In The Last 33 Years, 70 Of The 71 Mass Murderers In The U.S. All Had 1 Thing In Common


In The Last 33 Years, 70 Of The 71 Mass Murderers In The U.S. All Had 1 Thing In Common

 Adam Mordecai 

They were all men. Beyond that, most of them felt they were somehow being denied something that they should have been given. That attitude didn’t appear out of thin air. It was honed by our culture, generation after generation, perpetuating bad ideas and stereotypes over time. Elliot Rodger is just the latest permutation of the guy who thinks that he is owed something and demands retribution. Rather than figure out that maybe he might not be communicating with women properly, he blamed their lack of interest on them.

The vast majority of men aren’t evil, though. It does us no good to vilify an entire gender. But our culture that perpetuates this attitude among a small minority of men needs to be scrutinized — so all…

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen 1.251 weitere Wörter


Video – Edward Snowden Exclusive Interview with NBC Brian Williams

Video – Edward Snowden Exclusive Interview with NBC Brian Williams.

http://youtu.be/I-xxzOwr7I4 via @YouTube


Mr. Kerry: Why Snowden Can’t ‚Make his Case‘ in ‚Our System of Justice‘

Published on Friday, May 30, 2014 by Informed Comment

Mr. Kerry: Why Snowden Can’t ‚Make his Case‘ in ‚Our System of Justice‘

Secretary of State John Kerry said that Edward Snowden should “return home and come back here and stand in our system of justice and make his case.” Kerry seems to have a high opinion of the Department of Justice and the US courts when it comes to national security issues. I can’t imagine for the life of me why. Kerry is either amazingly ignorant or being disingenuous when he suggests that Snowden would be allowed to “make his case” if he returned to the US. No one outside the penal justice system would ever see him again, the moment he set foot here, assuming he was not given a prior deal. He could maybe try to explain himself to the prison guards, assuming they didn’t stick him in solitary. Here are some reasons Mr. Snowden would be unwise to trust himself to that system, given the charges against him:

1. The United Nations Special Rapporteur found that the US was guilty of cruel and inhuman treatment of Chelsea (Bradley) Manning, who was responsible for the Wikileaks and revelations of US killing of unarmed journalists in Iraq. Manning was kept in solitary confinement and isolated 23 hours a day for months on end, was kept naked and chained to a bed, and was subjected to sleep deprivation techniques, all three well known forms of torture, on the trumped up pretext that he was suicidal (his psychiatrist disagreed).

2. The Espionage Act under which Snowden would likely be tried is a fascist law from the time when President Woodrow Wilson (like Obama a scholar of the constitution) was trying to take the US into the war, and was used to repeal the First Amendment right of Americans to protest this action. It was used to arbitrarily imprison thousands and is full of unconstitutional provisions. In recent decades the act was used against whistleblowers only three times, but Barack Obama loves it to death. It is an embarrassment that it is still on the books and it reflects extremely badly on Obama and on Eric Holder that they have revived it as a tool against whistleblowing (which is most often a public service).

3. John Kiriakou, who revealed CIA torture under Bush-Cheney, was prevented by the Espionage Act from addressing the jury to explain the intentions behind his actions and therefore forced into a plea bargain. None of the CIA officers who perpetrated the torture or their superiors, who ordered it, have been punished, but Kiriakou is in prison and his family is in danger of losing the house because of the lack of income. The US public deserved to know about the torture rather than having Obama bury it the way he has buried so many other things wrong with the system.

4. National security official such as Snowden are not covered by protections for whistleblowers in the Federal government, as Thomas Drake discovered. Drake helped bring to public attention the National Security Agency abuses that Snowden eventually made more transparent. But he was forced to plea bargain to a charge of misusing government computers. He lost his career and his retirement, for trying to let us know that when faced with a choice between a surveillance system that was indiscriminate and one that was targeted, the US government went indiscriminate. Indiscriminate is unconstitutional.

5. Not only did the US torture Manning, US officials have on many occasions practiced arbitrary arrest and imprisonment and torture. Most often these policies have been enacted abroad, as at Abu Ghraib, Bagram, Guantanamo, and black sites in countries such as Poland. But arbitrary arrest, trigger-happy killings, and extended solitary confinement are all practiced domestically as well, on America’s vast gulag of 2.4 million prisoners, 4/5s of them black or brown. A fourth of all the prisoners in jail in the entire world of 7 billion people are in the United States. At any one time 80,000 US prisoners are in 23-hour-a-day solitary confinement. Abu Ghraib wasn’t a low-level military excess. It was simply the transposition to Iraq of the ideals of an incarcerating society, dedicating to disciplining and interrogating those who fall into the system’s hands. You don’t get these outcomes– a fourth of the world’s prisoners and a small city worth people in solitary confinement by accident. These abuses are systemic, and worsened by the privatization of prisons. John Kerry’s notion that there is a fair trial to be had for Snowden in this cruelly flawed system is bizarre.

Kerry is a bright and informed man and knows all this. I vote for disingenuous. He is just trying to deflect Snowden’s obvious popularity with the public and is trying desperately to keep the NSA warrantless dragnet on us all in place. I remember when he compared the US military in Vietnam to the Mongol hordes. He should take off those big black expensive shiny shoes once in a while. He’d find feet of clay there now.



Article printed from http://www.CommonDreams.org


NZZ: Leben und Tod in Texas – (Death and Texas) – Videoreportage zur Todesstrafe in den USA (Germ./Engl.)




Leben und Tod in Texas – Eine Videoreportage zur Todesstrafe in den USA


zu den zahlreichen Reibungspunkten im Verhältnis zwischen Europa und den USA gehört sicher die Todesstrafe. Auf dem alten Kontinent ist man zu Recht stolz darauf, die Todesstrafe abgeschafft zu haben. Man hält sie für unvereinbar mit den Gepflogenheiten zivilisierter Staaten. «Dass sich hochentwickelte, demokratische Rechtsstaaten wie die USA und Japan dieser Sicht verweigern, schmerzt wie ein Stachel im eigenen Fleisch», schreibt Andreas Rüesch. Anlass für seinen Kommentar ist eine Videoreportage, die wir heute hier veröffentlichen. Der Schweizer Fotograf Fabian Biasio hat 2003 und zehn Jahre später in Huntsville, Texas, zahlreiche Gespräche geführt – mit einem Gefängnisdirektor, mit Angehörigen von Mordopfern und mit der Schwester eines Hingerichteten. Entstanden ist eine Reihe von Videoporträts, die sich zusammen mit Texten, Grafiken und Bildern zur einer grossen Multimediareportage zum Thema Todesstrafe fügen…



Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen 524 weitere Wörter


30 Jewish US Congressmen, senators urge Hungarian PM Orban to reconsider Nazi occupation monument

30 Jewish US Congressmen, senators urge Hungarian PM Orban to reconsider Nazi occupation monument

22 May 2014

Representative Eliot L. Engel, chairman of the International Council of Jewish Parliamentarians (ICJP) and leading Democrat on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, was joined by 29 other Jewish senators and representatives in calling on Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban to reconsider his current plans for the construction of a controversial monument in Budapest commemorating the victims of the Nazi occupation of Hungary. 

Rep. Eliot Engel

Rep. Eliot Engel

In the letter, the lawmakers expressed “deep concern over [the] government’s decision to move forward with the construction of a controversial monument commemorating the tragedies suffered in Hungary under Nazi occupation.”

“Hungary is an important ally and partner of the United States. But we believe that partners need to speak frankly with one another,” said Rep. Engel.  “The Hungarian Jewish population suffered perhaps worse than anyone else in Hungary during the Nazi occupation, and any commemoration has to be sensitive to that.  We think that the Hungarian government should build an appropriate memorial that tells the entire Hungarian story of the Nazi Occupation, not one that whitewashes the truth.”

The Federation of Hungarian Jewish Communities (Mazsihisz) recently decided to avoid official commemorations of the 70th anniversary of the Nazi occupation over the design of the monument, in addition to a number of other contentious issues. Critics argue that the monument diminishes the prominent role the pro-Nazi Hungarian government had in the deportation of more than half a million Jews during the Holocaust, most of whom were murdered in Auschwitz.

“Hungary is a valued NATO ally and European partner with a long, impressive history — but one that includes a dark period of complicity during the Holocaust,” said Rep. Henry Waxman, adding: „I am concerned that this proposed monument glosses over the role played by Hungarian authorities at the time in deporting its Jewish population, and it is my hope that Prime Minister Orban will work with Hungarian Jewish organizations to design a memorial that respects the experience of all Hungarians during World War II.”

Full text of the letter

Dear Prime Minister Orban:

As Members of the United States Congress, and long-standing supporters of Hungary and the U.S.-Hungarian partnership, we are writing to express our deep concern over your government’s decision to move forward with the construction of a controversial monument commemorating the tragedies suffered in Hungary under Nazi occupation.

Viktor Orban addressing the World Jewish Congress in May 2013

Viktor Orban addressing the World Jewish Congress in May 2013

The Nazi occupation of Hungary was a horrific period in Hungarian history, which caused incalculable suffering and tragedy to millions of innocent people. And while there were individuals in Hungary who actively helped those persecuted by the Nazis, it cannot be ignored that there was also a portion of the population at that time that willingly participated in Nazi activities, including the deportation of Hungarian Jews.

According to the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, one of the preeminent institutions on the history of the Holocaust, in mid-May 1944, Hungarian authorities in coordination with the Nazis began to systematically deport Hungary’s Jews. In less than eight weeks, nearly 440,000 Jews were deported from Hungary, most of whom were murdered in Auschwitz. In total, over 500,000 Hungarian Jews were killed during the Nazi occupation.

While we understand and greatly appreciate the desire to honor all Hungarians brutalized during the Nazi occupation, we also believe that Hungary’s remaining Jewish population should participate in determining the appropriate way to remember the suffering of Hungary’s Jews during this period. They too share in the Hungarian historical narrative and it is their leadership’s opinion that the current proposal whitewashes the fact that there were Hungarians complicit with the systematic murder of their relatives.

This issue is compounded by the fact that next year Hungary is set to assume the chairmanship of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and the recent rise of the Jobbik party, widely believed to be formed, in part, around an ideology that employs anti-Semitism.

Mr. Prime Minister, as a member of the European Union and NATO, Hungary is a friend and key ally of the United States. We greatly value the strong and enduring relations and partnership between our two nations, and it is with that in mind that we urge you to reconsider your government’s current plan to construct this monument against the wishes of the Hungarian Jewish community.

We are confident that a memorial which appropriately respects the sensitivities of all of Hungary’s citizens can and should, be erected to commemorate the tragedy and hardship of the Nazi occupation of Hungary. We stand ready to help find a resolution to this issue, and should you want to discuss this with us at greater length, we welcome the opportunity to meet with you or your designee.

Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to your response.


ELIOT L. ENGEL                      HENRY WAXMAN                     ERIC CANTOR
Member of Congress             Member of Congress               Member of Congress

United States Senator             United States Senator             United States Senator

BRIAN SCHATZ                        BENJAMIN CARDIN                 AL FRANKEN
United States Senator             United States Senator             United States Senator

DIANNE FEINSTEIN               RON WYDEN                             BARBARA BOXER
United States Senator            United States Senator             United States Senator

STEVE ISRAEL                       ADAM SCHIFF                            BRAD SCHNEIDER
Member of Congress            Member of Congress                Member of Congress

SANDER LEVIN                     TED DEUTCH                           JERROLD NADLER
Member of Congress            Member of Congress              Member of Congress

