Archive for August, 2017

Credible threat of severe accident at two nuclear reactor

August 30, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

WARNING: “Credible threat of severe accident at two nuclear reactors” due to Hurricane Harvey — “Clear potential for major disaster” — Plant “could be overwhelmed by raging flood waters” — Officials refuse to provide public with information
Posted: 29 Aug 2017 07:49 PM PDT

Advertisements

Flooding Crisis At Texas Nuclear Plant and Fukushima

August 29, 2017

Dear Friends,

I am sending you an article of News Punch dated August 28,2017.

Confronted with serious consequences of recent typhoons and flooding in Japan,
we are led to think that the natural disasters taking place in the United States,
would be spreading worldwide in future, including Japan.
The flooding crisis at the Texas Nuclear Plant teaches us that the existence itself
of nuclear reactors is the top and real security issue.

We are reminded of the Unit 2 crisis of the Fukushima Daiichi. If an earthquake of intensity 7
happens there, the building of the Unit 2 could collapse, bringing about a nuclear disaster
that could make Tokyo uninhabitable in the worst case.
We cannot but shudder to recall that besides the Unit 2 building stands a huge exhaust emission stack
(more than 130 meters high). It is already partially damaged.
If it collapses, Trillions of Bq of radioactive radiation could be released.

It is now obvious that Japan must consecrate all efforts to bring Fukushima under control,
and this very urgently.

With warmest and highest regards,

Mitsuhei Murata
Former Ambassador to Switzerland

News Punch
· HOME

· [ August 28, 2017 ] Flooding Crisis At Texas Nuclear Plant Sparks ‘New Fukushima’ Fears NEWS

Search for:

Flooding Crisis At Texas Nuclear Plant Sparks ‘New Fukushima’ Fears
August 28, 2017 Baxter Dmitry News, US 0

Experts are warning the STP Nuclear Plant in Texas is not prepared for the level of flooding and claim it will be the ‘new Fukushima.’

Experts are warning the STP Nuclear Plant in Texas is unprepared for the unprecedented level of flooding in the area and claim the troubled nuclear plant could become the “new Fukushima” and contaminate the entire south of the USA.

Before Hurricane Harvey hit the area, STP Nuclear Plant officials claimed the nuclear reactor was prepared to weather the storm, with an article published in the Bay City Tribune in Texas boasting:

“The plant site is located 10 miles inland and at an elevation of 29 feet, well above the reach of even a Category 5 storm surge. The plant was designed with watertight buildings and doors to keep emergency electric power and cooling systems fully functional. All buildings housing safety equipment are flood-proof to an elevation of at least 41 feet above mean sea level.”

An article in the San Antonio Current also debated the plants safety in the wake of Fukushima and made similar points about a hurricane storm surge – but also made an important distinction about inland flooding from the Colorado River, located about 2 miles away from the plant.

According to officials, the STP Nuclear Plant is built to withstand a “worst case scenario“ of a 100 year flood on the Colorado River.

From the article:

“STP spokesman Buddy Eller said the five-foot-thick, bunker-like concrete reactor domes reinforced with steel are able to withstand hurricane Category 5 winds and a 41-foot storm surge…“We’re built to withstand a worst-case scenario involving a hurricane with combined wind and a 100-year flood along that Colorado River,” Eller said. “…we’re located at 29 feet above sea level.”

While these pre-Harvey boasts from officials and nuclear plant spokesman may have sounded impressive before the storm hit, they now become truly disturbing.

According to the two articles and the STP spokesman himself, the nuclear reactor can withstand a 41 foot storm surge from the ocean – but being at 29 feet above sea level, that only allows for 12 feet of inland flooding.

Let’s take a look at the river level gauge on the Colorado River at Bay City, about 10 miles upstream from the STP nuclear plant:

new-fukushima-texas

The Colorado River at Bay City is forecast to surge 27 feet in the next two days!

And considering the river is currently 9 feet above what was forecast for this time, according to the graph, this is likely to surpass the all-time record crest of the Colorado River in the next few days. That “100 year flood” the plant spokesman talked about which happened in 1913 crested at a level of 56.1 feet.

The highest crest of the Colorado River at Bay City since the STP nuclear plant began operating was 24.04 feet in 1991.

<a

record-flooding-houstonRecord flooding hit Houston after Harvey.
Is the STP plant designed to withstand a record flood? Judging by the brags and boasts coming from officials before Harvey hit, the nuclear plant is only designed to withstand a “worst case scenario” of 41 feet.

In the wake of the Fukushima nuclear crisis in Japan, it is worth keeping a close eye on nuclear reactors in disaster zones. As we learned from TEPCO in Japan, officials cannot be trusted to tell the truth when there is such devastation on the line.

