DV8 2XL

Different from ours; colonialism was in full swing, disenfranchisement of groups of citizens based on the amount of melanin in their skin. The Allies had a few skeletons in their closets too. I'm not saying that it was hypocritical of them to hold the Axis powers responsible for their actions, or that the actions of the West licensed death-camps and the like, but to apologize now for the actions that were taken by people that are two, sometimes three generations removed from us....

We'll Meet Again The Ink Spots Written by Ross Parker and Hughie Charles This version did not chart but In 1941, Kay Kyser and Guy Lombardo's versions both hit # 24 In 1942, Benny Goodman stood alone at # 16 And in 1954, Vera Lynn brought it back at # 29 and her version was used in the final scene of the 1964 film "Dr. Strangelove Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb" We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when But I'm sure we'll meet again some sunny day Keep smiling through, just the way you used to do Till the blue skies chase the dark clouds far away Now, won't you please say "Hello" to the folks that I know Tell 'em it won't be long 'cause they'd be happy to know that when you saw me go I was singing this song We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when But I'm sure we'll meet again some sunny day MONOLOGUE: Yes, we'll meet again. Darlin', I don't know where and I don't know when. But I KNOW we'll meet again one of these good ole sunshiny days. Ya know, darlin', all ya gotta do is just keep on smilin' through you know just like you ALWAYS do, until the blue skies chase the dark clouds far, far, far away. I wantcha to do me a favor, please say "Hello" to all the folks that I know. Well, just tell 'em it won't be long. They'd be happy to know that when you saw me go, I was standin' right here, singin' this song. We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when But I know we'll meet again some sunny day

That's just a cover story; the truth is the money goes toward covert nighttime spraying of Toronto with Fabreaze air freshener to maintain the fiction that the shit in that town doesn't stink!

Are we making the error of judging the people that made those decisions in the Nineteen Forties by to-days standards?

The NPT was supposed to restrict the proliferation of nuclear weapons and, in addition, monitor the progress of the existing nuclear states in fulfilling the other part of the treaty, which is the reduction and eventual elimination of their great nuclear weapons stockpiles. The second part was to be the transfer of proliferation-resistant nuclear power technology to non-nuclear weapons states The NWS appear to believe that only the first part counts - and then only when it concerns their perceived opponents such as non-weapons country Iran, rather than their fully tooled-up Israeli mates. Countries that can build weapons, like Canada, and Brazil, and Japan do not because the choose not to and wouldn't NPT or not. The others like Israel, India and Pakistan that choose to are now labeled “rouge” by the treaty and they are now not involved in the next important step which is the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. In other words I think at this point it is doing more harm than good.

So are you suggesting that the NPT has worked? Or do you agree that it has been a failure?

Too much heavy water Is toxic, but you do have to soak up quite a bit of it.

Then what is the The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory observing? See: http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/

