PS-As a samll measure of revenge, I’ll let you try to figure out what “langage” means all on your own…
Well, you know, all sorts of things might happen. It is possible to become so absorbed with the possible bogeyman in the closet that nothing else gets done. Life has perils and I think the only thing that can be done about them is to take reasonable precautions (which vary according to the magnitude of the possible danger) and remember that a certain amount of luck is involved.
Our president, I think, is overdoing the scare tactics routine and is operating in hazardous waters on skimpy evidence. Sort of like the hullaballoo about this “uranium” before any facts were known.
This is a side issue but what the hell -
From the Britannica: “… uranium-238, through the absorption of a neutron (n) and the emission of … a gamma ray , becomes the isotope uranium-239 (the higher mass number reflecting the presence of one more neutron in the nucleus). Over a certain period of time (23.5 minutes), this radioactive isotope loses a negatively charged electron, or beta particle; this loss of a negative charge raises the positive charge of the atom by one proton, so that it is effectively transformed into the element neptunium (Np; with an atomic number of 93, one more than uranium). Neptunium-239 in turn undergoes beta decay, being transformed into plutonium-239 (atomic number 94).”
The plutonium is then separated from the other elements in the mix by a complex chemical process which I don’t understand. Here is one site and here is another one that might give some idea about the process.
And here is a site with more about plutonium.
-Beyond Nunn-Lugar: Curbing the Next Wave of Weapons Proliferation
So does anyone else feel that perhaps now we should stop trying quite so hard to privatize “inefficient” federal programs, and worry a little more about whether they are getting the job done ?
For more see the Strategic Studies Institute
Getting to the root of the charge of WMD leveled at Iraq from the US/UK, it should be viewed as a bald-faced plea to the human instict of fear.
When the fear instict is activated, one may naturaly question his or her survival, but cannot question the opposite – his or her pearl. For instance, if you believe that someone means you harm, you can only think about what to do to stop from being harmed. If the other party seems incapable of harming you, your mind will imagine the possibilities of harm that are not evident. The opposing side to this should be the questioning of the reality of the threat. Such as: “We don’t like each other, but am I mistaken?” The fear instict blocks this rational counter-argument, however, and the mind focuses on the emotionally central issue, fear, but not the absence of fear.
Discussing the evidence incriminating Saddam of WMD is, really, pointless. There will be war, and WMD will be the public pretext. This is really beyond the realm of debating evidence – regrdless of wether or not Iraq posses a present or immenent threat. Know that the masses are having their buttons pushed, and very diliberately so. The preperations for war are so furious that even a child can sense it coming. The issue is far, far beyond the stage of public debate – if, indeed, it ever came to that stage to begin with – and is now in the hands of ruling class.
Now we learn that the uranium wasn’t even uranium…
Aha! The Iraquis were secretly trying to smuggle zinc and manganese into their country! They’re trying to make counterfeit Sacagawea dollar coins to undermine the U.S. economy!!
RedFury wrote:
Well, I understand quite well what “langage” means, but the word “samll” is harder to crack. 
RedFury wrote before that:
Yes it’s true that it is not my first.
But dear RedFury, try to understand this:
- my spell checking program is not a very good one
- my Collins is down
- I think in Finnish which is my second language.
- I have studied English by my own.
- I am writing in our living-room where the Latvian born daughter of my Russian wife is looking at the same time at an Italo-western film, filmed in Spain, which is telling a story about an American in Mexico, starring Clint Eastwood who speaks [laudly] perfect Russian with a Moscow accent. (The Good, The Bad and The Ugly)
- my rabbit, who usually is proofreading my texts, flew south for the winter. (The explanation of this last one I will E-mail You, if You do not mind? Just let me know).
So You might understand that my language can not be perfect. 
RedFury wrote even before that:
Referring to me.
RedFury obviously referred to what I wrote:
Just read my post slowly again. There is some passages that are not so “clear”, but just think a little bit and You will come to the right conclusions.
And read also the post of mine in another thread that I am referring to.
Happy reading! 