The Probligo answers the critics

of New Zealand's anti-nuke policy (and guarantees that I will not ignore him nor forget him; I'm sure that was his secret agenda).

A taste:

NZ's anti-nuclear stance has its genesis in the 1950's and early 60's. At that time Britain was testing at Christmas Island, the US was testing further north. I have strong recollections of the continuing reports of scientists testing Strontium 90 levels in both pasture and milk over a period of some 10 to 15 years. The conclusion was that there was clear connection between Sr90 and atmospheric testing. Those soil tests were resumed when the French moved their test programmes from the Sahara to Mururoa.

Why was this so important? Because our major markets had expressed concern and threatened to stop buying dairy product because of the potential Sr90 contamination. What started as a protective (it is not as bad as you think) study, became an early weapon against the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons. It formed a strong part of the case that NZ took to the World Court in the 1980's against atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons.

Read the whole thing. He felt it important enough to email it to me. This is my response [All right, so my response isn't brilliant.]:

It's a beautiful story.* Have you posted it yet? Never mind, I'll check before you can respond. It should be a copyrighted piece in a prestigious publication somewhere.

Got any room for a cheesehead and his family? You sound like you've got the right attitude.

*What right does any foreign government have to tell you what pollution you have to accept from them? Thumb away!

"Futility of isolationism?" I look forward to seeing you back that claim up.

But, as I said, the third freest (did I spell that right?) country--and the MOST pleasant, from what I hear--in the world MUST be accepted morally as an equal in all peaceful endeavors. I'll tell all five of my readers so. [A blogger said that? It must be false humility.]

Live long and prosper,
Al.

Update: Email from The Probligo
>The point really is, Al, that it is NOT a story. It is fact. It is a
>part of our history. I know it. I lived with it. I lived in it.
>
>Thanks for the kind words...
>
>Ka whakarongo, ko whawhai tonu matou
>Bob

My answer:
Now THAT was a case of hitting the send button before I thought better of it. Although, even now I can't think of a better way of phrasing what I was thinking. I suppose a complete revision would be in order.

What I think is beautiful, is the independence it shows. The pain of accepting the consequences of that independence--that standing for principle can end a great friendship (when the "friend" irrationally refuses to understand your side).