Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [osint] REAL numbers in Iraq

Expand Messages
  • Steve ~ Touchdown-News
    DoD figures updated this morning (from Defenselink.mil): Operation Iraqi Freedom Casualty numbers (U.S. Only) AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST Hostile: 368
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 4, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      DoD figures updated this morning (from Defenselink.mil):

      Operation Iraqi Freedom Casualty numbers (U.S. Only)

      AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
      Hostile: 368
      Non-Hostile: 160
      Total Killed: 528

      Deaths since May 1, 2003
      AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
      Hostile: 253
      Non-Hostile: 137
      Total Killed: 390

      AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
      Wounded in Action 2,596
      Non-hostile wounded 403

      Quote from the article: "many of the non-hostile deaths ought not to be
      counted as specific to Iraq, although, of course, a portion of them
      are" is completely inaccurate: all of those 155 deaths (160 as of
      today) were either in Iraq or due to circumstances brought about by
      participation in OIF. Of course there were other deaths in the five
      military services caused by accident or illness during the same
      time-scale, but they are not represented in the figure that the author
      quotes. Nor are totals for OEF in Afghanistan included.

      What the author also fails to point out is that "non-hostile" deaths
      include things like EOD (explosive ordnance) teams working on weapons
      caches that detonate, tanks and armored personnel carriers sliding off
      roads not designed to carry them into canals and their crews drowning,
      deaths in helicopter accidents which are occurring at a much higher
      rate than back in CONUS due to the amount of missions flown and adverse
      environmental conditions.

      I sincerely doubt that a family would find much solace in the fact that
      a father, brother, son, daughter or sister died in Iraq through
      negligence or by pure accident rather than due to hostile action.

      All of the above aside, figures of "500 deaths" that I have seen were
      in relation to COALITION losses and not solely American: but then I'm
      in London so perhaps the press here takes a less isolationist view of
      the situation.

      Best regards


      Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News


      On Wednesday, Feb 4, 2004, at 18:11 Europe/London, CodeTen7 wrote:

