You kiss your mother with that mouth?

["ZAPP, NEAL (JSC-SD)" <neal.zapp1@jsc.nasa.gov>]

Well, I told you someone would jump up and try to whack me, didn't I?  

Let's take these things in order, if you don't mind:

"I'm dismayed by your attack on the legal profession and your assumption
that 
Mr. Slavin doesn't know what he's talking about because he isn't a
scientist. "	

1)  I never attacked the legal profession.  What I said may have hit close
to home, but I didn't intend to attack anyone, truly.  I think a litigator
is a pretty bad choice for an arguing opponent (unless you like to fight as
much as me and Mr. Slavin, that is), about as bad a choice as a cobra for a
bite-fight.  You people are just a little high strung, don't you think?  And
you'll forgive me if I limit the people I trust to lecture me about health
physics to health physicists.  Unless they've taught that at law school
lately.
	
"Unfortunately, I know from personal experience that scientists are
sometimes 
merely highly schooled bigots who know very little outside their area of 
expertise. "

2)  You don't know me either, Pam, so be careful using the work "bigot".
The honorable Mr. Slavin isn't the only person who likes a good fight, and
you're not the only person without a Ph.D.  By the way, did you ever notice
that the first thing a person does when their argument can't stand on its
merits?  Start acting just about like this message sounds from here on in.

"And as for your smug assertion that Mr. Slavin says what his 
clients pay him to say, who do you think is paying him to say what he said
on 
the RADSAFE email list?  Who do you think paid him to say what he said to
the 
U.S. Senate?  Who do you think pays him for all the letters he writes to 
email lists and newspaper editors and all the DOE public meetings he
attends? 
 And what makes you think that an attorney who helps whistleblowers and sick

workers sue for compensation is any more a whore than a scientist who works 
for NASA or DOE?"
	

3)  Attorneys are paid to represent their clients.  End of story.  Oh, and
the difference is that I'm not paid to support anyone else's point of view.
I also don't besmirtch other people's professional integrity by questioning
their research 'cause it won't help me get paid.  By the way, nice language,
you're a real credit to your buddy.  Is that how one goes about addressing
Congress, by the way?

"But even if he were paid for every single thing he does or if he just likes

to argue (which I consider to be quite an admirable quality), it wouldn't 
mean that what he says isn't true or that what he is accomplishing doesn't 
need to be accomplished."

4)  Pay close attention, Pam, 'cause I don't want you to miss this.  If
these people were hurt by the DOE, and the DOE covered it up, I say pay 'em.
Pay 'em all, they've got it coming.  But this is the part you missed, Pam:
they have to prove it.  That's what I said, and that's what I mean, and
that's why I'm right.  If they prove it, pay 'em all.  Regardless of Mr.
Slavin's love of mountains.  But don't come to this or any other group
anywhere and expect to bully people into your point of view.  And don't call
a group of people who you know nothing about into professional question
because their work doesn't support what you need to win a case.  That's
irresponsible, probably about as bad as jumping on some list server to try
save your buddy (who doesn't have much to say on his own, I notice) and
trying to strongarm some guy half a country away because he expects a couple
of lawyers to abide by the law and not get paid until they prove it.  Maybe
you get away with that wherever you are, but not with me.  "Agree with me or
I'll either be mean to you or get my friend to be mean to you" will NEVER
work with me, lady.  You too, Pam.

Neal Zapp





************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html