Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Another nuke exercise in Charleston
World Net Daily ^ | 1/23/2006 | Staff

Posted on 01/23/2006 6:39:38 AM PST by Dark Skies

The Defense Department has scheduled a second major, three-day exercise to combat nuclear terrorism in the Charleston, S.C. area.

The goal is not prevention, but coping with the catastrophic results of a terrorist nuclear attack on a major U.S. port city. The Defense Department has scheduled a second major, three-day exercise to combat nuclear terrorism in the Charleston, S.C. area.

The goal is not prevention, but coping with the catastrophic results of a terrorist nuclear attack on a major U.S. port city.

The military's Joint Task Force-Civil Support, headquartered at Ft. Monroe, Va., will host the three-day drill for commanders and representatives of other federal agencies that would be involved in managing the consequences of a 10-megaton nuclear blast, enough to inflict mass causalities and devastation on an American city.

Like last summer's exercise, the Jan. 31 to Feb. 2 drill is centered around a hypothetical blast that affects nearly half a million people across a 900-square mile section of tidewater South Carolina. The scenario assumes 10,000 fatalities and more than 30,000 injuries.

Officials from the Department of Homeland Security, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency and senior Coast Guard brass will be on hand.

Though the target of the attack is Charleston, no part of the exercise will actually take place there. Maj. Gen. Bruce Davis, the task force's commander, will oversee the exercise from Fort Monroe.

Joint Task Force-Civil Support – part of U.S. Northern Command, which oversees the Defense Department's domestic military activity – is a standing joint task force composed of active, reserve and National Guard members from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard, as well as civilian personnel.

Last summer, a similar exercise, "Sudden Respond '05," was led by Virginia's Fort Monroe-based Joint Task Force-Civil Support. It, too, was designed to simulate a nuclear terrorist attack that the highest U.S. officials, including President Bush, have said is the No. 1 threat facing the nation.

Organizers say the nuclear drills should not frighten civilians but instead encourage them to learn how to protect themselves if such an attack – which some officials have referred to as inevitable – should occur.

The drill is strikingly similar to a scenario detailed by Graham Allison, former Pentagon assistant secretary for plans and policy and current Harvard professor, in his book, "Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe."

A month after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Allison wrote, the Central Intelligence Agency presented Bush with a report that al-Qaida had smuggled a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb into New York City. The president, according to the book, dispatched Nuclear Emergency Support Teams of scientists and engineers to New York to search for the weapon, which was never found.

Allison described the devastation that a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb would visit on Manhattan, were it detonated in the middle of historic Times Square: some 1 million people would die almost immediately.

"The resulting fireball and blast wave would destroy instantaneously the theater district, the New York Times building, Grand Central Terminal, and every other structure within a third of a mile to the point of detonation," he wrote. "The ensuring firestorm would engulf Rockefeller Center, Carnegie Hall, the Empire State Building, and Madison Square Garden, leaving a landscape resembling the World Trade Center site. From the United Nations headquarters on the East River and the Lincoln Tunnel under the Hudson River, to the Metropolitan Museum in the eighties and the Flatiron Building in the twenties, structures would remind one of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Office Building following the Oklahoma City Bombing."

As WND has reported, for more than 10 years, Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida has planned to use nuclear weapons in a terrorist attack on the U.S. The plan is dubbed "American Hiroshima." In fact, as first reported in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, captured al-Qaida operatives and documents suggest the weapons have already been smuggled into the country.

The military's Joint Task Force-Civil Support, headquartered at Ft. Monroe, Va., will host the three-day drill for commanders and representatives of other federal agencies that would be involved in managing the consequences of a 10-megaton nuclear blast, enough to inflict mass causalities and devastation on an American city.

Like last summer's exercise, the Jan. 31 to Feb. 2 drill is centered around a hypothetical blast that affects nearly half a million people across a 900-square mile section of tidewater South Carolina. The scenario assumes 10,000 fatalities and more than 30,000 injuries.

Officials from the Department of Homeland Security, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency and senior Coast Guard brass will be on hand.

Though the target of the attack is Charleston, no part of the exercise will actually take place there. Maj. Gen. Bruce Davis, the task force's commander, will oversee the exercise from Fort Monroe.

Joint Task Force-Civil Support – part of U.S. Northern Command, which oversees the Defense Department's domestic military activity – is a standing joint task force composed of active, reserve and National Guard members from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard, as well as civilian personnel.

Last summer, a similar exercise, "Sudden Respond '05," was led by Virginia's Fort Monroe-based Joint Task Force-Civil Support. It, too, was designed to simulate a nuclear terrorist attack that the highest U.S. officials, including President Bush, have said is the No. 1 threat facing the nation.

Organizers say the nuclear drills should not frighten civilians but instead encourage them to learn how to protect themselves if such an attack – which some officials have referred to as inevitable – should occur.

The drill is strikingly similar to a scenario detailed by Graham Allison, former Pentagon assistant secretary for plans and policy and current Harvard professor, in his book, "Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe."

A month after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Allison wrote, the Central Intelligence Agency presented Bush with a report that al-Qaida had smuggled a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb into New York City. The president, according to the book, dispatched Nuclear Emergency Support Teams of scientists and engineers to New York to search for the weapon, which was never found.

Allison described the devastation that a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb would visit on Manhattan, were it detonated in the middle of historic Times Square: some 1 million people would die almost immediately.

"The resulting fireball and blast wave would destroy instantaneously the theater district, the New York Times building, Grand Central Terminal, and every other structure within a third of a mile to the point of detonation," he wrote. "The ensuring firestorm would engulf Rockefeller Center, Carnegie Hall, the Empire State Building, and Madison Square Garden, leaving a landscape resembling the World Trade Center site. From the United Nations headquarters on the East River and the Lincoln Tunnel under the Hudson River, to the Metropolitan Museum in the eighties and the Flatiron Building in the twenties, structures would remind one of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Office Building following the Oklahoma City Bombing."

As WND has reported, for more than 10 years, Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida has planned to use nuclear weapons in a terrorist attack on the U.S. The plan is dubbed "American Hiroshima." In fact, as first reported in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, captured al-Qaida operatives and documents suggest the weapons have already been smuggled into the country.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: South Carolina; Unclassified; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: charleston; drill; evacuation; islam; jihadinamerica; notbreaking; nuclear; preparedness; wot
I think this is a good idea if only because it keeps Americans aware that we are at war!
1 posted on 01/23/2006 6:39:41 AM PST by Dark Skies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

2 posted on 01/23/2006 6:41:21 AM PST by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

Chaleston was destroyed by a nuclear terrorist attack in the early 90's. I saw it on TV..........


3 posted on 01/23/2006 6:42:20 AM PST by Red Badger (LUKE 22:36 JESUS: "........and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one."........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
Please note however...

Though the target of the attack is Charleston, no part of the exercise will actually take place there. Maj. Gen. Bruce Davis, the task force's commander, will oversee the exercise from Fort Monroe.

4 posted on 01/23/2006 6:42:56 AM PST by Dark Skies ("A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies


Remember that cheesy TV, fake real time, movie about terrorists with a nuclear weapon in Charleston's harbor?

As I recall the feds kill all the terrorists but when trying to diffuse the bomb set it off...classic eighties TV.


5 posted on 01/23/2006 6:43:34 AM PST by in hoc signo vinces ("Houston, TX...a waiting quagmire for jihadis. American gals are worth fighting for!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

anyone remember 'Special Bulletin'?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086350/


6 posted on 01/23/2006 6:44:10 AM PST by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

New York Times building...Rockefeller Center...United Nations headquarters

I doubt that Al Qaeda really wants to off so many of their allies at one time!


7 posted on 01/23/2006 6:48:10 AM PST by epluribus_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
What altitude did they detonate Hiroshima and Nagasaki at? Like 5000 feet or so to get the best blast dispersion? So, while a container ship with a nuke will make a big mess, sure, and leave an ugly cloud....will it really cause very much physical damage? 10 kilotons is tiny compared to MIRVd ICBM warheads.

What it will do is completely stifle the Peacenik crowd, and that won't be good news for the 72 virgins.

8 posted on 01/23/2006 6:49:07 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69


Yep...see my post.


9 posted on 01/23/2006 6:51:30 AM PST by in hoc signo vinces ("Houston, TX...a waiting quagmire for jihadis. American gals are worth fighting for!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
nuke will make a big mess ????

Yea, a hell of alot more then crashing plane into two buildings, and look at what that did to this country.

10 posted on 01/23/2006 6:53:28 AM PST by The Turbanator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
That's about all it serves... to those who are 'listening'

If the 'slami's get their act together and detonate a couple of nukes over here... we will see how all that 'homeland security' money was spent by the states. I believe that in many cases(especcially in the 'blue-states') the funds were spent unwisely and little has been done to learn from the lessons of 9/11.

Nothing backs this up more than what happened in NOLA after Katrina.

11 posted on 01/23/2006 6:56:28 AM PST by johnny7 (“Iuventus stultorum magister”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
What altitude did they detonate Hiroshima and Nagasaki at? Like 5000 feet or so to get the best blast dispersion?

1,890 feet was the altitude the bombs were set to detonate at in order to achieve maximum blast effect.

So, while a container ship with a nuke will make a big mess, sure, and leave an ugly cloud....will it really cause very much physical damage? 10 kilotons is tiny compared to MIRVd ICBM warheads.

A 10 kiloton warhead detonated at ground level would do more damage then you might think. Not only would the blast destroy anything in the immediate area but it would also send out a very powerful precursor wind ahead of the main shock wave. This wind is powerful enough to lift tanks off the ground and throw them hundreds of feet downrange.

12 posted on 01/23/2006 6:59:22 AM PST by COEXERJ145 (Those Who Want to Impeach President Bush Are the Party of Treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145; sam_paine

The article says 10 megaton - a huge blast.

Could the reporter have it wrong?


13 posted on 01/23/2006 7:04:15 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

I do indeed remember it!


14 posted on 01/23/2006 7:05:16 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
Actually, one of biggest concerns about a terrorist improvised nuclear weapon is the fact if the bomb is detonated a ground level it will kick up a lot a highly radioactive debris--e.g., a huge fallout danger. Anybody 15-20 miles downwind from the blast of a 1 kT IND could face radiation sickness and/or substantially shortened lifespan from fallout radiation exposure.
15 posted on 01/23/2006 7:06:16 AM PST by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842
It also said "10 kiloton" at one point in the article.

Personally though, any time there is an article about nuclear weapons in World NUT Daily, I just laugh.

These same people are the ones who publish Joseph Farah's dribble about Iranian EMP strikes on the U.S. and the 30+ Al-Qaeda nukes all set to go off at once in the U.S.

These kinds of drills are also useful in preparing for a chemical accident such as a derailment or a shipping disaster but of course World NUT Daily loves to over hype everything with the would "nuclear" in it.

16 posted on 01/23/2006 7:10:01 AM PST by COEXERJ145 (Those Who Want to Impeach President Bush Are the Party of Treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
A 10 kiloton warhead detonated at ground level would do more damage then you might think.

NO. IT WOULD NOT! [I might think it would do a helluva lot of damage!!] :-)

I'm just thinking, for example, that it would likely do less damage than was done at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, given about the same KT'nage and being at, at least we can say, "sub-optimal" height for maximum dispersion. And also due to the fact that most structures around and American port are not made from bamboo and paper, and the medical care/rescue response is going to be somewhat enhanced over 60 years.

I'm not dismissing the event, but I guess I am minimizing it from "doomsday" status. Many people, surprisingly close will survive, much better than they did in Japan. And unless it's a coordinated multi-port attack....it will hurt economically, but not strangle us.

