RE: The Safety of Radioactive Waste Shipments

Monday, July 15, 2002

(Published in The Spectrum, St. George, UT, Aug 9, 2002)

As a former Radiation Control Technician at the Nevada Test Site, I have acquired some specialized knowledge about nuclear waste that is not apparent here in Southern Utah.

Normal Uranium ore consists of ~ 0.35% of the reactive (fissionable) U²³⁵ & U²³³ isotopes, and  99.65% of relatively benign U²³⁸.  Nuclear power generation fuel rods are “enriched” to approximately 5% U²³⁵.  Research reactor enrichment is at least 20%.  Spent nuclear fuel’s U²³⁵ has decayed to less than 1.5% of the total.

As part of the “Atoms For Peace” program initiated by president Eisenhower in 1958, unspent newly manufactured fuel rods destined for research reactors in over 40 foreign nations, as well as all U.S. reactors, is received from the ONE AND ONLY U.S. manufacturing facility in Columbia, SC.  Shipments to reactors in Arizona, Utah, California and Japan, very probably have been routed through Southern Utah on occasion.

Spent nuclear fuel rods, e.g. “nuclear waste”, from those same research reactors have also very likely been shipped across portions of Utah on their way to the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory fuel rod storage facility near Idaho Falls, Idaho.

From both nuclear reactive and radioactive standpoints, the public is at MUCH GREATER risk from cross country shipments of new fuel rods, than they EVER will be from nuclear waste!  Yet, in all this time there has never been an accident where radioactive material leaked out and endangered the public.  From a practical standpoint, we are at considerably more risk from a hazardous chemicals-carrying truck accident—tanker trailers are not built to withstand a breach during a serious traffic accident.  Nuclear shipping casks are built to such standards, and have been successfully tested in head-on collisions with concrete walls and locomotives in excess of 80 mph.

Nuclear fuel, whether new, or spent, has been safely shipped, is being safely shipped, and will be safely shipped through Southern Utah.  Yucca Mountain and Skull Valley are irrelevant.

I have been a staunch supporter of Israel all of my adult life, and most of the rest of my life as well. That said, and not wanting to play "devil's advocate", the tactics of the Palestinians, while perhaps directed at the wrong targets, are not, in either form nor degree, much different from those of the Sternists, Irgun, Etzel, or Palmach against the British in 1945 & 1946 in what is now the state of Israel. It is possible to see things from the Palestinians' point of view, however twisted that may seem to those who know the real truth about how they came to be...

If the Palestinians had received a full and complete lesson in history, their wrath would be justified against the secular and religious leaders of Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, who entreated their recent ancestors to "leave Palestine so that we can have a completely Jewish kill zone, and when we are finished you can move back in and fertilize the fields with the Jewish corpses"! And who NEVER allowed the palestinians they had thus coerced to abdicate their homeland to assimilate into the populations of the surrounding Arab nations to which they had fled, when events of 1947 & 1948 didn't go as planned. And who kept them bottled up in little Ghettos on the Israeli border, hoping that "next year in Jerusalem" the Arab Nations would be victorious.

So from the Arab point of view, the 1947 war is still going on, and will continue for as many years as it takes to wipe Israel off the map, present peace treaties notwithstanding. And since the Palestinians would never have received a balanced, "two_sided", non_religious (read non_Islamic) education in modern history inside those same ghettos on the border, they are still believing with all their hearts and souls that they are helping their Arab "brothers" fight the infidel in a holy jihad. Macchiavelli would have been proud of how well the Palestinians' Arab brothers have so accurately translated his philosophy into action in these "modern times"!

And ANY nation or culture that supports Israel is, in their eyes, "harboring the enemy", and should therefore "be eliminated" also. Although there is room for the compassion of Christ, or of Mohammed, on all sides, Tony Van Hemert (Re: The Spectrum  "The Writers Group", August 07, 2002) would do well to listen to the words of Thomas Sowell about a month ago, and a treatise by humorist Dennis Miller entitled "Mid-East for Dummies":

"The greatest curse of the 20th Century was the inability of decent people to realize that what was unthinkable to them was both thinkable and doable to others--like Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. Are we to wait until Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction and we wake up one morning to find a couple of American cities obliterated?"

Mid-East for Dummies by Dennis Miller :

A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need.  Don't thank me. I'm a giver. Here we go:

The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about it. There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but it's really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, and there were no "Palestinians" then, and the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians" then. As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the Palestinians," weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation." So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" any more to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths until someone points out they're being taped. Instead, let's call them what they are: "Other Arabs From The Same General Area Who Are In Deep Denial About Never Being Able To Accomplish Anything In Life but Struggle And Death."

I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: "Adjacent Jew_Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew_Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew_Haters in the region want:  Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course_-that's where the real fun is_-but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel_-or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it_-for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue_ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth, you know that's really saying something!

It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mid_East. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one.

Chew this around and spit it out:  Five hundred million Arabs; five million Jews. Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals.

Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea? Oh, that? We were just kidding.

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day. Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshalling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab state into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that with vital operations coming up against Iraq and others, it's in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of supermodels who've just had their drugs taken away. However, in any big_picture strategy, there's always a danger of losing moral weight. We've already lost some.

After September 11 our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful. Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every day) start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint.

If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterranean and east of the Jordan. (Hey, wait a minute, that's actually not such a bad idea.... uh, that is, what a horrible thought, yeah, horrible.)

azraelle@earthlink.net

(published by the Dixie State College student newspaper, St. George, UT, February 26, 2001)

To the Editor:

RE: Amber Sands' "pan" of Romeo&Juliet

In response to Amber Sands' "pan" of the recent DSC production of Romeo & Juliet: Although I read the play in the 9^th grade, I remember very little, it having been some 3 decades ago. I rather appreciated the "clan warfare" aspects that this production brought out, which were not apparent, apparently, to my English teacher back then!

More to the point, however, are Ms. Sands' comments about the acting, or the lack thereof, and the sound. The acoustics in the Graff auditorium leave a lot to be desired--not the fault of the production crew--they make do with what they have. Thanks in no small measure to the aforementioned lousy acoustics, I was able to understand, maybe, 1/3 of the words of the dialog. Had the acting been as bad as Ms Sands claims, I would have been virtually clueless as to the story line. Exactly the opposite was the case; indeed, I had the impression that if the actors had been muttering their lines in Russian, I still would have gotten the gist of the play. There is more to acting than lines--have you ever seen a Mime play? Acting, in its purest form, should be line independent, although not necessarily voice (inflection) independent--a great actor should be able to move you in a play regardless of the language he/she presents it in. Personally, I believe that this play, and its actors, accomplished that.

Full Time Student

azraelle@earthlink.net

(published by The Spectrum, St. George, UT, January 06, 2001)

Columnist Ellen Goodman (1/6/01) seems to feel that Cabinet Diversity will be ineffectual unless the political views of its' diverse membership match those normally ascribed (by the liberal press) to the various members' demographic groups (their "constituents"). Women Cabinet members should therefore support abortion "rights", and champion corporate affirmative action for executive promotion; Latinos and Blacks should likewise support hiring quotas for their constituency. Corporate "traditionalists", however competant, need not apply.

Having never been "at the top" (not even close!), I nevertheless have observed that: Those persons who HAVE climbed to the top of the corporate or entreprenurial ladders from humble beginnings, almost invariably adopt the political views and attitudes normally ascribed to free-market Conservatives. Could this not be a result of a change in perspective, stemming from exposure to the "Big Picture" of global reality (which the vast majority is not privy to), rather than some sort of tainted sell-out of demographic principles? I've also noted that the most competant Cabinet members have had extensive experience in the corporate or entreprenurial arena.

The traditional purpose of the Cabinet, which seems to escape Ms. Goodman, is to advise the President, and manage his Constitutionally-delegated responsibilities, foreign and domestic. The Cabinet is not mentioned in the Constitution, but was created by the first president to help him manage the affairs of the new country, and has subsequently been renewed by each succeeding president until today. Its' purpose is not, and never has been, to represent America demographically, which IS the Constitutionally described reason for the existence of the House of Representatives.

