Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PamW

(1,825 posts)
25. Reading Comprehension Problem???
Mon Jun 24, 2013, 08:01 PM
Jun 2013

suffragette,

Do you have a reading comprehension problem??

I stated in a previous post:

When I say "Hanford"; I mean the US Dept. of Energy weapons production facility.

When I say that, I'm telling you what I mean when I say "Hanford".

The word "Hanford" is over loaded, there are multiple meanings of the word "Hanford".

One could mean the production facility, or one could mean the site.... The only way to be unambiguous is to write out the whole name of the facility every time; but that gets cumbersome. So I use the word "Hanford" to mean the production facility. Anywhere you see me say "Hanford", please mentally substitute the full name "US Dept. of Energy Hanford nuclear weapons production facility".

I told you in the previous post what MY shorthand definition was for "Hanford".

Now you say that the State of Washington disagrees with me.

I'm giving you MY shorthand definition. I'm telling you what I mean by the word "Hanford" out of the multiple meanings.

Put your brain in gear and THINK - how does the State of Washington have anything to do with MY personal naming convention??

People here post some of the most ill-considered, and ill-thought out posts; but yours takes the cake.

The State of Washington disagrees indeed!

I'm telling you which one of multiple definitions of the word that I use for my convention, and the State of Washington may have another.

However, I'm telling you what I mean so that you can understand future posts.

Belay that; you've proved you probably will NEVER understand if you can't understand the previous post.

PamW

Fully half from russian nukes? RobertEarl Jun 2013 #1
Don't doubt it; believe it - it's TRUE PamW Jun 2013 #9
Hi Pam RobertEarl Jun 2013 #10
Not half of total PamW Jun 2013 #11
So you proved wt was wrong RobertEarl Jun 2013 #16
Not odd at all - different parts of the government PamW Jun 2013 #18
How much $$ do they need? RobertEarl Jun 2013 #19
Answers to questions PamW Jun 2013 #20
What about Columbia Generating Station? That's the operational nuclear plant on the Hanford site. suffragette Jun 2013 #21
What is "Hanford" PamW Jun 2013 #22
The State of Washington disagrees with you suffragette Jun 2013 #23
Reading Comprehension Problem??? PamW Jun 2013 #25
Compared to Pandora's Promise, the Breakthrough Institute and the nuclear industry writ large... kristopher Jun 2013 #2
This is what the corporate media uniformly do cprise Jun 2013 #3
We've shot ourselves in the foot on Iran. wtmusic Jun 2013 #4
There is no inspection regime that is good enough cprise Jun 2013 #5
I guess that's my point wtmusic Jun 2013 #6
This is a nuclear problem cprise Jun 2013 #7
You do know that it's impossible to build a weapon with reactor grade fuel, don't you? wtmusic Jun 2013 #14
"We need...a roadmap for guarding against weapons proliferation" kristopher Jun 2013 #8
100% WRONG as ALWAYS PamW Jun 2013 #12
What a fucking flake. kristopher Jun 2013 #15
Nothing of substance, I note PamW Jun 2013 #17
Ha! oldhippie Jun 2013 #24
They argeed. PamW Jun 2013 #13
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Memo to Fox News: Nuclear...»Reply #25