[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CNN-> RADSAFE list, where are you going?
A-1160 Vienna, AUSTRIA
Phone: -43 699 11681319
MR Dr. Franz Schoenhofer
Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management
Dep. I/8U, Radiation Protection
A-1031 Vienna, AUSTRIA
Von: Chuck Cooper <firstname.lastname@example.org>
An: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Datum: Dienstag, 04. Dezember 2001 22:37
Betreff: CNN-> Osama bin Laden's "Dirty Bomb"
>Device called a crude nuclear weapon designed to terrify
>December 4, 2001
>Posted: 1:25 PM EST (1825 GMT)
>WASHINGTON (CNN) -- At a meeting of senior al Qaeda leaders in
>Afghanistan within the last year, a member of the terrorist network
>a cylinder and said it contained radiological material that could be
>used in a
>so-called "dirty bomb," according to U.S. officials.
Bla, bla, bla, CNN says bla, bla, Washington Post writes bla, bla, David
Lochbaum writes and says bla, bla, bla (Norman - it is written three times
deliberately...), Greenpeace states (not enough space and time for the
thousands bla, blas that would be needed), Norman Cohen forwards more bla,
bla from whatever he gets hold into and so on and so on.
The forwarded message is so ridiculous that it would be a waste of time to
comment more than this single sentence.
So, where is RADSAFE going? I notice since weeks, that an increasing number
of the contributions are forwarded mass media articles (anthrax, crash tests
on reactor containments, x-raying members of the public to prevent
terrorism, now again the old silly story about shooting nuclear waste into
the sun, nuclear terrorism, etc. etc. and comments on these articles which
often is again a repetition of what "everybody" knows and has been discussed
also on RADSAFE over and over again.
I wonder how many replies will come for that CNN contribution, trying to
convince professional RADSAFErs about what every one knows - that these are
silly and old speculations and that the terrorist would be killed by
radiation if he would use enough Cs-137 to do real harm, maybe an estimation
of dose he would receive. Does this impress any professional RADSAFEr?
(Norman Cohen is of course not a professional RADSAFEr, but I doubt that
even he would be impressed......). Would it impress anybody at CNN if you
wrote a detailed comment on it and send it to them? Would they interview
anybody? Would any paper print it? Would anybody be enlighted if it were
May I pose another - and serious - question: Do you really believe that
people are any more scared by such nonsense? They are told everyday since
decades, that nuclear energy is poisoning them - but they still live. They
are told since weeks, that nuclear power plants will be hit by airplanes,
destroyed and spawn their deadly interior over the USA (other countries seem
not to exist in the US papers!) to kill everybody living there - but it
still has not happened. OK, so we now invent the deadly threat from hearsay
that somebody somewhere showed a metal cylinder and claimed it to be a
radiological weapon - how afraid are we because of this threat! And if some
fool would really distribute a few Bq of Cs-137, I-131 or - I hardly to
imagine - Pu-239 on Broadway or the Golden Gate Bridge? Can you imagine the
scenario? Can you imagine the traffic jam, because all the cars - and
helicopters - of the TV-stations, the reporters of newspapers would rush to
this - so dangerous - place? Distributing the news, that a long expected
threat has become real? Can you imagine all the politicians rushing there as
well to give their comments and to appear on TV?
I have since long ago advocated that RADSAFE should also discuss
sociological, political and economical questions of radiation and of our
profession. I remember some vivid discussions on that topic. But now I
believe, that "enough is enough". Let us return to more science.
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.