Reply #25: William Clark, right?

[Dogmudgeon]

He lied his way through Washington. It took his employment at the power plant -- the plant's and the NRC's investigatory staff -- to finally expose his lies. Tom Junod broke the story, and broke it well.

But the press had an opportunity to put the words "nuclear" and "assassin" together in the same sentence. It sells papers and magazines.

My question is: why don't we investigate people this well when they are seeking Pentagon clearance, as Clark did, and got?

Junod's poetic writing in the quote, though, is simply 9-11 fear mongering. Funny, but when Bush does it, it's the nexus of politics and terror. But since Junod did a good job on the story, it can be forgiven. :)

Indeed, "proliferation" -- the wrong people getting access to nuclear material -- is the big problem with nuclear energy. But in a few short years, it will become downright cheap to get uranium from seawater or coal dust. "Exotically"-initiated nuclear reactions (e.g., laser or maser kindled) are also becoming easier to achieve; soon, a full-scale fission chain reaction may be possible without even using radionuclides.

What then?

The genie is out of the bottle; do we seize it by the neck, or cower in fear?

--p!