Ah yes, Newsmax, the source for all things without any bias, right?
Anyways, in regards to Armstrade, you really think that cultures of Antrax etc. were just sent there, or through a third party? I am sure the US declared every single piece of equipment they wanted in Iraq to be going through "official channels" and leave a paper trail, after all we're all honest here right?
As for the Sipri Website it states:
The following file contains a register that describes the weapons on order or under delivery, or for which the licence was bought and production was under way or completed during the period 1982 to 2001. This register also provides comments and some additional information on each deal.
As well as
The SIPRI Arms Transfers Project
only reports transfers of complete major conventional weapon systems. Thus, reports that indicate Iraq has obtained parts of a given weapon system, even if confirmed, would not be registered as a transfer.
I recommend reading "Body of Secrets" for an example just how usually "undercover" weapon shipments are made. A hint: It isn't a complete system.
Here, is another nice link that might entertain you.
Some quotes:
Iraq's generals hit back at the Russians by requesting that their government purchase an Anglo-French fighter, then one of the most advanced aircraft in the world. In my London office I received the call to begin unofficial negotiations with a British aircraft manufacturer. My exact mission was to determine this company's possible interest in supplying Iraq and to secure a six-per-cent commission agreement for my Iraqi associates.
Whatever contacts I had with intelligence establishments wanted more in return for their help than I was willing to offer. A CIA chum, however, recommended I tap the Peace Institute in Stockholm. They kept thorough files, he advised. To get at them I bribed the correspondent of an American weekly. This young man went to Stockholm and came back with the prize; he had copied all the price data they had on Mirage Fl sales. The Institute files were complete.
So yes, the French sold Iraq airplanes but it seems the CIA was very well aware of what was going on.
Here is another link from the BBC this time, again an interresting quote:
In fact, the UK arms trade has been mired in controversy since the 1980s, when British firms joined the scramble to supply Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.
In the early 1990s, Coventry-based engineering firm Matrix Churchill hit the headlines when it breached an arms export ban by providing Iraq with equipment used by the military to build a "supergun" capable of striking Israel.
Following the arrest of Matrix Churchill's directors, it emerged that Conservative ministers had signed the export certificates.
They had also signed Public Interest Immunity (PII) certificates to try to stop the disclosure of documents which showed that the defendants had been working for British secret services.
The judge in the case refused to accept the certificates and the prosecution collapsed in 1992.
So the UK was activly involved as well. I guess they all did this on their own, not while Saddam was a Protege of the Reagan Administration?
And where exatcly is the US selling all these weapons to if they only sell to "friendly" countries as was claimed?
BTW, let's not stop at the BBC with the whole armstrade thing from back in the '80s. Here is a nice report from the Guardian about Saddam trying to
The interresting thing about inventions is that before the world was so connected (reads, the last 10 years), people could make invention at the same time without anybody else knowing about it.
Canada for example claims to have invented the Thermos and there is also the claim that a German (Philip Reis) invented the Telephone before Bell did.
The Iraqi military was 70% Russian/Soviet equipment, %20 French, and %10 Other(mostly European). The French are well-known arms-whores. The US doesn't sell to countries it decides are "evil".
Well, at least not directly....
Kosovo? Somalia? I defy you to find ANY pressing national interest for the US in places like that.
Somaila? How about the fear of Terrorism (yes, that was a point, same reason why the "chemical factory" was bombed. Terrorism was a "fear factor" for quite some time for the US Government, just never in the mind of the average Joe.
As for Kosovo: It took the US a lot longer to get in there than into Iraq the first time, exactly because there wasn't anything there, they finally intervened after the EU went through NATO asking for help, which they got as well as snitty remarks about "European Responsibility" etc.
(no debate is complete without a Hitler reference) I'm sure Neville Chamberlain had a jolly time negotiating "peace in our time" with Hitler. National relationships change all the time. Furthermore, diplomacy is often about glad-handing the opposition while simultaneously letting him know through "back channels" that you could blow them to pieces if they get out of line.
