[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Purpose of the List
Do antinuclear activists have a public forum for discussion like Radsafe? I
have not seen such a site. I've only seen one-way treatises of dogma on
my reviews of their issues. Surfers either bite or disregard their
information, but they don't open the issues for public discussion like what
we see on Radsafe. That seems convenient for their purpose. If there is a
discussion site, could someone please refer me to it. Thanks.
Tom
"Frey, Steven R." wrote:
>
> When will this misuse of this forum end? I am tired of seeing openly-avowed
> anitnuclears use it for their 'helpful' purposes. It is facetious that they claim
> they have a right to be here because of the First Amendment. As I see it, they
> don't. This is a private forum, not a public one, and as such we can deny, and
> ought to deny, membership to those who would deprive society of the beneficial
> uses of radiation and radioactive materials.
>
> They can start their own forum, and, yes, even keep us out of theirs in turn.
>
> Steve Frey
> (My opinion here of course is not meant to speak on behalf of my employer)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Norman Cohen [mailto:ncohen12@HOME.COM]
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 3:09 PM
> To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
> Subject: Re: Purpose of the List
>
> Hi Patrick
> Does this criticism only apply to me, your friendly anti-nuker, or does it apply
> to ALL radsafers who post news articles or other non-technical, opinion pieces?
> Just curious, because other radsafers DO post similar stuff at times.
>
> My posting of that press release was meant to inform you all how your friends at
> the DOE are giving in to this hysteria over security. Had I had a newspaper
> article I would have posted that instead of NIRS's obviously slanted press
> release. I mean, of course, any one's press release will be slanted towards their
> own cause. NEI has never issued a slanted press release??
>
> Anyway I felt that what I posted was within the bounds of radsafe's mission.
>
> If I was wrong, apologies.
>
> Back to lurkdom.
>
> peace
> norm
>
> Patrick Muldoon wrote:
>
> > "Self-serving claptrap. The "Nuclear Information & Resource Service"
> > is not objective source of news. It is an entity of antinuclear activist
> > organizations, is promoted as an antinuclear information service, and is
> > privately funded by contributions by antinuclear supporters. As such, it
> > cannot be regarded as an objective and balanced source of information.
> > We oug
>
> ************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
> ************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
--
Thomas Mohaupt, M.S., CHP
University Radiation Safety Officer
104 Health Sciences Bldg
Wright State University
Dayton, Ohio 45435
tom.mohaupt@wright.edu
(937) 775-2169
(937) 775-3761 (fax)
"An investment in knowledge gains the best interest." Ben Franklin
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.