      > February 02, 2004, 9:59 a.m.
      > 343
      > Real numbers in Iraq.
      >
      >
      >
      > The news media, which constantly accuse the Bush administration
      > of
      > exaggerating the threat in Iraq, are constantly exaggerating the
      > number of
      > U.S. combat deaths there. I first pointed this out last August. For a
      > while,
      > the exaggeration stopped, but early in January it recommenced. The
      > round
      > number "500" was apparently irresistible.
      >
      > Yet as of January 15, exactly ten months after the war began on
      > March
      > 16, 2003, the official number of U.S. combat deaths listed by the
      > Defense
      > Department was 343. Another 155 had died from non-hostile causes,
      > including
      > 100 in accidents and others from illness. Since non-hostile causes are
      > responsible for army deaths in peacetime as well as wartime, in bases
      > at
      > home as well as in war zones, many of the non-hostile deaths ought not
      > to be
      > counted as specific to Iraq, although, of course, a portion of them
      > are.
      >
      > These 343 (not 500) combat deaths, furthermore, need to be set in
      > context. During 2003, the number of homicides in Chicago was 599, in
      > New
      > York City 596, in Los Angeles 505, in Detroit 361, in Philadelphia
      > 347, in
      > Baltimore 271, in Houston 276, and in Washington 247. That makes 3,002
      > murders in only eight cities.
      >
      > The least the media could do is print the number of combat
      > deaths in
      > Iraq in two columns. The first would show the number of days since the
      > war
      > began (as of January 15, 305). The second column might show the number
      > of
      > combat deaths as of the same date (343).
      >
      > Since January 15, the death toll has climbed in one of its upward
      > spurts, as roadside bombings by more sophisticated agencies become more
      > deadly. The countdown toward the turnover of the levers of government
      > to
      > Iraqi leaders is now less than 150 days away. We can expect the bitter
      > despair of the Sunni diehards and the foreign jihadists to grow. They
      > will
      > try to stop history in its tracks. They will become ever more violent.
      > They
      > have been drawn like moths to bang against the brightness of our
      > troops in
      > the dark. Now, more than ever, we need a steady hand at the American
      > helm.
      > Now is not the time for recriminations and retreat.
      >
      > The war in Iraq has been one of the noblest and brightest pages
      > in
      > American history. At enormous risk to ourselves, and at great cost, our
      > troops have liberated an entire people from one of the most sadistic
      > despots
      > in history. In the near future, they will leave behind a far better
      > infrastructure (better schools, hospitals and clinics, power grids,
      > telephone systems, oil technology, television, etc.) than has
      > heretofore
      > existed in Iraq, a greater array of free media, and the first
      > beginnings of
      > a new form of republican government not before experienced on the
      > ancient
      > soil hallowed by Hammurabi. The fear Saddam struck in the hearts of his
      > neighbors, and the instability he promoted in the region, will be no
      > more.
      >
      > Those who died in that cause have given an unforgettable gift to
      > the
      > Iraqi people, which will be remembered with gratitude for generations
      > to
      > come. Their extraordinary achievements have burnished the glory of our
      > nation, and their fame will long outlive the early opposition of those
      > compromised by their past dealings with Saddam. The rich rewards raked
      > in
      > from Saddam's network of international bribery are only now being
      > revealed.
      > The predictions of those who marched against the war - about massive
      > streams
      > of refugees, hunger, the unleashing of weapons of mass destruction,
      > immense
      > domestic destruction, huge uprisings in "the Arab street," etc. - have
      > been
      > proved false.
      >
      > The international terrorist groups led by al Qaeda have now been
      > deprived of their bases in Afghanistan, their potential source of
      > chemical
      > and biological agents in Iraq, their support from Libya, their
      > unrestricted
      > access to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and the reliability of their
      > hitherto
      > totally safe assistance from Iran and Syria. All this our honored dead
      > have
      > won for us. Their families deserve to glory in it for generations.
      >
      > "Greater love no man hath," the Good Book tells us, "than that
      > he lay
      > down his life for his friends." This, too, they have done for their
      > fellow
      > citizens. They have saved the cause of liberty from the shame of
      > appeasing
      > terror. They have protected their homeland and countrymen.
      >
      > One day it will be a great boast for their children: "My father
      > fought
      > in Iraqi Freedom. He altered the course of history." And so they will
      > be
      > remembered by grandchildren, so long as memory lives.
      >
      > - Michael Novak is the winner of the 1994 Templeton Prize for
      > progress
      > in religion and the George Frederick Jewett Scholar in Religion,
      > Philosophy,
      > and Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute. Novak's own
      > website
      > is www.michaelnovak.net.
      >
      >
      > http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/novak/
      > novak200402020
      > 959.asp
    • Gerry Blackwood
      You know this game playing of KIHA and NONKHIA just kills me! Like the 58,000 + names on the Wall were all KIA! And they are not. I am a Vietnam Vet and yes I
      Message 2 of 4 , Feb 5, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        You know this game playing of KIHA and NONKHIA just kills me!
        Like the 58,000 + names on the Wall were all KIA! And they are
        not. I am a Vietnam Vet and yes I never have appreciated the
        Pentagons number games. These people are dead because they were
        placed in Harms Way. I tell this to all who do this with the
        numbers. Go to the closest war memorial and shout it out, you all
        did not die in battle! See if that makes anyone feel any better.

        BTW, for those interesed, www.iraqbodycount.org these numebrs
        are pretty accurate.............