True, but what I was pointing at was the fact that the US isn't as innocent as they would like to think they are.
There is nothing "holy" about the US, you are not the champions for the good in the world, you brought as much (if not more) suffering to the world.
Maybe not (always) on purpose, but if an elephant turns and is not careful he's injuring or killing the smaller ones without even noticing.
There is nothing abstract about seeing B-52s flying overhead after taking off from the SAC base 2 miles away. Can you say "ground zero"?
Considering the sheer size of the USA, how many people lived right next to a SAC airbase in comparision to Europeans? And who could look over the fence and see Russian Tanks?
Maybe M-B invented the airbag, maybe not. But it took an American to make it better.
Actually, my understanding always was that they just made it bigger, mainly because people in the US, at one point in time, didn't like the idea to "buckle up".
Aha! And you said europeans are more productive because they don't hang about the water cooler. When in Rome?:)
The cold war was about ICBMs and long range bombers. The whole world was in the middle of the cold war. You're naive if you think it was about Europe.
It is a little bit different if you live with the Abstract notion of someone dropping "The Bomb(TM)" on you or if you actually live in a town where you can see ABC tanks and Tactical Nuclear missles rolling through your town.
Believe me, the US did not feel the cold war as chilling as most of Europe did.
Europe was under siege, and people knew it, the US was "far away".
Of course, Europe was still well of in comparision to the "hot zones" like Vietnam.
Do you have a source to back up this statement?
I am at work right now, but I do have some links at home, if you are interrested either send me an email or tell me here and I try to dig this up sometime tonight.
Yes, and for national security. Do you doubt that Iraq backed terrorists? Heck, it used to pay money to the families of suicide bombers.
See, the problem with Terrorism is that it is like the Hydra, the more heads you cut off, the more will grow back.
You won't fight Terrorism with Weapons, you have to fight it in the head of the people, it is ideologically and bombing somebody doesn't make them your friend.
Having said that, why Iraq? The 9/11 Hijackers were all Saudis, Osama is Saudi. None of them was Iraqi, do you really think that the world is a safer place now? I think the opposit is true.
Ah, but we made the computer useful and ubiquitous. You can keep the television:)
Can we take the Airbag and Seatbelt back as well? Both were developed by Mercedes-Benz, plus some other things;)
But hey, at least I provided links to back up my statements.
I am at work right now, I don't have the link list here, as I said i can give you links tonight.
But hey, pay attention as there were no stereotypes in my post. It's a fact that France and Germany have more vacation time and shorter work weeks. Your statement that US workers are less productive is an opinion...possibly a stereotype?
It is an observation, having worked in both places for extended periods.
The reality is that the philosophies are different, the end result is about the same. Personally I guess I'll be going back to Europe in the long run..... More vacation;)
That's not true. Most europeans have no concept of war. Most of those that have experienced the privations of war are dead (except in those countries that can't resist a good civil war).
Unlike most North Americans, most Europeans where in the middle of the cold war, most people in Germany had relatives on the other side of the Iron Curtain.
Most Europeans can drive for a couple of hours and still see how "bad" it was over there, you can still find places where you can see bullet holes in Walls. If you go through some woods you can still see bomb craters, some old, destroyed buildings.
If you go a bit east of Berlin and walk through woods and fields you can still find human remains from the battle of Berlin in '45.
If you have a Metal detector you can still find bullets, Dog Tags and other stuff.
Even though "Western Europe" was pretty much war free for the past 50 years, conflicts where always raging nearby. While the US lived in "harmony" with itself there was terrorism in Europe (think RAF in Germany for example).
Yeah, Europeans have no concept of cultural diversity either, right?
Go, get a passport and travel a bit.
France didn't get involved because it was owed money and knew once the deals were exposed wouldn't receive a franc.
If anything they were afraid of loosing Euros. But in reality the US supplied just as much, if not more, materials to Iraq than the Europeans did.
Furthermore, it is very clear that the US Government knew what Saddam was using it for. While in Germany for example there were public investigations into the involvement of the then German Government in those deals and the companies fined money, the US didn't do anything like it.
