On May 17, 11:27=A0am, Vngelis <meberr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 16, 3:34 pm, Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 2008-05-16 00:23 +0100, Vngelis allegedly wrote:
>
> > > Sichuan earthquake: Update on dams and nuclear sites
>
> > > As we told you earlier, there had been very real fears that the
> > > Zipingba Dam, 6 miles upstream from the devastated city of
Dujiangyan,=
> > > was displaying "extremely dangerous" cracks. The People's Daily is
now=
> > > re****ting that the dam is "structurally stable and safe" following a
> > > full inspection.
>
> > > "The conclusion was reached after a panel of experts, led by Jiao
> > > Yong, Vice Minister of Water Resources, rushed to the site and made
a
> > > thorough inspection of the 156-meter-high facility."
>
> > > Nevertheless, despite official reassurances, fears persist over
other
> > > dam projects in the area with The Associated Press still re****ting
> > > that hundreds of structures could be at risk.
>
> > > "The National Development Reform Commission, China's top economic
> > > planning body, said the earthquake had damaged 391 dams. It said two
> > > of the dams were large ones, 28 were medium-sized and the rest were
> > > small ones."
>
> > > Landslides have re****tedly caused rivers to be blocked in Qingchuan
> > > County, creating an enormous lake, with Xinhua quoting Li Hao, the
> > > county's Communist Party chief, as saying: "The rising water could
> > > cause the mountains to collapse. We desperately need geological
> > > experts to carry out tests and fix a rescue plan". As the
> > > International Herald Tribune points out, "much depends on efforts to
> > > reduce the menacing pressure of water behind the dam walls", if
> > > further disaster is to be averted.
>
> > > In addition, The Guardian says that two hydropower stations in
Maoxian=
> > > County have been affected, although the extent of the damage is not
> > > yet clear. Meanwhile, Guangyuan and Mianyang, near the quake
> > > epicentre, house plants that help process plutonium for nuclear
arms,
> > > although the China Nuclear Engineering & Construction Cor****ation
> > > currently states that, despite some damage to buildings in the area,
> > > there are no major concerns at this time regarding nuclear material.
>
> > Nostradamus-tactic. Guess widly and as much as you can, some of it
might=
> > turn out true.
> > Which is why you can't emphasize often enough that science isn't about
> > the results, but about the *method*.
>
> > >http://shanghaiist.com/2008/05/15/zipingba_dam_st.php
>
> > Sic! Those lapdogs really hate it when competing countries have their
> > own sources of energy...
>
> > --
> > DF.
> > in the FROM address from "invalid" to "net"
>
> There is an economic war with China over the value of the Renmimbi and
> Burma has been under sanctions.
>
> These are the politics which lead to conflict.
>
> Walters and the state caps all argue =A0there is no conflict as
> capitalism is triumphant everywhere hence they dismiss weather war
> weaponry as ...conspiratorial
>
> Much in the same manner as they alibi the 'war on terror' by
> presenting Osama as being real...
> vngelis- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, no, not exactly. The fact that there are like maybe 2 workers
states anywhere in the world (Cuba and N.Korea...the last one being
questionable btw) is not the point. In fact, it goes more our British
globalist Vngelis's POV that an "economic war" exists between China
and the US goes to China's capitalist nature more than anything else.
Of course if it was a 'war' you'd see the US treating China like N.
Korea or Burma, clearly something it does not do. US investment in
China has about doubled every year for 10 years and the Chinese are
tied to the US economy to the tune of 30% of their GNP, so hardly a
'war'. Ah...'competition' is what it is, similiarly to two rival
capitalist states.
David
|
