Archive for February, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews “Smoke billowing” from Japan nuclear plant — Possible fire reported near reactors — TEPCO “has not identified the cause of the incident” Posted: 23 Feb 2017 05:58 PM PST

February 24, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

“Smoke billowing” from Japan nuclear plant — Possible fire reported near reactors — TEPCO “has not identified the cause of the incident”
Posted: 23 Feb 2017 05:58 PM PST

February 24, 2017

Accreditation for the UN conference to negotiate a ban treaty!
Inbox
x

Akira Kawasaki kawasaki@peaceboat.gr.jp via post.freeml.com
Feb 23 (1 day ago)

to abolition-japan
核兵器禁止条約交渉会議へのNGOの登録方法について、先にお送りしたRCWのものと基本的に同じですが、ICAN国際事務局からのメールを転送します。川崎哲

———-転送メッセージ———-
From: Beatrice Fihn
日付: 2017年2月23日木曜日
件名: [ICAN] Accreditation for the UN conference to negotiate a ban treaty!
To: ICAN Campaigners

Hi everyone,

Registration for UN accreditation the first session on 27-31 March has opened, the aide memoir can be found here As always, the UN is slightly complicated, so if you are attending the negotiations in March, please read the following information carefully. The official NGO coordinator for the negotiating conference is Reaching Critical Will, so if you have any questions about the procedure, please contact ray@reachingcriticalwill.org or allison@reachingcriticalwill.org

Registration is done in three steps.

1. Accrediting the organisation you belong to

First, the organisation needs to be accredited before we can start registering individuals. ICAN will of course register, but we encourage partner organisations to register your own organisation, as we’re not really able to coordinate the registration for all campaigners coming in March. So please register your own organisation if possible, but make sure you coordinate with other people from your organisation so you don’t send several different accreditation applications on behalf of the same organisation. ¨

If your organisation can’t or doesn’t want to register, please let me or Daniel know, and we’ll help you get on another organisation’s delegation.

The deadline for applications of accreditation of organisations is 3 March 2017. The application is done through the United Nations Civil Society Network (CSO-Net) by completing an online accreditation form available at http://bit.ly/2m9jfr5. (Your organisation must first be registered on CSO Net, and NGOs with ECOSOC Consultative Status must indidate this.) If your organisation is not already registered in the CSO Net, please create an organisational profile here: http://esango.un.org/civilsociety/showNewProfile.do?method=addNewProfile&sessionCheck=false

Those non-governmental organizations that have requested accreditation as above will be informed by UNODA by e-mail by 10 March 2017 of the outcome of their request. NGOs with ECOSOC consultative status will be accredited to the Conference. All other approved NGOs will be provisionally accredited to the Conference, pending the decision of the Conference on the list of such NGOs. We don’t foresee any problems with any ICAN partner organisation being rejected.

Please note: A second accreditation period will be opened prior to the session of the Conference in June/July 2017, only for those organisations that did not apply for accreditation prior to the March session. The accreditation of NGOs granted in time for the March session will remain valid for the June/July session.

2. Registering individual participants

NGOs that receive confirmation of accreditation must then register their representatives who will to attend the Conference. This is also done via CSO Net. The registration of individual representatives will be open from 13 to 17 March 2017 at http://bit.ly/2lJlG6w.

Once you’ve completed the registration of individual representatives, you need to download the personal registration form and the confirmation letter from CSO Net. You must print these documents out and bring to New York.

3. Picking up the badge at the conference

Once you are in New York, you will be able to pick up your your badge on 27-28 March at the United Nations Pass and ID Office located on 320 E 45th Street, New York, NY on 27 and 28 March (9:00am – 11:00am; and 1:00pm – 3:00pm). You will need to bring the printed personal registration form and the confirmation letter, as well as valid photo identification to the Pass and ID Office.

Representatives arriving after 28 March must contact Ms. Haruka Katarao, E-mail: haruka.katarao@un.org, Tel. +1 (212) 963-4178, or Mr. Hong Tan, E-mail tan1@un.org, Tel. +1 (212) 963 7062 to arrange for issuance of a security identification badge.