Despite that there even is Photograhic evidence that Rumsfeld was shaking hands and telling jokes with Saddam.
Really? So by implication the US and GB went to war for oil. Can you support this? I'm not aware of any "oil dividend" either nation has received...no spoils of war. You shouldn't spout rhetoric unless you can support it.
Well,
it looks like you still pay the price in Blood these days, but you honestly think the US went in there out of the good of their heart? When was the last time the US did something just out of pure humanism?
The reality is the US is about money (or the illusion of it), humanitarian effort don't quite fit in there.
So tell me, why exactly did the US go into Iraq (and the UK happily followed)? If it wasn't for the oil, then it was for what? WMDs?
The real reason france and germany didn't go to war is because going to war would interfere with vacation time.
Wow, now that was a real good argument.
Of course, the french have that 35 hour work week with a similar amount of vacation time. See, that's why all the useful things like the Internet and computer you are using and the airplane you take on vacation were invented in the US
Actually the Computer was invented in Germany, too bad, so was TV btw, but heck, who really cares right?
You are just jealous because people can actually live a happy life without working 50 weeks out of the year.
Furthermore, you seem to think the more people work the more productive they are, that this might not be the case somehow escapes you.
I worked in both places and I can tell you that the per hour productivity in Europe is a lot higher, when people are at work, they work, don't talk at the water cooler, but hey, it's all about stereotypes here, isn't it? No real arguments, so use stereotypes.
I would prefer damaging it so that they have to send someone to repair it, we all then wait for him or her and corner them, after they loose five or six people they'll think twice of sending out a repair crew.
Yeah! Anarchy!;)
Re:Don't know why this is so controversial...
on
Hackers On Atkins
·
· Score: 1
Low-fat diet+exercise will simply not work for a significant percentage of the population. Some people will simply not lose weight with the traditional exercise and diet route. The human body is a complex and often uncooperative machine.
Any "diet" in the sense it is understood today is bullshit. The idea is to eat a BALANCED diet, but what is balanced depends on the individual.
It still is true, eat less calories than you burn (up to a certain degree) and you will loose the fat. There is no real magic about this.
The way the calories come together though is different for each individual and you have to try and find out.
I am pretty anal about my nutrion mainly because of my Ironman training and for me it is a year of hits and miss. I experimented with different combinations and finally after a year I have found something that seems to work for me.
There is no "one stop shop" for a diet, it is all about your lifestyle and your diet should adapt both to your lifestyle and to your nutrional requirements.
Atkins might or might not work. High carb and low fat might or might not work. Experiment, see how you feel and then make a choice.
It seems that the hunting was done by the guys (go figure) but they hardly brought any of the "hunt" back, it seems they ate it all where they found or killed it.
The women on the other hand found and used the grains, so in essence you can say that the female body is more geared towards vegan / vegetarianism opposed to the guy who seems to tend to thrive on animal Protein.
It makes some sense, considering how much more muscle the average guy has.
But let's face it: There is no "magic bullet" that will cure all of our problems, it's different for each individual. I can't handle dairy while my g/f loves it. I like Soymilk while she can't stand the taste etc.
Re:SPORT!!! and the American way of life
on
Hackers On Atkins
·
· Score: 1
n my time working for the USAF and my one visit to the US, I noticed how damn difficult it is to buy vegetables and food you actually have to cook--most supermarkets seem to be stuffed with precooked, processed shit that is neither nutritional nor healthy and people resort to chemical crpa like olestra etc in order to avoid actually getting out of their huge fucking cars and moving their bodies.
Yep,
made the same observation when I was living for 9 months in the states, and I turned into a fatty as well, gained roughly 20kg in 9 months, despite me walking to and from work every day for 45 minutes (one way).
Food in the US in general sucks, there are some "european style" super markets, but they cost an arm and a leg.
Where I disagree is the "serious amounts of exercise". This will certainly help a person lose weight, but like a car that's constantly raced (instead of driven normally), parts just wear out faster and break more often
You're not supposed to redline it. Base building is done at an "easy effort" means: You can still talk, this is 80% of my training.
In our distant past, we might have been out running around all day, hunting, but our lifespans were MUCH shorter than what they are today too.
Yet, there is no indication that large amounts of exercises (I talk here about Ironman distances, up to ten times) are having a negative effect on the body. And they have 30 years to research that, in fact they use Ironman Hawaii every year to probe all kinds of Athletes to see how they do physically.
Their findings so far: You're more likely to get a cold right after the race as your immune system is down, otherwise there don't seem to be any long term effect.
Just ask any ex pro-athlete, and they'll have plenty of stories and gripes about their bad joints, torn ligaments/tendons, and permanent injuries that are luckily paid for because they earned so much money while playing the sport.
Our understanding of exercise has greatly changed in the past 20 years, if you don't play any contact sports you are pretty low risk of injury (i.e. running), of course there are always freak accidents and such, but one has to take risks, no?
Better for your knees & hips and you can actually get some upper body exercise.
Huh? Since when do you need upper body strength on a bike?
I could bike just fine last year, but because I didn't have any upper body strength I couldn't run. Care to explain?
Re:IT AINT FUCKEN EASY!
on
Hackers On Atkins
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Free, yes. Easy? No way. I have tried excercising everyday for about 1/2 hour, and only lost about 5 pounds. That payoff is like earning less than min wage. Plus, jogging can be boring as hell, and more interesting activities like basketball leave you sore and injured often. I still excecize, but not every day.
Fat burning doesn't really start until around 30 minutes in the exercise, plus if you're still overeating you won't loose anything.
The goal would be not to go below 500kCal of your daily requirement.
As for the jogging: Use it as a meditative exercise, my long runs are 2 1/2 hours (iPods are great) and I use it to clear my mind.
As far as eating less, your body knows very well that your intake is less than it wants, and not only cranks up the cravings to high heaven, but also lowers your metabalism to compensate, negating the effects. Being hungry all the time is miserable. It is comparable to having a slowly tighting vice on your arm. Constant discomfort.
Instead of starving yourself change what you eat:
- Let go of refined foods. - Let go of McDonalds and co, read the nutrionional guide and look at your caloric requirements and you'll realize just HOW much is in your double whopper with cheese. - Instead of eating three meals a day break it up in more, smaller sizes.
I am hardly hungry, though I sometimes manage to crash my blood sugar when I am too deep in work, but in general I am constantly eating and snacking, just not the choclate bar that has almost 300kCal.
It is going against 4 billion years of evolution that pushes us to hord food in preperation for lean days of no supply. Lean days are less likely in the modern world, but our body does not know that. Evolution is blind.
True, but the problem also is that people just overeat instead of looking at what they really need.
I am ~6'2" and currently weight 192 pounds (this is really bad, weight is a bad indicator), I am at ~11% Body Fat (now that is what you really want to know) and most people think I am at most 170. The point I am trying to make here is: For my height and weight I need roughly 2000kCal a DAY to maintain my body (add any exercise on top of that).
Now look in your nutrional guide and tell me exactly how much was in your breakfast burrioto you just had? Not to forget your large coffee with a kg of sugar and the Dr. Pepper you have while sitting at the desk?
And, diet food tastes like cardboard. I would rather throw away the contents and eat the damned box! It tastes better.
My diet food consists of fresh veggies, lean protein and fruits. Occasionally I have a pop and other stuff, but it's in moderation. Tastes a hell of a lot better than "normal" food (whatever that is).
Science/tech created the problem, let it also fix it without this miserable 24/hr discipline shit.
Lyposucktion?
Seriously: You need some mental discipline, it won't work any other way, instead of whining start making changes to your life and to your diet, this is not a 5 minute thing, this is something for the lifetime.
Oh, and as for Atkins and stuff: Great if people loose fat on this, but how's your cardio? Just to be thin is by far not healthy.
Our new Premier says he will hold a referendum on Proportional Representation. That is a start. After that, we kill First Past The Post voting with some other sane method.