They designed a nuclear plant to withstand a “100 year flood” on the Colorado River? That’s negligent and reckless for a nuclear plant. It looks like STP will be facing a major test in the coming days, and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it right now.

Imminent flood coming” near nuke plant from Hurricane Harvey

August 28, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

Nuclear Worker: “Imminent flood coming” near nuke plant from Hurricane Harvey… “Potentially catastrophic”… Running out of food… Working tirelessly to manage problems… Area turned “upside down” — Nearby river forecast to rise 50 ft and overtop levees, “Major Flood Stage” (VIDEO)
Posted: 28 Aug 2017 12:21 AM PDT

“Biblical” hurricane expected to hit US nuclear plant

August 25, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

“Biblical” hurricane expected to hit US nuclear plant — Experts fear epic catastrophe — Rainfall could be “nearly apocalyptic… borderline unfathomable… unprecedented” — Wind gusts near 150 MPH expected (VIDEOS)
Posted: 25 Aug 2017 01:01 AM PDT

TEPCO faces $5 bil lawsuit in U.S. over 2011 Fukushima disaster

August 25, 2017

Storage tanks for contaminated water at the Fukushima plant Photo: AFP
National

Today 06:54 am JST 14 Comments
By Tomohiro Ohsumi
TOKYO
Tokyo Electric Power Co Holdings (TEPCO) said Thursday it faces another U.S. lawsuit over the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, with the latest one demanding at least $5 billion in compensation.

A total of 157 U.S. residents who were supporting Fukushima victims at the time filed the class action suit in a California district court earlier this month against the utility known as TEPCO and a U.S. company.

A massive tsunami triggered by a 9.0-magnitude earthquake smashed into the Fukushima Daiichi power plant on March 11, 2011.

The giant waves overwhelmed reactor cooling systems and sent three into meltdown, spewing radiation over a wide area.

The plaintiffs, who joined aid efforts along with U.S. troops shortly after the disaster, claim they were exposed to radiation because of the improper design, construction and maintenance of the plant.

They are seeking $5 billion to cover the cost of medical tests and treatment needed to recover from the disaster, TEPCO said in a statement.

They are also demanding compensation for physical, mental and economic damage but no further details such as a sum of money or the identities of the claimants were available.

It was the second multi-plaintiff suit filed against the utility in a U.S. court following one by more than 200 individuals in 2013.

In Japan, more than 10,000 people who fled their homes over radiation fears have filed various group lawsuits against the government and the firm.

© 2017 AFP

14 Comments Login to comment

DisillusionedToday 08:10 am JST
Milk that cow!

2( +3 / -1 )

BertieWoosterToday 08:31 am JST
Was this the so called “Tomodachi” gang?

4( +4 / -0 )

SaikoPhyscoToday 08:42 am JST
What? They were volunteers and they must have know what they were getting themselves into. It was immediately apparent that there was a high risk of radiation exposure anywhere near the Fukushima area. The only way I’d pay any of them a dime is if they could prove that TEPCO intentionally lowered the radiation numbers in the areas they were working below actual numbers. In addition… there would have to be actual proof that it was the radiation that caused real physical ailments. I would not pay a dime if it was for mental suffering over the idea that they may have been affected by radiation.

1( +4 / -3 )

tinawatanabeToday 08:48 am JST
It was GE (US) made reactors. Japan (Kan administration) refused Tomodachi Operation but was forced by US. Japan was made to pay billions of yen for US’s “Volunteer” operation.

No Japanese residents or rescue workers became sick by radiation.

-1( +2 / -3 )

papigiulioToday 08:48 am JST
In Japan, more than 10,000 people who fled their homes over radiation fears have filed various group lawsuits against the government and the firm.
What are the statuses of those lawsuits? Its 6 years since it happened, time to get the people the money they deserve!

0( +2 / -2 )

BertieWoosterToday 09:04 am JST
tinawatanabe,

That’s right then. It was the so called “Tomodachi” guys. A PR stunt that left a very bad taste.

1( +2 / -1 )

SaikoPhyscoToday 09:08 am JST
@tinawatanabe; It does not matter where the reactors were made… it was the location and height above sea level that caused the back-up power generators to fail. The original plan to build the plant had it being built on a bluff which was 35 meters above sea level. But TEPCO lowered the design to 10 meters in order to save money. TEPCO did research regarding a Tsunami but they felt 10 meters would be sufficient… of course, it was not.

5( +5 / -0 )

Striker10Today 09:23 am JST
I’m with SaikoPhysco, if they volunteered and went to Fukushima themselves after the meltdown they had to have known there would be a definite risk of radiation in the area. The reasoning of this lawsuit doesn’t make any sense to me, unless it really just is the bold-faced money-grab as it appears to be.

