Skip to main content

View Diary: Hanford's Radwaste Tanks Leaking & Explosive, Waste Treament Plant Unsafe: Whistleblowers Vindicated (159 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  True...and though the diarist has done a pretty (0+ / 0-)

    good job (granted coming from his/her personal bias) in this diary the use of Ms. Donna Busche's lawsuit in terms of being a pure "whistleblower" issue is way off base.

    Wonders are many, but none so wonderful as man.

    by Morgan Sandlin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 02:53:26 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  You haven't explained how. If you want (0+ / 0-)

      to inject some facts into the discussion, you should... Inject some facts. Just saying something is "offense" doesn't really advance the conversation.

      •  Just because someone has filed a lawsuit.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        doesn't give substance to a standing as a whistleblower who has been retaliated against.

        It is my understanding that Ms. Busche has not been fired, demoted, etc., etc.. Her suit is based upon what she believes might happen.

        Wonders are many, but none so wonderful as man.

        by Morgan Sandlin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:09:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You're an idiot. Bechtel has been pulling (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          this poisonous corrupt crap for at least 40 years. I'll cite you a source if it's still in print: The Seven Sisters-the Giants of the Multinational Oil Companies. Bechtel--the grandpappy of Halliburton, etc.  T and R!!

          Some people make u want to change species! --ulookarmless, quoted w/his permission: RIP good man.

          by orlbucfan on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:17:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm an idiot? (0+ / 0-)

            Whilst you are giving reason as to why you failed debate in high school I'm speaking as someone who meets these individuals over cocktail parties...and I'm one of Ms. Busche's biggest fans.

            Try harder next time...or at least try to think.

            Wonders are many, but none so wonderful as man.

            by Morgan Sandlin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:55:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Haha. You're accusing the diarist of failing to be (3+ / 0-)

              objective, but your analysis is based on cocktail party chatter? I don't think your exactly hitting any home runs yourself in the debate department. That you don't buy the terms of her lawsuit based on chatter doesn't actually prove that the text of the lawsuit is without merit. And, as I say above, the lawsuit is irrelevant to her status as a whistleblower.

              •  You've touched on the heart of the issues (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sandino, FishOutofWater
                ...your analysis is based on cocktail party chatter
                This is the problem.  Very Serious People run the world from cocktail parties and look down their noses at the hoi polloi over whom they rule.  

                When they're not schmoozing, they're signing lucrative deals for themselves and screwing the rest of us over.  That's just how the world works.

                In the case of the nuclear industry, it just happens to be especially evil since it is ultimately what will probably end up killing the planet.

                The meek shall inherit the Earth that the stupid destroyed.

                by CharlieHipHop on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 07:36:17 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  ...and Mr/Mrs orlbucfan...might I suggest that.... (0+ / 0-)

            before you call out someone as an "idiot" you may think of how that may brand yourself.

            I will not be so rude as to think of you as an "idiot", rather I'm more comfortable as thinking of you as a low-level, knee-jerking, common thinker who simply can't climb past the first level of thought and insist on clinging to the most rudimentary intellectual engagement.

            Good luck with that :)

            Wonders are many, but none so wonderful as man.

            by Morgan Sandlin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 08:35:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  She says they were suppressing information. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sandino, FishOutofWater

          If she made that information public regardless, of course she is a whistleblower. That's pretty straightforward. Sure, we don't know that they were "working to fire" her. You don't know that they weren't. That has to come out in the lawsuit.

          I have no idea what you think a whistleblower would be if not someone who makes suppressed information public. Whether they fired her or were working to fire her, she's still a whistleblower. Your argument is a red herring, and it's a red herring based on presumption.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site