Submitted by Frank Nevis, May 18, 2007 06:30

I have lived in Russia for more than a decade. So I'm quite informed about what's going on within the borders of former USSR and countries adjoining them. That's the specifics of my job.

Chernobyl was not a very poorly restructured military installation. Military was involved, of course. But it was definitely not mismanaged. Russian science is very good. And such projects as space exploration or nuclear technologies have always gained much support from the government. Chernobyl was a mistake of operators. Today, a chance of such a mistake is highly diminished, but it exists (despite computer control, anyway, the final decision is up to humans) and it's not comparable to the risks, were such a mistake to occur.

About mining project in Romania. Local residents of the place, where mining would have taken place, were ones outraged the most. Just check the facts, ok?

About genetically modified products. I'm not aware how these issues are managed in other countries, but in Russia medical researches about potential hazards to human's health have been classified until recently by the major Russian institute working in this field. Why classify? By the way, independent research on mice showed that mice fed with GM-products suffered significant deviations in organism's development, compared to mice fed with organic food. It's also on the web.

Definitely, Greenpeace is exaggerating sometimes. But at least, they are very honest in what they're doing. Not gonna say that about Patrick Moore. He is not an environmentalist, but a wise use adherent using his Greenpeace history as something that gives him more credibility. And by the way, you CAN find his name at Greenpeace's site, in the section of organization's history. Look here: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/about/history/founders.

Please, check the facts. This article pretends to be investigative one. But even for me, who is not very well aware about Greenpeace (I'm specializing in ecology - yes, but not in Greenpeace), it's obvious that you made this article on the fly. Imagine now what would happen if someone interested particularly in Greenpeace came here - he would bash your article at the double.

Cheers,
Frank

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.