Oh, Lord, here we go again. "The isotope in question has about the equivalent strength of a couple of X-ray snapshots." That's just plain untrue. It's also untrue, of course, to say that irradiated food becomes radioactive. The truth is probably somewhere in between. Here are a few points to think about.

1. The planned irradiator for Hawaii was going to use a dose of radiation that would sterilize fruit flies, which is far below the dose that would kill bacteria. The planned dose of approximately 100,000 rad (1 kGy) was equivalent to about 2 million chest x-rays.
2. Ionizing radiation generates so-called "unique radiolytic products" in food. Despite what the FDA and WHO have stated, good scientific studies have not been done to demonstrate that these URPs have no adverse effect on health, and there have been a number of studies in reputable scientific journals (ignored by the FDA) raising serious questions about adverse health effects of eating irradiated food. These effects include an increased rate of chromosomal breakage, increased mortality (in animal studies), and loss of essential nutrients. Here's an article from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists that reviews some of this data, and here is a list of references to scientific studies on the health hazards of irradiated foods.
3. One of the reasons there is such a big push for irradiation is the skyrocketing incidence of foodborne illness. And the main reason for that is the deplorably unsanitary conditions on many big factory farms and in feedlots, slaughterhouses, and meat packing plants, among others. When cows are given feed that includes feces, when the pace of the killing and processing is so fast the inspectors can't even hope to keep up, and when past-dated meat is routinely relabled in supermarkets as "fresh", it's no surprise that there is increased contamination.
4. If you the consumer buy irradiated meat and you store and prepare it carelessly because it's "safe", the small percentage of bacteria not killed by irradiation (the strongest ones!) will multiply quickly enough to make you just as sick. If you want to avoid getting sick, prepare and cook your food properly. Don't count on the nuclear industry to keep you healthy!
5. The meat industry wants to be taken off the hook (so to speak) by having somebody irradiate their dirty meat, and the nuclear industry wants to build lots of little irradiators to take the place of all the nuclear power plants that are aging dangerously. It's a neat little partnership.
6. Recent studies suggest a need to rethink so-called "safe" levels of radiation. A 1997 study from UCLA showed a higher incidence of cancer among workers exposed to levels of radiation considered by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to be "safe"--including exposures to workers and to the community surrounding a nuclear facility.
7. Irradiation facilities themselves are potentially dangerous. The NRC website (www.nrc.gov) has lots of information about accidents and malfunctions at irradiation facilities, some of which have led to serious injury and death to workers, and numerous instances of sloppy techniques, mechanical breakdowns, crooked inspectors, and failure to follow safety procedures, leading to conditions that were dangerous for workers and the surrounding community.

I don't claim to have all the answers. It's true that there is a lot of hysteria, and much misinformation on both sides. It's clear to me that the real risk is still unknown, and much of the known risk is being ignored or downplayed by the people who are pushing irradiation, who stand to make a great deal of money if they sell the public on it. But that, of course, is just my opinion.

Aloha,
Mark