The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Watching News at Ten and found myself shaking my head and quietly seething at, yet again, the media's attempts to brainwash the populace (sandwiched between the Bond Movie...irony?) into "Get Saddam! He's a Hitler"
Top news story? The "terrorist poison plot" that was failed. Anti-Terrorist police seize small quantities of a poison from a North London flat and 6 North Africans have been arrested.
Good, nice to see potentially murderous people detained - no problem with that at all. It's how it should be.
But the news linked it to...can you guess?...thaaaat's right, "countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq" - cue shots of Hussein waving like a girl and various bearded folk, obviously radical terrorists.
Ok now:
Countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq, yes. But also like England, France (Rainbow Warrior anyone?) and the United States. Yet strangely no mention of Afghanistan or Bin Laden - who seems to have disappeared from the world's "He's evil" list since Bush started itching for a sequel to The Gulf. Yet no mention of North Korea....but that's a whole other topic.
The news spent an age linking the threat of large quantities of this poison to "weapons of mass destruction", which fed nicely into the next story about reserves being called up in readiness for war.
But oddly, another story further into the news was to do with the UN Weapons Inspectors having not found a single piece of evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. And without this evidence, the UN will not pass a resolution for war.
What I don't get is why they tried so hard to put the poison story and shackle it to Iraq - a country that has no history of terrorist action against us or the US to the best of my knowledge.
It seemed to me that the media was stirring public unease and fear towards Iraq to justify the current course of war - despite the UN not authorising any such action.
And the "No weapons found" story also made mention of the Inspectors calling unannounced on a chemical factory and recieving no resistance and total co-operation from the director of the company. They have taken samples away for testing, but have admitted that it's previous history of creating Uranium may prove inconclusive in linking to any recent action.
Experts admitted that this poison is only a major threat to large numbers of people in massive doses and should be handled in full biohazard suits. Yet these arresting officers were kitted out in normal flak-jackets etc.
I'm confused, getting mixed signals here.
But then, I am a cynical lefty flag-burner.
Top news story? The "terrorist poison plot" that was failed. Anti-Terrorist police seize small quantities of a poison from a North London flat and 6 North Africans have been arrested.
Good, nice to see potentially murderous people detained - no problem with that at all. It's how it should be.
But the news linked it to...can you guess?...thaaaat's right, "countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq" - cue shots of Hussein waving like a girl and various bearded folk, obviously radical terrorists.
Ok now:
Countries that support terrorism. Like Iraq, yes. But also like England, France (Rainbow Warrior anyone?) and the United States. Yet strangely no mention of Afghanistan or Bin Laden - who seems to have disappeared from the world's "He's evil" list since Bush started itching for a sequel to The Gulf. Yet no mention of North Korea....but that's a whole other topic.
The news spent an age linking the threat of large quantities of this poison to "weapons of mass destruction", which fed nicely into the next story about reserves being called up in readiness for war.
But oddly, another story further into the news was to do with the UN Weapons Inspectors having not found a single piece of evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. And without this evidence, the UN will not pass a resolution for war.
What I don't get is why they tried so hard to put the poison story and shackle it to Iraq - a country that has no history of terrorist action against us or the US to the best of my knowledge.
It seemed to me that the media was stirring public unease and fear towards Iraq to justify the current course of war - despite the UN not authorising any such action.
And the "No weapons found" story also made mention of the Inspectors calling unannounced on a chemical factory and recieving no resistance and total co-operation from the director of the company. They have taken samples away for testing, but have admitted that it's previous history of creating Uranium may prove inconclusive in linking to any recent action.
Experts admitted that this poison is only a major threat to large numbers of people in massive doses and should be handled in full biohazard suits. Yet these arresting officers were kitted out in normal flak-jackets etc.
I'm confused, getting mixed signals here.
But then, I am a cynical lefty flag-burner.
Page:
Whilst it seems somewhat grasping at straws by the media, Iraq has;
1) Developed and tested Ricin as a deployable agent - it says that the tests failed and were ended in 1990 prior to the invasion of Kuwait - but it did manufacture large amounts.
2) A somewhat haphazard track record of keeping its materials where it can find them...like the vast pile of anthrax its claiming to have "lost"...
As it is, it looks like the ricin was being made in that location, and it seems a crap choice of agent on the terrorists part.
