oops got a typo in my reply post
oooh well, no one is perfect...

I re-checked my post where did you see crayon,spinach and baby **** green aliens of extraterristial origins come from?

Sept. 26, 2007 - Religion and social status have always been deal breakers in relationships. But for those navigating today’s dating pool, the currents may just have gotten rougher. No longer is it enough to share an interest in piña colada or getting caught in the rain—today’s singles want to know whether potential partners are fit and how often they work out, among other personal details. And then there’s the friction between vegans and vegetarians.

It might sound counterintuitive; after all, neither group eats meat. But for many vegans—who also eschew animal products like the dairy and eggs eaten by vegetarians—love may not be enough to conquer ideology. “I’m in a relationship with a murderer,” bemoans Carl, one of many vegans who wrote in to the “Vegan Freak” podcast for romantic advice. Carl, who didn’t give his last name, says his girlfriend is a regular vegetarian, and their differences are becoming a major source of tension. In the vegan world that’s not an uncommon dilemma. Bob Torres, one of the show’s hosts, says that dating and relationships are two of the most popular topics on the podcast, which deals with all things vegan.

Vegans are hardly the only partner-seekers with health concerns. Online dating site Match.com has noted a steady rise in interest in the topic among its 15 million members. In 2004 about 15 percent of its members said they exercised regularly. Among today’s members, about 43 percent say they exercise three to four times each week. That’s more people declaring their devotion to exercise than declaring their religion on the Web site. Food has also become a concern; just under half the site’s members want their partner to have a healthy diet, compared to 12 percent three years ago. And these are issues that relationship counselor Ian Kerner, who works with the site, thinks can cause more serious conflict in relationships than political or philosophical differences. “I think people can get past a lot of intellectual debates, because that’s what makes opposites attract,” he says. But getting past a fitness fanatic/couch potato clash? “I can’t tell you how many times I hear people breaking up over things like this,” says Kerner. “It’s a lot about sharing values, about how they sped their time. It’s both scheduling conflicts and different value systems.”

Vegans and vegetarians can get caught in worse dating dilemmas. For many vegetarians and almost all vegans, their distaste for meat runs much deeper than their taste buds; it’s an outward expression of their ethical and moral beliefs about animal cruelty and responsible living. Take John Cunningham, who lives in Baltimore. “If I don’t have to contribute to cruelty in society and this world, I would like to abstain from that,” he says. He’s been a vegan since 2001, and he married his long-term girlfriend (a vegetarian) this past summer. He understands the critical role veganism can play in dating and relationships. “If someone is going to make such a large change in the way they eat, the motivation behind that has to be serious,” he says. “That can’t be taken causally when entering into a relationship.”
Not surprisingly, a number of niche dating sites have popped up to respond to veggie dating demands. Vegan Passions, Veggie Fishing and Planet Earth Singles are all sites that cater to environmentally conscious daters. Planet Earth Singles launched in April (fittingly, on Earth Day) and already boosts 23,000 eco-friendly members, many of whom are among the nation’s 1.4 million vegans or 4.7 million vegetarians. “If somebody is for the environmental movement, they want to support it on all levels, even in their relationships,” says Jill Crosby, the founder of Planet Earth Singles

September 26, 2007 -- A Massachusetts bar manager trying to give a break to a man claiming to be an Iraq war vet had his kindness thrown back in his face when it turned out the man was lying through his teeth.

Christopher Lee Proe, 23, ran up a $4,000 tab at Pufferbellies in Hyannis and convinced staffers to let him pay by check.

But the checks were as bogus as he was, authorities said.

The pub's manager said Proe took advantage of the bar's policy of giving military personnel special treatment.



****
Add doggie-dancing classes to the list of ways to pamper your pet.

For $275, dog owners can learn to do the cha-cha, twist and rumba with their pooch.

The school in East Troy, Wis., is dubbed the Dancers with Woofs K9 Freestyle Dance Camp.

"The goal for this sport is to become an Olympic sport," said instructor Linda Blanchard.



****
Strange way to stage a protest.

A pet rabbit was stolen from a Spokane, Wash., preschool and fliers protesting circus animal acts were left in his empty cage.

