Karen Maute is against uranium mining. Who Knew?! (I edited the word in the headline to make it family-friendly, but you know what I wanted to say.)
Writer: Just who are VUI’s investors? (Thanks, R&B. I never would have known that was a letter to the editor if you hadn’t put “Writer” in that headline. Sheesh.)
Let me get this straight. Karen Maute has a problem with one person (who was cleared to vote by legal counsel) out of a whole committee voting to fund a study of uranium mining. Let’s assume that Maute’s contention actually has some value (bear with me, people). The motion still passes unanimously even with the abstention. Big Frickin’ Deal.
Later in the letter, Karen Maute delivers this piece of Front Page Breaking Headline News…
I don’t believe there is any way uranium can be “safely” mined.
STOP THE PRESSES! 🙄
But wait, this letter’s still got enough for a Bucket-O-Irony award! In Bad-Nancy-Grace style, she asks one two three four five open-ended semi-accusatory questions trying to bring ethical doubts about potential situations and then gives absolutely no answers to those questions. That would be because she has absolutely no idea of the answers, but who needs facts when you can scare the hell out of people who don’t think for themselves? If you haven’t noticed by now, scaring the hell out of the people who don’t think for themselves is the one of the key tactics of the anti-uranium mining crowd.
What do you know? Karen Maute is against poisoning the environment, yet she has no problem poisoning the well.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Southside Central. Southside Central said: Karen Maute's against uranium mining!. Who Knew?! – New OpinionCentral at http://bit.ly/c9R2ft […]
Thank you Southside Central for posting my letter. However, the Register and Bee edited it (and not very well) so I’m sending you the original. Next time I’ll include you in the mailings. You might also be interested in posting minutes of the April 15 TIC meeting found at Hopefully you’ll be at the TIC meeting tomorrow and can report on that first hand. That’s probably more productive than critiquing letters to the editor.
Editorial,
According to Anita Kumar of the Washington Post, as of January of 2008, thirty one people had invested in Virginia Uranium, Inc. “several of whom live in the area”. Some of the investors are known to the public; many are not. Investments of citizens are not normally of concern. However, if citizens are appointed to public committees and are allowed to determine policy that will positively affect their personal investments, there is a problem.
Uranium mining is currently prohibited in Virginia. Virginia will be forever changed if uranium mining, milling and resulting waste disposal from these processes occur. So too, will the bottom line for the investors in Virginia Uranium, Inc. They will directly financially benefit if uranium mining occurs.
Who are these investors? How many are in public positions enabling them to influence pro-mining policy? Do VUI investors sit on the TIC, the VA Coal and Energy Commission, other boards, commissions, bureaus, and agencies that will decide Virginia’s fate regarding uranium mining and milling? Do you think they will fairly represent and protect you and your interests or have their personal investment as a priority? How many elected officials are currently making decisions based on the uranium industry’s promises?
It was recently learned that one of the local investors sits on the Tobacco Indemnification Commission and endorsed $200,000 for a Virginia Coal and Energy Commission’s socio-economic study. Is that appropriate? He could have, and most likely should have, recused himself. The only purpose his vote served was to further erode public confidence in the uranium study process being pushed by the VA Coal and Energy Commission (which is already in the toilet).
Politics, not science, will determine if uranium is mined in Virginia. There is no way we’ll be “safely” mined and everybody knows it. Why are we continuing with this expensive, divisive and corrupt game? I imagine that answer can be calculated in the billions… by the investors.
Karen B. Maute
You don’t speak for me. I have no idea whether uranium can be safely mined. That’s why I support an independent study and I will be glad to endorse whatever conclusion comes out of it.
On the other hand, you and your group continue to use scare tactics to terrify the weak-minded people who are easily influenced by flowery rhetoric. Now, you and your group are attempting the logical fallacy of “poisoning the well” in trying to cast doubts into unknown situations.
This issue is becoming your white whale.
Bruce Hedrick
Can anyone that thinks Uranium mining is safe please tell me where the PCB’S we have in the Roanoke(Staunton)and Dan rivers along with parts of Buggs Island lake came from ?
I don’t think uranium mining is safe. I just don’t know, that’s why I’m waiting for the independent study.
The answer to your question is probably “Monsanto”, by the way.
I was at the meeting in Brookneal a few years ago and the experts there weren’t sure either.
Bruce do a poll on the 5th district GOP candidates.
We need the jobs this project will bring; we don’t need the scare tactics!!
VaPatriot how many jobs will it bring and how long will they last ?
What independent study does the pro uranium group refer too?
The only independent study is Virginia Beach!
The NAS study paid for by VUI, funnel thru VA Tech, pushed by the State of VA, is not an independent study because the VUI Investors are sitting on different boards influencing the state leaders.
Plus VUI has lobbyist giving monies to VA leaders!
So VUI/NAS is not an independent study, it really is a joke.
The VUI/NAS study could be truly independent if the State of VA makes an announcement that they are not supporting this study, they will stop a state school funnel of moneis and will pay for their own study and not with TIC monies.
Bruce, you do know whether uranium can be mined “safely” here. It cannot. In fact, it is not mined “safely” anywhere on Earth. Mining is not a safe industry. All mining carries risks, both to the miners and the surrounding communities. The only difference is that uranium mining poses health and environmental risks which many people are not willing to take. Myself included. I am anti-mining, and proud of it.
No, I don’t. You don’t either. I respect your opinion on uranium mining because you haven’t gone around trying to scare the hell out of the people like the “HELL NO WE WON’T GLOW OMGWTFBBQ WE’LL BE RADIOACTIVE FOR ELEVENTY-THREE BAJILLION YEARS!” group.
You’ve set up a strawman by mentioning that “Mining is not a safe industry.” You’re right because mining anything isn’t as safe as making cotton balls. However, that’s not what I’m talking about. I am talking about “Is it safe enough to the environment to pull the uranium out of the ground using today’s updated technologies?”. I don’t know that answer. You don’t know that answer. Nobody does right now, hence the study.
Here’s the challenge. If the study says “Uranium mining is too risky”, I’ll gladly agree and let’s keep that glowing stuff buried. However, if the study says “It’s safe enough that you’ll never notice it.”, will you change your mind?
If you haven’t figured it out by now, I’m only firmly against the bullshit scare tactics that this group of anti-uranium mining people have done so far.