Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: willcousa who wrote (240694)	3/21/2002 6:00:05 PM
From: joseph krinsky	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I'm sure the article IS slanted. The articles that are pro nukes are slanted also. I doubt if there are any articles anywhere that explain it in laymens terms that go into it in depth enough so that people can make reasoned decisions about it. We're not supposed to have the information. LOL LOL. The U.S. govt/military IMO had an agenda to further nuke power, so they did it that way. Had they an agenda to not do it that way, they would have been promoting NG instead, or coal, or whatever, in their articles. There's always "unknown" reasons why things are done or not done. For example---Why isn't Fla drilling for oil and gas? They drill in texas, louisiana, alaska, mississippi, etc etc etc. Why is fla so special? The other states have shorelines also. The drilling has been going on for a lot of years and I don't read about terrible ecological disasters in any of those states. Forget exxon valdez, it wasn't due to drilling, it was a shipwreck.