Sixty years ago, the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, followed by one on Nagasaki three days later. The killing and injuring of hundreds of thousands of people ushered in an age that threatened nuclear annihilation. Since the East-West confrontation ended 15 years ago, the world has tended to move away from the risk of a major nuclear conflagration, yet it remains far from eliminating nuclear weapons. Rather, in the past couple of years, the world has suffered setbacks even in its endeavors to curtail their spread. A series of events have hampered antinuclear moves. For example, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference failed, and North Korea and Iran have been pushing their own nuclear programs. Their development efforts may not yet be at the stage of producing large bombs, but it has reached the extent where they worry their neighbors and destabilize regional peace. The NPT review conference held in New York in May did not produce any agreement to further strengthen the NPT regime because of a rift between nuclear and nonnuclear-weapons states. While nonnuclear-weapons states insisted that nuclear-weapons states cut their nuclear arsenals and refrain from developing new nuclear weapons, the latter, in particular the United States, demanded that the NPT member countries focus on the nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea. The failure of the review does not necessarily mean the collapse of the NPT regime, but it is certain that it has weakened the momentum of efforts to rid the world of nuclear threats. In 2002, in the first reduction agreement of its kind in nearly a decade, the U.S. and Russia signed a treaty to cut their deployed strategic nuclear forces by approximately two-thirds to 1,700-2,200 warheads each by 2012. But even with this treaty, the weapons will only be mothballed -- not destroyed -- and no verification procedures are provided. It is estimated that over 30,000 nuclear warheads are scattered throughout the world at present. The nuclear-weapons states must bear responsibility for taking a lead role in working to realize the NPT's ultimate ambition of creating a nuclear weapons-free world. They can do this by carrying out substantially deep cuts in their nuclear arsenals. Only when they move in this direction will they have a credible ability to persuade other nations, including nuclear gray states like India, Pakistan and Israel, to abandon their nuclear weapons and forgo programs that may lead to the production of nuclear weapons. As America's responsibility for nuclear disarmament as the only superpower in the world is especially heavy, it is regrettable that the U.S. refuses to join the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. On the contrary, it is moving to turn nuclear weapons -- whose use has been unimaginable since the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- into more "practical" weapons such as small-yield mini-nukes and earth penetrators. We would like to point out that the lack of enthusiasm on the part of the nuclear-weapons states for nuclear disarmament provides countries like North Korea and Iran with an excuse for pursuing a nuclear-development program. North Korea apparently has been using its nuclear-weapons program as a means of securing political and economic gains. To many people, this seems deplorable. If North Korea becomes a full-fledged nuclear-weapons state, it not only poses a serious threat to other nations in the region but may also encourage an extreme reaction on the part of some elements in Japan, including demands that Japan also arm itself with nuclear weapons. The confession by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear-weapons program, sounded an alarm because it showed that one individual could play a significant role in proliferating nuclear-arms technology. Although he dealt with states, his case points to the danger of terrorists acquiring nuclear-weapons technology from scientists who do not guard themselves against the risks of contributing to proliferation. It shows that the fear felt since the collapse of the Soviet Union that nuclear-weapons technology might find its way into the hands of terrorists is not far-fetched. With the number of survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings dwindling, it becomes all the more important that the experiences of the two cities, as well as accurate knowledge about the dreadfulness of nuclear arms, be handed down to future generations worldwide. An encouraging sign was the Nagasaki National Peace Memorial Hall for the Atomic Bomb Victims' sponsorship of an atomic bomb exhibition in Chicago that coincided with the NPT review conference -- the first such event by the body. As the only nation on Earth to suffer from atomic bombings, Japan should step up such efforts in earnest. From: The Japan Times: Aug. 6, 2005

Thomas, you and I will never see eye-to-eye on this question and at this point we are at risk of just repeating ourselves ad infinitum. Also the amusement factor of this topic has left along with the comic relief from New Zealand. Would you please join me in a thread I started called "Nonproliferation policies must be called a failure." over in the politics section of the forum; I think you might have some valuable insights and we would be allies (I think)?

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens (Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain)... Friedrich von Schiller

KnowaboutU - Are you telling me that the techs don't have access to the standard Boeing and Airbus manuals? Because it's all in there along with the hazmat data that they are required by law in most jurisdictions to include. Thomas, demystifying superstitions is virtually an impossible job, because people believe in superstition no matter what. It's like trying to prove that God does not exist. If you want to believe something, you will and I guess that is what's going on here. The original report by Gunther that everybody still uses to "prove" the Iraqi increase in cancer and leukemia cases, showed the increases mostly in areas where very few DU weapons were used (Basra), and little or no increase in areas where DU weapons were used massively (border of Iraq and Kuwait). The increase in cancer and leukemia cases is real. But its distribution does not match the use of NATO weapons. The Clinton administration repeatedly responded to all these reports by showing that there was no correlation between the distribution of illnesses and the distribution of DU. But, of course, you will never find Clinton's arguments published on the websites that denounce the USA for using DU. At the beginning of the Gulf War, DU-munitions were mainly used inside the territory of Kuwait, but there has been no increase in leukemia and cancer cases in Kuwait. France has always been one of the main users of DU: Cogema, one of the world's main suppliers of DU, is a French company. One of the main DU processing facilities is in Annecy. The two largest storages of DU in Europe are in Bessines and Miramas. I bet there is more DU in France than all the DU left in Iraq. And France is much more densely populated than Iraq. So, according to the "depleted uranium kills civilians" theory, people should be dying like flies all over France. No DU-related deaths have been verified in the countless camps in the USA where those DU bullets were used daily for training for many years. No such death was reported anywhere else in the world, despite the fact that NATO countries were transporting and stocking and testing and training with the same bullets and armors for 20 years. The Iraqi civilians have been exposed to only a fraction of the DU that NATO soldiers (and civilians in NATO countries) have been exposed to. If DU caused cancer, you would notice a statistical anomaly in the number of cancer cases only after several years. Not even Hiroshima caused cancer right away. But the case for cancer caused by depleted uranium was made right after the war. A big tactical mistake, because it is hard to believe that cancer appeared so suddenly in so many people. Whatever caused that increase was probably a much older event. A more reasonable explanation is that the increase in cancer and leukemia of the 1990s was caused by something that happened in the 1980s, before the coalition troops (including the USA) invaded Iraq. In 2001 the UNEP (United Nations Environment Program) tested the effects of 9,000 kgs of DU munitions used in Kosovo. UNEP found no abnormal radioactivity, no significant sign of contamination in water or in the food chain, and no correlation with all reported illnesses. Needless to say, countless journalists from the mainstream media have taken a Geiger counter and traveled to southern Iraq to test the Iraqi tanks hit by DU bullets. You never read their articles because... there was nothing to write about. They didn't find any abnormal radioactivity, they didn't write any article. Not a single one. This is nothing but a huge fabrication that has been perpetrated to further anti-America propaganda at best , and to scam fools out of money by leveraging irrational fears at worst. Find another windmill to tilt at.