Once the badge is issued, you will be able to get in to the UN and access the negotiating meetings.

——————————————————————

So, to recap. Your organisation need to apply for accreditation before 3 March (please coordinate with other colleagues from the same organisations, so you don’t double up), the organisation need to register the individual people that are coming to New York between 13 to 17 March.

And if you haven’t done so yet, please register for the ICAN campaigners meeting on 25-26 March in New York, so we can budget for catering etc. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdHEuZrXx2PHmicM6qQneRAtQGKIIcWi8GRiFZm-THYDxjKVg/viewform?mc_cid=d367a28712&mc_eid=a6d9a999e1

Looking forward to seeing many of you in New York!

Beatrice

Retreat fromTokyo Olympics and a new page

February 24, 2017

Dear Friends,

Governor Yuriko Koike has finally succeded to set up the article 100 Committee
to clarify the background of the Toyosu market issue.Together with other recent developments,
such as the surfacing of the Dentsu’s illegal labor management with its subsequent consequences,
the persitent investigation by the French prosecuters concerning Olympic corruptions.

This reminds us of the saying “Heaven’s vengeance is slow but sure”.We owe this thinking to
Chinese ancient philosopher Laozi who is considered as the principal source of Japanese maternal culture.
I often use the term “the will of heavevs and the earth”whose definition is “the law of history researched by philosophy”,
such as the inevitable fall of the arrogant,that of all dictatorships and the impossibility of immorality to last long.

It is based upon this way of thinking that I foresee the approaching retreat from the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020
being prepared totally ignoring the deterioratong situation in Fukushima and the consequent reactions from abroad such as
the following;

ENENEWS http://enenews.com/ 、CLICK HERE for this week’s episode, #296、
Fukushima: a Lurking Global Catastrophe?、 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0bsrFyLz6U 

The ongoing attempt to revive militairism in some quarters has encountered a serious obstacle which is linked to the acquisition by a school corporation of national land at an exceptionally low price.It may develop into a fatal political scandal that could lead Japan to open a new page.

Please allow me to count on your understanding and support.

Mitsuhei Murata
Former Ambassador to Switzerland

‘Mystery’: Radiation spikes being detected in many countries

February 21, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

‘Mystery’: Radiation spikes being detected in many countries — US military secretly deploys ‘nuclear sniffer’ aircraft — Radioactivity levels quadrupled — Officials: Iodine-131 is “proof of rather recent release… the origin of which is still unknown”
Posted: 20 Feb 2017 01:57 AM PST

Japan history revisionists bolder under Abe: analysts

February 20, 2017

POLITICS FEB. 20, 2017 – 10:32AM JST ( 52 )

Japan history revisionists bolder under Abe: analysts

A man walks past advertising for the APA hotel group at a subway station in Tokyo
AFP
TOKYO —
Successful hotel chain operator Toshio Motoya doesn’t mind if his denial of a notorious Japanese World War II military atrocity in China drives customers away.

Motoya not only penned a book calling the 1937 Nanjing massacre a lie but proudly displays it in guest rooms of his nationwide chain of APA hotels.

In protest, China and South Korea pulled their athletes from his inns for the Asian Winter Games that began in Sapporo on Sunday. China has also told its tour businesses to stop cooperating with APA, essentially calling for a boycott.

Motoya has told supporters he “will never withdraw” the book under foreign pressure.

Such an attitude, analysts say, shows how those who whitewash Japan’s modern history are growing more emboldened by what they see as a tacit wink from hawkish Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Now in his fifth year in power, Abe makes no secret of his nationalist views. He says Japan must shake off past constraints, including altering its war-renouncing constitution imposed by American occupiers after World War II.

Tamotsu Sugano, an expert on Japanese rightist groups, said hotelier Motoya has close ties with ultra-conservative lobby Nippon Kaigi, or Japan Conference, which has published a dossier calling the Nanjing massacre a “false accusation”.

And while Abe does not question the massacre, he and more than half his cabinet ministers hold membership in a parliamentarians’ league that supports the group.

“Since he was first elected to parliament, Abe has acted very closely with the core members” of Nippon Kaigi, said Sugano, who has written a book on the organisation.

