George, you're such a jerk and a hypocrite, too. When the topic displeases
you, you squeal and yell and offer to suck someone's dick. When someone
disagrees with you, he's a scumbag.

If you don't like what I say, use your email filter or just delete the mail
before you even look at it. Isn't that what you scream at others to do?
Hypocrite!

What difference does what I have between my legs have to do with my posts?

What is this fetish you seem to have for male genitalia, anyway? - are you
trying in a subtle way to tell us something? No, that can't be it, George is
never subtle, just foul-mouthed and now I'm really wondering about sexual
problems or inadequacies.

I'm also impressed with your grasp of the English language and grammar. Keep
it up, please.

Jack

-----Original Message-----
From: trey@ne*.co* [mailto:trey@ne*.co*]
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 11:17 AM
To: Kreska Jack-FJK003; polarbea@sa*.ne*; Joel Markwell
Cc: Techdiver
Subject: Re: Smoking & Smokeless



Jack, anytime the discussion is painful to the scumbags in the "community",
you start howling. Fuck off or unsubscribe. You are worse than Chrissy
Brown. Take a quick look down between your legs and see if you in fact have
a dick, I think you are in for a surprise , pal.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kreska Jack-FJK003 <Jack_Kreska-FJK003@em*.mo*.co*>
To: 'polarbea@sa*.ne*' <polarbea@sa*.ne*>; Joel Markwell
<joeldm@mi*.co*>
Cc: Techdiver <techdiver@aquanaut.com>; Cavers <cavers@ca*.co*>
Date: Thursday, June 22, 2000 12:07 PM
Subject: RE: Smoking & Smokeless


>Please take this nonsense off-line if you want to discuss politics.
>
>Jack
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Joe C [mailto:polarbea@sa*.ne*]
>Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 12:26 PM
>To: Joel Markwell
>Cc: Techdiver; Cavers
>Subject: Re: Smoking & Smokeless
>
>
>How about the gov't. subsidies?  Why not refuse to subsidize tobacco
>that is grown for the purpose of human consumption?  (I understand
>tobacco has other uses.)
>I can't fathom how a gov't. that whines about the medical expenditures
>caused by tobacco use will still subsidize it.  The politicians are
>sometimes worse the "big tobacco".
>
>Joe
>
>
>Joel Markwell wrote:
>>
>> I just had someone point out to me privately that I should step back and
>> look at this comment:
>>
>> >I look at smoking as a disease. I think it should be illegal
>>
>> And he asked if we should outlaw pneumonia next. Good point.
>>
>> Easy enough. Excessive drinking is often a disease. We control it. You
>can't
>> drink and drive. You can't be publicly drunk. You can't give alcohol to
>> minors.
>>
>> Heroin is also considered to be an addiction and therefore a disease. I'm
>> sure you would have no problem with its illegality or at least control.
>> Control. Perhaps that is a better word than "illegal." Tobacco should be
a
>> controlled substance like heroine and cocaine.
>>
>> Of course, then we get into the war on drugs which is a complete
>clusterf--k
>> and one of the worst abuses of individual liberties one can think of. I
>> didn't say this is going to be an easy problem to solve. It will take
>> creative thinking and a lot of resolve - and time.
>>
>> But we're not helpless, what falls apart we can put together with the
>right
>> effort. How do we get there? I think that we're on the path. The efforts
>to
>> characterize smoking for what it is. To tell people the truth: that it's
a
>> poison. To drive those who manipulate its effects to addict their
>customers
>> out of business. Where we can go from there we can discuss.
>>
>> But certainly divers shouldn't smoke. That just seems like good sense.
>>
>> Someone else asked about smokeless tobacco. It's just as bad if not
worse.
>> Here's a webpage that seems to sum it up pretty well:
>>
>> http://www.entassociates.com/smokeless.htm
>>
>> Read the section labeled "Effects of Smokeless Tobacco." I thought the
>> sentence that read, "Constricted blood vessels: nicotine constricts the
>> blood vessels, slowing down the circulation of oxygen-rich blood to the
>> organs." Probably not a good thing when breathing compressed air and
mixed
>> gases.
>>
>> Of course, you could always say that nicotine's positive effect is that
it
>> could retard the onset of oxygen toxicity. Ya right. Then there's also
the
>> part about higher blood pressure and irregular heart beats.
>>
>> Those circulatory effects are the same for smoke and smokeless, BTW. I
>think
>> the answer is still, "DUH!"
>>
>> Ya'll do know that the Marlboro man died of lung cancer, right?
>>
>> Later,
>>
>> JoeL
>>
>> Here are some other webpages:
>>
>> Some lovely cancer photos:
>>
>> http://www.quittobacco.com/Facts/effects.htm
>>
>> A quiz:
>>
>> http://www.adha.org/oralhealth/cancerquiz.htm
>>
>> Samples of weekly warnings that you can have sent to your smoking or
>dipping
>> friends:
>>
>> http://www.weeklywarning.com/sample2.htm
>>
>> And general cancer risks for smoking and smokeless tobaccy from the NIH:
>>
>> http://rex.nci.nih.gov/NCI_Pub_Interface/raterisk/risks67.html
>>
>> Note this paragraph:
>>
>> Among male cigarette smokers, the risk of lung cancer is more than 2,000
>> percent higher than among male nonsmokers; for women, the risks were
>> approximately 1,200 percent greater. Lung cancer is the single largest
>cause
>> of cancer mortality among both men and women and accounts for more than
>one
>> in every four cancer deaths nationally in the U.S.
>>
>> --
>> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
>> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]