-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 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 credibility. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFF4m3kS9HxQb37XmcRAlFXAJwOPv5WeIuWGrH1Jv5DpeUMuc0x7ACg1kik kKt8eC8Bo0CICudWYB4oUy0= =xSDD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
