From braintree!news.sprintlink.net!news.us.world.net!ns2.mainstreet.net!news.isp.net!news-out.internetmci.com!internetMCI!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sesqui.net!uuneo.neosoft.com!usenet Tue Oct 31 10:53:56 1995
Subject: Re: Atom bomb testing is NOT dangerous
Date: 30 Oct 1995 05:33:50 GMT
Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services +1 713 968 5800
email@example.com (A. McPherson) wrote:
> Definition: HASI = Hubbard Association of $cientologists International
> You are probably going to be most angry at your former teachers for giving
> you false information about radiation and its dangers - there are none! It
> has been proven scientifically and with clear logic, that hysterical
> reaction is all that radiation really produces.
I have extensive high level experience in the nations
nuclear weapons manufacturing facilities, studying these
liability issues, and have been retained in several cases
to advise and make recommendations for radio active
containment systems on a national scale.
Your point of confusion has been carefully implanted by
those with a vested interest in proving radio active
***contamination*** harmless, which of course it decidedly
is not... witness the downwinders from the nevada sites,
Hiroshima, and Chernobyl..... these folks are LIABLE
for massive damage to the human race.
Accordingly the dissinformation campaign has been to
*deliberately* confuse 'radiation' (harmless in the usual
doses....with *contamination* deadly in many cases.
The physics of the issue stated in a nut shell are that
when you ingest a PARTICLE.... say PuO for instance, it
emits alpha radiation directly concentrated on just a few
cells... this intensive point source alters the cell dna
structures precipating cancers in maybe one case in 1,000,000.
One can inhale a million particles of PuO that will assure
the development of cancer in a contamination situation... these
same particles however will read very lightly, and if the
dose is calculated as though it were spread out over the entire
body... well it would be a harmless dose.
An analogy: If one were shot with one ounce of lead bullet
at 1,000 feet per second... well it would be quite a
catastrophy... fatal probably.
If that one ounce of lead were turned to lead powder, and
shot from the same distance, say 50'...well it would be almost
totally harmless..... its a concentration of force issue.
An open mind (openheimer, father of the atomic bomb)
Brighter than a thousand suns (Jungk)
> All this and more can be found in ElRon's article of May 6, 1957 "The
> radiation picture and $cientology", culminating in ElRon's admission of
> being a radiator: "I am only saying that we have one case - me - who has
> had 502 ties the 'allowed' amount and is surviving nicely, thank you..."
> I apologize to the Australians. Your hospitality is beyond description.
> Andrew McPherson
> Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED.
> Please, report inappropriate use to firstname.lastname@example.org
> For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to email@example.com
> If you have any problems, address them to firstname.lastname@example.org