0( +1 / -1 )

gogogoToday 09:24 am JST
157 U.S. residents
Get 5 billion, Japanese citizens get?

1( +1 / -0 )

tinawatanabeToday 09:31 am JST
it was the location and height above sea level that caused the back-up power generators to fail.
Snowden and Wikileaks say US implanted explosives in many Japan’s important infrastructure to prevent Japan become independent from US.

-3( +0 / -3 )

David VarnesToday 09:34 am JST
Snowden and Wikileaks say US implanted explosives in many Japan’s important infrastructure to prevent Japan become independent from US.
Your non-point is? The decision was made by TEPCO. No amount of hemming, hawing, conspiracy theorizing, or other attempts to shift the blame off of TEPCO and onto anyone else is going to change that.

1( +2 / -1 )

DukeletoToday 09:38 am JST
The US and its law suits never fail to amaze! So you volunteer to go and help where a nuclear reactor has had a melt down. You then cry foul and climb on the bandwagon to claim $5 billion to be shared amongst 157 shameless individuals who’s original intentions were no doubt to do this eventually and had no intentions of actually helping. Let’s see $5,000,000,000 / 157 = $31,847,133 each minus lawyers fees and reduced settlement figure, taxes etc should net these sharlatans less than their expenses to fly over for the scam. Only the lawyers are going to go home with their pockets full if anyone is.

I notice there is no actual concern for the poor Japanese folk who were the actual victims…typical!

3( +4 / -1 )

ClippetyClopToday 10:02 am JST
Snowden and Wikileaks say US implanted explosives in many Japan’s important infrastructure to prevent Japan become independent from US.
That’s quite a claim! Please provide some sources, we’d love to know more.

1( +1 / -0 )

PsyopsToday 10:12 am JST
i agree, if you volunteered to help thats on your head, if the military made you go thats on your head because you signed your life away to uncle sam and they own you and can use you however they want. Also its 157 people who more than likely were brainwashed by lawyers since i dont see the thousands of other US volunteers on the lawsuit wagon. They went to help Japan like i did. So yes they are Tomodachi uncle my favorite anti-american troll that loves to be jealous on here. He just cant accept its the way the world is and his anti-american rhetoric isnt doing anything except influence the JT peanuts gang 🙂

0( +0 / -0 )

Trump’s Articles of Impeachment: A Greatest Hits Collection

August 23, 2017

Trump’s Articles of Impeachment: A Greatest Hits Collection

By David Swanson, FireDonaldTrump.org

Several years back, I led a team of authors drafting articles of impeachment against then-President George W. Bush for then-Congressman Dennis Kucinich. We drafted over 60 and settled on the best 35. Had Congress moved forward, it would not have passed all 35 or convicted on them. But we felt it was important to establish the record and present the options. In fact, I would have preferred to go with more than 35, including a wider range of topics. The fact that someone has abused power in 10 ways should constitute no license to abuse it in an 11th way.

Believe it or not (hint, hint: I don’t need more emails on this) I am aware of the general horror of Mike Pence, but a country that impeached and removed presidents would be a very different country in which the next president would have to behave or face impeachment and removal in turn. Fear of the next person will look ever weaker as grounds for allowing the current person to destroy things as he proceeds with his destruction.

I’m further aware that Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi’s team wants Trump around more than the Republicans do, so that the Democrats can “oppose” him. The task before the public is to compel members of both major parties to impeach, not to sit back and observe them doing so of their own volition.

Although several potential articles of impeachment against Trump stand very strongly on their own, and picking any one of them would be sufficient, the very strongest case for impeachment is a cumulative one. I cannot predict which articles, if any, will gain the most popular or Congressional support. I am, therefore, collecting the strongest ones available here at FireDonaldTrump.org. I will add more as the crime wave rolls on. I pushed for impeachment of Bush and of Obama for some similar offenses and some completely different ones. Many of Trump’s high crimes and misdemeanors are unprecedented. None are identical to the abuses by those who have gone before him.

I. Domestic Emoluments

In his conduct while President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has illegally received emoluments from the United States government and from individual state governments.

The Constitutional ban on domestic emoluments is absolute, not waivable by Congress, and not subject to proving any particular corrupting influence.

President Trump’s lease of the Old Post Office Building in Washington D.C. violates the General Services Administration lease contract which states: “No … elected official of the Government of the United States … shall be admitted to any share or part of this Lease, or to any benefit that may arise therefrom.” The GSA’s failure to enforce that contract constitutes an emolument.

