Rabits, come spring, will instictively "murder" any rabit that looks unhealthy in anyway. knowing this, one can use this evolutionary trait and apply it possibly to the behaviors of other mammal herbivores such as the alpaca. Just because animals might not look the same doesn't mean that an enviroment can't shape them all to have similar behavioral characteristics.

Weapons should be graded on their effectiveness on the battlefield, not some pre set standardized tests. Looking at both the AK-47 and M-16 on a firing range, one could claim the M-16 is better but its far more reliable to cull from several conflicts where both weapons were used, to reach a conclusion, the most significant would be Vietnam.

As a precison, futuristic, tech reliant rifle the M-16 almost failed in Vietnam, early versions shipped with ammunition that fired dirty in the chamber leading to catastrophic dirt jams, initially they were shipped with no cleaning kits as well, its sensitive mecahnism could easily jam in harsh enviroments, early models also weighted so little that firing control and usage as a close combat blunt weapon was lost.

The AK-47 thrived, its firing power, reliablity, simple training methodology meant that troops spent little time training and cleaning with their weapons and more time shooting at an enemy. In close range a butt smack from an AK-47 can down a person. There is an entire handbook on just how to disassemble the M-16, you can teach a 6 year old how to clean, arm and fire the AK-47 in about 30 minutes.

The AK-47 is built for urban combat and close range engagement, while the M-16 is built as a long range high accuracy stand off weapon. You can run a guerilla war on the AK-47, while the M-16 is reliant on highly trained troops with the weapon system and supplies to keep the weapon functioning. There are still reports on newer M-16A2s failing to fire or jamming in the sandy dunes of Iraq.

The US Army Ordance is really skwed in my preception, there is high concentration on high tech bullshit (robots? network centric warfare?) while still using a weapon design from the late 50s, the M-16A2 and M4 are simple modifications on the M-16 frame, both are standard US infantry weapons and haven't really progressed to a more simpler and more reliable weapon platforms even though alternatives are field tested every goddamn year. The AK on the other hand is progressinng as a weapon design, currently I believe its ireation is the AK-74.

Basically if I had to fight tommorrow, I would go for the AK-47 over the M-16.

PLEASE view this link
http://members.greenpeace.org/blog/exxonsecrets/2007/12/11/dana_perino_takes_it_personally_when_peo

it will supply the hyperlinks that are in the article below

White House Climate Science Censorship - Why Perino Takes It Personally
Posted by kert_davies on 12/11/2007 4:33 pm

Hmmm...wonder why Dana Perino reacted with such passion to a question yesterday about Rep. Waxman's (proposed) report on climate science censorship by the Bush White House?

Aside from her laughable and classic Bush-like response - dismissing the report then admitting that she hadn't even read it but had "seen reports about the report".... a flub up reported nicely here on DeSmogBlog.

Add this to Perino's mishandling of White House censorship of Center for Disease Control Director's Senate testimony in late October, covered well by ThinkProgress and RollingStone.

Here at ExxonSecrets, we know a little more about Ms. Perino from our 10+ years of research on global warming backlash. Her anti-environmental roots run deep.

Kyoto Bashing in 1997
First off, in our archives we have a press release she penned during her days on Capitol Hill in the late 1990s, when she was press officer for Representative Schaefer (R-CO). Her boss was admonishing the Clinton Administration in June 1997 to slow down the push toward Kyoto agreement in December 1997, saying there still were too many unanswered questions about the impact on the US economy and other common refrains of the day pushed by the Global Climate Coalition.

On the CEQ Denial Team
Perino came back to DC to work as Director of Public Affairs for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, where she was, in fact, running cover for climate criminals Jim Connaughton and Phil Cooney, the two main culprits in the Waxman report.

At CEQ, Perino was part of the global warming policy gatekeeper team, doing damage control and coordinating with other agencies on climate policy and communications. There are many memos to and from Perino to Cooney including this one in the midst of Cooney's EPA report editing meltdown. Here she forwards Phil a comforting article by Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center, another Exxon funded front group. Cooney responds hopefully, "do you know where this ran?"

Perino Hangs Out with Exxon's Main Front Group

Like Cooney, Perino also cozied up to Exxon's Denial Machine. Here is an email from Perino to the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Angela Logomasini asking for a lunch meeting and saying she had been reading the CEI's report The Environmental Source. The global warming chapter of this anti-enviro tome, penned by Myron Ebell, looks like it became a key page in the CEQ playbook. CEI at the time was the leading recipient of Exxon denial cash, but was dumped by the Exxon Foundation in 2006.

Here's another note from Perino to Cooney and Connaughton referencing a Myron Ebell piece in the Washington Times about a prank invitation to a CEQ reception for Lee Raymond.

Redacted Information
Most of these documents were delivered to Greenpeace after multiple Freedom of Information Act requests (see previous blog) and can now be found on the White House web page and our web site.

