|
Ruth and et al, just think about all the DOT,
nuclear engineers, hazardous material shipping people, firefighters, HAZMAT
people, and other professionals that saw the show. They
probably had similar thoughts as ours, such as: What tunnel in
Idaho? What do you mean they can't tell if a release had occurred, its in a
tunnel and the chimney effect would allow you to monitor for a release?
How could it burn for so long at such a high temperature, what is the fuel
source? They ship medical waste by rail and "spent fuel" by truck? The
cask is only 20 tons? Whay was it not in a safe haven and traveling at
night? etc. Its just entertainment and like other forms of
media it is used to push an agenda sometimes.
Dean Chaney, CHP
----- Original Message -----
From: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: Comments on the West Wing episode Sorry, Sandy, but I believe this is why the anti-nukes get the mileage that they get. You are apparently of the opinion that, because there wasn't MUCH distortion, the topic was handled well when compared to others... (sure, it was a lot better than "Atomic Train"). However, why should there have been ANY distortion and disinformation? Why should West Wing have talked about such an accident at all, when it was clearly extraneous to any story line? I see this as sophisticated propaganda: no terrorized screaming, and with enough truth that it sounds credible. Ruth Weiner, Ph. D. ruthweiner@aol.com |