Since 1980 Trump and his businesses have garnered, according to the New York Times, “$885 million in tax breaks, grants and other subsidies for luxury apartments, hotels and office buildings in New York.” Those subsidies from the state of New York have continued since President Trump took office and constitute emoluments.

In these and many similar actions and decisions, President Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

II. Foreign Emoluments

In his conduct while President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has illegally received emoluments from foreign governments. Foreign emoluments are banned by the U.S. Constitution.

Donald J. Trump’s business has licensing deals with two Trump Towers in Istanbul, Turkey. Donald J. Trump has stated: “I have a little conflict of interest, because I have a major, major building in Istanbul.”

China’s state-owned Industrial and Commercial Bank of China is the largest tenant in Trump Tower in New York City. It is also a major lender to Donald J. Trump. Its rent payments and its loans put President Trump in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Foreign diplomats, including the Embassy of Kuwait, have changed their Washington D.C. hotel and event reservations to Trump International Hotel following Donald J. Trump’s election to public office.

In these and many similar actions and decisions, President Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

III. Incitement of Violence Within the United States

In his conduct while President of the United States, and while campaigning for election to that office, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has illegally incited violence within the United States.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Brandenberg v. Ohio in 1969 that “advocacy directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action . . . likely to incite or produce such action” is not protected by the First Amendment.

An incomplete sampling of public statements by candidate Donald J. Trump:

“If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them. I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.”

“Maybe he should have been roughed up, because it was absolutely disgusting what he was doing.”

“See, in the good old days this doesn’t happen, because they used to treat them very, very rough. And when they protested once, you know, they would not do it again so easily.”

“You know what I hate? There’s a guy, totally disruptive, throwing punches, we’re not allowed to punch back anymore. I love the old days—you know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out on a stretcher, folks.”

“See the first group, I was nice. Oh, take your time. The second group, I was pretty nice. The third group, I’ll be a little more violent. And the fourth group, I’ll say get the hell out of here!”

“I’d like to punch him in the face, I tell ya.”

“You see, in the good old days, law enforcement acted a lot quicker than this. A lot quicker. In the good old days, they’d rip him out of that seat so fast — but today, everybody’s politically correct.”

“He was swinging, he was hitting people, and the audience hit back. That’s what we need more of.”

Numerous incidents of violence followed these comments. John Franklin McGraw punched a man in the face at a Trump event, and then told Inside Edition that “The next time we see him, we might have to kill him.” Donald J. Trump said that he was considering paying McGraw’s legal bills.

Since Trump’s election and inauguration, his comments appearing to incite violence have continued, as have incidents of violence in which those participating in violence have pointed to Trump as justification.

On July 2, 2017, President Donald J. Trump tweeted a video of himself body slamming a man with an image of “CNN” superimposed on him.

In August 2017, participants in a racist rally in Charlottesville, Va., credited President Trump with boosting their cause. Their violence included actions that have led to a murder charge. President Trump publicly minimized the offense and sought to blame “many sides.”

In these and similar actions and decisions, President Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

IV. Voter Intimidation

In his conduct while President of the United States, and while campaigning for election to that office, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has engaged in acts of voter intimidation and suppression.

For months leading up to the November 2016 elections, Donald J. Trump publicly encouraged his supporters, the same ones he had encouraged to engage in violence, to patrol polling places in search of participants in the virtually nonexistent practice of voter fraud. In so doing, candidate Trump made would-be voters aware that they might face such patrols. His remarks included:

“I hope you people can sort of not just vote on the 8th, go around and look and watch other polling places, and make sure that it’s 100 percent fine.”

“We’re going to watch Pennsylvania. Go down to certain areas and watch and study and make sure other people don’t come in and vote five times.”

Trump urged supporters to target Philadelphia, St. Louis, and other cities with large minority populations.

He created on his campaign website a way to sign up to “volunteer to be a Trump election observer.”

When early voting began, incidents were reported of Trump supporters photographing voters and otherwise intimidating them.

Trump ally and former campaign advisor Roger Stone formed an activist group called Stop the Steal that acted in line with Trump’s public statements. The group threatened violence against delegates if the Republican Party denied Trump its nomination. It then organized intimidation efforts in the general election around the unsupported claim that Trump’s opponents would somehow “flood the polls with illegals. Liberal enclaves already let illegals vote in their local and state elections and now they want them to vote in the Presidential election.”

According to the U.S. Department of Justice in 2006, in all federal elections between 2002 and 2005, a total of 26 people out of 197 million were convicted of trying to vote illegally.

Stone’s organization created official-looking ID badges for volunteers and asked them to videotape voters, and conduct phony exit polls in nine cities with large minority populations.

