johnny9fingers: (Default)
[personal profile] johnny9fingers

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8548707.stm


And as for why?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium

Though this link is of course, not proven. However, birth defects 13 times higher than in Europe may have other aetiologies: it could be that these folk are all foreign.

Besides, if they didn't want us to come and save them from Saddam with our very wonderful modern unborn-deforming-weaponry, they should have said so.

Isn't it nice to be on the side of the liberators when we think of all the good we've done for the people of Iraq? Because, as we know, this wasn't about WMD but it was about regime change, and giving the folk of Iraq a better life. Well, some of them certainly have that now. Just think of the opportunities for these newborns to work in carnivals or appear in Ripley's Believe It Or Not. Now that wouldn't have happened under Saddam now, would it?

Bliar and Bush can be truly proud of themselves. And as for the rest of us, I should lead you in salutes to these two fine patriotic ex-leaders who have done so much for so many people in Iraq.

History will remember them both, and both their names will be held up as educational examples to the coming generations. 
(deleted comment)

Date: 2010-03-04 06:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] johnny9fingers.livejournal.com
Well, I've always considered Afghanistan to be a different case to Iraq....but now I'm much less sure of this opinion.

Date: 2010-03-04 06:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] winterlion.livejournal.com
actually this was also covered on CBC on several occasions....
http://www.cbc.ca/dispatches/janjune2001.html
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2000/11/15/uranium001115.html
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2000/05/03/uranium000503.html

This has been analyzed since it first was identified circa first invasion (1991) when the US started using depleted uranium. (Bush Sr)

searching "site:bbc.co.uk research "depleted uranium"" also brings up some interesting stuff...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/408122.stm
for instance... (Jul 30 1999) : referring to use in Serbia likely to result in higher cancer rates, complete with references to evidence....


This is all stuff that appears every year or two and then promptly gets buried. Quick searches only show research going back to the early 90s, but one of the CBC links above hints that it's been a known risk since 1974.

Date: 2010-03-04 06:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] johnny9fingers.livejournal.com
Oh I know smaller national networks (sorry Canada) and news agencies, and for example 'Private Eye' (which is even smaller) have covered this, but the mainstream just won't put their heads above the parapet.
CBC is to be lauded, but doesn't quite have the world-wide reach of the BBC....in fact the only network that rivals the Beeb in this ability to reach large numbers of cross national folk is alas....Voldemort's empire itself.

NewsCorp. Because they have the dementors.

Date: 2010-03-04 06:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] winterlion.livejournal.com
actually CBC is followed by governments worldwide and has (likely) as wide a following internationally - on that kind of level - and amongst some classes of professionals.
it's just not as visible to the "general public".

no competition RE: TV. While CBC's TV shows are finally being followed internationally, it's still not all that common for anything out of Canada to be followed until Hollywood takes it.

Profile

johnny9fingers: (Default)
johnny9fingers

September 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
34 5 6789
10111213141516
17 1819 2021 2223
24252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 22nd, 2017 07:59 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios