Archive for the ‘Nuclear Crisis’ Category


December 19, 2017

BY JASON LE MIERE ON 11/14/17 AT 10:28 AM



It would take just five minutes from the time President Donald Trump ordered the launch of nuclear weapons—perhaps after being provoked by the latest insult from North Korean leader Kim Jong Un—for them to be fired.

That alarming scenario involving a president who has shown a thin skin and a propensity for rash decisions has prompted Congress to hold its first serious debate about the president’s unilateral authority to launch nuclear weapons in four decades.

Related: North Korea complains about U.S. Military bringing ‘nuclear war equipment’ near Korean Peninsula

Keep Up With This Story And More By Subscribing Now

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hold a hearing Tuesday on “the executive’s authority to use nuclear weapons.” The hearing was announced last week by the committee’s Republican chairman, Senator Bob Corker, and it represents the first time either the Senate or House Foreign Relations Committee has addressed the issue since 1976.

According to Bruce Blair, a nuclear command and control expert and research scholar at the Program of Science and Global Security at Princeton University, it is long overdue.

“We all need to confront the fact that this system gives one person the God-like power to end the world,” he told Newsweek Monday.

Tuesday’s hearing is not the first attempt to address Trump’s ability to launch nuclear weapons. Earlier this year, two Democrats, Senator Ed Markey and Representative Ted Lieu, introduced a bill that would deny Trump the authority to launch a nuclear first strike without a declaration of war from Congress.

“As long as President Trump has a Twitter account, we need a nuclear no-first-use policy for the United States of America,” Markey said in May.


Donald Trump

Donald Trump
President Donald Trump looks on during a bilateral meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sideline of the 31st Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Manila on November 13.

Blair shared a similar assessment of Trump and his perceived lack of judgment, concluding that “he is very capable of making a very bad call against the advice of others, even if he asks for it, and that could be the end.”

Under the current procedures, it is possible Trump could act without getting any high-level advice or even a note of caution. Were he to decide the time has arrived to go nuclear, Trump would descend to his bunker, known as the Presidential Emergency Operations Center, and initiate a conference with the war room at the Pentagon. But there is no requirement for the president to listen to advice and no guarantee that top advisers would even be on the call. The technology is so outdated and neglected that in both exercises and real-world scenarios the secretaries of defense and state never came on the line, said Blair, who once served as an intercontinental ballistic missile launch control officer.

Once the decision was made, Trump would authenticate the order with a code before the war room transmitted a launch order that is, ironically, roughly the length of a tweet. From the decision being made to nuclear weapons being launched, the time elapsed can be as little as five minutes, or, if launched from submarines—as would likely be the case for an attack on North Korea—15 minutes.

It is an incredible responsibility no matter who sits in the White House. If nothing else, Blair, who co-founded Global Zero, which is dedicated to eliminating nuclear weapons, said he is grateful to Trump for unwittingly highlighting that fact and pushing Congress to address the issue.

“I think the silver lining in Trump’s behavior and election is his single-handedly raised public’s awareness and concern about nuclear weapons to the highest level it’s been in decades,” he said.

Kim Jong Un missile launch
This photo taken on February 12, 2017 and released on February 13 by North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) shows North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un (C) surrounded by soldiers of the Korean People’s Army as he inspects the test-launch of a surface-to-surface medium long-range ballistic missile Pukguksong-2 at an undisclosed location.

For months, Trump has engaged in a nuclear war of words with Kim, in August famously vowing to unleash “fire and fury like the world has never seen.” As North Korea has stepped up its testing of intercontinental ballistic missiles it says can carry nuclear warheads, the United States and South Korea have engaged in increasing military exercises on the Korean Peninsula.

During Trump’s trip to South Korea last week, he even took the step of revealing that a “nuclear submarine is also positioned.”

A president who has shown a proclivity for snap reactions to minor perceived insults, his basically unchecked authority and the country’s outdated technology are not the only concerns about U.S. nuclear weapons systems: They are also vulnerable to cyber-attacks, and there have been numerous false alarms.

It is enough to keep anyone up at night, particularly someone intimately aware of the fragile sytems that keep the world from experiencing nuclear holocaust.

“I worry about it all day long and into the evening until I have my second cocktail,” Blair said.



December 19, 2017

BY JASON LE MIERE ON 11/29/17 AT 6:00 PM


President Donald Trump’s claims that the Access Hollywood tape and President Barack Obama’s birth certificate are fakes are not just lies he tells others, psychiatrists say, they are delusions consistent with a severe personality disorder. And according to two psychiatrists who have warned that Trump is dangerously unfit for office, this could lead to a nuclear showdown with North Korea that results in the deaths of millions.

Related: Trump could create nuclear holocaust in five minutes; Congress is now trying to stop that

“He has to bend reality to fit his narcissistic needs,” psychologist John Gartner, a former assistant professor at Johns Hopkins University and founder of a political advocacy group targeting Trump, called The Duty to Warn, told Newsweek Wednesday. “Reality can actually be bent and molded to fit his narcissistic needs and fantasies and to fit his persecutory and paranoid needs and fantasies.”

Keep Up With This Story And More By Subscribing Now

Despite initially apologizing about the infamous Access Hollywood tape, Trump while among his allies has begun disputing that the voice heard bragging about sexual assault is actually his, The New York Times reported Tuesday. The president is even said to have told a Republican senator that he wants to investigate the recording. (Access Hollywood, meanwhile, has insisted that the tape is not a fake.)

At the same time, he has not dropped the disproved conspiracy theory that Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery and that he was not born in the United States—despite saying during the campaign that he did not really believe it.

This should not necessarily come as a surprise, given that his presidency started with a delusion. Just hours after Trump was sworn in, then-Press Secretary Sean Spicer was pushed in front of the media—by Trump, many believe—to falsely claim that his inauguration crowd was the largest in history.

Donald Trump
President Donald Trump speaks about tax reform at the St. Charles Convention Center on November 29, in St. Charles, Missouri.

While some have portrayed the mistruths as a political strategy, it is far more than that, according to a former assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, Lance Dodes.

“He is a far more sick person than people realize or want to realize,” Dodes, who like Gartner was a contributor to the book The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, told Newsweek. “To say for example that he is even a con man is way too benign. He loses track of reality when it comes to a challenge to his sense of himself, which is extremely fragile. It’s out of his control—he is not clever like a fox, he is just very, very sick.”

While many observers, including Obama, expressed a hope and expectation that Trump’s more outlandish mental gymnastics would be reined in when he took on the responsibility of the presidency, the opposite has proved to be true, both experts claimed. With a group of enablers surrounding him and a supporter base of millions who swallow his mistruths, they only grow more extreme.

Trump’s delusions appear to have taken yet another uptick in recent days. Just this week, he has proposed a Fake News Trophy that mainstream media outlets would compete over; retweeted anti-Muslim videos from a British far-right group; and suggested that a cable news host was a murderer.

Trump took similar dips into conspiracy theories shortly before the first indictments in the Russia investigation were unveiled last month. It is evidence of a clear, and worrying, pattern, Dodes stressed.

“He feels more threatened now, which we all predicted he would,” he said. “The more stress he’s under the more delusional he’s going to become, the more out of control and, from a danger standpoint, the more enraged he’s going to become.”

Trump’s latest dance with delusion comes at a particularly perilous time. On Wednesday, North Korea launched an intercontinental ballistic missile it called its most advanced yet, and some said it theoretically put Washington, D.C., within range.

There is a growing fear, including among some in Congress who recently held a hearing on the president’s authority to use nuclear weapons, that a rash decision could end in disaster.

“The noose is tightening,” Gartner said. “What do cornered animals do when they’re under attack? They lash out. Pushing that button solves a lot of problems for him. Psychologically it takes him out of the position of feeling like the weak victim, which is intolerable to him, and puts him back in the position of being the sadistic dominant power man. It will be irresistible to him to do that.”

As it has become clear that Trump’s mindset has not improved since entering the White House, some, including dissenting Republican Senator Bob Corker, have put their faith in Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis to keep the ship on course. But both Gartner and Dodes insisted that that was a forlorn hope. Not only is there no containing someone like Trump, who they define as a malignant narcissist, there is no treating him, either.

“People who are as empty as him can’t engage in therapy,” Dodes said. “He is more likely to become more psychotic if you treat him.”

A devastating war is inevitable, both men said, if Trump remains in office.

“We are truly on the edge of Armageddon,” Gartner said. “We are that close to losing millions of lives.”

Shocking information:U.S. Planned 7 A-bombs Dropped on Japan!

November 16, 2017

Concerning my BCC message of November 11, 2017, I am transmitting youDear Friends,

a mail sent to me from the Natural Solutions Foundation,an International NGO

Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 12:18 PM


Happily the US government did not have hundreds of nuclear weapons at the end of the War  and so the “plan” to nuke Europe was just a terrible potential not achievable.

It appears there was enough nuclear material for six or eight bombs at that time. There was a plan to use 7 atomic bombs on the coast of Japan during an American invasion (the “plan” was to have the invading troops come ashore just after the bombs and march through the fallout). Sanity prevailed and the war ended without that madness.

By the time the US had hundreds of bombs the Soviets had them too and the world was saved, so far, from the horror of a general nuclear war.

From: mitsu

Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2017 12:00 AM

Dear Friends,

I am transmitting the shocking information sent from Major-General Vinod Saighal.

The world is yet to achieve true denuclearization.

The insinuated madness and dangers therefore remain real and present.

The necessity of the shift from the currrent patenal civilization based on power and domination

to a maternal civilization based on harmony and solidarity is increasingly evident.

Mitsuhei Murata

Former Ambassador to Switzerland

Trump’s nuclear dreams

October 27, 2017

This site is funded by readers like you. We need your help today to continue operations.
Donate Now or Learn More
$1,407/$15,000 raised. Donations are tax-deductible.
Home Politics Trump’s nuclear dreams

Nightmares past and present.

By Rebecca Gordon – October 27, 2017 | Op-Ed 0 Comments27
Share on Facebook Tweet on Twitter

SOURCETom Dispatch
TAGSCongressDonald Trumpnuclear weapons
Preventing a nuclear war between the United States and North Korea may be the most pressing challenge facing the world right now.

Our childish, ignorant, and incompetent president is shoving all of us – especially the people of Asia – ever nearer to catastrophe. While North Korea probably hasn’t yet developed the missiles to deliver a nuclear warhead to the U.S. mainland, it certainly has the capacity to reach closer targets, including South Korea and Japan.

But what can ordinary people do about it? Our fingers are far removed from the levers of power, while the tiny digits of the man occupying the “adult day care center” we call the White House hover dangerously close to what people my age used to call “the Button.” Nevertheless, I think there may still be time to put our collective foot on the brakes, beginning with the promise of a bill currently languishing in Congress.

Meanwhile, many of us who were born in the post-World War II years are re-experiencing nightmares we thought we’d left safely in the past.

Duck and cover

I was born seven years after the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Like the rest of my generation of Americans, I grew up in the shadow – or perhaps more accurately, the glow – of “the Bomb” (which, in those days, we did indeed capitalize). I remember the elementary school ritual of joining a line of neat, obedient second-graders crouching on knees and elbows against a protective concrete hallway wall, hands covering the backs of our necks. I remember coming home from school, recounting that day’s activities to my mother and watching as she rushed to the bathroom to vomit – her all-too-literal gut reaction to a world in which her children were being prepared in school for global annihilation.

Is NationofChange worth $0.17/day?

NationofChange is a nonprofit organization, and this website is funded by readers like you.

We must raise $15,000 this week to continue our good work through November.

If you use this site, please donate $5 for the month or create a recurring donation.
In class, we saw civil defense films produced by the government, like the one that encouraged us to “set aside a small supply of canned goods” in makeshift basement shelters. “They’re safe from radioactivity,” the narrator assured us, as a lovely, young, white mother confidently placed the last can firmly on the cupboard shelf. (The film was far less enlightening about what to do once that “small supply” ran out.) Other movies reminded us that we should always be aware of the location of the nearest fallout shelter or taught us how to duck and cover.

By 1961, my family had moved from rural New York State to Washington, D.C., where my mother got a job with the brand new Peace Corps. Everywhere in my new city I saw the distinctive black-and-yellow signsindicating fallout shelter locations. The student body at Alice Deal Junior High School was too big for hallway drills. Instead, at the appointed time, we would all be herded into the auditorium, where a solemn-faced principal would describe the secret underground shelter where we would all be safe, should the Soviets actually launch a nuclear attack on our country. I remember bursting out laughing, while my homeroom teacher fixed me with an angry stare. Who was the principal kidding? We lived in Washington, the number one political target of any potential Soviet nuclear strike. Even then, I was aware enough to know that, whether above ground or under it, we would either fry immediately or die of radioactive poisoning thereafter.

In my family, we joked about bomb shelters. We knew they wouldn’t save us. So I remember being shocked when, in the early 1960s, we visited the family of a friend of my mother’s named Yarmolinsky. We kids were all sent out to play behind their suburban Virginia home, where my brother and I stumbled upon a large dome in the middle of the woods. “What’s that?” we asked our new friends.

“Oh, that’s our fallout shelter,” one of them replied.

I was stunned. The Yarmolinskys lived just a few miles from Washington and yet they had their own fallout shelter! They were crazy. What I didn’t know then was that the father, Adam Yarmolinsky, at the time a special assistant to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and one of his “whiz kids,” was the architect of a “complicated domestic [program] to expand the construction of fallout shelters in American homes.”

Indeed, “shelter morality” became one of the favorite ethical issues of the day. The question was: What responsibility would people who had the sense to build such shelters before an attack have for people who failed to do the same? In 1962, Life magazine published a cover story urging the government to build mass shelters in order to avoid just such a future division between “haves” and “have-nots.” It quoted a Mrs. Florence Ergang who said, “I am dismayed at shelter morality. It is natural to protect one’s family, but my ethics dictate that my neighbors be protected too.”

Even today, students in college political science or business ethics classes sometimes wrestle with the “fallout shelter exercise” (although the quandary it lays out undoubtedly seems to them like a scene from ancient history). In that exercise, students are asked to decide which individuals – a Latina prostitute and her infant son, a white male biologist, and so on – should be allowed to remain in a fallout shelter with limited space and supplies. There’s even a fallout shelter game for your cell phone where the characters are a bit more multicultural than in the civil defense films of the 1950s – although all three women pictured on the home screen still wear little-girl skirts.

As an adolescent, I knew all the words to satirist Tom Lehrer’s “Who’s Next.” (“First we got the bomb, and that was good/’cause we love peace and motherhood…”) I read the nuclear thriller Failsafe, the grim, end-of-everything novel On the Beach, and that peculiar mixture of racism and nuclear terror, Robert Heinlein’s Farnham’s Freehold, in which a nuclear blast sends the author’s self-reliant, libertarian hero into a dystopic future “America.” There, Black people oppress the white population – to the point of regarding young white women as culinary delicacies. Yes, the science fiction writer who gave the world Stranger in a Strange Land and taught hippies how to “grok” (to understand something deeply and intuitively) also created that perfect fictional confection of the fears of comfortable white people of the 1960s.

It’s hard to explain, especially to those who were born after the Soviet Union imploded in 1991, taking with it the immediate fear of nuclear holocaust, what it was like to grow up in the knowledge that such a war was coming within your lifetime. It’s hard to describe what it was like to lie awake at night waiting for the sound of the sirens that would let us all know it was happening. During those long nights, I hid a transistor radio under my pillow, turning it on repeatedly to reassure myself that the pop-rock station I disdained during the daytime was still transmitting top 40 hits, not duck-and-cover instructions.

My morbid preoccupations weren’t unusual in that era. The constant threat of nuclear war formed the background radiation for the childhood of a whole generation. All my friends, many of whose parents worked for the federal government, shared my fears. When we said good night on the phone, my high school boyfriend and I sometimes wondered aloud if we’d see each other the next day. Our adolescent reckoning with our own mortality became a confrontation with the mortality of our species, and it made some of us more than a little crazy. We lived with a curious wartime consciousness, in which we planned for our futures while knowing that there might be none to plan for.

A dose of reality

So much for the never-realized fears of the baby boomers. How likely is Donald Trump not just to revive them, but to start a nuclear war with North Korea in 2017? Several indicators suggest that the danger isn’t as great as some of us may fear.

* Trump has yet to follow through on his August 9th threat to rain “fire and fury like the world has never seen” on North Korea, should it again threaten to attack the United States. Nor has he implemented his breathtaking guarantee at the United Nations that, should North Korea “force” us “to defend ourselves or our allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy” it. In both cases, as political scientist Steven Brams has pointed out, Trump’s rhetoric left the location of his nuclear tripwire so vague that even he may not know where it is or when it might be crossed. As recently as October 13th, according to the New York Times, North Korean officials “renewed their threat to launch ballistic missiles near Guam, an American territory in the western Pacific.” There has been no response from Trump, so we can only assume that, whatever he means by a North Korean threat, that isn’t it. Fortunately for the world, it seems that he’s treating such promises the way he treats all his utterances – as infinitely subject to reinterpretation or even retraction.

* The president’s threats to use nuclear weapons may well be another instance of his well-documented “negotiating” tactics, in which he launches a bargaining process with a preposterous starting position in order to make the merely outrageous appear like a reasonable compromise.

* Even in the case of another U.S. adversary that may have sought nuclear weapons in the past – Iran – Trump has not been as decisively destructive as he could have been. Although he has railed endlessly against the six-nation nuclear agreement with Iran, negotiated in large part by President Obama, he didn’t tear it up recently (as he has often promised to do). Rather, he punted the problem to Congress, simply refusing to certify that Iran is abiding by the agreement, in spite of International Atomic Energy Agency assurances that it is. For a man who has an obvious urge to wield autocratic power, Trump is surprisingly willing to dilute it to get credit with his base while avoiding genuine action.

Those are modestly hopeful signs – although it’s hardly a hopeful sign of anything that the world is reduced to reading an American president’s words as if they were so many throws of the I Ching. Unfortunately, we must also consider ways in which Trump’s presence in the White House makes nuclear war more likely.

* He has repeatedly expressed a personal fascination with nuclear weapons, although he seems to have little idea of what their actual use might mean. In March 2016, for instance, he told The O’Reilly Factor on Fox News that he might even consider using nuclear weapons in Europe, which he called “a big place,” as if some parts of it might be legitimate nuclear targets. And he added, “I’m not going to take cards off the table.” At an MSNBC town hall that same month, he proposed using nuclear weapons against the “caliphate” of the Islamic State. Nuclear weapons directed against guerrilla fighters? That makes so much sense!

When Chris Matthews suggested that Japanese citizens might be nervous on hearing a presidential candidate bring up the use of nuclear weapons, Trump responded by asking, “Then why are we making them? Why do we make them?” It might be a reasonable question, if someone other than Donald Trump had been asking it.

When word first surfaced that his Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had called him a “moron,” some of us wondered which of Trump’s many displays of ignorance had occasioned the label. Now we know. It seems to have been the president’s suggestion, at a July 2017 national security briefing, that the United States should increase its current nuclear arsenal of around 4,000 warheads by a factor of 10.

* The advisers Trump seems to respect the most at the moment are generals or former generals, including his chief of staff John Kelly, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. Commentators (including some on the liberal end of the spectrum) like to think of this coterie of military men as the “grown-ups” in the Trumpian room. I’m not convinced, but even if they are more temperamentally suited to governing than this president, they have a tendency, not surprisingly, to reach first for military solutions to diplomatic problems.

Mattis, for example, has warned of “a massive military response” to any North Korean threat to the U.S. or its allies. “We are not looking to the total annihilation of a country, namely North Korea,” he told the reporters in September, “but as I said, we have many options to do so.” Similarly, when ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked McMaster, “[J]ust to be clear, threats alone will not provoke a U.S. military response, will they?” the general replied, “Well, it depends on the nature of the threat, right?” McMaster then essentially argued that, because Kim Jong-un has had family members killed and is cruel to the North Korean people, he must be too unstable to understand how mutually assured destruction (a Cold War nuclear strategy with the apt acronym MAD) is supposed to work. Oddly enough, another communist dictator, Joseph Stalin, who presided over party purges and the deaths of millions of Soviet citizens, seemed to comprehend the concept well enough, but those inscrutable Asians are apparently altogether different.

Even retired General Kelly has recently said that North Korea simply cannot be allowed to have “the ability to reach the homeland” with nuclear-armed missiles, “cryptically telling reporters,” according to CNN, that “if the threat grows ‘beyond where it is today, well, let’s hope that diplomacy works.’”

* Trump’s civilian advisors aren’t much better. In September, U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley told CNN’s State of the Union that the administration “wanted to be responsible and go through all diplomatic means to get [the North Koreans’] attention first.” But, she warned, “if that doesn’t work, General Mattis will take care of it.” Lest listeners should be confused about how he’d “take care” of that country, she explained as bluntly as the president had: “If North Korea keeps on with this reckless behavior, if the United States has to defend itself or defend its allies in any way, North Korea will be destroyed.”

Certainly, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has repeatedly brought up the need to keep communication channels open to North Korea, even in the face of Trump’s tweeted advice “that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man.” Nevertheless, he seems to expect diplomacy to “fail.” On October 15th, Tillerson explained to CNN that “those diplomatic efforts will continue until the first bomb drops.” Until? Why does he assume bombs will fall? And exactly who does he expect to drop the first one? Is he talking about a possible U.S. first strike?

It’s as if the entire administration has accepted the inevitability of an otherwise optional war. If you want an analogy, consider the way George W. Bush’s administration maintained the pretext of being open to negotiations with Iraqi autocrat Saddam Hussein until it launched its preordained invasion and the first bombs and cruise missiles began to hit Baghdad on March 20, 2003.

* Trump wants to rule by command. The niceties of the Constitution, the law, and the doctrine of the separation of powers have made this harder than he thought. So far, his attempts to run the country by executive order have largely failed, with his “third one’s the charm” Muslim ban once again stalled in the courts. Even his latest move to dismantle Obamacare by ending federal premium subsidies won’t take immediate effect. Indeed, it already faces legal challenges from at least 18 states.

He’s frustrated. Why can’t he just wave a hand, like Jean-Luc Picard, commander of the Starship Enterprise, and order his underlings to “make it so”?

As it happens, there is one realm in which the Constitution, the legal system, and Congress make no difference, one realm where he can do exactly that. He, and he alone, has the power to order a nuclear strike. The more that what remains of law and custom can still prevent him from ruling by fiat elsewhere, the more likely he may be, as Senator Bob Corker has warned us, to put the world “on the path to World War III” and to the first use of such weapons since August 9, 1945.

Pull his fingers off the button

Congress would still have time to stop this madness, if it had the courage to do so. There are a number of actions it could take, including passing a law that would require a unanimous decision by a specified group of people. (For example, officials like the secretaries of state and defense together with the congressional leadership for a nuclear first strike.

Better yet, Congress could reassert its long-abdicated constitutional right to declare war. It could, for example, approve a simple piece of legislation introduced in January by Representative Ted Lieu of California. According to the Congressional Research Service, his bill, House Resolution 669, the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act of 2017, “prohibits the president from using the Armed Forces to conduct a first-use nuclear strike unless such strike is conducted pursuant to a congressional declaration of war expressly authorizing such strike.”

Congress should act while there is still time. Removing Trump’s ability to unilaterally launch a nuclear attack might ease some fears in Pyongyang. And the rest of us might once again be able to sleep at night.


“Worst hurricane ever” headed straight for multiple US nuclear plants

September 7, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

“Worst hurricane ever” headed straight for multiple US nuclear plants — Winds up to 225 MPH — Storm to cause “apocalyptic damage” — Officials making Fukushima comparisons (VIDEOS)
Posted: 06 Sep 2017 07:21 PM PDT

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

· [ 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:


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.


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.

Nuclear Crises

May 26, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

TV: Millions of dead sea creatures wash ashore in Hawaii — Carcasses found along miles of beach — “That should trigger some alarm” — “I don’t know what’s going on over there… I’ve never seen anything like this” (VIDEOS)
Posted: 26 May 2017 04:06 AM PDT

“Emergency Alert”: Fire breaks out at nuclear plant — Officials take action “to avoid a nuclear disaster” — Large amount of smoke reported — Government activates emergency plan
Posted: 25 May 2017 12:08 PM PDT

Emergency at US Nuclear Site: “Unusually high” radiation levels reported

May 22, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

Emergency at US Nuclear Site: “Unusually high” radiation levels reported — Worker: “Everybody’s freaked, shocked, surprised” — Governor: “Alarming incident” — TV: “Major event… Sign the plant is falling apart” (VIDEOS)
Posted: 22 May 2017 04:24 AM PDT

ALERT: Officials warn of more collapses at US nuclear site

May 18, 2017

Latest Headlines from ENENews

ALERT: Officials warn of more collapses at US nuclear site — “High spikes” in radiation levels recorded — Expert: Plutonium could go airborne — Major concern over radioactive releases — Gov’t delays revealing data to public (VIDEOS)
Posted: 18 May 2017 03:56 AM PDT

Alarming situation in Japan

April 21, 2017

Dear Friends,

Conscientious Japanese do not forget the goal described in the Constitution “We desire to occupy an honored place in an international society striving for the preservation of peace.” They are required to stay particularly vigilant to any departure from it, under present circumstances.

The Japanese Government has decided to tolerate the use of Adolf Hitler’s autobiography “Mein Kampf” (“My Struggle”) as teaching material in schools. It is known that this book advocates fascism, racism and extremism.
Earlier, the Government announced its intention to allow equally the use of the Imperial Rescript on Education of 1890.

It has stunned the majority of the Japanese and, to a greater degree, the international community, because it reveals undeniably the move of returning to the prewar militarism.
On April 18, Chinese Foreign Ministry official’s reaction was reported as expected. It is to the effect that fascism and militarism “must be held thoroughly accountable and eradicated” and that Japan must educate its young people with “the right view of history”.

Something seems to be wrong in Japan.
The credibility of the party in power is seriously being damaged by successive scandals in addition to the Moritomo school problem and newly surfacing Kakei school affair, concerning the transfer of national land and the supply of huge grant-in-aid.

Mr.Toshinao Nakagawa has tendered his resignation as Parliamentary vice minister of Economy, Trade and Industry for having had an extramarital affair. We are reminded of recent verbal gaffs by a number of ministers and the presence in the Cabinet of certain incompetent ministers.

A few days ago, a commentator of the Television Asahi expressed his astonishment about the unprecedented resolution of the commission to enable the presence of a director-general of the Ministry of Justice in order to assist the Minister of Justice. Opposition parties are severely criticizing the autocratic management of the parliamentary deliberations.

It is noteworthy that Chairman Natsuo Yamaguchi of Komeito, the coalition partner of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party could not refrain from stating in his recent public speech made a few days ago that the administration of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is “strikingly lacking in a sense of alertness.”

To complicate the situation, the President of the organizing Committee, Yoshiro Mori, has written a book commented in the attached Japanese article.
It seems to be a fierce attack against Governor Koike. President Mori is” fighting against two fears,one is cancer and the other is the blade of Governor Koike”. This will invite a discussion on the “under control” assertion. I have sent to Gonernor Koike the attached message to reiterate my conviction that the retreat from the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020 would mark the beginning of a new age awaited by the majority of the Japanese.

Please allow me to count on your understanding and support.

Mitsuhei Murata
Former Ambassador to Switzerland

2 Attachments