Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (110257)	8/6/2003 4:58:44 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

BTW, if bolton cant come, we should object to one of their negotiators too. The old soviet game is in play and we must not look week. Oh.. we could do that.. but I say we can probably let Kim save a little face on this one and permit Bolton to play "behind the scenes".. We accomplished quite a bit in getting China to finally step up to the plate... Let's see how things pan out from here.. Hawk

To: michael97123 who wrote (110257)	8/6/2003 5:49:09 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

<if bolton cant come, we should object to one of their negotiators too. The old soviet game is in play and we must not look week.> .... or stupid. Mqurice@paintball.com PS: newscientist.com There was discussion some time ago about depleted uranium. The Royal Society disagrees that it's dangerous [especially dangerous compared with other things]. It is of course, like lead and mercury, a very toxic heavy metal causing brain and other damage - but there's so little of it used compared with lead shot in shotguns and normal guns and in building materials not to mention petrol, that we could say, "So what?" Here are my first comments on depleted uranium. Message 19096491