nuclear nations justifies the expenditure to counter the ballistic missile threat. Russia I believe is afraid of losing its nuclear bargaining chip. Also it is geographically situated much too far north for an eventual shift

to a colder climate which some of their scientists have proposed as likely in the next 50 to 100 years. The Green/Politically inspired Globaloney Warming is not supported by rational science. Our last 12,000 years of so called warming since our last glacial period (Wisconsin) has been interrupted by cooling episodes several times, first 11,000 years ago (Younger Dryas) almost returned us to glacial conditions for more than 1000 years. This was ended by a cycle of warm / cool spells until the Mideval Warm period, 900 to 1,400 AD (warmer than today), followed by the Little Ice Age that lasted until 1850. The claim that we are now in a period of "unpresidented" warming is totally false as we have not had a warmer year since 1989.

Our war with radical Islam, is irrational,

religious inspired (the worst kind). That is our and Europe's most dangerous opponent. The future of Western Civilization is at stake. I am not worried about China. Its huge population is not its strength but its weakness. Drastic overpopulation has resulted in widespread pollution of its air, soil and water which will occupy most of its attention just to suppress widespread starvation and disease.

The nuclear weaponry obviously works both ways: to destruct and to intercept thus – activate the nuclear reactors in the area sensitive to such intercept ( and who is not loaded with these).

All this more weapon when particles / areas are already acting out are wrong.

We need a change but in understanding that destruction reduces ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY with nondestructive action in itself.

So does any other interaction in human world.

There is something entirely wrong with American view on the wars we as Americans do not make but are in – that is very destructive to..us. Why be in? The ideology is wrong.

The last war to "end all wars” ( saying very well known than and liberally used in press and literature) was WW the First – the fact well known and sufficient conditions of worse manslaughter there was. ( you might’ve different response if you do not know that these who set Japan on communist route also lunched or participated in the attack; very likely scenario in other parts of the WWII scenario)

Have yourself less destructive thoughts for the Holliday. I mean in – please check against the reality that destruction can only destruct more and no less in the world of particles. if you destruct – you activate surrounding area ( se samples around and in Japan after the nuclear attack). The time to be constructive with the acting out already particles is now.

We are contractive with it if we using them for activate more neutrons ( a clean particles) that pait with clean agents only, like is now planned to do in European subways; by growth of the specifically selective plants that make best use of these but in the prospective contamination can become a factories of processing the bad fission effects

( plants will do the cleaning not any anti-nuke device). There are many other uses of the

Slow nuclear energy that is constructive. Even thought the FV University does not specialize in the nuclear power issue, the slow nuk is very well undertook as it is clear cut sample of the process taking over Structure and creating a new clean structure. The slow nuk is a constructive energy when it is undertook in the all context that it acts in.

Many nuk specialist including from Harvard Uni, Princeton Un I and other consult us about effects of fissions and the cleaning process. We do not need 20 years to clean fission, fusion or burned reactor. We need a good operation how to do it. This one will not trigger nuk lunched at us from around Alaska. If there is a conflict in Alaska

( for these who unlike Obama, remember), the constructive way is to negotiate it with affected parties.

(publically known)

Hans Scheibe

4. It's ALL about the money: Roughly $10 billion is spent per year on the program, which is run by defense contractor Boeing Co. but includes work by most of the nation's largest weapons makers. It is spread across three branches of the military and is composed of missiles, radar and satellites designed to intercept missiles during different stages of flight.

5. Fortunately, President-elect Barack Obama expressed skepticism about the capabilities of the system during his campaign, leading to speculation he may reduce the program's scope. Russia has strongly objected to plans to install missile interceptors in Eastern Europe.

6. At least the true character of the KLC has finally been admitted. According to the AP: "WASHINGTON – The Defense Department said today it shot down a missile launched from a military base in Alaska…"

7. Finally, Kodiak desperately needs a new high school and a new police station and jail. Our roads are a mess and infrastructure in Kodiak, Alaska and all across the United States is crumbling. Take a drive down Mission Road past the Salvation Army and ask yourself: Is Missile Defense worth it? Friday's test cost between $120 million to $150 million.

Linda