        On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 20:10:26 +0000, Steve ~ Touchdown-News wrote:

        >
        > DoD figures updated this morning (from Defenselink.mil):
        >
        > Operation Iraqi Freedom Casualty numbers (U.S. Only)
        >
        > AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
        > Hostile: 368
        > Non-Hostile: 160
        > Total Killed: 528
        >
        > Deaths since May 1, 2003
        > AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
        > Hostile: 253
        > Non-Hostile: 137
        > Total Killed: 390
        >
        > AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
        > Wounded in Action 2,596
        > Non-hostile wounded 403
        >
        > Quote from the article: "many of the non-hostile deaths ought
        not
        > to be
        > counted as specific to Iraq, although, of course, a portion of
        > them
        > are" is completely inaccurate: all of those 155 deaths (160 as
        of
        >
        > today) were either in Iraq or due to circumstances brought about
        > by
        > participation in OIF. Of course there were other deaths in the
        > five
        > military services caused by accident or illness during the same

        > time-scale, but they are not represented in the figure that the
        > author
        > quotes. Nor are totals for OEF in Afghanistan included.
        >
        > What the author also fails to point out is that "non-hostile"
        > deaths
        > include things like EOD (explosive ordnance) teams working on
        > weapons
        > caches that detonate, tanks and armored personnel carriers
        > sliding off
        > roads not designed to carry them into canals and their crews
        > drowning,
        > deaths in helicopter accidents which are occurring at a much
        > higher
        > rate than back in CONUS due to the amount of missions flown and
        > adverse
        > environmental conditions.
        >
        > I sincerely doubt that a family would find much solace in the
        > fact that
        > a father, brother, son, daughter or sister died in Iraq through

        > negligence or by pure accident rather than due to hostile
        action.
        >
        > All of the above aside, figures of "500 deaths" that I have seen
        > were
        > in relation to COALITION losses and not solely American: but
        then
        > I'm
        > in London so perhaps the press here takes a less isolationist
        > view of
        > the situation.
        >
        > Best regards
        >
        >
        > Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
        >
        >
        > On Wednesday, Feb 4, 2004, at 18:11 Europe/London, CodeTen7
        wrote:
        >
        > > February 02, 2004, 9:59 a.m.
        > > 343
        > > Real numbers in Iraq.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > The news media, which constantly accuse the Bush
        > administration
        > > of
        > > exaggerating the threat in Iraq, are constantly exaggerating
        > the
        > > number of
        > > U.S. combat deaths there. I first pointed this out last
        August.
        > For a
        > > while,
        > > the exaggeration stopped, but early in January it recommenced.
        > The
        > > round
        > > number "500" was apparently irresistible.
        > >
        > > Yet as of January 15, exactly ten months after the war
        > began on
        > > March
        > > 16, 2003, the official number of U.S. combat deaths listed by
        > the
        > > Defense
        > > Department was 343. Another 155 had died from non-hostile
        > causes,
        > > including
        > > 100 in accidents and others from illness. Since non-hostile
        > causes are
        > > responsible for army deaths in peacetime as well as wartime,
        in
        > bases
        > > at
        > > home as well as in war zones, many of the non-hostile deaths
        > ought not
        > > to be
        > > counted as specific to Iraq, although, of course, a portion of
        > them
        > > are.
        > >
        > > These 343 (not 500) combat deaths, furthermore, need to
        > be set in
        > > context. During 2003, the number of homicides in Chicago was
        > 599, in
        > > New
        > > York City 596, in Los Angeles 505, in Detroit 361, in
        > Philadelphia
        > > 347, in
        > > Baltimore 271, in Houston 276, and in Washington 247. That
        > makes 3,002
        > > murders in only eight cities.
        > >
        > > The least the media could do is print the number of
        > combat
        > > deaths in
        > > Iraq in two columns. The first would show the number of days
        > since the
        > > war
        > > began (as of January 15, 305). The second column might show
        the
        > number
        > > of
        > > combat deaths as of the same date (343).
        > >
        > > Since January 15, the death toll has climbed in one of
        > its upward
        > > spurts, as roadside bombings by more sophisticated agencies
        > become more
        > > deadly. The countdown toward the turnover of the levers of
        > government
        > > to
        > > Iraqi leaders is now less than 150 days away. We can expect
        the
        > bitter
        > > despair of the Sunni diehards and the foreign jihadists to
        > grow. They
        > > will
        > > try to stop history in its tracks. They will become ever more
        > violent.
        > > They
        > > have been drawn like moths to bang against the brightness of
        > our
        > > troops in
        > > the dark. Now, more than ever, we need a steady hand at the
        > American
        > > helm.
        > > Now is not the time for recriminations and retreat.
        > >
        > > The war in Iraq has been one of the noblest and
        brightest
        > pages
        > > in
        > > American history. At enormous risk to ourselves, and at great
        > cost, our
        > > troops have liberated an entire people from one of the most
        > sadistic
        > > despots
        > > in history. In the near future, they will leave behind a far
        > better
        > > infrastructure (better schools, hospitals and clinics, power
        > grids,
        > > telephone systems, oil technology, television, etc.) than has

        > > heretofore
        > > existed in Iraq, a greater array of free media, and the first

        > > beginnings of
        > > a new form of republican government not before experienced on
        > the
        > > ancient
        > > soil hallowed by Hammurabi. The fear Saddam struck in the
        > hearts of his
        > > neighbors, and the instability he promoted in the region, will
        > be no
        > > more.
        > >
        > > Those who died in that cause have given an unforgettable
        > gift to
        > > the
        > > Iraqi people, which will be remembered with gratitude for
        > generations
        > > to
        > > come. Their extraordinary achievements have burnished the
        glory
        > of our
        > > nation, and their fame will long outlive the early opposition
        > of those
        > > compromised by their past dealings with Saddam. The rich
        > rewards raked
        > > in
        > > from Saddam's network of international bribery are only now
        > being
        > > revealed.
        > > The predictions of those who marched against the war - about
        > massive
        > > streams
        > > of refugees, hunger, the unleashing of weapons of mass
        > destruction,
        > > immense
        > > domestic destruction, huge uprisings in "the Arab street,"
        etc.
        > - have
        > > been
        > > proved false.
        > >
        > > The international terrorist groups led by al Qaeda have
        > now been
        > > deprived of their bases in Afghanistan, their potential source
        > of
        > > chemical
        > > and biological agents in Iraq, their support from Libya,
        their
        > > unrestricted
        > > access to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and the reliability of
        > their
        > > hitherto
        > > totally safe assistance from Iran and Syria. All this our
        > honored dead
        > > have
        > > won for us. Their families deserve to glory in it for
        > generations.
        > >
        > > "Greater love no man hath," the Good Book tells us,
        "than
        > that
        > > he lay
        > > down his life for his friends." This, too, they have done for
        > their
        > > fellow
        > > citizens. They have saved the cause of liberty from the shame
        > of
        > > appeasing
        > > terror. They have protected their homeland and countrymen.
        > >
        > > One day it will be a great boast for their children: "My
        > father
        > > fought
        > > in Iraqi Freedom. He altered the course of history." And so
        > they will
        > > be
        > > remembered by grandchildren, so long as memory lives.
        > >
        > > - Michael Novak is the winner of the 1994 Templeton
        Prize
        > for
        > > progress
        > > in religion and the George Frederick Jewett Scholar in
        > Religion,
        > > Philosophy,
        > > and Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute.
        Novak's
        > own
        > > website
        > > is www.michaelnovak.net.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/novak/
        > > novak200402020
        > > 959.asp
        >
        >
        >
        > --------------------------
        > Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion
        list,
        > discuss-osint@yahoogroups.com.
        > --------------------------
        > Brooks Isoldi, editor
        > bisoldi@...
        >
        > http://www.intellnet.org
        >
        > Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
        > Subscribe: osint-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > Unsubscribe: osint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        >
        > *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material
        > whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
        > owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making
        it
        > available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have
        > expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information
        > in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence
        and
        > law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods,
        > techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and
        > other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and
        > educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a
        > 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in
        section
        > 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this
        > copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond
        > 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
        > For more information go to:
        > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >

        _________________________________________________
        FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
        http://www.FindLaw.com
        Get your FREE @... email!
        http://mail.Justice.com
      • David Isenberg
        Right on Steve; speaking as a vet Novak was UTTERLY pathetic. David Isenberg
        Message 3 of 4 , Feb 5, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Right on Steve; speaking as a vet Novak was UTTERLY pathetic.

