05-04-2006, 03:09 AM
Due to the serious nature of this forum, I hope a significant number of people will choose to not be anonymous. I will try to set a good example by identifying myself openly. I'm sure if anyone really wanted to find me, they could. I figure that goes for anyone.
My name is Peter Dearman. I'm an English teacher in Taiwan. Making incomplete Web pages is a bit of a hobby for me. So is spending countless hours navigating the endless ocean of information that is the Internet. Of course I don't believe everything I read, but sometimes it is hard to tell. Is the New York Times really that much more reliable than, say, Wikipedia? I think it depends what you're looking for. The famous concept of spin applies as much to what's not in the newspapers as it does to what is in the newspapers.
I take issue with the conspicuous absence of depleted uranium stories. That's one of the reasons I built this Web site. If we can't have the news media give us proper balanced reporting of this issue, then maybe the public needs to take this oh-so-debatable issue into its own hands.
Oddly enough, I read an article in today's paper (the real paper variety) basically on this very issue. In fact it was the first time I ever actually read something about DU in an actual solid newspaper that I was holding in my hands. Perhaps it's a sign. Now my job is to get this BBS into orbit. You can help of course by inviting people to visit and join in.
Here's the link: (I daresay this one is really worth a read.)
Truth and lies blend in the name of `balance'
(By A.L. Kennedy THE GUARDIAN , LONDON )
My name is Peter Dearman. I'm an English teacher in Taiwan. Making incomplete Web pages is a bit of a hobby for me. So is spending countless hours navigating the endless ocean of information that is the Internet. Of course I don't believe everything I read, but sometimes it is hard to tell. Is the New York Times really that much more reliable than, say, Wikipedia? I think it depends what you're looking for. The famous concept of spin applies as much to what's not in the newspapers as it does to what is in the newspapers.
I take issue with the conspicuous absence of depleted uranium stories. That's one of the reasons I built this Web site. If we can't have the news media give us proper balanced reporting of this issue, then maybe the public needs to take this oh-so-debatable issue into its own hands.
Oddly enough, I read an article in today's paper (the real paper variety) basically on this very issue. In fact it was the first time I ever actually read something about DU in an actual solid newspaper that I was holding in my hands. Perhaps it's a sign. Now my job is to get this BBS into orbit. You can help of course by inviting people to visit and join in.
Here's the link: (I daresay this one is really worth a read.)
Truth and lies blend in the name of `balance'
(By A.L. Kennedy THE GUARDIAN , LONDON )
Quote:
...
And grown-up discussions about anything nuclear are off limits. So recent UK coverage of the Chernobyl disaster concentrated on how wildlife is thriving in the post-leak wasteland, while skipping the possibility that up to 600,000 people died as a result of the accident. And you won't have heard that amounts of uranium in UK air samples increased in 2003, when it was dumping tonnes of depleted uranium (DU) on Iraq, because weather travels. Or too much about the fact that living with DU in Iraq (or Afghanistan, or the former Yugoslavia) can make you very sick, if not dead.
This is because our governments like DU, so they don't want to hear about any unfortunate repercussions. And, according to many reputable sources, death, misery, pain, radiation and the consequences of any action will all go away, perhaps quite quickly, if we only ignore them hard enough.
And grown-up discussions about anything nuclear are off limits. So recent UK coverage of the Chernobyl disaster concentrated on how wildlife is thriving in the post-leak wasteland, while skipping the possibility that up to 600,000 people died as a result of the accident. And you won't have heard that amounts of uranium in UK air samples increased in 2003, when it was dumping tonnes of depleted uranium (DU) on Iraq, because weather travels. Or too much about the fact that living with DU in Iraq (or Afghanistan, or the former Yugoslavia) can make you very sick, if not dead.
This is because our governments like DU, so they don't want to hear about any unfortunate repercussions. And, according to many reputable sources, death, misery, pain, radiation and the consequences of any action will all go away, perhaps quite quickly, if we only ignore them hard enough.