Guess we'll see... Let's be positive, but I somehow have my doubts, imagine if all of the sudden you have greens in the house of commons;)
Slashdot Mirror
Anyways, in regards to Armstrade, you really think that cultures of Antrax etc. were just sent there, or through a third party? I am sure the US declared every single piece of equipment they wanted in Iraq to be going through "official channels" and leave a paper trail, after all we're all honest here right?
As for the Sipri Website it states:
As well as
I recommend reading "Body of Secrets" for an example just how usually "undercover" weapon shipments are made. A hint: It isn't a complete system.
Here, is another nice link that might entertain you.
Some quotes:
So yes, the French sold Iraq airplanes but it seems the CIA was very well aware of what was going on.
Here is another link from the BBC this time, again an interresting quote:
So the UK was activly involved as well. I guess they all did this on their own, not while Saddam was a Protege of the Reagan Administration?
And where exatcly is the US selling all these weapons to if they only sell to "friendly" countries as was claimed?
BTW, let's not stop at the BBC with the whole armstrade thing from back in the '80s. Here is a nice report from the Guardian about Saddam trying to
Amen, but don't expect them to get it.
Saw a nice picture one, it showed an M1A2 MBT with the headline: "Delivering Democracy for 50 years!"
That pretty much sums it up.
I agree, it is so much more civilised to press a button high up in the sky and rain bombs on the people below.
I am sure the US can train some pilots and sell planes and bombs to them. They did it before after all.
At least I am not hiding my identity.
The interresting thing about inventions is that before the world was so connected (reads, the last 10 years), people could make invention at the same time without anybody else knowing about it.
Canada for example claims to have invented the Thermos and there is also the claim that a German (Philip Reis) invented the Telephone before Bell did.
Well, at least not directly....
Somaila? How about the fear of Terrorism (yes, that was a point, same reason why the "chemical factory" was bombed. Terrorism was a "fear factor" for quite some time for the US Government, just never in the mind of the average Joe.
As for Kosovo: It took the US a lot longer to get in there than into Iraq the first time, exactly because there wasn't anything there, they finally intervened after the EU went through NATO asking for help, which they got as well as snitty remarks about "European Responsibility" etc.
True, but what I was pointing at was the fact that the US isn't as innocent as they would like to think they are.
There is nothing "holy" about the US, you are not the champions for the good in the world, you brought as much (if not more) suffering to the world.
Maybe not (always) on purpose, but if an elephant turns and is not careful he's injuring or killing the smaller ones without even noticing.
Considering the sheer size of the USA, how many people lived right next to a SAC airbase in comparision to Europeans? And who could look over the fence and see Russian Tanks?
Actually, my understanding always was that they just made it bigger, mainly because people in the US, at one point in time, didn't like the idea to "buckle up".
I am in North America right now, I adapt
M.
It is a little bit different if you live with the Abstract notion of someone dropping "The Bomb(TM)" on you or if you actually live in a town where you can see ABC tanks and Tactical Nuclear missles rolling through your town.
Believe me, the US did not feel the cold war as chilling as most of Europe did.
Europe was under siege, and people knew it, the US was "far away".
Of course, Europe was still well of in comparision to the "hot zones" like Vietnam.
I am at work right now, but I do have some links at home, if you are interrested either send me an email or tell me here and I try to dig this up sometime tonight.
See, the problem with Terrorism is that it is like the Hydra, the more heads you cut off, the more will grow back.
You won't fight Terrorism with Weapons, you have to fight it in the head of the people, it is ideologically and bombing somebody doesn't make them your friend.
Having said that, why Iraq? The 9/11 Hijackers were all Saudis, Osama is Saudi. None of them was Iraqi, do you really think that the world is a safer place now? I think the opposit is true.
Can we take the Airbag and Seatbelt back as well? Both were developed by Mercedes-Benz, plus some other things
I am at work right now, I don't have the link list here, as I said i can give you links tonight.
It is an observation, having worked in both places for extended periods.