"Somebody stoled him," said 5-year-old Zion. "I'm sad."

The fliers railed against Ringling Brothers Circus, which was in town at the time.



****
Hungary has come up with a novel way to bring prostitutes into legitimate society.

Officials say they will allow sex workers to apply for an entrepreneur's permit that will allow the government to collect taxes on their services.

Experts say the move could bring in $1 billion a year in revenue.

Prostitution has been legal in Hungary since 1999.



****
A top cricket player in Australia sank his marriage when he wrote racy text messages to his mistress - but accidentally sent them to his wife.

Shane Warne texted, "Hey, beautiful, I'm just talking to my kids - the back door's open."

But he sent it to the wrong number.

When his wife got the message, she texted back, "You loser, you sent the message to the wrong person."

September 26, 2007 -- THE ridiculous little man who needs a shave and a tailor has every right to make a fool of himself, says Sgt. John Borders, who left his right leg in Iraq.

"The reason I went over there was to make sure everyone there had the right to freedom," said the sarge. "This is a free country and we are showing the world that.

"Maybe it wasn't right that Columbia invited him, but he had every right to speak at the United Nations. We're not scared of freedom of speech."

Sgt. Borders suffered his injury in the explosion of a roadside bomb - quite possibly supplied by Iran - that blew up his Humvee outside the town of Tajic on Jan. 5, 2006, during his second tour to the blood-soaked country.

"Perhaps if he knew the determination and patriotism of the men I served with, he might not have come here," the sergeant was saying.

"Not that we would cause him any harm, but if he said something derogatory about our country to our face, well, that might be something else."

Borders came to New York to see Dr. John Kennedy, a specialist, who is trying to save his other leg, which also was damaged in the bomb blast.

His trip was sponsored by Flip Mullen of the Wounded Warriors organization.

Said Borders, "I am lucky. I can see, I have my hands, and I can get around by myself.

"I am very, very lucky."

How can that despicable little dictator think he can scare a country that produces men like Sgt. Borders.

steve.dunleavy@nypost.com

Sun Sep 23, 2007 (NEWSWEEK/REUTERS)

Vice President **** Cheney had at one point considered asking Israel to launch limited missile strikes at an Iranian nuclear site to provoke a retaliation, Newsweek magazine reported on Sunday.

The news comes amid reports that Israel launched an air strike against Syria this month over a suspected nuclear site.

Citing two unidentified sources, Newsweek said former Cheney Middle East adviser David Wurmser told a small group several months ago that Cheney was considering asking Israel to strike the Iranian nuclear site at Natanz.

A military response by Iran could give Washington an excuse to then launch airstrikes of its own, Newsweek said.

Wurmser's wife, Meyrav Wurmser of the neoconservative Hudson Institute think tank, told Newsweek the claims were untrue.

Wurmser left Cheney's office last month, the magazine reported. The steady departure of neoconservative hawks from the administration has also helped tilt the balance against war, it said.

Washington has been pursuing diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran to alter its nuclear program. It has refused to take military options off the table, even U.S. resources are taxed by having 169,000 troops in Iraq.

Although some intelligence sources say Iran is years away from nuclear capability, Israel believes that military action may be necessary as early as 2008, Newsweek said.

Israel has declined to comment on the reported air strike, while Syria has denied receiving North Korean nuclear aid and said it could retaliate for the September 6 violation of its territory.

Gee I wonder if he believes in the Chupacadre or even Godzilla?

spase i didn't you don't understand of course it's was women's right to join the military whether they volunteer or were recruited through selective service. The fact here is that within our own media rarely do they ever let the public know that women have fought long and hard in combat and died with pride and honor in serving her country. They always mention men who fought bravely .

As the War in the Middle East continues, our military is experiencing enormous strains and unprecedented social change at the same time. The 2008 Presidential Election is already underway, but little attention has been given to military personnel issues that affect morale, discipline, and readiness in the volunteer force.

