Dear Lexi,

You make the observation that

"What amuses me is that Shadow Minister says
he is for the freedom of speech - yet he won't have
a bar of anything that disagrees with his political
leanings and is very quick to assign labels to people.
I guess that speaks for itself."

The point about having opinions, and the right to express them is that nobody, you or me or anybody, has to 'have a bar of anything that disagrees with [our] political leanings'. SM has a right to his, you have a right to yours, I have a right to mine - and we all should have the right to express these views, offending each other mightily in the process.

We all equally have the right to criticise and condemn views other than our own, and to offend the holders of those views by doing so. Well, currently we do have those rights, and we did even in the days when Howard was 'Silencing Dissent'.

Which we don't have to read either, by the way: we have the right to stay ignorant, and nobody has the right to force any book, the Koran, the Bible, Dale Carnegie's 'How to Win friends and Influence People', any volume of Harry Potter, or Eliot's Middlemarch, onto anybody. Maybe their loss, but that's how it goes.

I think I read a brief review of that pap you refer to, but the empty, overblown arguments of Manne and Hamilton and other children put me off going any further.

Cheers,

Joe

Hi Bonmot,

I don't know anything about nuclear power, the different generations of technological improvements, etc. But I guess if AGW is such a big deal, it is certainly something we have to think seriously about, if we are to be genuinely Gaia-oriented.

That should stir up a hornet's nest. Or maybe just a lady-bird's nest.

Obviously, nuclear power stations should never have been built anywhere near fault-lines -what the hell were the Japanese thinking ? But Chernobyl was what ? First or second generation technology, already out-of-date in 1986 ? Fukushima was a third-generation reactor, built fifty foot from the bloody sea ? Really, what WERE they thinking ?

France and Sweden and Germany don't seem to have had any major accidents with their nuclear power stations; perhaps they are fourth generation systems ? Those countries are not known for seismic activity, so that factor is in their favour. Is there a fifth generation system ? Are there systems which use something other than uranium or plutonium, thorium maybe ? i.e. which are even safer than the French/Swedish/German systems ?

Is any of the evil CO2 put into the atmosphere in the construction of such nuclear power generation systems, as it is with solar and wind power components manufacture ?

And what has been the cost of nuclear power generation in those European countries, to consumers ? Is it greater than power generation by other means ?

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Shadow Minister,

You really need to read what you post.

You posted this reply to Poirot:

"I have never spruiked myself as fair and balanced..."

Really?

The following sentence should give you a hint:

"I do however, like to refer to opinions and news articles from
respected journalists and commentators. (Respected by whom?).

And that's
not spruiking yourself as "fair and balanced."

Lexi,

No it is not. Do you have a problem with the English language?

I use respected commentators to support my views. This means that my views are solidly supported with facts, very often far from the Labor view point. I think that Labor and Greens are incompetent, dishonest idiots. This is a long way from balanced between labor and liberal, however, I have facts to back up my view point,which is far more substantial than the dross dished up by those from the left.

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

You absolutely have the right to stay ignorant.
That is your choice - no argument from me on that
score.

And I fully agree that a healthy, vital society is not
one in which we all agree. However it is one in which
those who disagree can do so with honour and respect
for other people's opinions - without stooping to
personal insults - such as "Comrade Conroy," or
"Juliar." Without personal commitment to the
atributes of fair play and integrity, this country is
in grave danger as malice and intolerance stalk our
society.

There is a tendency on some people's parts to think
that their way is the right way and that people who
disagree with them are "bad," or are given other labels
such as "Lefties," et cetera. (I used to think that a
"Leftie," was someone who was left-handed).

What would be refreshing would be productive discussions,
instead of constant finger-pointing and criticisms.
A great deal must change before that happens. It would
require a serious re-thinking on how we might organise
ourselves in more co-operative mutually respectful
ways. We would have to reject "us" versus "them,"
name-calling, labelling, et cetera. And for some sadly, that
would be a big ask.

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

Shadow Minister has just proved my point (again).

According to him what comes from his sources are
"facts," but what comes from the "Left,"
(there's that "L" word repeated), is of course "dross."

Dear oh dear!