budullewraagh

thats sad. the one annoying thing about fractional distillation with small amounts of solute is that the "crystals" are really mostly powder that you have to scrape out of your beaker with some crystals moving with the water.

saying that hussein was a threat to his neighbors and israel is like saying canada is a threat to the united states. seriously. he knew not to be aggressive anymore. as for the claim of him being a threat to his people, the only killings i have heard of were 5000 kurds 10 years ago, which, although bad, was not many casualties compared to those casued by the united states. north korea is a threat directly because of the attack on iraq, unfortunately.

oh dear, not this again. where was the threat? nukes? wait, he had none. wait, he wasn't even trying to make them. chemical weapons? wait, he only had one or two left over from when rumsfeld sold them in 1984. biological weapons? nope. did he have incentive to attack? nah. was he going to put his "massive" army onto boats and sail over to the states? i'd take awhile and we'd see it coming.

slowly? planning? the united nations said "if you go into iraq as you say you are going to, you will cause 500,000 civilian casualties".

heh, lovely. say 1 in every 3 died. hmm, thats still a few hundred thousand isn't it? ah but he wasn't, and we all know that that excuse was completely manufactured propaganda. if you still say yes, would you have changed your attack plans at all to reduce iraqi civilian deaths?

iraqbodycount is actually a conservative site posing as an anti-war site. for the sake of arguement, tell me this; with the united nations estimating 500,000 casualties, would you have gone to war?

ok, so it was improperly used as an adjective, gotcha

way to spell "democrat" incorrectly. what do you mean by "demecratic" laws? i dont think that's a valid adjective for a law.

ah yes. i just did it again without using the pot i used. same result.

not necessarily. people haven't been counted really. theyve been estimated by biased sources. history is always written by the victors. we don't hear much of the atrocities in japan (firebombings) and the bombing of civilian targets in germany, now do we? the united states was in a bad situation in vietnam, and finally withdrew, leaving vietnam in chaos. vietnam saw 4,000,000 vietnamese casualties in all, but we dont hear much of that, now do we? no, because vietnam still hasn't fully repaired itself and has little political influence.

the united nations make estimates but never guess

the united nations do not guess.

that's quite strange. any way i could filter it out?

the color of the match head was white. the equipment i used was all clean.

and bush was willing to kill that many iraqis because, hey, who cares about them? how much work do you really think that people have been doing finding the dead in iraq? http://www.harpers.org/UnitedNations.html http://www.worldrevolution.org/article/252 http://www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=17493 http://www.un.org/News/ossg/sg/index.shtml text of the actual resolution: http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/11/08/resolution.text/

the match wasn't colored. anyway i figured out the problem. it was that the oxidizers in the solution oxidized my pan (stanless steel) and the color is from aqueous nickel and chromium. highly carcinogenic salts, anyone?

the trend with halide acids is that the higher the halogen the less ionization occurs. if you take any given volume of all halogen acids at a certain molarity, you will find that the acidity of HI>HBr>HCl>HF

the united nations is just a bit more credible than iraqbodycount.net

yesterday i decided to recover potassium chlorate/potassium perchlorate by adding match heads to boiling water, filtering out the recovered sulfur and cardboard and boiling off the water. well, i found that as i concentrated it, the mixture (that ended up as a solution/suspension of white powder) turned a certain light blue, as seen below. can anybody tell me what that blue is from?

