On 19 May 2007 10:11:16 -0700, jl <jls1016@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On May 19, 12:24 pm, Running Scissors <run...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> jl wrote:
>> > On May 19, 10:42 am, Useful Info <useful_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >>Read all about it, here:http://Muvy.org
>>
>> > I saw that re****t and it's obvious that dragon skin provides more
>> > protection, while powerful interests have their stakes in maintaining
>> > the current body armor. Even the inventor of the current official
>> > body armor claims dragon skin will save more lives.
>>
>> > But, hey, folks, isn't most everybody (other than neocons and their
>> > toadies) aware that the soldier is an expendible tool in warfare, as
>> > opposed to the quest for wealth and power?
>>
>> No. That's why they developed body armor to begin with.
>
>The current body armor was satisfactory until better armor, dragon
>skin, came along. The warlords didn't approve of dragon skin,
>however, because they hadn't got their money sunk into it, couldn't
>make a profit off of it. The Iraq war is all about oil, profiteering,
>Halliburton, etc., ad nauseam.
And that the current body armor supplier happens to be a big time GOP
donor is just pure coincidence.
>The cir***stances clearly tell you something when the warlords had
>already rejected and condemned dragon skin before it was even tested
>and found to be superior.
--
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
The Bush 'balanced' budget: -3 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12.5 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and
counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -3414 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush **** up my country: Worthless
newsgroups Yang promises not to revenge post
in response to Sound-of-Trumpet's bull****:
rec.art.scifi.written
sci.archaeology
soc.history.what-if
|