This website has posted several new articles that explain the issue of homosexuals in the military. The difference between the 1993 law that Congress actually passed, and Bill Clinton’s convoluted and expendable “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” enforcement regulations that are inconsistent with that law, are explored thoroughly.

The Center for Military Readiness is also working on unresolved controversies regarding the illicit “employment” of female soldiers in or near direct ground combat. Our servicemen and women are serving with courage and distinction in Iraq and Afghanistan, and all soldiers are “in harms way.” The missions of infantry, armor, Special Operations Forces, and Marine infantry, however, have not changed.

These direct ground combat units, and battalion-level forward support companies that embed or “collocate” with them 100% of the time, are required by Defense Department regulation to be all male. Nevertheless, the Army is using semantics and sophistry to justify their “employment” of many female soldiers in or near direct ground combat positions that are required to be all male.

If Army leaders believe that these rules should change, they need to secure approval from the Secretary of Defense, and then comply with the law requiring formal notice to Congress 30 legislative days (about 3 months) in advance. The law also requires an analysis of the effect of proposed changes on young women’s exemption from Selective Service registration. In 2005 Congress mandated a report on the current assignments of female soldiers, which was due on March 31, 2006. None of these legally mandated requirements have been met, but most members of Congress are looking the other way.

Active duty, retired military and civilians who agree that Congress and the American people should exercise oversight on these important issues should contact their own members of Congress at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov. President George W. Bush, who is ultimately responsible for the Defense Department’s violations of policy and law, can be reached at www.whitehouse.gov.

This website presents background information and commentary on additional issues of concern to CMR, the principles that guide us, and the contributions we plan to make in this unique field of public policy. Because the War on Terrorism is still in progress, CMR will continue to display the American Legion Blue Star flag in the “window” of our website as a symbol of our support for the troops.

for more info regarding this check: http://www.cmrlink.org/WomenInCombat.asp?DocID=271

The Center for Military Readiness has provided the following information to officials in the Pentagon, Congress, and the White House, starting in April 2006. This document accompanies a list of questions about this issue, which appears nearby on this website.




Army Changing Regulations Without Required Notice to Congress




Our female soldiers are serving with courage and distinction in Iraq and Afghanistan, and all soldiers, regardless of their specialty, are “in harms way.” But even without a “front line,” missions of “direct ground combat” (DGC) troops remain the same.





“Direct ground combat” means engaging or attacking the enemy with deliberate offensive action under fire. It is more than the experience of being in danger or “in harms way.” 1




Direct ground combat units, coded “P1,” are required by current Defense Department regulations to be all male. Examples of DGC units include Army and Marine infantry, armor, and Special Operations Forces like those that fought to liberate Baghdad in March 2003 and Fallujah in November 2004.




Female soldiers are also exempt from placement in support units that embed or “collocate” with smaller direct ground combat battalions 100% of the time. Most brigade level positions, which do not involve constant collocation, are coded “P2” and are open to women.




These regulations, including the collocation rule, were adopted in January 1994 and remain in effect today. 2




If Army leaders want to change these regulations, current law requires formal notice from the Secretary of Defense to Congress 30 legislative days (about 3 months) in advance. Current law also requires a report on the effect of proposed rule changes on women’s exemption from Selective Service registration. 3



Land Combat-Collocated Forward Support Companies (FSCs)




The DoD collocation rule, which is not difficult to understand or implement, affects only those support units that constantly collocate with DGC maneuver battalions. Army officials nevertheless have placed female soldiers in forward support companies (FSCs), which collocate with all-male infantry/armor maneuver battalions 100% of the time.





To support the claim that this practice does not violate current regulations and the congressional notification law, Army officials have administratively “assigned” female soldiers (on paper only) to brigade support battalions (BSBs) that are legally open to women, while physically “attaching” or “opconning” them to battalion-level direct ground combat units.