One such volunteer, Steve Webb of Ohio, told the Boston Globe, “I’m going to go right up behind them. I’ll do everything legally. I want to see if they are accountable. I’m not going to do anything illegal. I’m going to make them a little bit nervous.”

Since becoming president, Donald J. Trump has continued with voter intimidation efforts. He has created a Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, which has sent letters to states requesting sensitive voter information. Most states have refused. But thousands of people have canceled their registrations rather than have their information turned over to Trump’s administration.

In these and similar actions and decisions, President Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

V. Muslim Bans

In his conduct while President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has engaged in acts of discrimination in violation of the First Amendment and other laws by seeking to ban Muslims from entering the United States.

Donald J. Trump had openly campaigned for office promising a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” Once in office, he created an executive order that his advisor Rudy Giuliani, said on Fox News had been drafted after Trump had asked him for the best way to create a Muslim ban “legally.” The order targeted several majority-Muslim countries for restrictions on immigration to the United States, but made allowances for people of minority religions within those countries. Trump told the Christian Broadcasting Network that Christian refugees would be given priority. When a federal court stopped this order from taking effect, President Trump issued a new one containing, in the words of his advisor Stephen Miller “minor technical differences.”

In these actions and decisions, President Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

VI. Environmental Destruction

In his conduct while President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has actively sought to endanger the future existence of human life in the United States and elsewhere.

On December 6, 2009, on page 8 of the New York Times a letter to then-President Barack Obama printed as an advertisement and signed by Donald J. Trump called climate change an immediate challenge. “Please don’t postpone the earth,” it read. “If we fail to act now, it is scientifically irrefutable that there will be catastrophic and irreversible consequences for humanity and our planet.” An overwhelming consensus of climate scientists agreed with and still agree with that statement.

As president, Donald J. Trump has taken the opposite course, refusing to take any significant steps to protect the earth’s climate, and actively taking steps to endanger it, including by seeking to de-fund the Environmental Protection Agency and to censor its publications. President Trump has issued an executive order curbing enforcement of climate regulations. He has withdrawn the United States from the Paris climate agreement. He has disbanded the Advisory Committee for the Sustained National Climate Assessment. He has canceled a study of the health impacts of mountain-top removal.

The prosecutor for the International Criminal Court has written than environmental crimes are crimes against humanity.

In the above and many similar actions and decisions, President Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States and the world. Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

VII. Illegal Wars

In his conduct while President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has waged numerous wars in violation of the United Nations Charter and of the Kellogg-Briand Pact, both treaties part of the Supreme Law of the United States under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution.

By these actions, President Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States and the world. Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

VIII. Illegal Threats of Wars

In his conduct while President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has threatened war against additional nations, including North Korea, in violation of the United Nations Charter, a treaty that is part of the Supreme Law of the United States under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution.

By these actions, President Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States and the world. Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

IX. Sexual Assault

Prior to becoming President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, stated:

“I’m automatically attracted to beautiful [women]—I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything … Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”

By this action, Donald J. Trump has acted in a manner that makes it impossible for him to fulfill his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Wherefore, President Donald J. Trump, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

##

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.

Explosives found near multiple nuclear power plants — Fire and explosion reported

August 23, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

Explosives found near multiple nuclear power plants — Fire and explosion reported — Large bomb just hundreds of feet from reactor site — Military squads called in (VIDEO)
Posted: 22 Aug 2017 12:49 PM PDT

Symtoms of a change

August 19, 2017

Dear Friends,

There are symptoms that allow us to foresee an important change in Japan.
The Japanese major media seem to start shifting toward supporting the retreat from the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020.
The Asahi Newspaper and the Mainichi Newspaper, both of them sponsoring the Tokyo Olympic Games, surprised the readers by the following frank expressions.

(The editorial of August 14,2017)

<The Tokyo Olympic Games is based on the false assertion that “Fukushima is under control”, assertion that deceives the whole world. The Abe Cabinet passed by force the law on conspiracy under the pretext of the Tokyo Olympic Games, law that could restrict human rights and menace democracy. We should at least retreat from “the sickness of the Tokyo Olympic Games!”
(The evening edition of the Mainichi News Paper of August7, 2017)

“The results of the nation-wide referendum among the listeners
conducted on 17 June by the TV Asahi news anchor Hiroshi Kume’s wide-show program entitled "Should we retreat from the the Tokyo Olympic Games 2010 ?"are impressive. All age categories except “under 19 years old”
have overwhelmingly(83%) supported the retreat from the 2020 Olympic Games.