The reality is that the philosophies are different, the end result is about the same. Personally I guess I'll be going back to Europe in the long run..... More vacation
M.
Unlike most North Americans, most Europeans where in the middle of the cold war, most people in Germany had relatives on the other side of the Iron Curtain.
Most Europeans can drive for a couple of hours and still see how "bad" it was over there, you can still find places where you can see bullet holes in Walls. If you go through some woods you can still see bomb craters, some old, destroyed buildings.
If you go a bit east of Berlin and walk through woods and fields you can still find human remains from the battle of Berlin in '45.
If you have a Metal detector you can still find bullets, Dog Tags and other stuff.
Even though "Western Europe" was pretty much war free for the past 50 years, conflicts where always raging nearby. While the US lived in "harmony" with itself there was terrorism in Europe (think RAF in Germany for example).
Yeah, Europeans have no concept of cultural diversity either, right?
Go, get a passport and travel a bit.
If anything they were afraid of loosing Euros. But in reality the US supplied just as much, if not more, materials to Iraq than the Europeans did.
Furthermore, it is very clear that the US Government knew what Saddam was using it for. While in Germany for example there were public investigations into the involvement of the then German Government in those deals and the companies fined money, the US didn't do anything like it.
Despite that there even is Photograhic evidence that Rumsfeld was shaking hands and telling jokes with Saddam.
Well,
it looks like you still pay the price in Blood these days, but you honestly think the US went in there out of the good of their heart? When was the last time the US did something just out of pure humanism?
The reality is the US is about money (or the illusion of it), humanitarian effort don't quite fit in there.
So tell me, why exactly did the US go into Iraq (and the UK happily followed)? If it wasn't for the oil, then it was for what? WMDs?
Wow, now that was a real good argument.
Actually the Computer was invented in Germany, too bad, so was TV btw, but heck, who really cares right?
You are just jealous because people can actually live a happy life without working 50 weeks out of the year.
Furthermore, you seem to think the more people work the more productive they are, that this might not be the case somehow escapes you.
I worked in both places and I can tell you that the per hour productivity in Europe is a lot higher, when people are at work, they work, don't talk at the water cooler, but hey, it's all about stereotypes here, isn't it? No real arguments, so use stereotypes.
... that they did this in order to prevent TWO programs at the same time trying to get a hold of the iPod?
If that's all it does it's okay. If it prevents MMJB from starting than it isn't quite that okay.
M.
I would prefer damaging it so that they have to send someone to repair it, we all then wait for him or her and corner them, after they loose five or six people they'll think twice of sending out a repair crew.
Yeah! Anarchy!
Any "diet" in the sense it is understood today is bullshit. The idea is to eat a BALANCED diet, but what is balanced depends on the individual.
It still is true, eat less calories than you burn (up to a certain degree) and you will loose the fat. There is no real magic about this.
The way the calories come together though is different for each individual and you have to try and find out.
I am pretty anal about my nutrion mainly because of my Ironman training and for me it is a year of hits and miss. I experimented with different combinations and finally after a year I have found something that seems to work for me.
There is no "one stop shop" for a diet, it is all about your lifestyle and your diet should adapt both to your lifestyle and to your nutrional requirements.
Atkins might or might not work. High carb and low fat might or might not work. Experiment, see how you feel and then make a choice.
Actually you have to break this up.
It seems that the hunting was done by the guys (go figure) but they hardly brought any of the "hunt" back, it seems they ate it all where they found or killed it.
The women on the other hand found and used the grains, so in essence you can say that the female body is more geared towards vegan / vegetarianism opposed to the guy who seems to tend to thrive on animal Protein.
It makes some sense, considering how much more muscle the average guy has.
But let's face it: There is no "magic bullet" that will cure all of our problems, it's different for each individual. I can't handle dairy while my g/f loves it. I like Soymilk while she can't stand the taste etc.
Yep,
made the same observation when I was living for 9 months in the states, and I turned into a fatty as well, gained roughly 20kg in 9 months, despite me walking to and from work every day for 45 minutes (one way).