However, many of the documents we got back from our FOIA request looked like this one, from Cooney to the entire staff including Perino - mostly redacted text, leading Waxman's team to look for what was under the black marker lines... Read their report for all the details of the investigation

What Else Has Perino Seen Behind White House Doors?
One can only guess what else Dana Perino knows about the global warming Denial Machine within the White House. She has certainly had a front row seat. Maybe the press will ask her more questions about her experiences. Eventually they will all be held accountable...stay tuned.

i cannot vouch for these books, but I would say there IS information out there pertaining to chemtrails.

__________________________________

Chemtrails Confirmed
by W Thomas
Book Description
Chemtrails are reported all around the planet and this is the first research record to verify what Airline Pilots, Police Officers, U.S. Marines, Air Traffic Controllers and Tanker Crews are reporting. This book will reveal the scientist who are working n the project, Congressman who oversaw "America's exotic weapons" project and the details so you can understand the Chemtrail project

About the Author
William Thomas is an independent journalist. His previous works include Scorched Earth: The Military's War Against the Enviroment and Bringing the War Home, a book which shows the suppression of the inoculations of troops in the first Gulf war and the diseased troops brining home the diseases to their family and friends.

__________________________________

Contrails, Chemtrails & Artificial Clouds
by Dave Dahl

The author, a Navy veteran and former university teacher, carefully explains how these toxic stratospheric clouds absorb and re-emit solar energy, warming the stratosphere; and greenhouse gases introduced by jets into the upper atmosphere cause additional heat to be trapped, preventing its escape into space and ultimately warming the Earth, altering our climate. His presentation is objective, informative and makes excellent use of aerial photography, charts and graphs. This science in chewable bite size paragraphs and bullet points is an outstanding introduction for anyone interested in advocating on behalf of cleaner air and slowing global warming (and that should be all of us). It gives readers an excellent overview, glossary of terms and an extensive listing of web sites that are additional recourses.

__________________________________


“H. R. 2977 of the 107th Congress (1st Session)” introduced by Dennis Kucinich on October 2, 2001 titled, "Space Preservation Act of 2001." In section, "B" of this bill you will find the term, "chemtrails" listed under exotic weapons systems.

"The term `exotic weapons systems' includes weapons designed to damage space or natural ecosystems (such as the ionosphere and upper atmosphere) or climate, weather, and tectonic systems with the purpose of inducing damage or destruction upon a target population or region on earth or in space." (Bill H.R. 2997 of the 107th Congress - Space Preservation Act of 2001)

Additionally, The Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques clearly states that, "each state party undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques."

"As used in Article I, the term "environmental modification techniques" refers to any technique for changing -- through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes -- the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space." (Article 2 of The Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques)



__________________________________

I think it is a great choice. Everything is linked, bad environmet, resrouces, poverty, unrest and war. Instead of choosing someone or something that directly e.g. reduces the number of nuclear weapons in the world, they are looking at one of the things that causes wars in the world. Alfred Nobel didnt have the information about the enviroment that we have today, but if he lived today I think he would agree with this.

What drop-innna-bucket, environmentally friendly thing have you done today, rightwinger...or have I done today?
Given the background and motivation of the piece, any argument with this used as an example of waste, or enviro-unfriendly, is completely lame, period.

i would have sead the chav originates from Yorkshire area.

as for all this controversy it would be nice if thay interviewed the kids that made it so people know there intentions before thay go mental over it. personally i think its just reflective of the fact that u still have toffs and chavs in england both groups don't really contribute much positive to society.

chavs arise from not having monny and living in a pore post industrial environment always failing back on state benefit.

toffs arise from having to much money living in a compleaty comfortable enviroment where thay can always fall back on there parents money.

Evan though likely unintentional this clip dose highlight the fringe classes of english soicity so i think its good.

I think some people who try to dismantle the pro-choice movement by applying the choice argument to other, real if you will, offenses need to give a second thought to the reason why women look to abortion.

In earlier posts I've seen the thought that prematurely born babies should be terminated aswell as the fetuses women choose to abort.
"I'm sure if I wanted to, I could find a few pro-choicers who would like to extend the law to allow the termination of prematurely born babies. After all, they're the same age as those in the womb normally right?". Wrong, but that's not the point.
To me, this looks like a person who haven't really considered why women decide to abort, and this person also doesn't seem to fully grasp the difference between a prematurely born baby and an undeveloped fetus, so let me try to explain my point.
A prematurely born baby is saved and kept alive because the mother did not have an abortion, obviously, but also because it's wanted and have developed enough to have a chance at surviving. You'll be surprised to know there are some fetuses who are so prematurely born that they're unable to survive no matter how much the parents would want it to. A woman having an abortion usually does so for a reason, of which there are plenty good enough to stop a life from starting.

