Thursday, August 17, 2006

An environmentally very UNFRIENDLY newspaper

The argument put forward by a mouthpiece in The Daily E*****s (Leo McKinstry) about the nuclear power issue conveniently ducks the obvious very major downside:


But the DE describes it all as environmentally FRIENDLY.

Environmentally clean nuclear power!! Clean?

Based only on the CO2 zero emissions this totally ignores the radioactive waste issue. Environmentally poisonous.

It is clear about the political leanings of this rag.

By the way I no longer buy or scan this rag. Like Lloyds TSB, Life, Scottish Widows: into the darkest depths with it all. Where the shit belongs.

Incidentally, this is where they'd like to 'bury' all our old nuclear waste wrapped up in concrete. Several hundred feet under ground.

And that's before we get busy and 'create' any more.

Absolute disgrace and at the same time attempting to besmirch Green Peace and anyone who dares to oppose such madness and corrupt thinking. A pathetic attempt at mind control.

As a waste product, there will be a tax on it eventually. The tax payer will pay to clear up the mess he had no part in 'pushing' through. Profits are siphoned off to everybody, EXCEPT the tax payer.

Except nuclear waste can NEVER BE 'cleared up'.

Got it yet? Have you woken up yet?

This mouthpiece for the Daily E*****s has, in the past, been praised for talking sense. Now, do you see how misdirection works? Lure the readers into following opinion, becoming stuck in the thinking pattern and lead into accepting what is said. Then bowl the really 'important' political googly. Acceptance that the way forward is 'nuclear' and it's environmentally friendly by not producing CO2. What a load of dangerous, very dangerous, bollocks. Crap of the worst kind. Verbal diarrhoea. Poisonous.

Not a word about the most serious issue: radioactive waste.

Even that issue of existing waste that can't even now be dealt with. Considering burying in concrete several hundred feet underground. Rendered harmless? Of course not. Out of sight, out of mind. That's all that can be done. It's still there. Still highly toxic. Still very, very dangerous.

Imagine terrorists (real or imagined) and this store of waste. Hundreds, thousands of tonnes of it. Difficult to get at perhaps, but it's there. Not conceivable to get at? That does not make it impossible to obtain. An explosion would make a great deal of atmospheric toxic pollution that could never be 'treated'. It would be in the air for 1000s of years.

It actually creates a greater problem. The challenge to 'terrorists', whoever they may be, to blow it up. Policing this burial site? Like AREA 51? I doubt it. It will all be left unguarded. Probably. A clear and easy target. What a fantastic challenge. Like the destruction of the A380 superjumbo. What a trophy!

My advice: don't go near this plane. It's doomed by definition. For what it is and stands for. Boeing. American? Who cares? But what a challenge! What a target!!

This paper (DE: still with me?) has done it before. Working on peoples' emotions with sensitive issues like the death of Princess Diana. Still won't go away, and it shouldn't. But it's being used nonetheless. I can make a case to allege disgraceful exploitation.

An interpretation is that the ongoing saga is being used to play another googly: championing the attack on speed cameras and that they turn drivers into criminals. Another load of bollocks. Total. If people speed, that's their choice. Those stupid people buy these 4x4 'tanks' live in the delusion that it makes them safer. To protect themselves from the problem of ‘dangerous roads’. They are a large part of the problem, for fuck's sake! Roads aren’t dangerous, but some of the people who use them are. They'd be among the first to complain if juggernauts and other lorries were commonplace in the local high street, but so hypocritical that they drive their fucking SUVs in the same places. They criminalise themselves. Tough shit. Break the law, whether that law is right or wrong, get caught (good) and expect the consequences. Most people actually think (I suspect) that speeders and SUV drivers in towns and any built up area are total arseholes. All part of today's selfish brigade: I'm OK Jack, fuck you.

Get real people. And take responsibility for your own inadequacies. Like a major lack of self control.

I would describe this Daily E*****s 'rag' as a government organ. The 'unofficial' mouthpiece. Dispensing required 'opinion' to inform people of correct thinking.

Cars aren't fast, but people drive them fast and the motor industry sells the average car with the potential to go very fast - too fast for any British roads. A greater density of ever more powerful cars, and these fucking SUV 'tanks' (what is a sports utility vehicle for fuck's sake?), makes the roads an evermore lethal place to be. The irresponsible motor industry just has no interest in safety. Provision of safety features? Window dressing to entice the mugs. And they can charge higher selling prices. It's all about money.

How easy it is to persuade stupid people that they really need an expensive-to-buy and expensive-to-run 'tank' to float around in. And the breathtaking arrogance of these fucks: parking where they like (special disabled peoples' places in public facilities, out-of-town shopping complexes, supermarkets) because they perceive themselves so important. Impotent more like. Totally ineffective as people. Useless. One of the definitions for arsehole: where all the shit comes from.

Isn't there supposed to be a permanent shortage of oil? Maybe, but it is an irreplaceable resource. When it's gone, it's gone. Never to come back. Certainly for the next few million years. It will be the extinct human race (today around 7 billions and still counting) who will be the future oil. The Earth will recover. It can wait.


Post a comment

<< Home