Food in the US in general sucks, there are some "european style" super markets, but they cost an arm and a leg.
I watched my shins grow quite a bit ;)
And yes, I do know you "pull" the bike during extended climbs.
M.
MMhh...
;)
didn't work for me, guess I was too much in my aero bars
M.
You're not supposed to redline it. Base building is done at an "easy effort" means: You can still talk, this is 80% of my training.
Yet, there is no indication that large amounts of exercises (I talk here about Ironman distances, up to ten times) are having a negative effect on the body. And they have 30 years to research that, in fact they use Ironman Hawaii every year to probe all kinds of Athletes to see how they do physically.
Their findings so far: You're more likely to get a cold right after the race as your immune system is down, otherwise there don't seem to be any long term effect.
Our understanding of exercise has greatly changed in the past 20 years, if you don't play any contact sports you are pretty low risk of injury (i.e. running), of course there are always freak accidents and such, but one has to take risks, no?
Huh? Since when do you need upper body strength on a bike?
I could bike just fine last year, but because I didn't have any upper body strength I couldn't run. Care to explain?
Fat burning doesn't really start until around 30 minutes in the exercise, plus if you're still overeating you won't loose anything.
The goal would be not to go below 500kCal of your daily requirement.
As for the jogging: Use it as a meditative exercise, my long runs are 2 1/2 hours (iPods are great) and I use it to clear my mind.
Instead of starving yourself change what you eat:
- Let go of refined foods.
- Let go of McDonalds and co, read the nutrionional guide and look at your caloric requirements and you'll realize just HOW much is in your double whopper with cheese.
- Instead of eating three meals a day break it up in more, smaller sizes.
I am hardly hungry, though I sometimes manage to crash my blood sugar when I am too deep in work, but in general I am constantly eating and snacking, just not the choclate bar that has almost 300kCal.
True, but the problem also is that people just overeat instead of looking at what they really need.
I am ~6'2" and currently weight 192 pounds (this is really bad, weight is a bad indicator), I am at ~11% Body Fat (now that is what you really want to know) and most people think I am at most 170. The point I am trying to make here is: For my height and weight I need roughly 2000kCal a DAY to maintain my body (add any exercise on top of that).
Now look in your nutrional guide and tell me exactly how much was in your breakfast burrioto you just had? Not to forget your large coffee with a kg of sugar and the Dr. Pepper you have while sitting at the desk?
My diet food consists of fresh veggies, lean protein and fruits. Occasionally I have a pop and other stuff, but it's in moderation. Tastes a hell of a lot better than "normal" food (whatever that is).
Lyposucktion?
Seriously: You need some mental discipline, it won't work any other way, instead of whining start making changes to your life and to your diet, this is not a 5 minute thing, this is something for the lifetime.
Oh, and as for Atkins and stuff: Great if people loose fat on this, but how's your cardio? Just to be thin is by far not healthy.
No, shipping cost was just one example that adds to the overall cost of the product.
My initial statement was about in general that the price we pay at the register is not what the real price of the product is.
There isn't much subsidizing going on.
Um... You are aware that most agriculture is very heavily subsidized by the government? Both locally, state and federal?
It's not only the Highways, but other things as well. It's not only the roads, but production as well. Read up a bit.
Yeah, according to things like NAFTA and WTO things like that shouldn't happen but they do.
Fresh, Ontario grown apples are very difficult to find in the winter.
Actually the wonderful thing about apples is that you can store them for a pretty long time.
S. You're probably wrong about where they were made and where they were shipped to.
Am I?
Michael
Gee, and silly me thought that aliens only visited rednecks and "backward" places. :) Have you asked to see anyone's leader yet?
;)
Actually I did, but the guy was talking a bit funny....
Our new Premier says he will hold a referendum on Proportional Representation. That is a start. After that, we kill First Past The Post voting with some other sane method.
;)
Guess we'll see... Let's be positive, but I somehow have my doubts, imagine if all of the sudden you have greens in the house of commons
M.