Koichi Nakano, a professor of political science at Sophia University in Tokyo, says revisionism has been rising among politicians, the business sector and media since the late 1990s.

“Abe has been careful after becoming prime minister, but his firm foothold is these people,” Nakano said, calling him “their flag bearer”.

The prime minister, who once prevaricated over whether Japan’s wartime aggression amounted to “invasion”, has also appointed cabinet ministers with a revisionist bent.

And while Abe has stood by previous government apologies for the war, he said ahead of the 70th anniversary of its end in 2015 that future generations should not have to say sorry.

China says 300,000 people died in a six-week spree of killing, rape and destruction by the Japanese military that began in December 1937.

Some respected academics estimate a lower number of victims, but mainstream scholarship does not question that the incident, known as the “Rape of Nanking,” took place.

Motoya’s book, dryly titled “The Real History of Japan: Theoretical Modern History II,” uses the word “fabrication” to describe Nanjing.

“Revisionists in Japan are seeking to rewrite Japan’s shared wartime history in Asia and promoting an exonerating narrative that ignores what happened,” Jeff Kingston, director of Asian Studies at Temple University Japan, told AFP in an email.

Motoya has also come under fire for anti-Semitic comments made in an in-house magazine placed in his Canada hotels, asserting that Jews “control” key sectors of the United States.

His history book has elicited no condemnation from the Japanese government and little from media or broader society.

The nationalist Sankei Shimbun daily has rather applauded the government for “neither pressuring APA hotel nor urging self-restraint”.

The situation in Japan contrasts with Germany, where opinions expressing sympathy for Nazi rule are broadly considered unacceptable and displaying fascist symbols such as the swastika, or denying the Holocaust, are illegal.

Last year, an 87-year-old woman was sentenced to prison for denying that Auschwitz was a death camp.

The lack of vocal criticism over revisionist ideas in Japan, however, does not mean nationalist views resonate widely.

Indeed, voters have bet on Abe mainly for his promise to revitalise the economy. Polls show underwhelming support for his pet project of constitutional revision.

“The rise of China is stoking anxieties and nationalism in Japan, but nationalism doesn’t resonate powerfully among Japanese because they understand what can go wrong,” said Temple University’s Kingston.

© 2017 AFP

IAEA fact-finding team examines devastation at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in May 2011. (photo: IAEA/Greg Webb)

February 16, 2017

IAEA fact-finding team examines devastation at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in May 2011. (photo: IAEA/Greg Webb) go to original article

Fukushima: Still Getting Worse After Six Years of Meltdowns
By William Boardman, Reader Supported News
12 February 17

Even Fox News reports radiation at “unimaginable levels”

fter a week of limited coverage of “unimaginable levels” of radiation inside the remains of collapsed Unit 2 at Fukushima (see below), Nuclear-News.net reported February 11 that radiation levels are actually significantly higher than “unimaginable.”

Continuous, intense radiation, at 530 sieverts an hour (4 sieverts is a lethal level), was widely reported in early February 2017 – as if this were a new phenomenon. It’s not. Three reactors at Fukushima melted down during the earthquake-tsunami disaster on March 3, 2011, and the meltdowns never stopped. Radiation levels have been out of control ever since. As Fairewinds Energy Education noted in an email February 10:

Although this robotic measurement just occurred, this high radiation reading was anticipated and has existed inside the damaged Unit 2 atomic reactor since the disaster began nearly 6 years ago…. As Fairewinds has said for 6 years, there are no easy solutions because groundwater is in direct contact with the nuclear corium (melted fuel) at Fukushima Daiichi.
What’s new (and not very new, at that) is the official acknowledgement of the highest radiation levels yet measured there, by a factor of seven (the previously measured high was 73 sieverts an hour in 2012). The highest radiation level measured at Chernobyl was 300 sieverts an hour. What this all means, as anyone paying attention well knows, is that the triple-meltdown Fukushima disaster is still out of control.

“Sievert” is one of the many terms of mystification used to prevent most people from fully understanding radiation. A “sievert” is roughly equivalent to a “gray,” as each represents a “joule” per kilogram (not to be confused, for example, with “Curie” or Bequerel,” or with “rem,” “rad,” or “roentgen”). In the International System of Units (SI), a “joule” is the “unit of work or energy, equal to the work done by a force of one newton when its point of application moves one meter in the direction of action of the force, equivalent to one 3600th of a watt-hour.” Got that? The jargon doesn’t much matter as far as public safety is concerned. All ionizing radiation is life-threatening. The more you’re exposed, the more you’re threatened. As Physics Stack Exchange illustrates the issue:

The dose [of radiation] that kills a tumor is deliberately aimed at that tumor. If, instead of using a collimated beam, you put a person in a wide beam for radio “therapy”, you would be treating their entire body as a tumor and kill them.
Radiation levels at Fukushima are comparable to a nuclear explosion that doesn’t end. That’s one reason that TEPCO, the Tokyo Electric Power Co. that owns Fukushima, keeps trying to reassure the world that little or no radiation escapes from Fukushima. This is not true, radiation in large, mostly unmeasured or undocumented amounts pours into the Pacific Ocean all the time, without pause. One reason this release is out of control is because no one apparently knows just where the three melted reactor cores have gone. TEPCO says it thinks the melted cores have burned through the reactors’ inner containment vessels, but are still within the outer containment walls. They keep looking as best they can.

On February 3, 2017, the Guardian reported the high radiation levels discovered by a remote camera sent into the reactor on a telescopic arm. Reader Supported News carried the story from EcoWatch on February 5. Essentially the same story was reported on February 6 by Smithsonian.com, on February 7 by ZeroHedge.com, and on February 8, Fox News reported that “radiation levels at Japan’s crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant are now at ‘unimaginable’ levels.” There have apparently been no such reports on CBS, NBC, CNN, or MSNBC. On February 9, ABC ran an AP story about pulling a robot out of Unit 2 because of “high radiation,” without specifying a level and adding: “TEPCO officials reassured that despite the dangerously high figures, radiation is not leaking outside of the reactor.” (PJMedia.com calls the Fox story “fake news,” relies on ad hominem argument, trusts TEPCO on keeping track of the irradiated ocean flow, and accepts US EPA standards for “safe” drinking water – without actually discrediting the story.)

On February 12, Pakistan Defence ran the AP story of February 9, but included the new level of radiation at 650 sieverts that fried a robot’s camera, adding:

The high levels of radiation may seem alarming, but there’s good news: it’s contained, and there are no reports of new leaks from the plant. That means that the radiation shouldn’t affect nearby townships. Higher levels of radiation could also mean the robot is getting closer to the precise source of radioactivity to properly remove the melted fuel.
All this coverage relates only to Unit 2’s melted reactor core. There is no reliable news of the condition of the melted reactor cores in two other units. Last November, in a half-hour talk reviewing the Fukushima crisis, Arnie Gunderson of Fairewinds Energy Education discussed the three missing reactor cores and what he suspected was the likelihood that they had not been contained within the reactor.

The ground water flowing into, through, and out of the reactor is contaminated by its passage and is having some impact on the Pacific Ocean. The US, like other governments, is ignoring whatever is happening, allowing it to happen as if it doesn’t matter and never will. In Carmel, California, local residents are finding that tide pools, once vibrant with life, are now dead. They blame Fukushima.

Whatever is actually going on at Fukushima is not good, and has horrifying possibilities. It is little comfort to have the perpetrator of the catastrophe, TEPCO, in charge of fixing it, especially when the Japanese government is more an enabler of cover-up and denial than any kind of seeker of truth or protector of its people. It took private researchers five years to figure out that Fukushima’s fallout of Cesium-137 on Tokyo took a more dangerous, glassy form that wasn’t cleaned up effectively.

The US and most of the rest of the world have chosen not to take Fukushima more seriously than a multi-car Interstate pile-up. The policy is one more roll of the dice, saving money now and gambling the future. But now we have Rick Perry heading up the US Department of Energy and Scott Pruitt slated to take over the Environmental Protection Agency – so we can expect big changes, right?

Actually there has been one big change already at the Energy Dept., which uses more contractors than any other US agency. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that the Energy Dept. failed to protect whistleblowers who raised legitimate nuclear safety and other concerns. In response, the Energy Dept. prepared a new rule protecting whistleblowers from contractor retaliation. That rule was blocked from going into effect by President Trump’s regulatory freeze on January 20.

In a sense, Fukushima is perhaps a metaphor for the current American moment. The electoral earthquake and tsunami of 11/9 has produced a political meltdown of unknown and expanding proportions, that continue unchecked, causing still unmeasured destruction and human suffering far into a dark and dangerous future.

Can the Climate Survive Adherence to War and Partisanship?

February 16, 2017

David Swanson via WarIsACrime.org david@davidswanson.org via sg.actionnetwork.org
8:16 PM (2 hours ago)

Can the Climate Survive Adherence to War and Partisanship?

By David Swanson
http://davidswanson.org/node/5448
For the past decade, the standard procedure for big coalition rallies and marches in Washington D.C. has been to gather together organizations representing labor, the environment, women’s rights, anti-racism, anti-bigotry of all sorts, and a wide array of liberal causes, including demands to fund this, that, and the other, and to halt the concentration of wealth.

At that point, some of us in the peace movement will generally begin lobbying the PEP (progressive except for peace) organizers to notice that the military is swallowing up enough money every month to fund all their wishes 100 times over for a year, that the biggest destroyer of the natural environment is the military, that war fuels and is fueled by racism while stripping our rights and militarizing our police and creating refugees.

When we give up on trying to explain the relevance of our society’s biggest project to the work of reforming our society, we generally point out that peace is popular, that it adds a mere 5 characters to a thousand-word laundry list of causes, and that we can mobilize peace groups to take part if peace is included.

Often this works. Several big coalition efforts have eventually conceded and included peace in some token way in their platforms. This success is most likely when the coalition’s organizing is most democratic (with a small d). So, Occupy, obviously, ended up including a demand for peace despite its primary focus on a certain type of war profiteers: bankers.

Other movements include a truly well informed analysis with no help from any lobbying that I’ve had to be part of. The Black Lives Matter platform is better on war and peace than most statements from the peace movement itself. Some advocates for refugees also seem to follow logic in opposing the wars that create more refugees.

Other big coalition actions simply will not include any preference for peace over war. This seems to be most likely to happen when the organizations involved are most Democratic (with a capital D). The Women’s March backs many other causes, but uses the word peace without suggesting any preference for peace: “We work peacefully while recognizing there is no true peace without justice and equity for all.” There is also, one might note, no justice or equity for anybody living under bombs.

Here’s a coalition currently trying to decide whether it dare say the word peace: https://peoplesclimate.org.

This group is planning a big march for the climate and many other unrelated causes, such as the right to organize unions, on April 29. Organizers claim some relationship among all the causes. But, of course, there isn’t really an obvious direct connection between protecting the climate and protecting gay rights or the rights of workers. They may all be good causes and all involve kindness and humility, but they can be won separately or together.

Peace is different. One cannot, in fact, protect the climate while allowing the military to drain away the funding needed for that task, dumping it into operations that consume more petroleum than any other and which lead the way in poisoning water, land, and air. Nor can a climate march credibly claim, as this one does, to be marching for “everything we love” and refuse to name peace, unless it loves war or is undecided between or uninterested in the benefits of mass murder versus those of nonviolent cooperation.

Here’s a petition you can sign to gently nudge the People’s Climate March in the right direction. Please do so soon, because they’re making a decision.

The struggle to save the climate faces other hurdles in addition to loyalty to militarism. I mean, beyond the mammoth greed and corruption and misinformation and laziness, there are other unnecessary handicaps put in place even by those who mean well. A big one is partisanship. When Republicans have finally proposed a carbon tax, many on the left simply won’t consider it, won’t even tackle the problem of making it actually work fairly and honestly and aggressively enough to succeed. Perhaps because some of the supporters seem untrustworthy. Or perhaps because some of the supporters likely don’t believe you need labor unions in order to tax carbon.

And which ones would you need, the ones advocating for more pipelines or the ones working in other fields?