JOHN YARMUTH                  JAN SCHAKOWSKY                  BRAD SHERMAN
Member of Congress           Member of Congress               Member of Congress

DEBBIE WASSERMAN        NITA LOWEY                              DAVID CICILLINE
SCHULTZ                               Member of Congress              Member of Congress
Member of Congress

JARED POLIS                        SUSAN DAVIS                          LOIS FRANKEL
Member of Congress           Member of Congress             Member of Congress

ALAN GRAYSON                    ALAN LOWENTHAL                STEVE COHEN
Member of Congress           Member of Congress             Member of Congress

About the International Council of Jewish Parliamentarians

The International Council of Jewish Parliamentarians (ICJP) is a global network of Jewish legislators, government ministers, and other elected officials. Its aim is to promote dialogue, the principles of democracy, the cause of human rights and the rule of law, and to combat racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, terrorism and Holocaust denial. The ICJP supports Israel and contributes to the creation of enduring peace in the Middle East. The ICJP provides a forum for exchanges of ideas and fosters greater knowledge and understanding of the challenges facing Jewish parliamentarians and communities in Israel and the Diaspora.

Story from: http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/14759/30_jewish_us_congressmen_senators_urge_hungarian_pm_orban_to_reconsider_nazi_occupation


The images North Korea doesn’t want seen


Occupy Activist Cecily McMillan Sentenced to 3 Months in Jail, 5 Years Probation


Occupy Activist Cecily McMillan Sentenced to 3 Months in Jail, 5 Years Probation

By Dave Lindorff
Occupy activist Cecily McMillan, convicted on May 5 of second-degree felony assault of a New York cop whom she and witnesses claimed had grabbed her breast from behind, bruising it, stood her ground before her sentence was rendered, refusing the judge’s insistence that she should “take responsibility for her conduct.”
Risking the possibility that Judge Ronald Zwiebel might sentence her to the maximum seven years for the charge she was convicted of, McMillan would only apologize for what she termed “the accident” of involuntarily throwing back her elbow when grabbed by behind from someone she could not even see (the cop was also in plainclothes, so even if she had seen him she would have been justified in protecting herself). Insisting to the judge that she lived in accordance to the “law of love,”…

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen 642 weitere Wörter


What Is The New Populism?

What Is the New Populism?

By Robert Borosage
Today, in Washington, the Campaign for America’s Future is convening a major summit on The New Populism, keynoted by Sen. Elizabeth Warren. (It will be live streamed on our website). What follows are excerpts from remarks I will deliver at that meeting.
What is the new populism? The Princeton dictionary defines populism as “a political doctrine that supports the rights and powers of the common people in their struggle with the privileged elite.”
Not bad for a dictionary.
The New Populism arises from the stark truth about today’s America: Too few people control too much money and power, and they’re using that control to rig the rules to protect and extend their privileges.
This economy does not work for working people. This isn’t an accident. It isn’t an act of God. It isn’t due to forces of technology and globalization that can’t be changed. It isn’t a mistake. It is a power grab.
Decades of deregulation and top-end tax cuts, of soaring CEO pay and assaults on unions, of conservative myths and market fundamentalism have recreated Gilded Age extremes of wealth and power. Once more a new American plutocracy is emerging, doing what plutocrats always do – corrupting government to protect and expand their fortunes.
Americans don’t tolerate self-perpetuating aristocracies easily. Opposition to aristocratic wealth is as American as apple pie, dating back to the American Revolution, to Jefferson who warned about the “aristocracy of monied corporations.”
The Populist Tradition
The movement that gave populism its name swept out of the Plains states in the late 19thcentury as small farmers and steelworkers, day laborers and sharecroppers came together to take on the trusts, the railroads, the distant banks that were impoverishing them.
They railed against a government that handed public lands to the railroads, kept interest rates high, coddled monopolies and cracked the heads of workers trying to organize.
But in challenging the corrupted government, they came to a profound realization: that in the emerging industrial economy, simply cutting back government and limiting its powers would only free monopolies and banks to gouge even more from workaday Americans.
They concluded that they had to take back the government, turning it from the arm of the privileged to the people’s ally.
This led to two other challenges. First, they had to mobilize people to counter what Roosevelt called “organized money.”
And second, protest wasn’t enough. They had to invent new ideas, sweeping reforms to make the economy work for working people.
That populist movement lasted only a few years as an independent party, but the reforms it championed set the agenda for progressives for more than half a century – the minimum wage, the eight-hour workday, antitrust laws, the progressive income tax, a flat ban on subsidies to private corporations, and worker cooperatives. It mobilized millions around a new monetary policy. It pushed to expand democracy through direct elections of senators, initiatives and referenda. There’s a direct line from the Omaha Platform of the People’s Party in 1892 to FDR’s Four Freedoms and Economic Bill of Rights, to Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, whose 50th anniversary we honor this week.
Today’s new populism stands in that tradition.
People aren’t worried that the rich have lots of money. This isn’t about envy; it is about power – that the privileged and entrenched interests rig the game, so the economy does not work for working people.
Billionaires like Sheldon Anderson toy with politicians as if they were miniature plastic puppets. Millionaires pay lower taxes than their secretaries. Multinationals stash profits abroad and pay lower taxes than mom-and-pop stores. After all, as hotel magnate Leona Helmsley famously said, “only little people pay taxes.”
Wall Street bankers – the folks whose excesses blew up the economy and cost millions their homes and their jobs – were bailed out. Now they are back, posturing as masters of the universe once more, apparently immune from prosecution for the epidemic of fraud they profited from. Jails, after all, are for little people.
The top 1 percent is capturing fully 95 percent of the nation’s income growth. CEO salaries are up and corporate profits hit record heights, while workers incomes are stagnating and insecurity is rising.
Mobilized People vs. Mobilized Money
What will it take to make this economy work for working people again? Mobilized people will need to take on organized money. Investments in areas vital to our future can be paid for with progressive taxes. But redistribution isn’t enough. Sweeping structural reforms – expanding shared security, making work pay, curbing Wall Street speculation, balancing trade and more – are essential to any new deal.
The American people get it. They don’t need to be convinced on the issues. CAF is issuing a report today at PopulistMajority.org that documents the simple fact: the majority of Americans are with us. Citizens United? Four of five Americans want it repealed, including three-fourths of Republicans. Raise the minimum wage? No question. Curb Wall Street? Lloyd Blankfein may think Goldman Sachs is doing “God’s work,” but Americans want more accountability. Protect Social Security and Medicare? Even Tea Partiers agree.
This new populism is not something we have to invent. It is already stirring. It is Occupy Wall Street putting Gilded Age inequality at the center of our political debate. It’s exploited low-wage workers protesting fast-food restaurants in over 150 cities. A left-right congressional coalition forming against continuing ruinous corporate trade policies. Moral Monday protests against the assault on voting rights and the vulnerable mobilizing thousands in North Carolina and are spreading to Georgia and South Carolina. A feisty citizen’s opposition growing in rural areas to block big oil’s effort to frack their lands.
We can see it in the culture. The new Pope condemning the modern “idolatry of money” and the “tyranny of unfettered capitalism.” Or bizarrely, a 685-page book by an obscure French economist about wealth inequality heading the best-seller lists along with Danielle Steele’s steamy new novel, “First Sight.”
Forceful leaders are emerging like senators Elizabeth Warren, Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders; Rep. Keith Ellison; New York Mayor Bill de Blasio. The demand for change is rising from activists in the heart of the Obama majority, the rising American electorate of millennials, people of color and single women that have fared the worst in this economy. The organized base of the Democratic Party, from unions to community and civil rights groups, women and environmentalists, are pushing an agenda far bolder and broader than that now before the public.
Democrats in the Senate have now moved to a “fair shot” agenda, calling for raising the minimum wage, pay equity, paid family leave, and lowering student loan interest rates paid for by taxing millionaires. A Forbes Magazine columnist warns the GOP that they can’t ignore the new “populist wave.” Sen. Rand Paul argues that Republicans can’t simply be the party of “fat cats, rich people and Wall Street.” It might be too late for that.
The Challenge
Washington is gridlocked by Republican obstruction, so people are driving reforms from the bottom up. The minimum wage is being hiked from Hawaii to Maryland to Seattle, where it is headed to $15 an hour. Californians voted to tax the rich to invest in schools. Cleveland uses government procurement to support locally based, worker-owned cooperatives. Over a hundred cities have joined the call for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.
Pundits suggest that Republicans have the advantage in the low-turnout 2014 elections, with the Democratic base discouraged by the lousy economy. Elites in both parties warn against a new populism, as if the old politics held any answers for people.
But this isn’t about one election or one leader. The pressure for change is only beginning. People are waking up to the fact that the game is rigged. They won’t tolerate it for long. It will take muckraking, organizing, teaching, protests and demonstrations, new ideas and new allies. It will face fierce resistance. The wealthy and entrenched interests will spend lavishly to defend their privileges. Our system is designed to clog change, not facilitate it.
But when the people speak, politicians listen. And this new populist movement has only just begun. The stakes are fundamental – whether the democracy can in fact check the power of great wealth and entrenched interests. This is the challenge facing our democracy and for each one of us privileged to be its citizens.
This article was published at NationofChange at: http://www.nationofchange.org/what-new-populism-1400822695. All rights are reserved.