Mr. Hiroshi Kume revealed in his radio broadcast of August12 that the Olympic Organizing Committee had addressed him opposing arguments. He told the listeners that they proved their “Olympic First”position, in stead of
“Athletes First”, explaining why the Tokyo Olympic Games is taking place at the hottest period in Japan(July21~August9). The IOC had accepted the request of 3 American television networks to make the acceptance of it the prerequisite of the candidacy. Actually, the imposed choice of this hottest period is the target of increasing criticism, because of the obvious dangers of heat strokes menacing athletes, spectators, volunteers etc.( The evening edition of the Mainichi News Paper of July 29, 2017)

In view of the unimaginable impact the cancellation of the Tokyo Olympic Games, it could not but develop into a major political issue sooner or later.
In this connection, some former prime ministers are expected to play an important role.
Former Prime Minister Kan Naoto who experienced the 3/11 disaster while in office is engaged in pleading the world to stop
using nuclear reactors, source of humanly unacceptable consequences.
Former Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama voiced his opposition against it in his interview given by Japan Times a year and a half ago.
Former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi continues to condemn strongly the false assertion “under control”. He has established a relief fund to help American soldiers, victims of the TOMODACHI operation after the 3/11 nuclear disaster.
Among former prime ministers who have not taken position on the Olympic issue, some deserve special attention.
Former Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa played a role in promoting the removal of nuclear fuel rods from the unit 4 reactor in Fukushima Daiichi.
Former Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda is now drawing special attention.
On August 2, the Kyodo News interviewed him. He most severely criticized Prime Minister Abe, asserting that Japan would be ruined due to his control of high ranking bureaucrats by dint of the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affaires established in 2014.
(Japanese version: http://yuruneto.com/hukudayasuo/)

This interview has not yet been reported abroad, as of August 20, according to the Kyodo News. Its impact is expected to be far reaching.

An important change seems to be in the making.

With warmest and highest regards,
Mitsuhei Murata
Former Ambassador to Switzerland

 Top 10 Misconceptions About Charlottesville

August 14, 2017

 
Top 10 Misconceptions About Charlottesville
By David Swanson
http://davidswanson.org/top-10-misconceptions-about-charlottesville

1. Let’s start with the obvious. Charlottesville, Virginia, and Charlotte, North Carolina, are actually two completely different places in the world. The flood of concern and good wishes for those of us here in Charlottesville is wonderful and much appreciated. That people can watch TV news about Charlottesville, remember that I live in Charlottesville, and send me their kind greetings addressed to the people of Charlotte is an indication of how common the confusion is. It’s not badly taken; I have nothing against Charlotte. It’s just a different place, seventeen times the size. Charlottesville is a small town with the University of Virginia, a pedestrian downtown street, and very few monuments. The three located right downtown are for Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and the Confederacy. Neither Lee nor Jackson had anything to do with Charlottesville, and their statues were put up in whites-only parks in the 1920s.

2. The racists who have begun coming to Charlottesville to campaign for governor, garner attention, threaten violence, engage in violence, and commit murder are almost all from outside Charlottesville, and extremely unwelcome here. Charlottesville is a slightly left-of-center, Democratic Party area. Most people don’t rally for good causes or against bad ones. Most people don’t want the Lee statue taken down. (Or at least they didn’t until it became a gathering point for neo-Confederates.) Most people want other memorials added to public space to diversify. And most people don’t want white supremacists coming to town with their hatred and their violence.

3. Armed attacks are not covered by the First Amendment. I can and have argued at length for the strategic — never mind legal — need to respect odious free speech, and — more importantly — to respect and build bridges of understanding to the troubled people preaching hatred. But the human right to free speech is not found in a gun or a torch or a can of pepper spray any more than in corporate advertising. When we hold peace rallies in U.S. cities we are sometimes forbidden to bring posters on wooden poles. We have to use hollow cardboard tubes to hold up our signs, because — you know — advocates of nonviolence can be so violent. Yet racist, nationalist, white supremacist agitators are allowed to bring an arsenal with which to attack the general public and counter-demonstrators! Whatever that is, it is not free speech. I’d be willing to say it’s closer to enabling terrorism. All media habits of “balance” and “even handedness” become lies when respect for rights, and blame for deaths and injuries, are based on the notion that premeditated violence and threats of violence and the carrying of weapons are not worth noticing.