Scientists, too, are planning to march on Washington. The scientific consensus on war has been around as long as that on climate change. But what about the popular acceptance? What about the appreciation among grant-writing foundations? What do the labor unions and big environmental groups feel about it? These are the important questions, I’m afraid, even for a scientists’ march.

But I appreciate the scientific method enough to hope my hypothesis is proven wrong.

Help support DavidSwanson.org, WarIsACrime.org, and TalkNationRadio.org by clicking here: http://davidswanson.org/donate.

If you were forwarded this email please sign up at https://actionnetwork.org/forms/activism-alerts-from-david-swanson.
x

David Swanson via WarIsACrime.org david@davidswanson.org via sg.actionnetwork.org
8:16 PM (2 hours ago)

to me
Can the Climate Survive Adherence to War and Partisanship?

By David Swanson
http://davidswanson.org/node/5448
For the past decade, the standard procedure for big coalition rallies and marches in Washington D.C. has been to gather together organizations representing labor, the environment, women’s rights, anti-racism, anti-bigotry of all sorts, and a wide array of liberal causes, including demands to fund this, that, and the other, and to halt the concentration of wealth.

At that point, some of us in the peace movement will generally begin lobbying the PEP (progressive except for peace) organizers to notice that the military is swallowing up enough money every month to fund all their wishes 100 times over for a year, that the biggest destroyer of the natural environment is the military, that war fuels and is fueled by racism while stripping our rights and militarizing our police and creating refugees.

When we give up on trying to explain the relevance of our society’s biggest project to the work of reforming our society, we generally point out that peace is popular, that it adds a mere 5 characters to a thousand-word laundry list of causes, and that we can mobilize peace groups to take part if peace is included.

Often this works. Several big coalition efforts have eventually conceded and included peace in some token way in their platforms. This success is most likely when the coalition’s organizing is most democratic (with a small d). So, Occupy, obviously, ended up including a demand for peace despite its primary focus on a certain type of war profiteers: bankers.

Other movements include a truly well informed analysis with no help from any lobbying that I’ve had to be part of. The Black Lives Matter platform is better on war and peace than most statements from the peace movement itself. Some advocates for refugees also seem to follow logic in opposing the wars that create more refugees.

Other big coalition actions simply will not include any preference for peace over war. This seems to be most likely to happen when the organizations involved are most Democratic (with a capital D). The Women’s March backs many other causes, but uses the word peace without suggesting any preference for peace: “We work peacefully while recognizing there is no true peace without justice and equity for all.” There is also, one might note, no justice or equity for anybody living under bombs.

Here’s a coalition currently trying to decide whether it dare say the word peace: https://peoplesclimate.org.

This group is planning a big march for the climate and many other unrelated causes, such as the right to organize unions, on April 29. Organizers claim some relationship among all the causes. But, of course, there isn’t really an obvious direct connection between protecting the climate and protecting gay rights or the rights of workers. They may all be good causes and all involve kindness and humility, but they can be won separately or together.

Peace is different. One cannot, in fact, protect the climate while allowing the military to drain away the funding needed for that task, dumping it into operations that consume more petroleum than any other and which lead the way in poisoning water, land, and air. Nor can a climate march credibly claim, as this one does, to be marching for “everything we love” and refuse to name peace, unless it loves war or is undecided between or uninterested in the benefits of mass murder versus those of nonviolent cooperation.

Here’s a petition you can sign to gently nudge the People’s Climate March in the right direction. Please do so soon, because they’re making a decision.

The struggle to save the climate faces other hurdles in addition to loyalty to militarism. I mean, beyond the mammoth greed and corruption and misinformation and laziness, there are other unnecessary handicaps put in place even by those who mean well. A big one is partisanship. When Republicans have finally proposed a carbon tax, many on the left simply won’t consider it, won’t even tackle the problem of making it actually work fairly and honestly and aggressively enough to succeed. Perhaps because some of the supporters seem untrustworthy. Or perhaps because some of the supporters likely don’t believe you need labor unions in order to tax carbon.

And which ones would you need, the ones advocating for more pipelines or the ones working in other fields?

Scientists, too, are planning to march on Washington. The scientific consensus on war has been around as long as that on climate change. But what about the popular acceptance? What about the appreciation among grant-writing foundations? What do the labor unions and big environmental groups feel about it? These are the important questions, I’m afraid, even for a scientists’ march.

But I appreciate the scientific method enough to hope my hypothesis is proven wrong.

Help support DavidSwanson.org, WarIsACrime.org, and TalkNationRadio.org by clicking here: http://davidswanson.org/donate.

If you were forwarded this email please sign up at https://actionnetwork.org/forms/activism-alerts-from-david-swanson.

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

Comment: Of course not. Paradigm shift from ego to eco is essential.

Google Alert – helen caldicott

February 16, 2017

Dear Friends,

I am sending you the article of Dr. Helen Caldicott describing most acurately
the present situation of Fukushima and the devilish nature of nuclear energy.
Its destructive power in all directions—states,individuals,organizations—is increasingly evident.
The case of Toshiba will be globally generating departure from nuclear reactors.
The mainstream of the world,still promoting 440 nuclear reactors,could not but undergo changes.
We all know that immorality cannot last long.

With warmest regards,
Mitsuhei Murata
Former Ambassador to Switzerland

From: Helen Caldicott
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 5:24 AM
To: mitsu
Subject: FW:

Dear Ambassador Murata,
Here is my recent article which may help also
Best
Helen Caldicott

From: Google Alerts [mailto:googlealerts-noreply@google.com]
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 11:04 AM
To: hcaldic@bigpond.com
Subject: Google Alert – helen caldicott

Google
helen caldicott
Daily update ⋅ February 13, 2017
NEWS
HELEN CALDICOTT: The inevitable Fukushima meltdown continues
Independent Australia
Dr Helen Caldicott, explains recent robot photos of Fukushima’s Daiichi reactors — radiation levels have not increased, it’s just the first time we’ve …
Google Plus
Facebook
Twitter
Flag as irrelevant
See more results | Edit this alert

You have received this email because you have subscribed to Google Alerts.
Unsubscribe | View all your alerts
RSSReceive this alert as RSS feed
Send Feedback

Nuke Experts: Fukushima plant must be entombed like Chernobyl

February 16, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews
Nuke Experts: Fukushima plant must be entombed like Chernobyl — Reactors will remain a threat to world “for the rest of time” — “Humanly impossible” to clean up due to shockingly high radiation levels
Posted: 14 Feb 2017 09:45 AM PST

February 14, 2017

Five faces of dystopia
Never before has a government been so completely fused with business.

jackson

By Paul Buchheit – February 14, 2017 | Op-Ed 1 Comment 171
Share on Facebook Tweet on Twitter

GET THE BEST IN INDEPENDENT NEWS AND ACTIVISM DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

email address

Sign me up!
I am already receiving the NationofChange newsletter.

SOURCENationofChange
TAGSAndrew JacksoncorruptionDonald Trumpecocideracism
Based on reliable news sources, his biographer, and his own writings, the most powerful man of his era has been referred to as an “egomaniac” and “narcissist,” possessing a “big mouth” with an “impulsive style,” unable to differentiate between truth and falsehood, preferring emotion over facts, focused on national greatness and law & order, fearful of “foreignization,” prone to coarseness and put-downs in speeches, and fond of “mantralike phrases” filled with “accusations, vows of revenge and promises for the future.”

Depravity

The man described above is Adolf Hitler. All of the descriptions were attributed to the Nazi leader: some of it by news media in the 1930s, some of it by modern historian and biographer Volker Ullrich, some of it by Hitler himself in “Mein Kampf.” Eerily familiar to the present day.

Racism

Donald Trump placed a painting of Andrew Jackson in the Oval Office, apparently feeling pleased that, in his own words, “a lot of people they compare the campaign of Trump with the campaign of [Jackson].”