17 posted on 01/23/2006 7:11:20 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
While certain Americans seem to need a constant reminder that we are at war, it almost seems as if the media (all of them) are having a contest to delinate the worst case scenario, and thus are handing that data to any 'targeting think tank' of terrorists.

The drill is a good idea, for preparedness' and awareness' sake, the speculation on death and destruction worst case scenarios only spurs the imagination of our enemies.

18 posted on 01/23/2006 7:13:56 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
Would it level the entire city? No. Would it flatten a lot more than just the port, d*mn right it would. Study about the effects of a lower yield weapon detonated at or near ground level. A good place to start is the test known as Upshot-Knothole Grable.

Oh, and for comparison, Hiroshima was 12.5 kilotons and Nagasaki was around 21 kilotons.

19 posted on 01/23/2006 7:15:13 AM PST by COEXERJ145 (Those Who Want to Impeach President Bush Are the Party of Treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

No more NY Rangers??


20 posted on 01/23/2006 7:15:15 AM PST by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
Correctly done, adding some Cobalt to a nuke will kick up the fallout tremendously.

That said, I still believe the dangers of a terrorist nuke is way over blown, especially by World NUT Daily.

21 posted on 01/23/2006 7:15:34 AM PST by COEXERJ145 (Those Who Want to Impeach President Bush Are the Party of Treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

Correct, it would not be of "doomsday" effect, but it sure would s**k.


22 posted on 01/23/2006 7:17:29 AM PST by The Turbanator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

"The resulting fireball and blast wave would destroy instantaneously the theater district, the New York Times building, Grand Central Terminal, and every other structure within a third of a mile to the point of detonation," he wrote. "The ensuring firestorm would engulf Rockefeller Center, Carnegie Hall, the Empire State Building, and Madison Square Garden, leaving a landscape resembling the World Trade Center site. From the United Nations headquarters on the East River and the Lincoln Tunnel under the Hudson River, to the Metropolitan Museum in the eighties and the Flatiron Building in the twenties, structures would remind one of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Office Building following the Oklahoma City Bombing."

I fail to see the downside...


23 posted on 01/23/2006 7:17:56 AM PST by vikingd00d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rahbert
No more NY Rangers??

But the good news is...maybe no more UN building.

24 posted on 01/23/2006 7:18:27 AM PST by Dark Skies ("A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145

Ah, see Achmed,"adding some cobalt" quick jot that down. :)


25 posted on 01/23/2006 7:20:48 AM PST by The Turbanator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145

Oh, I didn't catch the other reference. Certainly the damage they described seemed more consistent with 10 kiloton.

I'm not a big reader of WND either - just what I read here.


26 posted on 01/23/2006 7:24:23 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

What's the problem? Call Jack Bauer. Problem solved before the bomb goes off.

Then call Chuck Norris for revenge.

}:-)4


27 posted on 01/23/2006 7:24:33 AM PST by Moose4 ("I will shoulder my musket and brandish my sword/In defense of this land and the word of the Lord")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842

For sure, 10MT is in the size range of the largest thermonuclear weapons (hydrogen bombs) ever fielded.


28 posted on 01/23/2006 7:26:23 AM PST by Axenolith (Got Au? Ag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
Oh, and for comparison, Hiroshima was 12.5 kilotons and Nagasaki was around 21 kilotons.

Don't get cranky! I'm not disputing you! Don't you think a 10KT range is most likely for a "container bomb?" And whatever happened to the suitcase nuke scare?

29 posted on 01/23/2006 7:26:46 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

I wasn't being "cranky" at all. Just bringing up the information about Hiroshima and Nagasaki for reference.


30 posted on 01/23/2006 7:29:57 AM PST by COEXERJ145 (Those Who Want to Impeach President Bush Are the Party of Treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Moose4
What's the problem? Call Jack Bauer. Problem solved before the bomb goes off. Then call Chuck Norris for revenge.


How about Charles Bronson?
31 posted on 01/23/2006 7:32:01 AM PST by tarzantheapeman (The democrats --doing their best to defeat America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Axenolith

Right. I think there were (are) 20 megaton "city busters" and up to 60 MT bombs tested.