Arrangements of this kind have been made in maneuver battalion forward support companies in the 3rd and 4th Infantry Divisions, the 101st Airborne, the 1st Cavalry, and Reconnaisance, Surveillance, Target Acquisition (RSTA) squadrons. (See February 2006 CMR Policy Analysis)




This practice violates DoD regulations, which requires land combat-collocated units to be all-male. (See diagram of “opconned” FSCs in the 1st Cavalry)




The Secretary of the Army and other officials claim the service is in compliance with policy and law because female soldiers will not be present when DGC units are “conducting” direct ground combat. This suggests that the women will be evacuated (somehow) just prior to battle. 4




It is not clear how these evacuations might be accomplished under wartime conditions, when there are no aircraft or vehicles available for that purpose. Nor is it clear how the separation of FSC personnel on the eve of battle, when they are needed most, would improve the combat effectiveness of land combat battalions.




In addition to land combat-collocated support units, the Army has dropped multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) and RSTA squadrons from the list of DGC units coded to be all male, without DoD authorization or notice to Congress.



Congressional Oversight Delayed and Denied




Nothing in the history of regulations regarding female soldiers, going back to 1992, indicates that the Army may alter DoD regulations without the approval of the Secretary of Defense.





The Army’s practice of “assigning,” “attaching,” or “opconning” female soldiers to combat collocated forward support companies effectively and unilaterally repeals the collocation rule by rendering it meaningless.




The Defense Department has also disregarded legislation in the 2006 National Defense Act, which mandated a report on this subject by March 31, 2006. 5




Although a May 2004 Army briefing speculated that there might be a shortage of male soldiers for placement in the combat-collocated forward support companies, no data has been presented to support that speculation.




The law requiring advance notice to Congress of proposed rule changes regarding land combat, and a similar one regarding assignment of female sailors to submarines, were designed to ensure congressional oversight.




Acceptance of the status quo effectively relinquishes responsible congressional oversight, and opens the door to future incremental rule changes without the opportunity to have timely hearings. Units affected could include Army and Marine infantry, armor, and Special Operations Forces, and even submarines.

86 Women Killed in War on Terror
Updated: September 12, 2007
Since the attack on America on September 11, 2001, a total of 86 women deployed to Afghanistan, Iraq and Kuwait have lost their lives in service to America.

Most Americans, and even members of the media, are not aware that 86 brave servicewomen have died in the War on Terrorism. With few exceptions, news stories about their tragic deaths usually appear only in the military press, or in small hometown newspaper stories and television accounts that rarely capture national attention.

Everyone in this war is serving "In Harm's Way," but “Direct Ground Combat” units, such as the infantry, engage in deliberate offensive action against the enemy. Most of the servicewomen whose names are listed below were killed by improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and some died in military plane crashes. Nine were mothers of one or more children age 18 and younger. One female soldier, whose body was shattered by an explosive device she was attempting to disarm, died in the arms of her soldier husband who was stationed nearby.

Walter Reed Hospital in Washington D.C. has cared for many female heroes who have lost legs and arms. When two women Marines and a female sailor were killed in a Fallujah truck attack in June, eleven more were sent to Brooke Medical Center in Texas, which specializes in the treatment of severe burns. Hundreds have received medals for serious injuries and for personal valor under fire.

Heartbroken family members have expressed indescribable grief and great pride in their daughters, which is universally shared by a grateful nation. It is always when soldiers die, but losses of women in this war are unprecedented in modern history. According to Army Times, 7,000 women served in Vietnam, but only 16 were killed, most of them nurses. In the first Persian Gulf War, 33,000 women were deployed, but only 6 perished due to scud missile explosions or accidents. (Nov. 24, 2003)

Some have argued that the women who have died are no different than the men. But deliberate exposure of women to combat violence in war is tantamount to acceptance of violence against women in general. As a nation we must consider the long-term implications of this cultural shift, which many see as a setback for our values and civilization.

At times in our history it has been necessary to send young men to fight in defense of America. Women have always served in the armed forces with courage and distinction, but there is no military necessity to send young women and mothers to fight in close combat areas where they do not have an equal opportunity to survive, or to help fellow soldiers survive. Concern for men who are fighting and dying in this war should not preclude discussion of problematic policies affecting our women.

Decisions by Default Disrespect Women

As the war advances into its sixth year, it is appropriate to ask serious questions about policies that have led to this grim reality. Our female soldiers are being asked to shoulder heavier burdens and greater risk than military women have ever faced in America’s history. Recent policy changes have been implemented with deception and advanced by default, with elected representatives in Congress paying almost no attention to what has been going on.

In 1991 the military service chiefs expressed strong reservations about the consequences of repealing women’s combat exemptions. Their testimony was forgotten when the Navy’s Tailhook scandal led to sweeping changes in policy and law demanded by feminists who have not suffered the consequences themselves. Former Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder argued, illogically, that abuse of women in a Las Vegas hotel corridor was wrong, but combat violence at the hands of the enemy was perfectly all right.

The Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) has not heard testimony about women in combat since 1991, 16 years ago. Nor did the SASC have time to hear a single word of testimony about the findings of the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Services, which recommended that most of women’s combat exemptions be retained.

The House Armed Services Committee (HASC) did hear five minutes of testimony from former commissioner Elaine Donnelly about the panel’s report in 1993, but nothing more on the subject was heard until May 19, 2005, when the HASC briefly debated limited legislation regarding women in or near land combat. The last committee hearing on the subject occurred in the House in 1979, 28 years ago.

Female soldiers and the men with whom they serve have a right to expect that policies and laws will be honestly explained and faithfully enforced. But as CMR has explained in several articles posted on this website, critical policy decisions are being made by default, in violation of current Defense Department regulations and two specific laws written to ensure congressional oversight.

Neglect of this issue by President George W. Bush, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and by members of Congress shows disrespect for our women in uniform and the importance of congressional oversight. Failure to discuss this issue could also result in successful litigation to include civilian women in Selective Service registration. It is long past time for the Bush Administration and Congress to pay women the compliment of taking this issue seriously.

The following list of the names of deployed women killed since 9/11, updated on September 12, 2007, should be viewed with sober reflection and gratitude for the courageous women who gave their lives in service to America. Unless otherwise indicated, all were soldiers in the Army:

Afghanistan:



Marine Sgt. Jeannette L. Williams, 25, KC-130 crash in Pakistan mountains, Jan. 9, 2002

AF Staff Sgt. Anissa Shero, 31, loadmaster, MC-130H, crash on takeoff of Special Operations mission, June 12, 2002

AF 1st Lt. Tamara Archuleta, 23, co-pilot Pave Hawk helicopter, crashed while picking up two injured Afghan children, Mar. 23, 2003

Sgt. Maj. Barbaralien Banks, 41, Chinook crash, Apr. 6, married, one son, 19, Apr. 6, 2005

Spec. Chrystal Stout, 23, Chinook crash, Apr. 6, 2005

1st Lt. Laura M. Walker, 24, IED attack on Humvee, Aug. 18, 2005

Sgt. Wakkuna A. Jackson, 21, IED attack on convoy vehicle, Aug. 19, 2006

Reserve Sgt. 1st Class Merideth L. Howard, 52, suicide car bomb attack on Humvee, Sept. 8
Iraq:


Pfc. Lori Ann Piestewa, 23, captured, died in captivity, Mar. 23, 2003, two children, 4 and 3, Mar. 23, 2003

Sgt. Melissa Valles, 26, non-combat gunshot wound to abdomen, cause unknown, July 10, 2003

Spc. Alyssa Renee Peterson, 27, gunshot wound to head, cause unknown, Sept. 15, 2003

Pfc. Analaura Esparza Gutierrez, 21, RPG attack on supply vehicle, Oct. 1, 2003

Spc. Tamarra J. Ramos, 24, non-combat injuries, armor medical company, Oct. 1, 2003

Pfc. Rachel Bosveld, 19, MP, attack on Baghdad police station, Oct. 26, 2003

Pfc. Karina Sotelo Lau, 20, Chinook crash, under fire, Nov. 2, 2003

Spc. Frances M. Vega, 20, Chinook crash, under fire, Nov. 2, 2003

Chief Warrant Officer Sharon T. Swartworth, 43, CWO, JAG Corps, Blackhawk downed under fire, Nov. 7, 2003

Sgt. Linda C. Jiminez, injuries following a fall in Baghdad, Nov. 8, 2003

Staff Sgt. Kimberley Voelz, 27, explosive ordnance disposal expert, bomb exploded, died in soldier husband's arms, Dec. 14, 2003

Capt. Kimberly Hampton, 27, helicopter pilot, downed under fire, Jan. 4, 2004

Sgt. Keicia M. Hines, 27, MP, struck by vehicle, Jan. 14, 2004

Pfc. Holly Jeanne McGeogh, 19, vehicle hit by IED, Jan. 31, 2004

Pfc. Nichole M. Frye, 19, Civil Affairs Reservist, vehicle hit by IED, Feb. 16, 2004

Capt. Gussie Jones, 41,non-combat death (surgical nurse, possible heart attack), Mar. 7, 2004

Spc. Tyanna Avery-Felder, 22, shrapnel wounds, Apr. 4, 2004

Spc. Michelle Witmer, 20, Wisconsin NG MP, killed by small arms attack (one of three sisters in the Army), Apr. 9, 2004

Spc. Isela Rubalcava, 25, hit by mortar round to Stryker brigade, May 8, 2004

Pfc. Leslie D. Jackson, 18,vehicle hit by IED, May 20, 2004

Pfc. Melissa J. Hobart, 22, collapsed while on guard duty, mother of 3 year-old, June 6, 2004

Spc. Julie R. Hickey, 20, Civil Affairs Reservist, died in Germany after complications from non-combat related illness, July 4, 2004

Sgt. Linda Terango-Griess, Ordnance Company Reservist, 33, vehicle hit by IED, July 11, 2004

Sgt. Tatjana Reed, 34, vehicle hit by IED, July 22, 2004

Sgt. Shawna L. Morrison, 26, IL NG, 26, hit by shrapnel when barracks mortared, Sept. 5, 2004

Spc. Jessica L. Cawvey, 21, vehicle hit by mortar, single mother of 6 year-old, Oct. 6, 2004

Sgt. Pamela Osbourne, 38, three children, ages 9 t0 19, Oct. 11, 2004

Sgt. Cari Anne Gasiewicz, 28, convoy vehicle hit by grenade, Dec. 4, 2004

Sgt. Tina S. Time, 22, vehicle accident, Dec. 13, 2004

Sgt. Jessica M. Housby, 23, IL NG, hit by IED near truck convoy, Feb. 9, 2005

Spc. Katrina L. Bell-Johnson, 32, truck overturned, cause unknown, mother of 1 year-old, Feb. 16, 2005

Spc. Adrianna Salem, 21, vehicle rolled over, unknown cause, Feb. 21, 2005

Pfc. Sam W. Huff, 18, IED attack on Humvee, April 18, 2005

Spc. Aleina Ramirez Gonzales, 33, Puerto Rico, April 15, mortar attack on forward operating base, Apr. 29, 2005

Spc. Lizbeth Robles, 31, vehicle accident, Mar. 1, 2005

Spc. Carrie L. French, 19, bomb hit on convoy, June 5, 2005

Marine Lance Cpl. Holly Charette, 21, attack on truck convoy in Fallujah, June 23, 2005

Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Regina Clark, 43, 1 18 year-old son, Fallujah attack on truck convoy, June 23, 2005

Marine Cpl. Ramona Valdez, 20, Fallujah attack on truck convoy, June 23, 2005

Staff Sgt. Tricia L. Jameson, 34, medical specialist, Army NG, IED explosion while responding to a casualty incident, July 14, 2005

Pfc. LaVena L. Johnson, 19, non-combat related injuries, July 19, 2005

Spec. Toccara Green, 23, IED explosion, Aug. 14, 2005

Airman 1st Class Elizabeth N. Jacobson, 21, IED explosion, Sept. 28, 2005

1st Lt. Debra A. Banaszak, 35, non-combat related injuries, Oct. 28, 2005

Sgt. Julia V. Atkins, 22,IED attack near Humvee, Dec. 10, 2005

Sgt. Regina C. Reali, 25, IED attack, Dec. 23, 2005

Sgt. Myla L. Maravillosa, 24, RPG attack on Humvee, Dec. 24, 2005

1st Lt. Jaime L. Campbell, 25, helicopter crash, Jan. 7, 2006

AF Senior Airman Alecia S. Good, 28, Gulf of Aden helicopter collision, Feb. 17, 2006