          David Isenberg



          At 08:10 PM 02/04/04 +0000, you wrote:
          >DoD figures updated this morning (from Defenselink.mil):
          >
          >Operation Iraqi Freedom Casualty numbers (U.S. Only)
          >
          >AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
          >Hostile: 368
          >Non-Hostile: 160
          >Total Killed: 528
          >
          >Deaths since May 1, 2003
          >AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
          >Hostile: 253
          >Non-Hostile: 137
          >Total Killed: 390
          >
          >AS OF: Feb. 4, 2004, 10:00 a.m. EST
          >Wounded in Action 2,596
          >Non-hostile wounded 403
          >
          >Quote from the article: "many of the non-hostile deaths ought not to be
          >counted as specific to Iraq, although, of course, a portion of them
          >are" is completely inaccurate: all of those 155 deaths (160 as of
          >today) were either in Iraq or due to circumstances brought about by
          >participation in OIF. Of course there were other deaths in the five
          >military services caused by accident or illness during the same
          >time-scale, but they are not represented in the figure that the author
          >quotes. Nor are totals for OEF in Afghanistan included.
          >
          >What the author also fails to point out is that "non-hostile" deaths
          >include things like EOD (explosive ordnance) teams working on weapons
          >caches that detonate, tanks and armored personnel carriers sliding off
          >roads not designed to carry them into canals and their crews drowning,
          >deaths in helicopter accidents which are occurring at a much higher
          >rate than back in CONUS due to the amount of missions flown and adverse
          >environmental conditions.
          >
          >I sincerely doubt that a family would find much solace in the fact that
          >a father, brother, son, daughter or sister died in Iraq through
          >negligence or by pure accident rather than due to hostile action.
          >
          >All of the above aside, figures of "500 deaths" that I have seen were
          >in relation to COALITION losses and not solely American: but then I'm
          >in London so perhaps the press here takes a less isolationist view of
          >the situation.
          >
          >Best regards
          >
          >
          >Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
          >
          >
          >On Wednesday, Feb 4, 2004, at 18:11 Europe/London, CodeTen7 wrote:
          >
          > > February 02, 2004, 9:59 a.m.
          > > 343
          > > Real numbers in Iraq.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > The news media, which constantly accuse the Bush administration
          > > of
          > > exaggerating the threat in Iraq, are constantly exaggerating the
          > > number of
          > > U.S. combat deaths there. I first pointed this out last August. For a
          > > while,
          > > the exaggeration stopped, but early in January it recommenced. The
          > > round
          > > number "500" was apparently irresistible.
          > >
          > > Yet as of January 15, exactly ten months after the war began on
          > > March
          > > 16, 2003, the official number of U.S. combat deaths listed by the
          > > Defense
          > > Department was 343. Another 155 had died from non-hostile causes,
          > > including
          > > 100 in accidents and others from illness. Since non-hostile causes are
          > > responsible for army deaths in peacetime as well as wartime, in bases
          > > at
          > > home as well as in war zones, many of the non-hostile deaths ought not
          > > to be
          > > counted as specific to Iraq, although, of course, a portion of them
          > > are.
          > >
          > > These 343 (not 500) combat deaths, furthermore, need to be set in
          > > context. During 2003, the number of homicides in Chicago was 599, in
          > > New
          > > York City 596, in Los Angeles 505, in Detroit 361, in Philadelphia
          > > 347, in
          > > Baltimore 271, in Houston 276, and in Washington 247. That makes 3,002
          > > murders in only eight cities.
          > >
          > > The least the media could do is print the number of combat
          > > deaths in
          > > Iraq in two columns. The first would show the number of days since the
          > > war
          > > began (as of January 15, 305). The second column might show the number
          > > of
          > > combat deaths as of the same date (343).
          > >
          > > Since January 15, the death toll has climbed in one of its upward
          > > spurts, as roadside bombings by more sophisticated agencies become more
          > > deadly. The countdown toward the turnover of the levers of government
          > > to
          > > Iraqi leaders is now less than 150 days away. We can expect the bitter
          > > despair of the Sunni diehards and the foreign jihadists to grow. They
          > > will
          > > try to stop history in its tracks. They will become ever more violent.
          > > They
          > > have been drawn like moths to bang against the brightness of our