Consider the reason before anything else, like the offspring of a rape, the parent/s being unable (for a plethora of reasons) to support the child in any or all ways. For these reasons women will have abortions regardless of the law, which makes it toothless and in effect meaningless unless of course you want to legislate morality (in which case we could come up with lots of fun laws).
In conclusion, I feel having a baby is a huge undertaking, and writing off abortion as murder is to me completely unacceptable. To make a similar stupid generalisation for everyone to ponder, torture comes in many more forms than just the ones used in Abu-Ghraib, like for instance raising a child in an unsafe, financially- and emotionally barren enviroment. I guess the sanctity of life ends when the child is born, eh?

The bus system in Orlando is worse then horrible. It would take me two to 2 1/2 hours to get to the area where I work. It doesn't help that there is a bus stop like every 100 feet. I can drive it in 30 minutes. Which is better for the enviroment? My 20 mpg car for 30 minutes or a diesel smog belching half filled bus for 2 1/2?

Plus given the commute distances many people make these days most don't have access to mass transit.

I was a public transport person last few years and I would get a car if I could afford it. I've met so many crazy and dangerous people on the bus that it doesnt feel at all safe. Generally intimidating behaviour by gangs of young men seems to be the norm (I'm one too, so I can only imagine how older people feel), not to mention they are filthy, smelly and bus drivers often take ignorance and "dickishness" to new levels.

Is protecting the enviroment worth getting your head kicked in?

Science is no more rational than religion,.,. ?
that depends on what context you ask the questoin it is far far far far x 99999999 more ratoinal to belive that scince will alow us to doscover ways to live longer heal eachother controle the world enviroment and universe. than to belive that religoin will do anny of these things. and as i dont belive in heaven ore an after life well not in the way as described in christainty ore other religoins i have red about. it makes sence to try and work out a way to live this life comfortably and for the most people and religoin is not going to do that ratoinal thought and scince will. praying to "god" to stop the super volcano ore meteor is not going to do annything.

If you take the drug after researching it and actualy knowing what will happen and then slowly introduce yourself to it its very hard to have a bad trip unlike other drugs you have a great deal of controle and mental awarenes. i just wish people were responsable. it would be like drinking half a bottle of vodcha the first time u ever had a drink.( with the difrence beeang u cnt actualy die ore overdose on salvea )


ITs not bad at all the biggest problem with salvea is people take it for the wrong resoins. people take it to be all exstreeem ore to see what "affect" it has on them thay allso take realy high dossages for there first time which is not advised. it has to be noted salvea has very few toxins and is actualy remarcably safe allso it is not adictive in anny way. salvea should only be taken by sumone who is very mentaly secure and has a good understanding of themselfs allso it should be taken in a peacfull enviroment with maby just 1 other person who you trust and feal comfortable with ( not sumone who is presuring you )

alvea lets you see the world in a very true fasoin without anny of the assoceatoins that you place on objects throughout your life. allso it helps you see the compleat ironay in everything and for that resoin the drug will often make people laff quite uncontrolably. after the main trip its posable to think about things in a realy intresting way and maby think about things that you wouldent normaly think of.

Phew. Good question, dag. They had a lot of american stuff in the beginnig, but obviously it didn't work out and so they changed it soon after. On the "pro" side they had top locations and low prices. But if i had to guess i would say it mainly didn't work out for two reasons:

1) these big stores are indeed not very popular in Germany. You have to know we don't have many Malls and stuff. And if, they are very different from those in the US (no food courts etc). Everything is a bit smaller over here, even in the big cities. People over here also don't buy these big packets. Boy was i suprised when i saw one of those huge Doritos bags for the first time ;-) we don't have those.

2) Wal-Mart is very about low prices. And this role is already taken by ALDI, which is a very strange (german?) thing: They are extremely about prices (don't even have many regular shelfs, the stores are full stillages [hope this is the right word]). A few years ago it was somewhat "embarassing" to buy there, no one admitted it. But over the years it became somewhat trendy to buy at ALDI and nowadays its even somewhat "chic".

Another difference in my eyes is the fact that over here people tend to buy their things at different stores: Beverages there, food there etc.

The only really big stores are/were Wal-Mart and Real, only the latter survied and they are in big trouble too. They are the ones who bought nearly all the wal-mart stores by the way.

Oh, and one thing: In Germany trade-unions are VERY strong. And we have VERY strong laws regarding dismissal protection [again, not sure about the translation]. If you hire someone in Germany, it´s very, very hard to fire that person afterwards. That's a big topic in politics also. And the laws about working hours are very strict. And in Germany opening hours a regulated by law (no 24/7 allowed for example). ...and so on and so forth ;-)

You see Dag, Germany isn't Wal-Marts preferred enviroment i would say. I guess they had mostly american management who weren't used to these big differences.

I hope this answers your question :-)

I think it's better that any system implemented fall to the privy of 250s to use. Say a call between two or three, to the admins results in the offensive user account deletion/ban.

Am not for:
- Voting comments
- Ignoring comments
- Deleting comments
- Flagging comments

Because these systems create snarky enviroments like Digg.com.

Excellent post! This one truly belongs. The Transporter sure knows how to use his enviroment to kick ass!