[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: A Republican!!!!!! (was Re: OT: sponge burning!)

Hash: SHA1

On 02/25/07 23:02, Wulfy wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>> On 02/25/07 22:01, Wulfy wrote:
>>> Ron Johnson wrote:
>>>> On 02/25/07 21:39, Wulfy wrote:
>>>>> Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>>>>>> Ooh.  Don't even get me started on nuclear power.  Cheap, clean,
>>>>>> virtually unlimited.  We can't use it *because* of the
>>>>>> conservationists
>>>>>> and environmentalists.
>>>>> Decommissioning nuclear plant...  storage of nuclear waste...  clean?
>>>>> hardly.
>>>>> Chernobyl.., 3 Mile Island... how many people now have cancer
>>>>> because of
>>>>> your "clean" power source?
>>>> Ok, I give up.  How many people *have* died of cancer from the TMI
>>>> non-China Syndrome?
>>>> As for Chernobyl, well, what do you expect from Commie Pinko Atheists?
>>> http://www.american.edu/ted/SELLA.HTM
>>> Sellafield is just up the coast from me.
>> Sellafield != TMI.
> nope.  It's a Nuclear plant that is polluting NOW. And not by accident.

Just like any other poorly run industrial plant.

>>>                                          This is a "well run" plant in
>> Dumping nuclear waste doesn't seem very well-run to me!
> Obviously you missed my quotation marks.  It doesn't seem well run to
> me, either...

Yes I did.  I thought it was sarcasm.

>               but then again, storing it in underground bunkers for
> thousands of years doesn't appear to be a much better solution.

Sure it does.

>                                                                  The
> point is that TMI  and Chernobyl were accidents.  Sellafield isn't. 
> Nuclear policy overrides safety when it's "convenient" -

*Any* policy *always* overrides safety when it's "convenient".  If
you don't know that, you aren't very old.

> <quote>
> The Sellafield nuclear installation in north-west England produces vital
> energy to the people of the United Kingdom. It also produces weapons
> grade material needed for the production of nuclear weapons. For these
> reasons, Sellafield is an important facility for the U.K. in terms of
> domestic and security needs. Although Sellafield provides important
> services for the people and government of the United Kingdom, it has had
> a detrimental effect on the environment.
> </quote>
> Because it's "important" it's allowed to pollute. And while it "produces
> vital energy for the UK", it hurts Ireland which has none of the
> benefits of this facility.

And if this were some industrial plant dumping PCBs or DDT or any
other weird organic chemical the ocean, how would it be any
different than a nuke plant?

>>> a "Christian" country...
>> Britain is Christian??  Not since 1960, I wager.
> We have a State Church... something that you don't have... yet.  Though,
> if your president has his way...

Snarky, baseless, brainless angry-at-W comments don't help your

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: