Re: RoHS => tin whiskers?

On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 09:40:09 -0700, "Richard Henry" <rphenry@xxxxxxxx>
Gave us:


"Keith" <krw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ef2164e4eb8ce21989acd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <s6hg82dft2vq1g024j37mib0976vlbsfvm@xxxxxxx>,
jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 15:27:49 GMT, Rich Grise <richgrise@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 18:55:46 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On 7 Jun 2006 21:42:29 +0200, David <david@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

That question would be a dilemma, yes. However, the more appropriate
question given the American administration's track record is what's
more
valuable, all American residents' privacy, or the government's
appearance of protecting lives? Or do you really believe that
wasting
vast amounts of resources spying on everyone is the slightest help in
protecting against terrorism?


Didn't the Canadians just intercept three tons of ammonium nitrate?

Three tons.

My cousin is a farmer in Minnesota, and he can go down to the
fertilizer
store and pick up three tons of NH4NO3 any time he wants to.

IT'S FERTILIZER!!!!!

It's also stuff of bombs.

It wouldn't have fertilized much, except maybe the parks of Toronto,
with shredded human bodies. When your cousin buys ammonium nitrate,
nobody notices.

Sure they do. The transaction is recorded and you can bet someone
notices and it's filed away in some database. 'Tis the law, and all
that:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/s1141.html

The Law just says that the Secretary of DHS will "promulgate regulations".
Any further data on that front?


I would refer you all to this post and thread:

1149162125.863804.15830@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Sell chemicals, then go to jail..."

You can fucking bet they are heavily monitored, and Greaseball's
buddy CANNOT go down and buy 3 tons any time he wants.

UTTER BULL***!
.

Quantcast