          > > troops in
          > > the dark. Now, more than ever, we need a steady hand at the American
          > > helm.
          > > Now is not the time for recriminations and retreat.
          > >
          > > The war in Iraq has been one of the noblest and brightest pages
          > > in
          > > American history. At enormous risk to ourselves, and at great cost, our
          > > troops have liberated an entire people from one of the most sadistic
          > > despots
          > > in history. In the near future, they will leave behind a far better
          > > infrastructure (better schools, hospitals and clinics, power grids,
          > > telephone systems, oil technology, television, etc.) than has
          > > heretofore
          > > existed in Iraq, a greater array of free media, and the first
          > > beginnings of
          > > a new form of republican government not before experienced on the
          > > ancient
          > > soil hallowed by Hammurabi. The fear Saddam struck in the hearts of his
          > > neighbors, and the instability he promoted in the region, will be no
          > > more.
          > >
          > > Those who died in that cause have given an unforgettable gift to
          > > the
          > > Iraqi people, which will be remembered with gratitude for generations
          > > to
          > > come. Their extraordinary achievements have burnished the glory of our
          > > nation, and their fame will long outlive the early opposition of those
          > > compromised by their past dealings with Saddam. The rich rewards raked
          > > in
          > > from Saddam's network of international bribery are only now being
          > > revealed.
          > > The predictions of those who marched against the war - about massive
          > > streams
          > > of refugees, hunger, the unleashing of weapons of mass destruction,
          > > immense
          > > domestic destruction, huge uprisings in "the Arab street," etc. - have
          > > been
          > > proved false.
          > >
          > > The international terrorist groups led by al Qaeda have now been
          > > deprived of their bases in Afghanistan, their potential source of
          > > chemical
          > > and biological agents in Iraq, their support from Libya, their
          > > unrestricted
          > > access to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and the reliability of their
          > > hitherto
          > > totally safe assistance from Iran and Syria. All this our honored dead
          > > have
          > > won for us. Their families deserve to glory in it for generations.
          > >
          > > "Greater love no man hath," the Good Book tells us, "than that
          > > he lay
          > > down his life for his friends." This, too, they have done for their
          > > fellow
          > > citizens. They have saved the cause of liberty from the shame of
          > > appeasing
          > > terror. They have protected their homeland and countrymen.
          > >
          > > One day it will be a great boast for their children: "My father
          > > fought
          > > in Iraqi Freedom. He altered the course of history." And so they will
          > > be
          > > remembered by grandchildren, so long as memory lives.
          > >
          > > - Michael Novak is the winner of the 1994 Templeton Prize for
          > > progress
          > > in religion and the George Frederick Jewett Scholar in Religion,
          > > Philosophy,
          > > and Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute. Novak's own
          > > website
          > > is www.michaelnovak.net.
          > >
          > >
          > > http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/novak/
          > > novak200402020
          > > 959.asp
          >
          >
          >
          >--------------------------
          >Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list,
          >discuss-osint@yahoogroups.com.
          >--------------------------
          >Brooks Isoldi, editor
          >bisoldi@...
          >
          >http://www.intellnet.org
          >
          > Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
          > Subscribe: osint-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > Unsubscribe: osint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use
          >has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a
          >part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to
          >OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
          >the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
          >intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods,
          >techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other
          >intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational
          >purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the
          >copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright
          >Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own
          >that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
          >For more information go to:
          >http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
          >Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.