Archive for the ‘No nukes’ Category

As Nuclear War Danger Grows, NYC Conference Set For Feb. 28

December 21, 2014
General News 12/20/2014 at 12:54:47

By (about the author)     Permalink
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ;

; ; ; ; ; (more…) Add to My Group(s)

Become a Fan
(44 fans)
The growing threat of planet-wide nuclear extinction will bring some of the world’s leading scholars and activists to New York City for a two-day symposium Feb. 28-March 1, 2015.
This conference will be held at the New York Academy of Medicine, 1216 Fifth Ave., N.Y., NY, sponsored by The Helen Caldicott Foundation. The press is invited.[tag]

From Tsar Bomba mushroom cloud
Tsar Bomba mushroom cloud
(image by andy z)
Dr. Caldicott is an Australian physician, author, and anti-nuclear advocate who has founded several associations dedicated to opposing the use of nuclear power, depleted uranium munitions, and nuclear weapons. She has been awarded 21 honorary doctoral degrees and was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by Nobel Laureate Linus Pauling.
This symposium will be unique, linking the existential threat of Artificial Super Intelligence(ASI) with the current existential threat of nuclear war. It will examine a future in which intelligent machines could launch a nuclear war with no human input.
This threat is compounded as the escalating crisis in the Ukraine has significantly increased nuclear risk. According to Dr. Caldicott: “As the Cold War heats up again, the U.S. and Russia each maintain over one thousand nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert to be launched with a press of a button, increasing the risk of a global conflagration.”
“Between them,” she goes on to say, “the U.S. and Russia possess 93% of the world’s 16,400 nuclear weapons arsenal, a situation which is made worse by outdated equipment, negligence, poor maintenance, viruses, and hacking within the arsenals of both countries.”
Far from his past disarmament promises, “President Obama plans to earmark $1 trillion over the next 30 years to replace every nuclear weapon, missile, ship, submarine and plane.”
Among the Conference discussion topics are:
*How many times have we come close to nuclear war with Russia? What are the precipitating human and technological factors?
* What are the medical and environmental consequences of a limited or major nuclear war?
* How can we cure the present political pathology leading the world to the brink of nuclear war?
February 28, 2015
Session One
* Investigative journalist Eric Schlosser, author of “Command and Control,” who will discuss multiple nuclear accidents and near misses.
* Seth Baum, co-founder of the Global Catastrophic Risk Institute, will discuss the catastrophic risk of nuclear war.
* Max Tegmark, professor of physics at MIT, a Swedish-American cosmologist, will discuss the threat of artificial intelligence and of computers launching a nuclear war with no human input.
Session Two
* Hans Kristensen, of Silver Spring, Md., Director of the Nuclear Information Project of the Federation of American Scientists, will address the current size of nuclear arsenals.
* Bill Hartung, Center for International Policy of Washington, D.C., will discuss the inordinate power of the U.S. military-industrial complex.
* Greg Mello, Secretary and Executive Director of the Los Alamos Study Group, Albuquerque, N.M., will discuss the role and funding of the nuclear weapons laboratories.
* John Feffer, co-director of Foreign Policy in Focus at the Institute of Policy Studies, Washington, D.C., will compare military expenditures with global warming outlays.
* Bruce Gagnon, co-ordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, will speak on the dangerous, ongoing militarization of space.
Session Three
* Bob Alvarez, Senior Scholar for Nuclear Policy at the Institute of Policy Studies, Washington, D.C., will discuss lateral proliferation and describe how a small nuclear exchange could trigger a global holocaust.
March 1, 2015
Session Four
* Holly Barker, Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle, will discuss teratogenic and genetic pathology (congenital malformations) from U.S. nuclear testing in the Marshall Islands.
* Alan Robock, Distinguished Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J., will outline his pioneering work on Nuclear Autumn and Nuclear Winter.
* Lynn Eden, author of “Whole World on Fire: Organizations, Knowledge, and Nuclear Devastation” (Cornell Studies in Security Affairs), will discuss an issue the Pentagon has ignored: the holocaust of firestorms in the aftermath of nuclear war.
Session Five
* Janne Nolan, Research Professor, Elliott School of International Affairs, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C., will discuss the underlying psychological pathology of nuclear warriors.
* Mike Lofgren, former chief analyst for military spending at the Senate Budget Committee, will describe U.S. capitalism as it relates to tenuous nuclear situation.
* Susi Snyder, Nuclear Disarmament Programme Leader for IKV Pax Christi, Utrecht, The Netherlands, will discuss 2014 report “Don’t Bank on The Bomb.”
Session Six
* Hugh Gusterson, Professor of Anthropology and Sociology, George Mason University, Fairfax, Va., will describe his research after spending one year at the Los Alamos Labs.
* Robert Sheer, author of “Star Warriors” and Clinical Professor of Communications at the University of Southern California, will describe his research on the young men who do the research on nuclear weapons development at Lawrence Livermore Labs.
Session Seven
* Noam Chomsky, Institute Professor and Professor of Linguistics at MIT, Cambridge, Mass., will present the pathology within the present political system that could induce extinction.
Session Eight
* Tim Wright, Director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Geneva, Switzerland, will suggest some potential and exciting solutions.
* David Krieger, Founder and President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, Santa Barbara, Ca., about the law suit brought on behalf of the Marshall Islands.
* Helen Caldicott, President of The Helen Caldicott Foundation, will discuss an urgent prescription for survival.
The conference will begin at 9 a.m. sharp both days; check-in at 8 a.m. Press must register in advance with the Media Coordinator and must have current press credentials to be admitted.
The sessions will be livestreamed globally and broadcast by TUC radio, London.
The mission of the Helen Caldicott Foundation is to educate the public, the media, and public officials about the grave medical and environmental dangers inherent in nuclear power and the nuclear fuel chain, the manufacture and use of nuclear weapons, nuclear war, and climate change.
The Foundation is located at 131 Forest Hill Drive, Asheville, NC 28803. Mali Lightfoot is Executive Director. -30-