A Cabinet which is idealogically "all over the map", or in fundamental disagreement with its' President serves neither him nor his country. As the winner, in the Constitionally prescribed manner, of the election, it is President-elect Bush's right to appoint competant Cabinet members that are in agreement with his political beliefs, regardless of their demographic roots, diverse though they may be.

(published by The Spectrum, St. George, UT)
EDITOR:

RE: Letter from John Wilkinson, Friday, May 12, 2000. Elian Gonzalez is a LEGAL IMMIGRANT by virtue of the fact that he is from Cuba, and signed a request for political asylum, based on a law that was passed by Congress, I believe in 1972, to the effect that ANYONE arriving on our borders from Cuba was to be treated as a LEGAL IMMIGRANT unless he/she stated otherwise. Disagreeing with said law doesn't make Janet Reno's actions any less heinous under the laws of this country she swore to uphold when she took office, nor does it expunge her from legal culpability when she chooses to break the law. Ignorance of the law by Americans choosing to agree with her is truly blissful for Ms Reno because it means she probably will never be charged with an illegal action.

(published by The Spectrum, St. George, UT, May 17, 2000)

EDITOR:

Perhaps this will put the Elian Gonzalez matter into perspective. Suppose one of Fidel Castro's former concubines gives birth to a son, and decides, coincidentally when the son reaches the age of 6, to try to exit Cuba for America without informing her famous former bed-partner. Let's suppose she dies in the attempt, the boat sinks, but her son manages to get ashore with the assistance of an inner tube and a helpful American fishing boat. Once ashore, one of his mother's uncles is found in Miami, FL, to take the boy in (and who naturally gives the boy a tour of America and all the things that are available for next to nothing, and aren't available in his native Cuba at any price). Naturally, the boy expresses a desire to stay in America, and signs a note to that effect, of his own free will, without any coercion on the part of his great uncle.

Now let's suppose that Fidel somehow gets wind of this, decides that he is the boy's father (or should have been if the mother had done what she was supposed to do), and further decides to come to America to fetch the little miscreant back! Would we all be as willing to reunite Elian with his father if this were actually the case?

"Elian's father" has been divorced from Elian's mother some 4 years now. What proof is there, beyond his Castro-loving word of honor, that he actually IS ELIAN'S FATHER? A DNA test might be nice, ya think??

(unpublished)
To the "Vent", April 2, 2000:

As the featured speaker at a "devotional" during the summer of 1976 at Ricks College, the former governor of Michigan, and LDS Church leader, George Romney, stated: "If we [as LDS Church members] are supposed to be the leaven in the Great Loaf, we should remember that leavening doesn't work well in clumps!" His point was that the "high moral values" of the Church in general, and the individual membership in particular, can have little positive effect upon the world if they remain concentrated in the Mormon enclaves in the West. Instead of telling St. George newcomers to "love it or leave it," perhaps LDS Southern-Utahns should take their "high moral values" to where they don't (presumably) now exist-instead of keeping them here, in presumed abundance.

An unfortunate tendency among Mormons is to equate abstinence from "Nick Teen and Al K. Hall" as the proof and substance of their "high moral values". The requirement to be tolerant of the values, beliefs, and morals of others, as espoused within Joseph Smith's 11th Article of Faith ("We.... let them worship how, whom, or what they may."), is conveniently forgotten or ignored. Instead of telling St. George newcomers to "love it or leave it," perhaps LDS Southern-Utahns should take their "high moral values" to where they don't (presumably) now exist, (and are therefore, greatly needed)-instead of keeping them here, in presumed abundance!

If the "Olde Guarde" LDS population of Southern Utah had wanted to retain their privilege of acting as "Lords of the Manor" (and enjoying the peace and poverty that existed here 35 years ago), they should never have invited the retirees and snowbirds from the more prosperous (e.g. progressive thinking) regions of the US, here in the first place. Welcome to the real world you are trying so desperately to ignore, folks--you forfeited your place in the "Manor House" when you invited the rest of the world, and its' lovely green stuff, in!