[ RadSafe ] Re: A likely source for a great many of the contested birth defects...

[Steven Dapra]

Jan 28

         What is the primary source material for your 180% and 220% 
figures?  Not Power Point or slide shows, PRIMARY source material.  We know 
nutritional deficiencies affect mothers, not fathers.  There is no need to 
tell us or to remind us.

         You are the one who is refusing to face the truth that DU is not 
causing these birth defects.  The only P.R. problems the armed services had 
with Agent Orange was with certain parties who refused to accept the truth 
that Agent Orange was not causing the problems attributed to it.  If a 
"cause" is not a cause (of disease or defect), what should we do but ignore 
it?  You and your fellow-travelers seem to be making a mountain of diseases 
out of a molehill of DU.

         Speaking only for myself, I am not going to "defend depleted 
uranium weaponry".  All I am saying is that DU does not cause these 
diseases, etc. that you say it does.  I denounce your sleazy insinuation 
that DU 'defenders' are --- in effect --- bombing recruiting stations.  Why 
would you care anyway?  You are a peacenik, aren't you?  Why do you care if 
the services can't recruit enough soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines?

Steven Dapra
sjd at swcp.com



At 03:05 PM 1/28/07 -0800, James Salsman wrote:
>The fact remains that the number of birth defects in the children of
>combat-deployed male U.S. and U.K. 1991 Gulf War troops has been
>rising sharply, from 180% above the non-combat troops from the same
>era in 2000, to 220% in 2003.  Nutritional deficiency-related causes
>of birth defects affect mothers, not fathers.
>
>People who refuse to face the truth and solve this problem are only
>giving the military more of the same P.R. problems that they got from
>agent orange.  This problem won't go away by simply ignoring it, or
>telling lies, or trying to distract with anecdotes or hand-waving.
>
>People who defend depleted uranium weaponry claim to be in support of
>the military.  For all the good they are doing, they might as well be
>bombing recruiting stations.
>
>Sincerely,
>James Salsman