4. Charlottesville’s mayor voted against taking down the Lee statue, even if he now sounds on NBC News as if it had been his idea. Seen from a certain angle, that’s progress. I want people to get on board with the idea of taking down all racist monuments and all war monuments, and this one is both. But it is a misconception to imagine that the decision to take down General Lee came from the top or that it came without extensive public input. It’s true that City Council member Kristin Szakos publicly proposed the dominance of our public space by Confederate statues as a problem, and that City Council member Wes Bellamy pushed for that. But it was the national movement of Black Lives Matter, and local activism, that created the demand in the first place, as well as making Bellamy a member of City Council. The City held very lengthy and public and extensive hearings and gathering of facts and views. A Blue Ribbon Commission produced a report. And when the City Council voted to take down Lee (but leave up Jackson) it did so because City Council Member Bob Fenwick joined Szakos and Bellamy in a 3-2 vote, in which Mayor Mike Signer was on the losing and cowardly side. Because that is typical of him, we should be wary of fale perceptions of him as a leader, until he really becomes one. It’s possible that had he shown the leadership of the Mayor of New Orleans in taking down statues and explaining why, we wouldn’t be in this mess.

5. The military and militarized police are not here to protect you. An armed force on the streets and in the air of Charlottesville crashed a helicopter, tragically killing two people. But what else did it accomplish? It heightened tensions. It reduced turnout by those opposed to violence and racism. Its aggression toward anti-racists following the KKK rally in July contributed to fears of what it would do this time. The Charlottesville police do not need the mine-resistant vehicle they keep in their garage, because we do not have land mines. We do not need our skies filled — including on the Friday before the rally — with military helicopters. We do not need tanks on our streets for godsake. We need to disarm those seeking to exercise their First Amendment Rights, not arm someone else. The helicopter never should have crashed because it never should have flown. And every individual who assaulted and threatened people with pepper spray, torches, sticks, fists, or an automobile, should have been welcomed to nonviolently, without guns or other weaponry, speak their mind — and to meet and converse with those opposing their views.

6. The events in Charlottesville, like foreign and domestic emoluments, additional forms of financial corruption, Muslim bans, illegal wars, threats to North Korea, voter intimidation, environmental destruction, and sexual assault, make up yet another article of impeachment for Donald Trump awaiting only the awakening of a House of Representatives. Incitement of acts of violence is a crime, and it is certainly a high-crime-and-misdemeanor, the Constitutional phrase refering to an abuse of power that may or may not be criminal. Donald Trump went out of his way to persuade racists that they were free to engage in their racism openly. Numerous racists, including some of those who have been active in Charlottesville, have openly communicated their understanding of that presidential permission. Those sitting silently by in this moment are condoning racism. So are those not advocating for impeachment and removal. Yes I am aware of the general horror of Mike Pence, but a country that impeached and removed presidents would be a very different country in which the next president would have to behave or face impeachment in turn. Fear of the next person will look ever weaker as grounds for allowing the current person to destroy things as he proceeds with his destruction. I’m further aware that the D.C. Democratic leadership makes Mayor Signer’s cynicism look like child’s play, and that Nancy Pelosi wants Trump around more than the Republicans do, so that the Democrats can “oppose” him. But I’m not asking you to believe he’s going to be impeached without your doing anything. I’m asking you to compel his impeachment.

7. The answer to racist violence is not anti-racist violence or passivism, and the idea that those are the only two choices is ridiculous. Charlottesville’s and the United States’ resistance to racism would be far stronger with disciplined nonviolence. The behavior of a few anti-racists in July allowed the corporate media to depict the KKK as victims. There is nothing the alt-right crowd longs for more in this moment than some act of violence against them that would permit pundits to start trumpeting the need for liberals to be more tolerant of racists, and to proclaim that the real problem is those reckless radicals who want to tear down statues. We need nonviolent activism, and we need a thousand times more of it. We need to initiate the next rally in Charlottesville ourselves.

8. Tearing down statues is not opposing history. Charlottesville has three Confederate war statues, two (pro) genocide of the Native Americans statues, one World War I statue, one Vietnam War memorial, one statue of Thomas Jefferson (whose words and deeds, I’m sorry to say, agreed almost entirely with the latest racists), and one statue of Homer (poet of war). And that’s it. We have no memorials, whether monumental statuary or otherwise, to a single educator, artist, musician, athlete, author, or activst, nothing for Native American history, slavery, civil rights, women’s rights, or ANYTHING ELSE. Almost all of our history is missing. Putting up a giant statue for racism and war is not a step for history. Taking it down is not a blow to history. It could be a step forward, in fact. Even the renaming of Lee Park as Emancipation Park is educational. Creating a memorial to emancipation, and one to civil rights, and one to school integration, and one to peace would be more so.

9. The Lee statue is still there, not because racists rally around it, but because legislators glorify war. While neither side has any interest in opposing or even particularly in promoting war, and while the national and local media have gone through endless contortions to avoid mentioning it, the court case holding up the removal of Robert E. Lee and the horse he never rode in on is about war glorification. A state law that may or may not apply to this statue forbids taking down war memorials in Virginia. For fair and balanced free-speech advocates I should note that no similar law forbids taking down peace monuments. Also there really aren’t any to take down if you wanted to. This is a symptom of a culture that has come to accept endless war and the militarization of local police, and to report on rallies of “white nationalists” without ever considering that there may be a problem with both of those words.

10. As I’ve written in recent months, many sympathizers with the racist cause are understandable. This is a quite different thing from being acceptable or praise worthy. To say that someone is understandable is to say that you can understand them. They’re not monsters acting on inexplicable subhuman impulses any more than do the people they hate or the people against whom the United States wages wars typically behave that way. These racists live in one of the most unequal societies ever known, and they don’t live at the top of it. They hear about endless efforts to alleviate injustice toward all sorts of wronged groups that don’t include them. They notice the cultural acceptability in comedy shows and elsewhere of mocking white people. They seek a group identity. They seek others to blame. They seek others to place beneath themselves. And they hear hardly a peep out of Washington D.C. about creating universal rights and supports for everyone, as in Scandinavia. Instead they hear that hatred and violence and racism come with the Presidential seal of approval.

Sent via Action Network, a free online toolset anyone can use to organize. Click here to sign up and get started building an email list and creating online actions today.
Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them.
You can unsubscribe or update your email address by changing your subscription preferences here.

Nationwide Rallies After Hate Kills in Charlottesville | Weekend Edition

August 13, 2017

Independent, Non-Profit Newscenter since 1997

While Trump Equivocates on Charlottesville, Nationwide Rallies to Denounce White Supremacy
‘We mourn for the lives that were lost, and we will honor all those under attack by congregating against hate in our own communities.’

News…

Proud Mother Says Charlottesville Victim Heather Heyer ‘Was About Stopping Hatred’
“I want her death to be a rallying cry for justice and equality and fairness and compassion,” says mother of Heather Heyer. “No mother wants to lose a child, but I’m proud of her.”

Police Stood By As Mayhem Mounted in Charlottesville
State police and National Guardsmen watched passively for hours as self-proclaimed Nazis engaged in street battles with counter-protesters.

Horror in Charlottesville: One Dead After Driver Plows into Anti-Racist Demo
In a terrifying scene in Charlottesville, Virginia on Saturday, the driver of a car appeared to intentionally slam into progressive demonstrators marching against a Klu Klux Klan-backed neo-Nazi rally taking place in the city.

White Supremacists, Armed With Tiki Torches and Hate, Denounced at UVA
‘We cannot let their worldview normalize. We must be clear, united, and vocal in our opposition.’
More News…
Views…

There Are Only Two Sides to Charlottesville. Trump Is on the Wrong One.
by Christine Emba
As the leader of our nation, our president should know that some conflicts don’t deserve forbearance or false equivalence.

A Presidency Built on Racial Divisions
by Peniel Joseph
As the first modern president to consider racial segregationists a part of his base, Trump remains reluctant to forcefully speak out against racial hatred, thereby sending another signal that ensures that this latest explosion of racial violence will get much worse, before it gets better.

Dear White Supremacists: There Will Be No Race War
by Steven Singer
“This one goes out to all the white boys who think being ‘white’ and being a ‘boy’ means the world owes them something.”

Charlottesville Was Not a “Protest Turned Violent,” It Was a Planned Race Riot
by Zenobia Jeffries
Isn’t it time for the media to be honest and call white supremacists the domestic terrorists that they are?

For Media, Driving Into a Crowd of Protesters Is a ‘Clash’
by Adam Johnson
“There are times when things can be ambiguous,but after a person the police say ‘premeditatedly’ rammed into a crowd of anti-racist protesters with a car, it’s fairly clear the anti-racist protesters aren’t to blame for the death.”

The Misguided Attacks on ACLU for Defending Neo-Nazis’ Free Speech Rights in Charlottesville
by Glenn Greenwald
A caution about who exactly is to blame when what looks like political violence occurs.
More Views…
Newswire…

People’s Action:
Until Trump Condemns Racism and Hate, He is Condoning It
Indivisible Guide:
Statement on Charlottesville
National Nurses United:
Nurses Condemn Charlottesville Violence, ‘No Place for White Supremacy, Racism, Bigotry in a Democratic Society’
Democracy for America:
Charlottesville Solidarity Rallies

more newswire…

Review us on Google | Find us on Facebook |
Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community.
An independent, non-profit newscenter since 1997.
Our Mission: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.

Click here to manage your email preferences.
Common Dreams, PO Box 443, Portland, Maine 04112 | 207.775.0488
Common Dreams is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. Your contribution is tax deductible. EIN: 20-3368194.