[ RadSafe ] FW: II Quoted Radsafe comment and thanks!

Fri Mar 4 20:05:40 CST 2011

More twisting, misinterpretation and attempted intimidation.

  _____  

From: NiagaraNet at aol.com [mailto:NiagaraNet at aol.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 8:47 PM
To: kb60127 at comcast.net
Cc: gk at artvoice.com
Subject: II Quoted Radsafe comment and thanks!

Dear sir:

You are who you are and you wrote what you wrote. Calling me names ("fool")
sure helps this situation doesn't it?

Please show me the EXACT sentence or paragraph where ANY association was
drawn to isotopic composition within the AV article that was cited BY YOU.
Don't pull your holier than thou stuff now. SHOW IT. I happen to know what
"raw counts" will NOT show and that's exactly why the story was written as
it was. Get it? Pick a sentence. Any sentence to support what it is that you
just wrote to me here in your email and we'll call it a day. Don't pull the
typical double-talk -- Pa LEESE. Plenty of THAT to go around on Radsafe. If
you now don't agree with what it was THAT YOU wrote, ask Jeff Terry to pull
it down -- of course, with a retraction and apology directly to me and the
company ARTVOICE for your mistake, derogatory tone etc. Your contrition will
be accepted. Words games again and the story will tell itself.

You ARE directly associated with ORNL as is shown in numerous of your posts,
subject commentary (What? Is "Radsafe" a global listserv about "fashion"?)
and what is easily found online about you with a simple GOOGLE search to
lend yourself "credibility." Please don't try and spin any sort of "blame
game" onto me. Again I say, you wrote what you wrote and if it's still there
on Monday morning, it gets to print. It's that simple. Sorry. I'm not
placing any emphasis on anything at all and will surely give a direct link
back to your comment with proper citation and attribution. I may be nice
enough to couch it myself saying that you "inferred" what you actually knew
nothing about. Deal with it. What? You had time today to look up the
reports? AFTER you made your inflammatory post to the listserv earlier in
the week? 

BTW -- I certainly don't need your credentials to tell the story EXACTLY as
it played out on Radsafe. You guys are the ones that cause the industry to
be viewed as it is. Not myself.

I'm NOT threatening anything. Nice of you to "couch" it that way though. You
folks sure do have your spin down pat.

===
In a message dated 3/4/2011 8:05:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
kb60127 at comcast.net writes:

I am absolutely NOT saying that. I said YOU drew the association. Raw counts
will never show an association to any particular source. Only a fool would
try to draw such a conclusion.

I do NOT post to RadSafe on behalf of ORNL. That is my private e-mail and
was sent on my personal time. Do not try to establish credibility for
yourself using my credentials. That is dishonest beyond belief.

By threatening to twist what I have written to support your own position you
have even further exposed your bias and activism. Shame on you.

-----Original Message-----
From: NiagaraNet at aol.com [mailto:NiagaraNet at aol.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 8:20 PM
To: kb60127 at comcast.net
Cc: niagaranet at aol.com; gk at artvoice.com
Subject: Quoted Radsafe comment and thanks!

So Kim: I have a hidden agenda?
Could you explain your interestingcomment to RadSafe?

Are you saying/admitting that the contamination of city streets problem IS
associated with FUSRAP?
That's interesting. I hope that you don't mind if I quote you in our next
edition on that as it's not recorded that way. But I'll sure use it as
coming from you. Awesome! Thx.
I mean, since you're directly associated with ORNL, then I guess that makes
you an official spokesperson and this comment as quotable.

Bogard - LSD staff info
international nuclear safeguards support and dating of archaeological
artifacts .... Esther M. Kim, Kenneth W. Crase, J. S. Bogard, and Kimberly
L. 
McMahan, ...
_www.ornl.gov/sci/ees/bsd/staff/Bogard.pdf_
(http://www.ornl.gov/sci/ees/bsd/staff/Bogard.pdf)  

Since these streets are miles from the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works Site
(10mi/ or so), then we'll have to make this association attributed directly
to you if you don't mind. Thanks for saving us the interview phone call.

Cheers and best regards,
Lou Ricciuti

==

As Mr. Monty Burns might say in this instance:
"Excellent"!

K. L. McMahan kb60127 at comcast.net
Thu Mar 3 18:36:55 CST 2011 

Previous message: [ RadSafe ] ALAP
Next message: [ RadSafe ] ALAP
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Paul,

Not that I want to lend any credibility to the author's not-so-hidden
agenda, but I suspect the article/rant has its roots in the FUSRAP
remediation work being performed in the neighborhood (see NFSS at:
_http://www.lrb.usace.army.mil/fusrap/index.htm_
(http://www.lrb.usace.army.mil/fusrap/index.htm)  ) Some list members may
not be aware of the program.

Kim McMahan

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at
health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Radhealth1
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 4:55 PM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Article by Louis Ricciuti

I thought the list might enjoy an article by Mr. Riciuti in a local Buffalo
weekly regarding contamination:

_http://artvoice.com/issues/v10n8/week_in_review/seven_days_
(http://artvoice.com/issues/v10n8/week_in_review/seven_days) 

Paul Szalinski

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
_http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html_
(http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html) 

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
_http://health.phys.iit.edu_ (http://health.phys.iit.edu) 