The Myth of ‘Safe’ Thorium for Nuclear Energy


The Myth of ‘Safe’ Thorium for Nuclear Energy

By Christina Sarich

How can something be ‘safe’ for the environment and humankind if it has a half-life of 14 billion years (older than some estimates for the age of the earth, and only slightly longer than the estimated age of the entire universe), and is radiotoxic? While questions concerning the Fukushima incident and growing concern over nuclear power plague the planet, there seems to be a new golden child, propagandized as the savior of nuclear energy, but is thorium really safe as an alternative fuel for nuclear energy generation?

Thorium does contain 6 naturally occurring isotopes, but one of the ‘remains’ of nuclear energy generation utilizing this element is Thorium-232. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also admits that thorium can be artificially produced. They describe thorium’s radioactive properties:

“As thorium-232 undergoes radioactive decay, it emits an alpha particle, with accompanying gamma radiation, and forms radium-228. This process of releasing radiation and forming a new radionuclide continues until stable lead-208 is formed. The half-life of thorium-232 is about 14 billion years. Two other isotopes of thorium, which can be significant in the environment, are thorium-230 and thorium-228. Both decay by alpha emission, with accompanying gamma radiation, in 75,400 years and 1.9 years, respectively.”

Supporters of thorium as a nuclear energy ‘alternative’ argue that it has 200 times the energy content of uranium, without creating plutonium – the main ingredient used in nuclear weapons of mass destruction. According to Nobel Prize winning physicist, Carlo Rubbia, just one tonne of thorium can generate as much power as 200 tonnes of uranium.

Uranium mining is partly what subsidized the violence-mongering nations through recent multiple wars. There aretwo methods of extracting uranium: conventional open- pit or underground mining, or a chemical process of In-Situ-Leaching (ISL). Depending on the depth in the ground of the seam of rock containing uranium, the deposit is either mined using surface (open-cast or open- pit) or sub-surface (underground) mining. In Canadian Saskatchewan, it can be extracted from ore, which contains levels as high as 20% uranium. These mining practices absolutely devastate the environment, making native Navajo land, for instance, too toxic to live on despite hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on clean up.

Furthermore, the use of uranium in nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons hardly needs to be substantiated. Nagasaki, Japan, and Hiroshima were just the predecessors to Fukushima. Conservative estimates of death tolls in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, respectively, are over 75,000 and 150,000. These numbers do not include radiation-induced sickness, and many are just now reporting the true health ramifications realized by victims of Fukushima. Scientists are still struggling to determine the true fallout for US citizens.

