Nothing much new here, other than the information on foaming and smoking drums that were apparently sent from LANL to WIPP.
http://www.abqjournal.com/570812/news/final-report-on-wipp-leak-blames-lanl-doe.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
38 comments:
"I just want to make it very clear that I had nothing to do with this mess. You can be be confident, however, that LANS will be vigilant about hunting down the low level culprits and making them pay dearly."
- Charlie "WINNING" McMillian
How the heck is LANS keeping the LANL contract.
Past performance has to be a heavily weighted evaluation criteria in the upcoming RFP.
"It's just the day-in and day-out safety and security issues at Los Alamos"
Dr. Victor H. Reis, Former Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs, DP-1 U.S. Department of Energy, 1997
April 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM
As has been pointed out repeatedly to April 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Reis never sad that. Either provide a citation or stop the lying.
4:40 is a born liar.
April 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM
Vic Reis also said that the privatization of the labs has been a failure.
Vic actually DID say that.
As has been pointed out repeatedly to April 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Reis never sad that. Either provide a citation or stop the lying.
April 18, 2015 at 5:14 PM
Who cares whether or not Reis said it, fact is, it's a true statement.
Who cares whether or not Reis said it, fact is, it's a true statement.
April 21, 2015 at 5:23 PM
No, it's an opinion. If it were Vic Reis' opinion it might be noteworthy. Anyone else's maybe not. These days, no one understands the difference between "truth" or "fact" or "opinion." Too bad for the state of public discourse and the intelligence thereof.
5:14 pm, I understand he did say that. Either provide a citation stating that he never said that, or stop the lying.
I understand he did say that.
April 22, 2015 at 5:26 AM
Well, that certainly convinces me!
Yes, just as much as, "Reis never sad [sic] that".
It seems it should be much easier to substantiate that he actually said it than to prove he didn't. It is usually the case that the burden of proof lies with the person who claims something exists, rather than the person who claims it does not.
Reis never said such a thing. Do not put words into his mouth.
Reis never said such a thing. Do not put words into his mouth.
April 25, 2015 at 9:11 PM
Why are you just perpetuating the nonsense about this? Shut up about it, already.
"Why are you just perpetuating the nonsense about this? Shut up about it, already.
April 25, 2015 at 9:25 PM"
Because what Reis did or did not say almost 20 years ago, or what context the alleged statement was made would be a huge game changer, that is why it is brought up over and over again.
April 26, 2015 at 8:18 AM
OCD much?
If you claim, "Reis never said such a thing", the burden is upon you to back up the statement with evidence, since "never" is exclusive and even one instance of saying "such a thing" under his breath in private is enough to refute it. On the other hand, all I need to say is, "Reis probably did say such a thing", and you are hosed, toast, utterly vanquished, because "probably" qualifies the statement and allows me a victory whether or not he actually said it.
So, "Reis probably did say such a thing".
So, "Reis probably did say such a thing".
April 26, 2015 at 1:24 PM
So now you go from a direct quote to "probably." Wow. Well, the only possible response is to note that if your "probability" is, say, .0001, then both statements are correct. Happy now?
"So, "Reis probably did say such a thing"."
No more likely Reis said something competently different which was totally misinterpreted by some people wishing to hear something else because they need to hear something else. In any case knowing Reis we would have actually said the opposite.
Let us summarize the probability of what Reis may or may not have said. (1) Reis never said such a thing. (2) What Reis meant to say was misinterpreted. (3) Reis said that but has changed his mind. (4) Reis did say that but it was just an exaggeration to make a long forgotten point. (5) Reis said that and still means that. So by the laws of probability there is only 20% chance that this was said and accurately quoted. I think we can all agree that we should bring this up again since it is most likely not representative of the the truth. Case closed.
April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM
Did you mean "should NOT bring this up again"?? Proofread. Proofread. Or risk destroying your own point.
April 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM
The winner, ding, ding, ding....
(5) Reis said that and still means that.
"The winner, ding, ding, ding....
(5) Reis said that and still means that.
April 29, 2015 at 5:12 AM"
This simply does not sound like something Reis would ever say. It does sound like something a delusional person blinded by their own agenda would claim someone said to bolster their agenda.
Reis is pretty direct, and this sounds exactly like something he would say. I'm gonna go with (5).
If someone heard him say it personally, but it didn't get recorded or written down, it is the same as if he never said it. If it did get recorded or written down, it is up to the people who claim he said it to produce a source.
" If someone heard him say it personally, but it didn't get recorded or written down, it is the same as if he never said it. If it did get recorded or written down, it is up to the people who claim he said it to produce a source.
April 29, 2015 at 8:46 AM"
There will never be a source produced because it was never said.
There will never be a source for him not ever having said that, either.
Reis is pretty direct, and this sounds exactly like something he would say. I'm gonna go with (5).
April 29, 2015 at 6:57 AM
Funny Reis gave a talk at LANL lest than a year ago and never said such a thing.
Funny, I was talking to my wife the other day, and I didn't say "I do".
Are you saying Reis actually said it, but it was a one-time scripted ceremonial thing?
No, pointing out that once you say something, you usually don't have to keep repeating it especially a decade or more later.
No, saying something a long time ago and not repeating ever again likely means you never meant to say it in the first place or that you the situation has changed and you no longer believe it. Of course the other possibility is that he never said this. Again if you know Reis he would not say such a thing. He makes very pinpointed comments toward particulars, not vague sweeping statements.
Of course the other possibility is that he never said this.
April 30, 2015 at 5:47 PM
Again, to belabor the obvious, if no one can bring a citation or source for the comment he supposedly made, then HE DIDN'T SAY IT!! How is this even arguable??
Well lets belabor it a bit more. If no one can bring a citation or source supporting the claim that he did not say it, then he might have said it.
And April 30, 2015 at 9:53 PM might have to install a glass belly button to see where he is going.
"Well lets belabor it a bit more. If no one can bring a citation or source supporting the claim that he did not say it, then he might have said it.
April 30, 2015 at 9:53 PM"
The 9:53PM poster said he was a delusional weirdo, and that he lives in his mothers basement spending all day watching reruns of Gilligan's Island, and that he likes being cruel to flower pots. I cannot think of the exact post he said this and since I do not have the source than we can conclude that he may very well has said this.
And it might even be true!
Post a Comment