thanks; i try my hardest

with pleasure i will. the united nations stated before the war that as the united states was going to wage the war, around half a million iraqis would be killed. the morning after the first bombing in baghdad, there were estimates of 35,000 civilian casualties. what "rights" do they have now that they lacked before? they are living in eternal fear, oppressive poverty and getting killed. i dont think that is justified. and clinton was working against it. let's go to the magical world of make-believe (mr rodgers' neighborhood). let's pretend mr mcfeely planned to blow up mr rodgers' neighbor with a pipe bomb and mr rodgers' knew about these plans. mr rodgers' ran after mr mcfeely, chasing him all through the neighborhood. imagine mr rodgers' being suddenly replaced by an ingnoramous with an absurdly large belt buckle and a 25 gallon hat who says "hmm, i think i'll make myself a sandwich and go vacation in the ranch because, hell, i frankly dont care what happens to my neighbor. oh man i love money!" and then he skips off riding his stick horse shouting "yeeehaw!" and shooting his "trusty six shooter" randomly off into the air. yep, thats what happened. with regard to the 9/11 report, it was only created to make bush look like less of a slacker. with regard to your quotes: the second source hadn't seen the crash. rather the second source assumed it was a plane since, hey, a plane had just hit the trade center, so it must be another plane and hey, she was told it was a plane that hit the pentagon, so it all makes sense, right? i am still undecided on the pentagon situation. if you look around for pictures, any pictures, you will see that the plane's parts are not there. huge wings don't just disappear in a flash of oxidation. say, what a concept. right, but you know, these newer terrorists tend to come about the way i described. don't you take this personal either. it's nothing personal, but it is a debate on our beliefs.

in response to blike's post, apparently a few hundred thousand iraqis don't either, right? the dead don't have rights either. think they have rights now? think again. yes, on september the 11th of 2001, we were attacked. bush is responsible for spending more vacation time in his first 8 months in office than any other president in their time in office (yes, even more than fdr who served 12 years). when told of a threat, clinton met with advisors daily and stopped an attack on LAX. when told of a threat, bush kept vacationing and never met with the advisors clinton had met with daily. the 9/11 commission really served very little purpose. their mission was to give everybody closure and take away all possibility for blame. on a slight tangent, i would like to add that the pentagon was not attacked by a plane that day. see the link below for more information: http://pages.infinit.net/noc/pentagon.swf makes you wonder what happened. less, actually. liberating? what do iraq and afghanistan look to you now? are there parks with green grass, fountains, and the like? no, there's millions of people scared to death that they'll be bombed or shot, while a tens of thousands have taken arms to GET US OUT. (a report found that above 95% of "terrorists" in iraq were actually just pissed off iraqi citizens with guns). we secured safety for NONE. look what happened to spain when they sent troops in. oops, terrorist attack on THEM. left and right, foreigners are being slain and governments are getting pissed off at the united states because it was the united states who drew them into this "war". ah and yes, we have killed some terrorists. guess what. apparently, we have pissed off some certain people by blowing up their homeland and golly, they've decided to take up arms for al-qaida. i'll say what i've been saying all along; it's one awful cycle: (this works for israel and the united states' respective policies) 1. person's house is blown up 2. person says "gee, that's just what i need. come home from work and my house is gone. golly, countries these days... oh, but there are my children and there is my wife. apparently my children and wife were out walking at the time. thank allah." 3. person and family have been barely alive for the last few days, living on the streets. 4. good ol' al-qaida (or hamas in the case of israel) comes driving up, says "hey, join us and i'll give your family shelter, food and an edjumucation." 5. patriach says "hmm, we could all just live on rodents and bugs, and finally die a most dishonourable death or i could potentially sacrifice myself and save my family. i think i'll choose the latter because the former sounds too bloody sad." 6. patriarch blows himself up, killing X people. 7. mother and children say "those bloody $#!@%)(&!" 8. children learn to hate the people who killed their father. 9. children join al-qaida/hamas in their early teen years. the dead don't have freedom. and, look around. where's the bloody freedom? their economy is dead. they have few natural resources. -> they are essentially dead, and quite pissed off.

what do you like about bush's actions??

not quite, but you can make a decent comparison of deadliness. and yes i am saying george walker bush is worse than saddam hussein. hey, he's already killed more iraqis than hussein did, revoked our most basic civil liberties, plunged a surplus into record deficits (hmm, even more so than the bloody depression!), failed to defend our nation and yes, started unjustified wars that the poor pay for in blood and the tax payers pay for with superfluous amounts of money.

well, one can say that acid anhydrides aren't all that corrosive but they will hit water on contact with the body forming incredibly conc acids.