As for the weapons inspectors in Iraq, maybe I should point out that there job is to INSPECT ? As in go in, look around, leave, report. Not bang the doors down, grab the evidence and hold a press conference that night live on international TV. Until the first report is made to the UN then no conclusions can be made. Incidentally, I don't call Iraqi helicopters shadowing the UN inspectors helicopters to their destination not intimidating or intefering...Fox News had the footage yesterday - though I suppose some people will claim it was hoaxed and done with CGI or something....
AS for Afghanistan and N.Korea - fair point, the UK media seems to leave some things sometimes, incidentally Fox has been covering them all this week alongside a less frantic reporting of the ricin in London.
ho hum,
~~Belldandy~~
1) Developed and tested Ricin as a deployable agent - it says that the tests failed and were ended in 1990 prior to the invasion of Kuwait - but it did manufacture large amounts.
2) A somewhat haphazard track record of keeping its materials where it can find them...like the vast pile of anthrax its claiming to have "lost"...
As it is, it looks like the ricin was being made in that location, and it seems a crap choice of agent on the terrorists part.
As for the weapons inspectors in Iraq, maybe I should point out that there job is to INSPECT ? As in go in, look around, leave, report. Not bang the doors down, grab the evidence and hold a press conference that night live on international TV. Until the first report is made to the UN then no conclusions can be made. Incidentally, I don't call Iraqi helicopters shadowing the UN inspectors helicopters to their destination not intimidating or intefering...Fox News had the footage yesterday - though I suppose some people will claim it was hoaxed and done with CGI or something....
AS for Afghanistan and N.Korea - fair point, the UK media seems to leave some things sometimes, incidentally Fox has been covering them all this week alongside a less frantic reporting of the ricin in London.
ho hum,
~~Belldandy~~
France were the last to go testing nukes weren't they
Christmas Islands or something in 97/98
Fuds
:)
Christmas Islands or something in 97/98
Fuds
:)
Bah, mentioning the Rainbow Warrior gets me all angry again. I'm an environmentalist. I hate France.
Sounds like some sort of plan for stealing the spoon from the mouth of the silver infant perhaps (?).
If only they sold waffles in the Budgen's Express...
If only they sold waffles in the Budgen's Express...
unknown kernel wrote:
> "Although it is a very potent poison, ricin has been shown to
> possess antitumor qualities and has been used in cancer research and
> chemotherapy during recent years. One of the most promising uses of
> ricin is in the production of immunotoxins, where the protein ricin is
> joined to monoclonal antibodies. The antibodies are produced in a test
> tube (in vitro), and have protein receptor sites that recognize the
> specific target cells of a tumor. The resulting ricin-antibody
> conjugate is called an immunotoxin. By arming these antibodies with
> ricin, the deadly toxin can be carried directly to the site of the
> tumor in a cancer patient. Thus, ricin can destroy the tumor cells,
> without damaging other cells in the patient."
Interesting - so these people COULD, could, have been trying to develop a cure for cancer? Very interesting indeed.
But no doubt they are actually Saddam's sons.
> "Although it is a very potent poison, ricin has been shown to
> possess antitumor qualities and has been used in cancer research and
> chemotherapy during recent years. One of the most promising uses of
> ricin is in the production of immunotoxins, where the protein ricin is
> joined to monoclonal antibodies. The antibodies are produced in a test
> tube (in vitro), and have protein receptor sites that recognize the
> specific target cells of a tumor. The resulting ricin-antibody
> conjugate is called an immunotoxin. By arming these antibodies with
> ricin, the deadly toxin can be carried directly to the site of the
> tumor in a cancer patient. Thus, ricin can destroy the tumor cells,
> without damaging other cells in the patient."
Interesting - so these people COULD, could, have been trying to develop a cure for cancer? Very interesting indeed.
But no doubt they are actually Saddam's sons.
Bluntly, the average spod on the street knows nothing about what's going on. I nearly had a drunken row with my Dad in the pub over this, as he is very against a war in Iraq. I told him that none of us can possibly have any opinion based on fact, as none of us know the facts, despite what it says in the Daily Mirror. It's like a long chinese whisper chain, and we're on the end.
It's getting annoying, as headlines just seem repetitive, and now opinions make me confused. Caz Im stooopid. The Metro usually good for a normal view, I read something about the mentioned findings, and the words "Saddam Hussein" never came up (Even though I slightly skim-read it). It leaves people to their own opinion. Unfortunately, those people will often watch the stupid news and read the stupid headlines. Stupid.
I just watched the start of the BBC news and they did exactly the same thing. There was a little report on 'where the ricin came from'. The report could easily have consisted of three words - we don't know - but instead they went on about Algeria, Afghanistan and...Iraq. The reason for mentioning Iraq was that our government said in its weapons dossier that Iraq has factories capable of making ricin. So do we of course, because ricin has its benign uses.
