To: ggersh who wrote (50886 ) 4/7/2013 11:09:35 AM From: maceng2 Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71456 The Saddam factor was and is negligible or non existent. A figment in the minds of Bush and Blair and other warmongers of the time. Fukashima looks to be about the same order of problem as Chernobyle, which was bad and I think lead to the deaths in the order of 10's of thousands. Its data that not many are interested in researching. There is a nice nuclear fallout release comparison on the Wikipedia Sellafield accident site. That place has such a reputation they changed its name. en.wikipedia.org Mind you, notice its only the atmospheric estimates, not the chit that's been dumped into the sea. If you were a kid in the 1960's there were some serious amounts of nuclear fall out from above ground testing. The amounts generated were far worse than all the nuclear accidents then or since. en.wikipedia.org pinktentacle.com en.wikipedia.org This supposedly never happened (1958) when I was just a few years old living nearby. In May 1960, a group of scientists working at the atomic weapons research establishment (AWRE) at Aldermaston detected, almost by chance, highly radioactive readings near the establishment which could not possibly be explained by its emissions. They used readings taken from laurel leaves, which are highly accurate indicators of uranium contamination, and discovered that the amount of uranium-235 to the west of Aldermaston was one hundred times greater than could be accounted for by AWRE's discharges. When plotted, their readings showed hourglass-shaped contours of radioactive contamination centering around the runway at Greenham Common www10.antenna.nl If there was a problem, it never got fixed and the chit is still blowing in the wind today.