“According to Maxim Shingarkin, deputy chairman of Russia’s State Duma Committee for Natural Resources, “Currents in the world ocean are so structured that the areas of seafood capture near the U.S. northwest coast are more likely to contain radioactive nuclides than even the Sea of Okhotsk, which is much closer to Japan. These products are the main danger for mankind because they can find their way to people’s tables on a massive scale.”

In comes thorium. It is touted with the use of misinformation campaigns and fear mongering about meeting energy needs, but thorium can’t be considered a safe nuclear substitute because it is highly radiotoxic. While it may produce much greater energy yields, it can also have much more dire impacts on a human being’s health. If someone were to inhale an amount of thorium the bone surface dose is 200 times that if they inhaled the same amount of uranium.

Thorium also requires longer spent fuel storage than uranium. With the daughter products of thorium like technetium‐99 with a half-life of over 200,000 years, thorium is not safe nor a solution to spent fuel storage issues.

Most importantly, thorium cannot produce energy all on its own. It requires a fissile material, such as uranium-235 in order to make nuclear fuel. It also needs something like plutonium-239 to operate the nuclear reactor. The World Nuclear Association also admits that, “there are several tonnes of plutonium in our biosphere, a legacy of atmospheric weapons testing in the 1950s and 1960s. Plutonium is a highly toxic substance. Thorium reactors would also likely be run utilizing sodium fluoride, a toxic substance with its own health concerns.

Many countries are looking to India, including the US, China, Russia, and France, to build a successful commercial thorium nuclear reactor, but it still hasn’t been done. The Germans experimented with a Thorium reactor, called the THTR-300; however, German scientists found even with the thorium reactor there were substantial risks in a loss of coolant (and as we all know from Fukushima, keeping the reactors cool is paramount for safety). China even announced this year that it intended to develop a thorium MSR, but nuclear radiologist Peter Karamoskos, of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), says the world shouldn’t hold its breath.

Karamoskos explains:

“Without exception, [thorium reactors] have never been commercially viable, nor do any of the intended new designs even remotely seem to be viable. Like all nuclear power production they rely on extensive taxpayer subsidies; the only difference is that with thorium and other breeder reactors these are of an order of magnitude greater, which is why no government has ever continued their funding.”

Yet, the US government has plans to build new nuclear reactors, while decommissioning older ones that pose a break down threat, even though Japan’s former Prime Ministers have unified to stand against nuclear weapons and energy altogether. Thorium fuel will simply be another failure in the nuclear era, one that has long overstayed its welcome. Thorium is not more economical, it is not safer, and it poses yet another nuclear disaster risk which this world simply can’t afford, for any price.

Solar and wind power, anyone?

This article was published at NationofChange at: http://www.nationofchange.org/myth-safe-thorium-nuclear-energy-1400770307. All rights are reserved.


MOTHER JONES: A Guide to Mass Shooting in America


VERY IMPORTANT & PROFOUNDED ARTICLE: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map

Mother Jones http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map

A Guide to Mass Shootings in America

On Wednesday, Fort Hood was hit with a deadly rampage for the second time in five years.

By Mark Follman, Gavin Aronsen, and Deanna Pan | Fri Jul. 20, 2012 10:32 PM EDT

Update (4/2/2014): A gunman went on a rampage at Fort Hood, Texas—the site of a mass shooting in November 2009—killing 3 people and injuring 16 others before taking his own life, according to the Associated Press [1].

It is perhaps too easy to forget how many times this has happened. The horrific mass murder at a movie theater in Colorado [2] in July 2012, another at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin [3] that August, another at a manufacturer in Minneapolis [4] that September—and then the unthinkable nightmare at a Connecticut elementary school [5] that December—were some of the latest in an…

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen 957 weitere Wörter