Well then you mount it outside of any shield. They can be made rather small and flat for surface mounting.

Well that's the foundation of Faith isn't it?

Thats what RFID is for. There is no passive non-electronic emitter that would meet your specification.

Your nailed aren't you? You know exactly what I'm talking about, and now your just uttering rubbish to cover your humiliation. To clarify: the mass leaves the sample, converted into kinetic energy. You have blindsided yourself on this one, because at some point in time you did know this but you couldn't put it together or see how it was relevant to the discussion at hand. My big mistake was thinking you knew anything about this subject.

That's the whole point the mass is gone, changed into energy and radiated away from the source. That's why any given block doesn't increase it's overall radioactivity. Your assumptions are predicated on the mass staying constant. As for the readings, I'm afraid I can't help you there, I don't have that sort of data on raw stock.

From the time it was refined..from the time it was cast?

No, antiN that analogy is just plain wrong. Nether one of you seems to understand the fundamental nature of decay is that mass is lost. Try using this calculator: http://www.shodor.org/UNChem/advanced/nuc/nuccalc.html In your bucket analogy mass is conserved. The whole point of nuclear energy is that mass is converted to energy. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Developing nations' insistence that they have a right to obtain nuclear technology as a source of energy is one issue; just as contentious is the US drive to build a new arsenal of replacement nuclear warheads.

Simply asserting something doesn't make it so. Please reference your sources. And if it isn't clear by now. I do not think antiN a credible source of information. What you are asserting is just not so, and your calculations claiming to prove it demonstrate a total lack of understanding of the physics involved. Here's the decay chain for 238U: 238U -> 234Th -> 234Pa -> 234U -> 230Th -> 226Ra -> 222Rn -> 218Po -> 214Pb -> 214Bi -> 214Po -> 210Pb -> 210Bi -> 206Tl -> 206Pb (stable) The 214Po is far, far more radioactive than the 238U with a half-life of a couple milliseconds; however, since an atom of 238U has to decay in order to produce an atom of 214Po, it's radioactivity is limited. 238U has a half-life of 4.5 Billion years. Since T1/2 of 238U is much, much greater than T1/2 of any of it's decay products, the amount of any daughter nuclide should be in equillibrium. In short, DU does *not* get more radioactive over time. I just wanted to make that point a little bit clearer.

That's just not the case. Trim weights are made also of steel. Where, and how much trim weight is added to an aircraft depends on configuration, mods that might have been done and the airlines operating parameters.

Thomas, doesn't it strike you as strange that with all the web sites up against the use of DU and decrying it's effects that none of them seem to claim that the radioactivity of DU increases over time? After all these sites draw on the expertise of many leading scientists in this field (according to antiN) that I am sure this remarkable property of DU would not have escaped their notice. Or then again maybe your understanding of radioactive decay needs a little fine tuning.

DQW: That's exactly the point I was making. The NPT was based on the idea that existing nuclear weapons states would reduce their arsenals and transfer nuclear power technology to non-weapons states who in return would not develop an indigenous nuclear weapons program. When the NPT went into effect there were four nuclear weapons states; now there are nine. Now the U.S. has reopened nuclear trade with India, a non-signatory, in direct violation of the treaty, and threatens Iran, a member of the NPT, for it's domestic power program. This treaty is dead in the water.

Efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons began in the late 1940s. In part this reflected the horror of the weapon, but it was also spurred by the wartime secrecy that surrounded America's Manhattan Project. That secrecy continues to this day. What it overlooks is that the nature of scientific knowledge is such that it cannot be protected or controlled. If citizens of one country can learn physics, so can citizens of any other country. Given the spread of nuclear weapons, nonproliferation policies must be called a failure.