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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Hunt who wrote (28002)	2/11/1999 6:09:00 AM
From: John Hunt	Respond to of 116752

OT - Blinded By (Bad) Science? - Sudan Attack << A recent investigation of the factory ruins, commissioned by Idris and his American lawyers, collected samples from 13 locations at the site. Sophisticated testing and analysis by three different laboratories showed that the samples contained no EMPTA. U.S. officials continue to insist that the plant was involved in the production of chemical warfare agents — and that they were right to bomb it. “There is absolutely no question in my mind that we hit the right targets,” said Gen. Hugh Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. ABCNEWS has learned, however, that the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency has conducted its own highly-classified review. It concludes that the decision to bomb was based on bad intelligence … and bad science. >> abcnews.go.com I think at least a 'Whoops! ... Sorry about that', plus a few millions, is in order.

To: John Hunt who wrote (28002)	2/11/1999 9:41:00 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116752

John, I just find it amazing how shallow Worldnutdaily presents their articles. They truly are the National Enquirer for the Conspiratorialists. SpecOps forces do these operations quite frequently. And the reason they don't often make a public notification outside of authorities is that they don't want a huge crowd forming, and possibly, disrupting the exercise. MOUT training (Military Operations in Urban Terrain) is some of the toughest training to perform because of the costs building suitable training facilities (mini-towns). Because they are doing MOUT training doesn't mean they are training for US Y2K scenarios. They might just be training for another Mogadishu raid instead. The second link in that article took us to an article about Fort Polk, Louisiana and the JRTC maneuvers that occur there. Having been involved in two of these JRTC rotations myself, I feel I can state with some confidence that they are not geared in anyway, shape, or form with domestic US operations. In fact, the scenario was more attuned to a Latin American environment (or maybe West Virginia... :0), with peasants, local police (corrupt), spies, and guerillas running amuck. Have you heard of the NTC (national training center) out in Ft. Irwin, CA?? That is where they actually have an Opfor unit that mimicks Soviet-era tactics and equipment, and US military units are sent there for wargames where they play a mega-version of "laser tag" (using MILES equipment that shoots low-intensity lasers to register kills on the enemy). NTC is for Armored/mechanized Brigade sized units due to its geographical size and maneuver space. JRTC is for brigade sized non-mechanized units and light infantry divisions (82nd and 101st have trained there as well). Having been in the "Box" twice myself for two weeks at a time, and the "PEHA" once for 2-3 days (those having been to JRTC will immediately recognize both of the those "conspiratorial catch phrases"... :0), I have to just sit here and laugh at these guys at Worldnutdaily and pity the people who lend them any credibility. Worldnutdaily reporters are consumate journalistic "landscapers". They possess incredible abilities to turn molehills into alpine mountain ranges. Regards, Ron