Sherwood Ross worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News and contributed a regular “Workplace” column for Reuters. He has contributed to national magazines and hosted a talk show on WOL, Washington, D.C. In the Sixties he was active as public (more…)

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Are you up for the challenge? Global ZERO

December 19, 2014

DECEMBER 19, 2014
Hey Osamu,

2014 was a big year for Global Zero. Hundreds of activists around the world took to the streets to remember the devastating impact of nuclear weapons. Thousands of Global Zero members wrote letters to President Obama, demanding he abandon the $1 trillion nuclear arsenal. And supporters like you helped save the Iran negotiations by calling on their Senators to support diplomacy.

Osamu, we’re not stopping there. We have an even bigger vision for 2015: creating a national network of rockstar activists, trained and ready to take action at a moment’s notice. And I want you to be the first to know.

This January, Global Zero is launching Action Corps, a top-notch organizing program for volunteers across the country.

Action Corps is our biggest grassroots initiative yet — and since you’re already a Global Zero member, I think you’d be a great candidate.Take a look at the Action Corps program description and apply online today!

To be clear, Global Zero’s Action Corps isn’t for just anyone. We’re looking for the country’s most talented, passionate advocates who share our bold vision of a world free of nuclear weapons. Are you up for the challenge?

Join the fight for zero, and apply to Action Corps today! I look forward to seeing your application.

Fight on,
Meredith Horowski
Deputy Campaign Director

Global Zero is the international movement for the elimination of all nuclear weapons.
title title title donate
Sent by GLOBAL ZERO | 1436 U Street NW, Suite 401 | Washington, DC 20009 USA
This message was sent to To change your email address or update your contact info, please email us. To remove yourself from this list, please click here.

Shut Diablo Canyon Now!!!

December 12, 2014


The fight to shut the two reactors at Diablo Canyon, California, is heating up.

To hear all about it from two great activists, Damon Moglen & Linda Seeley, visit the EcoWatch site and link into HarveyW’s Solartopia Green Power & Show for a full hour of informative in-depth discussion:

Thank you!!

Our nuclear-weapons warriors – Are they rational? Are they sane?

December 10, 2014
OpEdNews Op Eds 12/9/2014 at 14:20:59

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 3 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ;

; ; ; , AddTags Add to My Group(s)

On 15th November 2014, Mr Cameron, the UK Prime Minister, was in Canberra addressing the Australian Parliament.

He was flaunting his aggressive macho/militaristic credentials. His speech included the following words.

‘For the first time since the 1970s the UK is expanding our presence east of Suez, opening diplomatic posts across Asia.

‘Our economic prosperity underpins our national security and we are using it to modernise our armed forces with the most modern equipment–new fighters; new hunter-killer submarines; renewing our nuclear deterrent; type 26 global combat ship, the world’s most advanced frigate; and two new aircraft carriers, the most powerful the Royal Navy has ever put to sea in its history.’

This demented boast simultaneously betrays a long-since-discredited imperialist and empire-building mindset, and lists a series of items that is costing British citizens countless billions of pounds. Trident renewal alone is costing one hundred billion pounds (100,000,000,000). The two aircraft carriers are so hopelessly expensive that even this reckless government acknowledges that they will only be building aircraft for one of them! An aircraft carrier with no aircraft! This vast militaristic profligacy is taking place at a time when the only major threat to the UK is from the greed and irresponsibility of bankers. And at a time when social services are being cut and the poor squeezed because of lack of funds!

The psychopathology of leaders

In the past the populace would just dismiss this sort of behaviour as ‘crazy’ and get on with their lives. Now it is beginning to be addressed much more seriously. We think of the duck adage — ‘If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck it probably is a duck.’ Similarly if our leaders sound as though they are mad and if they act as though they are mad, they probably are mad. Witnessing the way the members of the United Nations ‘Security Council’ (!) cling to their nuclear arsenals, each one capable of destroying billions of people, surely must make us wonder.

One prescient and well-qualified individual who is taking this matter very seriously is David Owen, a doctor of medicine who did research into neuroscience before becoming an MP for 26 years, and serving for a spell as foreign secretary. In 2002 he began to write and speak on the effects of serious illness in heads of government including what he called ‘hubris syndrome’. This brand of debilitating mental illness was recognised by Bertrand Russell who referred to the damaging consequences of those suffering from the ‘intoxication of power’.

David Owen published ‘The Hubris Syndrome: Bush, Blair and the Intoxication of Power’in 2007 and a more comprehensive book entitled ‘In Sickness and In Power: Illness in Heads of Government over the Last 100 Years’ came out the following year.

Hubris Syndrome commonly occurs in people with no other mental illness. It is an acquired personality change occurring in people in power. David Owen lists 14 signs and symptoms that are possible in defining the condition. Among these are ‘conflation of the self with the nation or organisation; use of the royal ‘we'; an unshakable belief that a higher court (history or God) will provide vindication; restlessness, recklessness and impulsiveness; and moral rectitude that overrides practicalities, cost and outcome.’

Do any individuals spring to mind?

Owen points out that hubris is ‘often associated with a distinctive form of hubristic incompetence of which the appalling failure to plan for the aftermath of the invasion [of Iraq] is the prime example’.

It is under the fingers of leaders showing this level of incompetence that we have put the nuclear button. At all times they have the power to start a global nuclear war. This arrangement is made, we are told, to make us feel secure! How sane is that?

Owen and others have set up the Daedalus Trust, which funds, in part or in whole, research (first subject to peer review) with a view, among other goals, of encouraging interdisciplinary studies on the detrimental effects of exposure to power, and into the avoidance of reality and a growth of a ‘yes’ culture. The insanely hubristic have to exist in a compliant and passive culture if they are to get away with their excesses.

Others have alluded to the way the leaders of the West play dice with starting World War III, which will see the end of us all. Andrew Gavin Marshall is a Research Associate with the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). In an article entitled ‘The Logic of Imperial Insanity and the Road to World War III 1‘, he writes, ‘The prospects of a new global war are increasing with every accelerated military adventure. The primary antagonist in this theatre of the absurd is, without a doubt, the United States.’

We live in a time of relative peace if it were not for the compulsive belligerence and incompetence of the leaders in the West. The London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) is the world’s leading think tank for military affairs. The US-led war in Afghanistan, says IISS, using uncharacteristically blunt language, is “a long-drawn-out disaster2. The report tells us that the presence of western troops in Afghanistan is actually fuelling national resistance.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

David Krieger: A Call to Eliminate All Nuclear Weapons

December 5, 2014

(photo: unknown)
(photo: unknown)

By Jane Ayers, Reader Supported News

04 December 14


An interview with David Krieger, president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation(Santa Barbara, California)

Jane Ayers: Over the years, nuclear expert Daniel Ellsberg has clearly illustrated and explained the threat to our mainland security if we continue to have land-based Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) nuclear weapons arsenals, which inevitably makes them a target of a nuclear strike from other countries. What do you think about the ongoing testing of these long-range missiles, especially since another ICBM was recently test-launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in late September?

David Krieger: It is a shared societal insanity that we take these nuclear missile tests as “business as usual,” with the testing going under the radar of the media and population. It is done in an environment of complacency. The testing of the Minuteman III ICBMs is provocative and actually undermines our security.

Ayers: Do you think it was a slap in the face to the U.N. Day for Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons which occurred a few days later?

Krieger: I do. The test was badly timed. This kind of test is totally unnecessary. The Air Force wants to test for effectiveness, readiness, and accuracy. But what is an effective launch? How do you measure effectiveness of a missile test? I would say that readiness is what should be tested for with the launch officers who are in the missile silos. So, even on their own terms, it comes down to accuracy, and with nuclear weapons you don’t need to be very accurate to destroy an intended target. The reason is that these are powerful nuclear weapons of indiscriminate mass destruction.

The test zone that is usually the target in the Marshall Islands is not “safe,” and makes the inhabitants insecure. With the reliability issues, if missiles will hit a target, how many times do they have to test them? No one assumes “no reliability” of hitting a long range target.

The testing seems to me about something else. Essentially, it is about sending a message to other nuclear nation states that we are powerful, but the testing is very badly timed. The U.S. and Russia are locked in an ongoing conflict over the Ukraine right now, and it seems excessively dangerous to be flexing our nuclear muscles with an ICBM missile test during a conflict with Russia. Rather we should be de-escalating the tensions with Russia over the Ukraine. Both sides need to back off from making provocative remarks and taking provocative actions, such as nuclear weapons tests.

Ayers: Why do you think ongoing nuclear missile tests are unnecessary?

Krieger: The U.S. needs to do far more to fulfill its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and end the nuclear arms race, and focus more on nuclear disarmament. Rather than fulfilling its obligation, The New York Times reported that the U.S. is modernizing its nuclear arsenal and infrastructure, and plans to spend $1 trillion over the next three decades doing so.

The U.S. has a long-term program in progress and shows no signs of being willing to meet its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and this is exactly why the Marshall Islands recently sued the U.S. and the other eight nuclear-armed countries. They sued them because they are modernizing their nuclear arsenals, and are refusing to negotiate in good faith for nuclear disarmament. It is tragic that the American people don’t understand how dangerous the stakes are: nuclear weapon installations are to protect us, but they actually make us targets for future attacks.

Ayers: So you are saying that modernizing our nuclear arsenals is an actual danger to our homeland?

Krieger: In September, on the International Day of Peace, 400,000 people marched in New York City for climate change, to prevent climate chaos. This is important, but the American people (and the people of the world) need to understand how high the stakes are with continual reliance on nuclear weapons. It is like we are always playing nuclear roulette, putting nuclear weapons in the barrel of a large one-tap gun, and then pointing it at the head of humanity.

Rather than continue to tests its Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, the U.S. needs to become serious about meeting its obligations to achieve a world free of nuclear threats. This would require a world free of nuclear weapons, and is every bit as important as ending the dangers of climate change.

Ayers: The Marshall Islands has filed a lawsuit against the nuclear nation states for not living up to their obligations to end the use of nuclear weapons. In late October, the judge pushed the case to January 2015 to give the decision on the U.S. Motion to Dismiss. Do you see this lawsuit as effective if heard?

Krieger: September 26th was the International Day for Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, declared by the United Nations. Again, the U.S. should have been focusing on negotiating total nuclear disarmament rather than letting the Air Force conduct nuclear missile tests with dummy warheads days before. It reminds me of a quote by Martin Luther King Jr: “We have guided missiles, and misguided men.” We need this wisdom today much more than we need the hubris involved in rattling our nuclear sabre.

The Marshall Islands is a small area with 70,000 remarkable people. It is one of the five countries in the Pacific that are most susceptible to destruction from climate change and which were terribly misused by the U.S. nuclear weapons testing program that took place there from 1946 to 1958. During this period, the U.S. conducted 67 nuclear and thermonuclear weapons tests. These tests had an explosive power equivalent to 1.6 Hiroshima bombs dropped daily for 12 years.

Now the Marshall Islanders are trying to rally global support to halt climate change, and by filing the lawsuit they want to also assure that the nine nuclear-weapon states fulfill their obligations under international law to negotiate a world without nuclear weapons. It is astounding that one small country is taking this battle on for all of humanity’s future.

In comparison with the amount of energy and intelligence that the Marshall Islanders are putting into the two survival issues for humanity, the modest steps taken by the U.S. in these areas are shameful.

The U.S. is actually taking some steps in the wrong direction rather than finding solutions to these problems. You can see clearly the global leadership of the Marshall Islands, but where is the global leadership of the U.S. on these critical issues?

Ayers: Didn’t President Obama run for the presidency on the premise of nuclear disarmament?

Krieger: Yes, in Prague, President Obama stated with conviction, “America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” He has not moved very far on that promise. In that same speech, President Obama went on to say that he wasn’t naïve, and that that promise would likely not be fulfilled in his lifetime. Given his lack of progress on this issue, he was actually making a self-fulfilling prophecy. I still believe President Obama has good intentions, but he has not had the necessary support in the political realm (or even from the American people) to be successful in even initiating negotiations for the elimination of nuclear weapons.

Ayers: Why do you think nuclear deterrence is flawed?

Krieger: The whole enterprise of nuclear deterrence is badly flawed, yet it is widely accepted at all government levels. Nuclear deterrence is basically a hypothesis about human behavior. We don’t know if it works or not because we might have just been lucky in not having a nuclear war, by accident or design, to this point. To argue that we have not had a nuclear war because of nuclear deterrence is not logical. We can’t just assume that, because we threatened the use of nuclear weapons, a nuclear war did not start. In logic, you can’t prove the causation of a negative (no nuclear war).

The intersections of climate issues and nuclear issues should be looked at more. Many nuclear plants are on coastlines because they use the water for coolant. As predicted, as the sea levels rise, there will be flooding of nuclear plants, which could lead to nuclear core meltdowns and radiation contamination. Climate dangers will also lead to more refugees crossing national borders or being militarily prevented from doing so, bringing more potential for war and the use of nuclear weapons.

Ayers: Are you concerned about the dangers of terrorist groups targeting nuclear power plants?

Krieger: One of the issues that hasn’t been looked into enough is the potential threat of the destruction of nuclear power plants as an act of war or terrorism. If a country at war or a terrorist group decided to take out a nuclear power plant, it would be horrific. It has been common to take out electrical power plants of an enemy in war, but taking out a nuclear power plant is far more dangerous and would instill panic due to the released radioactive materials.

