It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Divine Strake

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   
You're so right. Is it possible that they will be aloowed to go ahead and do this? It is insane.




posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 03:04 PM
link   
"Allowed" And also this reminds me of how bush raved about Sadamn killing his people. This is the same just a slower more costly death. Testing Dangerous WMD.



posted on Apr, 12 2007 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Now,... is the time to besmirch and ridicule those opposed.

Folks, this is textbook.

First, the effort with false reasons,

Second, the retraction with false reasons,

Then, reduce anyone that stood in your way, for false reasons,

Now, the public ridicule for anyone that opposed, for false reasons.




If I didnt know better, I would think thet gov was battling a valid ufo sighting.

doing everything in it's power to reduce and ridicule anyone that stood in their way or disagreed.

I started this thread just noticing the way the forums were handled.

And after following it thru, I can only come to one conclusion.



Blaine N. Howard, a Health Physicist took issue with our editorial.

"Scientists that I know laugh at the ridiculous furor that Utah politicians and media raised over Divine Strake," wrote Mr. Howard.

He cited several studies to support his contention that "There is no statistical evidence of excess cancer in Southwestern Utah" because of nuclear testing a half century ago.

"The only excuse for thinking there were fallout caused cancer deaths in Utah is a theoretical calculation using a false theory."

"I don't believe it right to compensate people simply because they had loved ones die from cancer. That is just a government dole. We can't compensate all cancer victims so why compensate any. Certainly, don't expand a program (RECA) which was not justified from the beginning."


Editorial


Now, if that aint calling someone out for disagreeing, I dont know what is. Ridicule for the wrong reasons to divert attention from the facts.

I know what I think now, and only based on logical reasoning and viewing the facts and chronological behavior of those involved.



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join