002


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] Taliban in Pakistan

2002-11-07 Thread Jon Spencer
OK, I'll bite.  What should we do?  And why do you think we are moving on
(could you define that please?)?

Jon

Stacy Smith wrote:

My point still holds even if they are no longer in Afghanistan.  Why are we
moving on?

Stacy.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




  1   2   >