It is important to recognize how much is at stake with both nuclear weapons and climate chaos. We must awaken and take steps to end these two major threats to humanity’s future.

Jane Ayers is an independent journalist (USA Today, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, The Nation, etc.), and is a regular contributor to Reader Supported News. Contact her at or visit her website.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.


UN vote urges Israel to renounce nuclear arms

December 3, 2014

General Assembly approves resolution calling on Israel to put its nuclear facilities under international oversight.

Last updated: 02 Dec 2014 23:31

Israel is widely considered to possess nuclear arms but declines to confirm it [Reuters]
The UN General Assembly approved an Arab-backed resolution calling on Israel to renounce possession of nuclear weapons and put its nuclear facilities under international oversight.

The resolution, adopted in a 161-5 vote on Tuesday, noted that Israel is the only Middle Eastern country that is not party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

It called on Israel to “accede to that treaty without further delay, not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, to renounce possession of nuclear weapons”.

The resolution also called on Israel to put its nuclear facilities under the safeguard of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency.

The United States and Canada were among four countries that joined Israel in opposing the measure, while 18 countries abstained, the Associated Press reported.

Israel is widely considered to possess nuclear arms but declines to confirm it.

Non-binding resolution

General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding but carry moral weight because it is the only body where all 193 UN member states are represented.

The resolution was introduced by Egypt, and includes an Arab-backed effort that failed to gain approval in September at the Vienna-based IAEA.

The UN resolution, titled “The risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East,” pushed for the establishment of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East and lamented that US-backed efforts to convene talks were abandoned in 2012.

At the time, Israel criticised Arab countries for undermining dialogue by repeatedly singling out the country in international arenas.

Israel has long argued that a full Palestinian-Israeli peace plan must precede any creation of a Mideast zone free of weapons of mass destruction.

The country also argues that Iran’s alleged work on nuclear arms is the real regional threat. Iran denies pursuing such weapons.

US representative Robert Wood, in voting against the resolution at the committee-level last month, said the measure “fails to meet the fundamental tests of fairness and balance. It confines itself to expressions of concern about the activities of a single country.”

Email Article
Print Article
Share article
Send Feedback

Obama Promised a “World Without Nuclear Weapons,” But May Now Spend One Trillion on Upgrades

October 27, 2014


In 2009, President Obama gave an address calling for a nuclear-free world. However, that has changed.

We are on the road in the historic city of Vienna, Austria, not far from the Czech Republic where President Obama gave a major address in 2009 that called for a nuclear-free world. His disarmament efforts were cited when he won the Nobel Peace Prize, but since then advocates say little progress has been made. A recent New York Times investigation found the United States is on pace to spend as much as $1 trillion over the next three decades to modernize its nuclear arsenal and facilities. This week, more than 150 countries at the United Nations signed a joint statement calling on nuclear powers to attend the third major conference on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons scheduled this December in Vienna. The United States has yet to attend one of the meetings. We are joined by Elena Sokova, executive director of the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation.

GMOs may be to Blame for Spike in Kids Suffering from Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Bio: Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 900 stations in North America. She is the author of “Breaking the Sound Barrier,” recently released in paperback and now a New York Times best-seller.


When Solartopia Transcends King CONG

October 21, 2014

You might like my new post on EcoWatch with the new Solartopia/King CONG poster:

A green-powered future is our only hope.

A planet run by King CONG—Coal, Oil, Nukes & Gas—cannot be sustained.

But to get beyond it, our Solartopian vision must embrace more than just a technological transformation.

It also demands social, political and spiritual transcendence …

Dr. Caldicott Talks of Fukushima & Meeting Ronald Reagan

October 17, 2014


Dr. Helen Caldicott Tells of Fukushima’s Lethal Toll & Meeting Ronald Reagan


By Harvey Wasserman



The great Dr. Helen Caldicott graced the Solartopia Green Power & Wellness Show this week with her unique assessment of the health effects of Fukushima and the rest of the nuclear power industry.