Article says 10 KT later on, someone pointed out.


32 posted on 01/23/2006 7:32:57 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

"Trust me, I know what I'm doing."


33 posted on 01/23/2006 7:39:23 AM PST by Jonah Hex ("Life's a beta, then you die." - overheard in City of Villains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842

A 10 megaton blast in Charleston would obliterate the city. The casualties would be in the 250,000+ range. This reporter probably meant 10 kilotons.


34 posted on 01/23/2006 7:41:46 AM PST by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 17th Miss Regt

Right. Thanks.


35 posted on 01/23/2006 7:49:11 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145

Okay! I'm cranky, then! I'll admit it.


36 posted on 01/23/2006 7:53:09 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842

The total wind energy of a category 3 hurricane is roughly on the order of 10 megatons/day.


37 posted on 01/23/2006 8:05:47 AM PST by fzx12345 (Three lefts don't make a right; they invent one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: fzx12345

I did not know that. thanks.


38 posted on 01/23/2006 8:08:17 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
Yields and Effects
39 posted on 01/23/2006 8:27:26 AM PST by SC DOC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SC DOC

Excellent link...thx!


40 posted on 01/23/2006 8:35:40 AM PST by Dark Skies ("A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SC DOC

Have you seen anything on the creation of tsunamis by nuclear detonation?


41 posted on 01/23/2006 8:45:33 AM PST by Dark Skies ("A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842

The article states 10 KILOton a whole order of magnitude weaker than what you are thinking of, but still something you would not want to be up close & personal with.


42 posted on 01/23/2006 9:40:02 AM PST by Nebr FAL owner (.308 reach out & thump someone .50 cal.Browning Machine gun reach out & crush someone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Nebr FAL owner

Thanks - I missed that reference. Earlier it says 10 megaton.


43 posted on 01/23/2006 9:51:15 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
Have you seen anything on the creation of tsunamis by nuclear detonation?

Yes; among the tin foil conspiracy theorists

44 posted on 01/23/2006 10:19:09 AM PST by SC DOC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SC DOC
Yes; among the tin foil conspiracy theorists

Thx, I have already seen that. Looking for something a little more scientific.

45 posted on 01/23/2006 10:37:55 AM PST by Dark Skies ("A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145

"A 10 kiloton warhead detonated at ground level would do more damage then you might think. Not only would the blast destroy anything in the immediate area but it would also send out a very powerful precursor wind ahead of the main shock wave. This wind is powerful enough to lift tanks off the ground and throw them hundreds of feet downrange."

Look at the photo's of Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Now cut the bomb size in half. Now look at the photo's again and note that most of the concrete or stone buildings in the blast area survived.

A bomb of that size would absolutely destroy an area about 1000 yards across. Damage after that would vary greatly based on the type of construction. Glass buildings will be whacked big time but older buildings will stand up pretty well. In addition, the comments about the scope of the serious damage seems to cover a pretty good area, at least 5 miles across. That is simply too much damage for the bomb. 2 or 3 miles from the blast is the area where damage is mostly windows and buildings already shaky.

The image of tanks being bounced around come from tests where tanks were parked within a mile of a hydrogen bomb in the megaton range, the sort of weapon we should use in retaliation.


46 posted on 01/23/2006 10:42:09 AM PST by Jim Verdolini (We had it all, but the RINOs stalked the land and everything they touched was as dung and ashes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jim Verdolini
The image of tanks being bounced around come from tests where tanks were parked within a mile of a hydrogen bomb in the megaton range, the sort of weapon we should use in retaliation.

Actually, it was not thermonuclear weapons in the megaton range. The videos of tanks being tossed around come from the Nevada Test Site where the largest device we ever detonated in atmospheric conditions was Plumbbob-Hood, 74 kilotons.

47 posted on 01/23/2006 3:37:17 PM PST by COEXERJ145 (Despite Popular Opinion, Tom Tancredo Does Not Support Deporting Illegal Aliens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson