– Spinbuster 2011
Spinning for nuclear is critical now. The Nuclear Establishment is in frenzied mode to get Australian to believe that nuclear power is OK.
Why? For one thing, some of Australia’s nuclear mafia see that they can make $squillions from an International Nuclear Waste Import Industry. Gotta convince Australians that it’s OK, that Australia needs the whole nuclear fuel cycle.
Australia’s Liberal Party heavies – like Greg Hunt, and Alexander Downer now come out publicly in a favour of Australia as the world’s first, and only, nuclear waste importing nation. They will be followed by other big nobs with dollar signs in their eyes.
For another thing – with uranium prices in the doldrums, and nasty information dribbling out from Fukushima, gotta prop up Australia’s belief in the uranium/nuclear industry’s future. Before it’s too late – seeing that BHP Billiton wants to get going on the world’s biggest uranium mine. Also, Rio Tinto wavering about its waterlogged Ranger uranium mine. The uranium industry in Australia is teetering
In fact, the nuclear industry is teetering and tottering, globally. In developed countries, USA, UK, Germany, even France – the nuclear industry is in a state of paralysis, mainly through issues of cost, safety, and waste disposal problem.
Japan is a whole other story. It is plunged in costs, and struggling to deal with the continuing Fukushima crisis, and with its dependence on nuclear power. Already, the Japanese govt is developing pro nuclear spin. For example, it has moved to increase the level of ionising radiation that it considers “acceptable” in children.
This month is critical for the nuclear industry worldwide. The nuclear establishment will now be in overdrive, as it seeks to neutralise information about Chernobyl and Fukushima.
The spin about ionising radiation is particularly important. The World Health Organisation works with the International Atomic Energy Agency – an unfortunate connection. Among other drawbacks, the WHO includes only thyroid cancer as a health effect from Chernobyl. This means that the leukaemias and other cancers, and birth defects, – are not counted in the population exposed to Chernobyl radiation.
On May 28, 1959, at the 12th World Health Assembly, WHO drew up an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency. A clause of this agreement says the WHO effectively grants the right of prior approval over any research it might undertake or report on to the IAEA – a group that many people, including journalists, think is a neutral watchdog, but which is, in fact, an advocate for the nuclear power industry. Its founding papers state: ”The agency shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity through the world.”
The WHO’s subjugation to the IAEA is widely known within the scientific radiation community,.. http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/nuclear-apologists-play-shoot-the-messenger-on-radiation-20110425-1du2w.html#ixzz1KfXmalLq
Chernobyl is critical, as it’s now 25 years since that disaster – 25 years being the right time to expect the development of cancers from “low level” radiation.
No comments yet.
1.This month.
Zoom webinar – “Nuclear Winter: The Environmental Consequences of a Nuclear Exchange.”
April 7th at 11:30 am PST / 2:30 pm EST
Nuclear Winter: The Environmental Consequences of a Nuclear Exchange”
Join us for an informative webinar with renowned atmospheric scientist, Professor Brian Toon, as he discusses the environmental risks and global impacts of a nuclear war. Despite the potential damage caused by the blast from even small nuclear weapons, many countries continue to invest in and expand nuclear arsenals. Professor Toon will provide a scientific assessment of civilian fatalities, agricultural failures, climate concerns, and complications with food supply that would follow any international nuclear conflict. We need to plan how to prevent nuclear conflict and avoid catastrophe. Politicians and military planners must be made aware of global climate and agricultural complications that would ensue. Don’t miss this opportunity to learn from, and engage in, this vital conversation
The Road to War brings a sharp focus to why it is not in Australia’s best interest to be dragged into a war with China which will almost inevitably go nuclear very quickly. The filmmaker has interviewed some of Australia’s senior foreign policy analysts who have vast experience behind them in analysing what really is going on here as the United States rattles its sabres with China. And sets us up to be its proxy, like the poor Ukranians have been fed into the Meatgrinder. So America can remain the Top Dog. The Road to War reveals how the United States through its spy base at Pine Gap and by stationing six nuclear capable B52 bombers in the Top End (without permission from the traditional owners) is making Australia a prime nuclear target if the current war of words suddenly melts down into full scale war.
The Road to War shows the implicit connection between Carbon emissions (the US military uses a whopping 70% of America’s annual petroleum to move its armies and vast War Machine around the globe to its 800+ military bases..but under a loophole wangled at Kyoto, the US military does not have to report its C02 annual emissions). The Road to War starts screening at selected cities and regional centres in March. See the trailer end for details.
Antinuclear 
Leave a Reply