Pvt. First Class Tina M. Priest, 20, gunshot wound to the chest, unknown cause, Mar. 1, 2006

Pfc. Amy Duerksen, 19, of injuries suffered in Iraq, Mar. 11, 2006

Spc. Amanda Pinson, 21, mortar attack while waiting for bus transport, Mar. 16, 2006

Marine Lance Cpl. Juana Navarro Arellano, 24, of wounds received in Iraq, April 8.

Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Jaime S. Jaenke, 29, Humvee struck by IED, Iraq, June 5, mother of 9 year old girl.

Pfc. Hannah L. Gunterman, 20, vehicle accident in Taji, Iraq, Sept. 4.

2nd Lt. J. T. Perez, 23, IED explosion near Humvee in Al Kifl, Iraq, Sept. 12.

Sgt. Jennifer M. Hartman, 21, suicide bomber attack on West Baghdad Substation, Sept. 14.

1st Lt. Ashley (Henderson) Huff, 23, suicide attack on convoy, near her Humvee, Sept. 19.

Sgt. Jeannette T. Dunn, 44, of non-combat related injuries, Nov. 26.

Maj. Megan McClung, USMC, 34, IED attack near Ramadi in the Anbar province, Iraq, Dec. 6.

Maj. Gloria D. Davis, 47, gunshot wound in a non-combat related incident, Dec. 12.

Senior Airman Elizabeth A. Loncki, 23, ordnance disposal team targeted by car bomb, Jan. 7, 2007.

Command Sgt. Maj. Marilyn L. Gabbard, 46, Black Hawk helicopter crash near Baghdad, Jan. 20.

Spc. Carla J. Stewart, 37, transportation convoy vehicle rollover, Jan. 30.

Marine Cpl. Jennifer M. Parcell, 20, female suicide bomber attack at checkpoint in Anbar province, Iraq, Feb. 7.

Marine Capt. Jennifer J. Harris, 28, helicopter crash due to enemy action in Anbar province, Iraq, Feb. 7.

Sgt. Ashly L. Moyer, 21, IED detonation near her MP vehicle, Mar. 3.

Pfc. Katie M. Soenksen, 19, IED detonation near her MP vehicle, May 2.

Spc. Karen Clifton, 22, RPG attack on her vehicle, near Baghdad, June 21.

Sgt. Trista L. Moretti, 27, indirect fire during an insurgent attack, June 25.

Spec. Michelle R. Ring, 24, mother of two young boys, mortar fire attack in Baghdad, July 5.

Capt. Maria I. Ortiz, 40, indirect fire attack in Baghdad, July 10.

Staff Sgt. Alicia A. Birchett, 29, non-combat related accident in Baghdad, mother of 3 young boys, Aug. 9.

Sgt. Princess C. Samuels, 22, indirect fire near Taji, Iraq, Aug. 15.

Spc. Zandra T. Worthy-Walker, 28, indirect fire near Taji, Iraq, Aug. 15.

Spc. Kamisha J. Block, 20, non-combat "friendly fire" incident, MP battalion in Iraq, Aug. 16.

Spc. Marisol Heredia, 19, injuries suffered from a non-combat related incident, July 18 in Baghdad, Sept. 7.
Kuwait:


Reserve Sgt. Denise Lannaman, 46, non-combat-related incident at Camp Arifjan, Oct. 1.

Cigarette Smoking

Introduction

The 1982 Surgeon General's Report stated that "Cigarette smoking is the major single cause of cancer mortality in the United States." This statement is as true today as it was in 1982.

Smoking is responsible for nearly 1 in 5 deaths in the United States. Because cigarette smoking and tobacco use are acquired behaviors -- activities that individuals choose to do -- smoking is the most preventable cause of premature death in our society.

