 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:22 pm Post subject: THE LAST BATTLE OF VIETNAM / AGENT ORANGE |
 |
|
http://www.soft-vision.com/fightback/
THANK YOU JOE.
TO ALL WHO VISIT,
PLEASE JOIN AND REGISTER AT THIS SITE TO POST OR ADD ANYTHING YOU CAN.
JOE OLIVER HAS WORKED FOR MANY YEARS AND THOSE AFFECTED DESERVE OUR SUPPORT ON THIS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Beatrice1000
Resource Specialist
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 1179
Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:54 am Post subject: Re: THE LAST BATTLE OF VIETNAM / AGENT ORANGE |
|
|
| powsnmias wrote: | | http://www.soft-vision.com/fightback/ THANK YOU JOE. TO ALL WHO VISIT, PLEASE JOIN AND REGISTER AT THIS SITE TO POST OR ADD ANYTHING YOU CAN. JOE OLIVER HAS WORKED FOR MANY YEARS AND THOSE AFFECTED DESERVE OUR SUPPORT ON THIS. |
My memories of AO: Back in the 80s I worked for an attorney who took on some cases in the Class -- we basically submitted the claims to the lead attorneys out east & didn't do representation. But, I personally knew a claimant so followed the case closely. I recall reading so much research about the chemicals & effects on rats in experiments & statements that dioxin was a carcinogen and a mutagen and that it was the most toxic substance known to man .. that it would stay forever in soil, didn't dissipate and "go away." I recall claims also in the US where the defoliant had been used & people got sick. I haven't thought about this in 20 years, after the case settled I gave up -- It was gut-wrenching in the media, sort of like what we recently went thru in trying to get the Swift message out. I recall there was little $ given the class as most was eaten up in attorney fees. There was a woman in Chicago that worked so hard on behalf of the vets -- tried to get the information out -- darn, but I don't recall her name...
The arguments -- the chem companies claimed that the military mixed the components wrong, too many parts of this and that .. and the tiny amount needed to be toxic -- I think they were dealing with "trace amounts." I don't recall what exact evidence they had of the handling of the barrels "to be mixed" on the ground in Nam. I remember one guy theatrically drank some dioxin to prove it wasn't lethal (VA or chem company official, don't recall) -- wonder how he's doing today? or if it was really dioxin that he drank...
The CDC report so touted and used for defense -- yet based on a handful, just a few thousand. It was used to show that the vets illnesses were within the range of probability in a given group of those not exposed. Such a small group used to dismiss their claims... The experts on both sides cancelled each other out. The resistance of the VA to support the vet claims. But the troops were sick and dying. The man I knew had clorachne (sp) -- one of the conditions the VA accepted -- and he also had a child with strange genetic abnormalities that died 2 days after birth -- no responsibility by the chem cos for that -- no evidence of the mutagenic properties of dioxin, yup, no evidence at all... they argued that it was not known if it stayed in the system, that after years go by, it could not cause genetic damage. (How then did they find it to be a mutagen in rats?) The atmosphere was negative towards the vet's claims, and the effort was not great enough to collect the data necessary from a large enough group to make a determination on their behalf.
I saw this issue again with Gulf War Syndrome and the dismissal over the years of symptoms the sick troops are having. However, recently on C-Span, I saw a press conference with the head of the VA and he is very aggressively pursuing research to find ways to help with what appear to be neurological & other disorders caused by chemicals of some sort. This is a huge change in policy. Surprisingly, Ross Perot was also at the conference and is deeply involved, financially and personally in fighting for these vets. They had experts on also, and the statements were clear that these troops are sick and not merely suffering from "stress" as was previously decided by the powers.
Note that in 1998 under Clinton, a "committee" was established to deal with this, but never went into action. It was only under Bush and his appt. of Principi and the authorizing of money and the appointing of people to the committee that it was set in motion.
| Quote: | “Toxic agents 'probable cause' of Gulf War Syndrome” (11/13/04)
"A substantial proportion of Gulf War veterans are ill with multisymptom conditions not explained by wartime stress or psychiatric illness," the report said. ... Research indicates that the illnesses are "neurological in character" and possibly caused by exposure to certain toxic agents such as sarin gas used by Iraq in its 1980s war against Iran or certain pesticides. ** ARTICLE ** |
| Quote: | “Toxins Cause Gulf War Syndrome: report” (11/13/04)
Anthony Principi, secretary of the Depart. of Veterans Affairs, said the depart. would no longer pay for research into stress as the factor behind Gulf War illnesses. He said he had adopted one of the report's key recommendations, for a $US15 million ($A19.6 million) research grant to try to nail down the real causes of Gulf War illnesses. He called the grant the single largest allocation for the department's research in one specific area. ... Congress enacted the law creating the Gulf War illness committee in 1998, during the Clinton administration, but it was not set in motion until Principi appointed its members in 2002. ** ARTICLE ** |
Can there be some help on the Agent Orange issue now that there has been an attitudinal breakthrough with Gulf War Syndrome? -- (and I'm going to thank the Bush admin. for this). They are now going to offensively research "toxic agents" -- including pesticides. Has an appeal been made to Principi regarding Agent Orange? Just glancing at this, one would think they would link up these issues as they both deal with chemical exposure.
I wonder what the researchers will find in the pesticides... I recall in the aftermath of 9/11, a crawl at the bottom of the screen during that first week, that indicated a list of chemical components found in the atmosphere at Ground Zero -- one of those items was dioxin... I cringed -- the workers were breathing that. No coverage on the media, just the crawl note. And I wondered, was it there from long ago which is possible as it doesn't go away -- or was it there from more recent use. I think the use of dioxin was outlawed (what does that say about the chem. co's defense about AO -- if it was that dangerous, what gave them the right to use it in the first place. That always ticked me off...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
USAFE5
PO2
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 362
Location: Reno Nevada
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just to add to your reading list...
The Day We Bombed Utah. I don't recall the author.
This covers the atomic testing done in Nevada with prevailing winds carrying the fallout over St. George Utah. They had birth defects and other mutations in the sheep. A lot of things. I remeber this book so well because I am a John Wayne fan. He filmed the Conquer in the desert outside St. George. All of the persons on the set developed some form of a cancer. Both his sons, Patrick and Michael, visited the set and I believe they got skin cancers. All the major stars died from cancer. They actually shipped sand from St. George to Hollywood to redo some scenes and when they were done they dumped it on the beach at Santa Monica.
Our government has a habit of denying responsibilty for more than just AO.
_________________
"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I’m here to help." Ronald Reagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Beatrice1000
Resource Specialist
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 1179
Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| USAFE5 wrote: | | Just to add to your reading list... The Day We Bombed Utah. I don't recall the author. This covers the atomic testing done in Nevada... |
Agent Orange, a dangerous defoliant used in Nam, involves the liability of major chemical companies and the lack of the VA to support the vet's claims of illness & death attributed to their exposure to the chemicals. I suppose one could say it's the gov't's fault, as it was the military using it -- but who approved its use, I don't know -- and what were they told about it by the suppliers.... I feel the major blame rests on the chemical companies for creating it in the first place - dioxin is a man-made substance -- and for supplying it to our military -- however, I certainly don't know the details of this case and was only commenting above from a minimal memory of events. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rurik
PO3
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 251
Location: Daschle-cleansed Free South Dakota
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Before anybody goes running off in all directions, you might want to read B. G. Burkett, "Stolen Valor", Chapter 22, "The Myth of Agent Orange".
The whole thing is a mess of political pressure combined wiht chemophobia. AGENT ORRRANNGEEE sounds real scary. And it is a way to stir up anti-government hysteria . Brought to you by the same people who prefer malaria to insecticides.
Misdirected good intentions may be comforting , but don't really help.
_________________
Hating John Kerry continuously since 1971.
Essayons!
Fight Build and Destroy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Beatrice1000
Resource Specialist
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 1179
Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rurik wrote: | | Before anybody goes running off in all directions, you might want to read B. G. Burkett, "Stolen Valor", Chapter 22, "The Myth of Agent Orange". The whole thing is a mess of political pressure combined wiht chemophobia. AGENT ORRRANNGEEE sounds real scary. And it is a way to stir up anti-government hysteria . Brought to you by the same people who prefer malaria to insecticides. Misdirected good intentions may be comforting , but don't really help. |
My discussion about the 80s Class Action was not meant to "stir up anti-government hysteria." I was just recalling how very difficult that lawsuit was. I read a lot of research reports about experiments & the chemicals -- all the powers that be were against the vets -- what I stated is what was happening at that time.
I just checked a bit of the current research on dioxin and nothing has really changed - experts cancel out experts. Dioxin remains in the fatty tissue, liver etc, for a long time -- NO, it passes thru the body quickly; it remains in topsoil 10-15 yrs or more -- NO, it degrades in 72 hrs, it’s a carcinogen/mutagen dependent on quantity and individual sensitivity -- NO, nothing has proven any adverse effect except skin irritations, and etc. What all do agree on is that dioxin (TCDD) is extremely toxic, that not enough data is available as to its effects on humans, and that studies are flawed. In looking back, I still believe the chemical companies were irresponsible in the concoction they brewed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
