1. This is crazy! Is there ANY way I/we can corral pro-nuclear blogs to issue a mass counterweight by email or interview requests to CNN or whoever? CNN (and PBS/NPR) slyly know that the damage to nuclear energy’s image is set and done in favor their coy anti-nuclear leanings in assertions like this, even if they deign for a shallow correction, much less retraction because they’re smug of zero-retaliation. This wasn’t any “misinformation” but a deliberate slur on nuclear energy. It just seems like the whole nuclear industry and nuclear professional organizations are gelded up the navel when it comes to the moxie and guts to swing back at the media and anti-nuke groups! Trying to say a ten person outfit like “Puppy Rescue” can afford all those cable PSAs in metro-NYC for their cause but the prestige and coffers of nuclear industry/professional groups can’t even match them squat for public nuclear education? The other side must lol’ing themselves into hernias. I just can’t blame Arnie and Helen and CNN & Co. for mugging their way over nuclear energy like this totally unrebuffed because this is truly a case of one’s efforts getting all the public respect and support it deserves.

    James Greenidge
    Queens NY

  2. It appears that CNN, like the New York Times, employes the heavy hand of censorship in the comments on their website. Doesn’t look like your comment is going to make it through, Rod. Too bad.

    Eh … CNN has sucked for years. All of their real talent left long ago for better pastures; although some of the fake-talent rejects — e.g., Christiane Amanpour — have since returned.

    The remaining group of amateurs left at the network spends too much of their time trying to be P.C. (or plagiarizing The New Yorker) to do a decent job at reporting the news. In case you haven’t noticed, support for nuclear power is not P.C.

    Seriously, who is surprised with this CNN piece?

    1. @Brian Mays

      The ‘smoking gun’ series is not designed to include new, surprising revelations. It is designed to provide documentation for my theory that people and organizations with financial interests in fossil fuels and industrial scale alternative energy projects are the primary force of support that enables antinuclear activity to be “Politically Correct” (PC, as you say.)

      There is a reason for every seemingly illogical activity and it is often hidden financial motives.

      It is supremely illogical for people who are concerned about the environment and who fight against climate change to also fear nuclear energy and fight against its safe and effective use.

      Therefore, I assume that they are either duped – in the case of some of the idealistic people I meet at public meetings – or they are well aware of reality. In the case of them being aware of reality, I believe they are pretending to think that there is something wrong with nuclear energy. I put most well-positioned and well-educated antinuclear activists and their friends in politics, business and the media in that category.

  3. Rod, I think the addition of a link in your comment may be the reason it is not making it through to the board. I have before posted long comments with links to my sources and have not ever seen them approved. If I remove the links it is posted right away. The link forces a moderator to have to review it which probably never happens at CNN.

    It is a silly system which promotes people just posting anything they want without having to back it up.

  4. Tried George’s suggestion (thanks for that and your persistent CNN posts, George), and may have broken through, citing Rods comment. Couldn’t have said it any better myself anyway.

    Let’s see if it sticks, on the network that thinks Michio Kaku is an expert on nuclear energy.

  5. It seems my comment about Titisee in Germany didn’t go unnoticed. The main reason why the death toll is so heavy is that it was a factory for disabled workers.

Comments are closed.

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

Similar Posts