The purpose of this document is to provide a brief overview of cigarette smoking: who smokes, how it affects health, what makes it so hard to quit, and what some of the many benefits of quitting are. For more information about quitting smoking, see the American Cancer Society document, "Guide to Quitting Smoking."

Who Smokes?

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 44.5 million US adults were current smokers in 2004 (the most recent year for which numbers are available). This is 20.9% of all adults (23.4% of men, 18.5% of women) -- more than 1 out of 5 people.

When broken down by race/ethnicity, the numbers were as follows: Whites
African Americans
Hispanics
American Indians/Alaska Natives
Asian Americans 22.2%
20.2%
15.0%
33.4%
11.3%


The numbers were higher in younger age groups. Almost 24% of those 18 to 44 years old were current smokers, compared to less than 9% in those aged 65 or older.

Nationwide, 22.3% of high school students and 8.1% of middle school students were current smokers in 2004. White and Hispanic students were among the highest in terms of cigarette use. (For more information, see the American Cancer Society document, "Child and Teen Tobacco Use.")

Health Effects of Smoking

About half of all Americans who continue to smoke will die because of the habit.

-----------------------------------------------
Annual Causes of Death in the United States
Tobacco 435,0001
Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,0001
Alcohol 85,000 1
Microbial Agents 75,0001
Toxic Agents 55,0001
Motor Vehicle Crashes 26,3471
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,0002
Suicide 30,6223
Incidents Involving Firearms 29,0001
Homicide 20,3084
Sexual Behaviors 20,0001
All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,0001, 5
Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,6006
Marijuana

An exhaustive search of the literature finds no credible reports of deaths induced by marijuana. The US Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) records instances of drug mentions in medical examiners' reports, and though marijuana is mentioned, it is usually in combination with alcohol or other drugs. Marijuana alone has not been shown to cause an overdose death.

Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN), available on the web at http://www.samhsa.gov/; also see Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A. Benson, Jr., "Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base," Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), available on the web at http://www.nap.edu/html/marimed/; and US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, "In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition" (Docket #86-22), September 6, 1988, p. 57.

According to what i posted there has been no recorded Death Related to Marijuana and yet, it's illegal. Whereas Cigarettes is legal in the U.S.A and has Contributed to Each year about 440,000 people die in the United States from illnesses related to cigarette smoking. Cigarettes kill more Americans than alcohol, car accidents, suicide, AIDS, homicide, and illegal drugs combined.

All i got to say is Something is seriously wrong in the decision of what should be legal and what shouldn't.

for more information about the War on Terrorism go to http://www.globalsecurity.org

President Bush's January 2007 announcement of a surge of 21,500 combat troops going into Iraq will bring the number of brigade combat teams or their equivalents up to 20 from 15 by early June 2007. The surge would probably require 7,000 to 8,000 servicemembers serving in support roles. As of 16 March 2007 142,000 US servicemembers were in Iraq, and by late May or early June 2007, there would be more than 162,000. By September 2007 total US troop strength in-country had reached 168,000. On 13 September 2007 President Bush announced plans under which 5,700 US troops would bewithdrawn by Christmas 2007. At that time, he said that four combat brigades [of at least 21,500 troops] along with other support forces would return by July 2008. The President said that when these withdrawals were completed, about 132,000 US troops would remain in Iraq.

Get Funky let's get high and listen to SteppenWolf orG rateful Dead.

I love that Comment Gypsy... Yes... Will the Real Gary please Stand up and prove these people wrong. Gary, Do you have the guts or man enough to show yourself. I am new to this site and not in the mood to be banned according to the rules. If there are too many complaints to one profile or handle they can be banned. If this is all just a sick game you play to welcome new people... Haha haha... Jokes over please can we all just get along and return to Normalcy.

plain curiosity to know why someone you don't know and you misrepresent him as someone he's not. Not that I take Offense to it. But, just in case there's some bad luck following GAry. I don't want to be mistaken for that person.

nice to meet you all including ones trying to paint me names of representation or meaning. Just plain old fashion curiosity i had.

hi, i am stefano

don't know i make a post and next thing i Know i get a bunch of replies saying: " Gary'S Back"