Andrew Jackson may have been our most racist president. To him, Native Americans were only ‘savages’ standing in the way of progress. For ten years Jackson arranged ‘treaties’ with Indians in the American southeast, setting up his own friends as land agents, traders, and surveyors while encouraging white squatters to take over the land. Eventually recognizing Florida as vital to “national security,” he initiated raids on Seminole villages, burning down homes and forcing out residents, all in the name of the “immutable laws of self-defense.” The result was a Trail of Tears that led thousands of sick and starving Cherokees across the Mississippi in the middle of winter to unfamiliar and unproductive land far from their home.

Indian removal, according to Jackson, would help the Native Americans to “cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community.” He hypocritically added, “Say to the chiefs and warriors that I am their friend…[their land] they shall possess as long as grass grows or water runs.”

Jackson didn’t reserve his enmity for Native Americans alone. He was the only president to have driven a “coffle” of chained slaves to work in faraway locations. As a reward for returning one of his runaway slaves, he promised: “ten dollars extra, for every hundred lashes any person will give him.”

Simplemindedness

Ronald Reagan said, “Government is the problem.” Donald Trump said, “Good people don’t go into government.”

There are other similarities, many of them reported by historian William E. Leuchtenburg, author of “The American President: From Teddy Roosevelt to Bill Clinton.” Says Leuchtenburg, “No one had ever entered the White House so grossly ill-informed.” A Reagan presidential aide remarked, “He made decisions like an ancient king…passively letting his subjects serve him, selecting only those morsels of public policy that were especially tasty.”

Reagan provided entertaining moments that Trump is beginning to emulate with newer technology. According to Indiana congressman Lee Hamilton, during a meeting on the MX missile “Reagan’s only contribution throughout the entire hour and a half was to interrupt somewhere at midpoint to tell us he’d watched a movie the night before.” On the day before a global summit meeting he was given a briefing book, which he never opened, and when asked about it by chief of staff James Baker, Reagan replied, “Well, Jim, The Sound of Music was on last night.” Reagan had his movies, Trump his TV. He watches it for hours, apparently searching narcissistically for news about himself, and then at times turning it into official policy. According to Fortune, “At least five times since he took office on Jan. 20, Trump has tweeted about policy ideas and thoughts that seem directly related to news that was being shown on channels such as Fox News.”

Through the 1980s, Reagan’s staff “protected him by severely restricting situations where he might blurt out a fantasy” while “keeping the press at shouting distance or beyond.” Yet he “alarmed members of his staff by flying into a rage if the press reported that he had changed his position on an issue, even when he undoubtedly had.” More similarities to the present day.

Ecocide

Stalin destroyed not only people, but also the environment. In “An Environmental History of Russia,” it is stated that “During the Stalin era, state-mandated programs…ensured that economic development was the sine qua non of decision making. Those who stood in the way of the programs…were often labeled ‘wreckers.’ The ‘wreckers’ included some of the nation’s most able biologists, forestry and fisheries specialists, agronomists, and ecologists. Officials…came to consider nature itself an ‘enemy of the people.’”

“We cannot expect charity from nature,” said Stalin. “We must tear it from her.”

Donald Trump has shown the same disdain for the earth with statements like “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” His new Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is an obfuscating climate change denier whose company, Exxon, has been linked to the great majority of other climate change deniers.

Corruption

Historian Kevin Kruse might be providing some insight into Donald Trump’s mind in his summation of Warren G. Harding, considered by many to be the worst president: “He felt woefully under-qualified for the job…so he surrounded himself with old friends…who themselves were unqualified for the jobs they held and many of them corrupt.”

Historian Eric Foner goes on to discuss Harding’s and Coolidge’s corruption in office, and their penchant for “channeling money and favors to big business.” The two presidents, says Foner, “slashed income and corporate taxes and supported employers’ campaigns to eliminate unions.”

“Never before,” said the Wall Street Journal at the time, “has a government been so completely fused with business.”

Until the dystopian Trump era.

DID YOU KNOW?
NationofChange is a nonprofit organization that provides an online magazine, daily newsletter, and activist platform – all free to the public.

It’s hard, expensive work, and our daily operations are funded entirely by donations from readers like you.

If you value the work that we’re doing, please take a moment to make a 100% tax-deductible donation to NationofChange.

Make a donation → Become a Sustaining Member →
SHARE Facebook Twitter