She tells us about what’s happening to the renewable industry in Australia, and why Dr. James Hansen needs to reassess his views on atomic energy.


Listen to Dr. Helen Caldicott on the Solartopia Green Power & Wellness Show. Photo credit: Heide Smith

“Nuclear Power Plants are cancer factories and bomb factories … because any country that has a nuclear reactor makes 500 pounds of plutonium a year and you need 10 pounds to make an atomic bomb … so the nuclear power industry in this country in its wisdom and in Japan, Canada and elsewhere is selling nuclear reactors as fast as it can … and they will have enough plutonium to make enough atomic bombs for the next half a million years … cause that’s how long the plutonium lasts …,” said Dr. Caldicott.

Then she shared one of modern American history’s most critical episodes. In the early 1980s, during the global campaign for a nuclear freeze, Helen met Patty Davis, the daughter of Ronald and Nancy Reagan. Davis figured that Dr. Caldicott might be one of the few people who might reach her father about the dangers of nuclear war.

read the rest at…….


October 2, 2014

Harvey Wasserman |/EcoWatchOkay, so we had this historic march a little over a week ago..It was …

… joyous, beautiful, exhilarating, inspiring, life-confirming … and in many ways a turning point.

Now that the dust has settled a bit, we can see that it will change things for a long time to come.

It proved to ourselves and the world that we have a huge, diverse, broad-based movement. And that we can put aside our differences and all get along when we have to.We are our species’ ever-evolving immune system. We are the survival instinct that must defeat the corporate profit motive.

We are also part of a mighty activist stream that’s campaigned for peace, civil rights, social justice, workers’ rights, women’s rights, gay pride, election protection, No Nukes and so much more.

We’ve endured the circular firing squad and want it abolished.

Our hard-earned commitment to non-violence allows for a calm internal space and the great power that emerges from it. So in a diverse movement of good people with very strong opinions, we are learning to cut each other plenty of slack.

But how do we now build on this? What do we do next?

Politically, we operate at two essential levels: the local and the global.

And to stay functional, we need: net neutrality, corporate accountability, election protection, social justice and peace.

1.  Local organizing is our ultimate source of power.

The green movement has the great luxury of tangible targets. The King CONG corporations (Coal, Oil, Nukes, Gas) need actual land on which to do their dirty work. So we can fight them inch-by-inch, at the source.

We can count the number of nukes Nixon wanted to build (1,000) and how many we stopped or shut (about 900 in the U.S.; far more worldwide).

We can name scores of reactors that didn’t get built, did get cancelled, are now being shut, will soon be stopped.

There are also mines undrilled, mountaintops not removed, oil rigs not pumping, fracking wells cancelled, polluting factories greenly altered, and much more we’ve beaten quietly, on the ground.

There are also solar panels on rooftops, windmills generating power, electric cars in the pipeline, recycling programs in place, consumption reduced, the overall vision of a green-powered Solartopia becoming ever more tangible.

In this movement, “what can I do?” always has a ready answer: fight the polluter next door. Pick one and shut it down!

So after our joy walk in New York, we return to our letter writing, phone calling, neighborhood speeches, strategy meetings, classroom educating, town council lobbying, around the corner picket lines, civil disobedience, finance-sabotaging, office seeking, rate withholding, fund raising, dog-that-corrupt-politician work.

Some of these fights we may seem to lose, at least for the time being. But it’s never over until we quit, which our survival instinct won’t let us do. A polluter once opened can always be shut if we never give up.

So at the grassroots, we are the individual immune cells that fight toxic industrial poisons and cancerous trash at the source. That’s the revolution that’s not televised…..


This message was sent to Rosan Yoshida by Harvey Wasserman through MoveOn’s public petition website. MoveOn Civic Action does not endorse the contents of this message. To unsubscribe or report this email as inappropriate, click here:

Want to make a donation? MoveOn is entirely funded by our 8 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 85 other followers