Using the magic of google I found this:
"Although it is a very potent poison, ricin has been shown to possess antitumor qualities and has been used in cancer research and chemotherapy during recent years. One of the most promising uses of ricin is in the production of immunotoxins, where the protein ricin is joined to monoclonal antibodies. The antibodies are produced in a test tube (in vitro), and have protein receptor sites that recognize the specific target cells of a tumor. The resulting ricin-antibody conjugate is called an immunotoxin. By arming these antibodies with ricin, the deadly toxin can be carried directly to the site of the tumor in a cancer patient. Thus, ricin can destroy the tumor cells, without damaging other cells in the patient."
Ricin can also be made at home. But funnily enough 'England' and 'my bedroom' weren't mentioned as possible sources. It seems to me that the media are trying to scare us into a war with Iraq by the most dishonest means possible. Fighting terrorism is great, I couldn't support it more. But war on terror is not the same as war on Iraq, however much the BBC persuades itself otherwise.
Using the magic of google I found this:
"Although it is a very potent poison, ricin has been shown to possess antitumor qualities and has been used in cancer research and chemotherapy during recent years. One of the most promising uses of ricin is in the production of immunotoxins, where the protein ricin is joined to monoclonal antibodies. The antibodies are produced in a test tube (in vitro), and have protein receptor sites that recognize the specific target cells of a tumor. The resulting ricin-antibody conjugate is called an immunotoxin. By arming these antibodies with ricin, the deadly toxin can be carried directly to the site of the tumor in a cancer patient. Thus, ricin can destroy the tumor cells, without damaging other cells in the patient."
Ricin can also be made at home. But funnily enough 'England' and 'my bedroom' weren't mentioned as possible sources. It seems to me that the media are trying to scare us into a war with Iraq by the most dishonest means possible. Fighting terrorism is great, I couldn't support it more. But war on terror is not the same as war on Iraq, however much the BBC persuades itself otherwise.
I wouldn't mind that much if the world ended
Honestly
I find it alarmly interesting and exciting
*runs*
Honestly
I find it alarmly interesting and exciting
*runs*
cookie monster wrote:
> To be honest at the moment i think more attention should be diverted
> to North Korea than Iraq.
Same here.
Now - Goatboy knows all about my views on these matters, but even I've been wondering recently...
I *do* believe that Saddam is dangerous, I *do* believe he poses a threat (particularly in the future, after developing WMDs), and I *do* believe he needs removing. BUT...
Bush wanted the inspectors back in, otherwise there'd be war. Mostly, I say 'fair enough' to that. But now the inspectors are there, going everywhere - randomly - and being unopposed - and finding nothing, and still finding nothing. And Bush is still pushing for war, despite his conditions being met.
I know that Saddam is a sneaky sod, but if there was a large stockpile of weapons, you'd have expected the inspectors to at least have found *something* remotely suspicious by now.
And to be honest, I think that the Korean issues present a far more immediate 'clear and present danger'. Whatever Iraq has, it's still in development. Korea are mere months away from having the ability to nuke whoever they choose, and it doesn't seem that they'd be overly reluctant to use that ability.
At the moment, it certainly seems that GWB is far more concerned about finishing daddy's work than he is about actually defending the free world.
> To be honest at the moment i think more attention should be diverted
> to North Korea than Iraq.
Same here.
Now - Goatboy knows all about my views on these matters, but even I've been wondering recently...
I *do* believe that Saddam is dangerous, I *do* believe he poses a threat (particularly in the future, after developing WMDs), and I *do* believe he needs removing. BUT...
Bush wanted the inspectors back in, otherwise there'd be war. Mostly, I say 'fair enough' to that. But now the inspectors are there, going everywhere - randomly - and being unopposed - and finding nothing, and still finding nothing. And Bush is still pushing for war, despite his conditions being met.
I know that Saddam is a sneaky sod, but if there was a large stockpile of weapons, you'd have expected the inspectors to at least have found *something* remotely suspicious by now.
And to be honest, I think that the Korean issues present a far more immediate 'clear and present danger'. Whatever Iraq has, it's still in development. Korea are mere months away from having the ability to nuke whoever they choose, and it doesn't seem that they'd be overly reluctant to use that ability.
At the moment, it certainly seems that GWB is far more concerned about finishing daddy's work than he is about actually defending the free world.
Page: