Fukushima: A Month of Media Disinformation

[robdogbucky]

Fukushima: A Month of Media Disinformation
Posted: 2011/04/13
From: Mathaba


"...Meanwhile, amid all the disinformation about radioactivity there has been the effort by most of media to frame a debate between nuclear and coal--chpose your poison. In fact, the energy debate is between nuclear, coal and oil, on one side, and safe, clean, renewable energy technologies, led by solar and wind, on the other.

But you wouldn't know that from media reports over the past month. The New York Times, for example, devoted part of a long "Science Times" article on March 29 to what the subhead stated: "Alternatives Carry Risks Too." It said: "Radiation is a real threat, nuclear physicists say, but not as great as many people believe it is, and not as great as other threats. Indeed, every energy source comes with dangers, from mine or wellhead or the smokestack or tailpipe." The piece went on to discuss coal-mining accidents and gas pipeline explosions. There was not a mention of the safe, clean energy technologies such as solar and wind...

...But the real energy choices were largely not being discussed by media through the past month of Fukushima disinformation.

The classic book on disinformation on nuclear technology is Nukespeak, published in 1982. It is dedicated to George Orwell, author of 1984, and written by Stephen Hilgarten, Richard C. Bell and Rory O'Connor. It opens by declaring that "the history of nuclear development has been profoundly shaped by the manipulation through official secrecy and extensive public-relations campaigns. Nukespeak and the use of information-management techniques have consistently distorted the debate over nuclear weapons and nuclear power. Time and time again, nuclear developers have confused their hopes with reality, publicly presented their expectations and assumptions as facts, covered up damaging information, harassed and fired scientists who disagreed with established policy, refused to recognize the existence of problems"claimed that there was no choice but to follow their policies." In the first month of the Fukushima disaster, there's been an explosion of Nukespeak by the nuclear power establishment aided and abetted by a compliant media. #

http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=626416

[robdogbucky]

1. Here's more

"...Yes, there is naturally occurring "background radiation" of various sorts--and that causes a level of cancer. As the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (www.nirs.org) states: "Even exposure to background radiation causes some cancers. Additional exposures cause additional risks." Cited is a 700-page 2005 National Academy of Sciences report, "Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation," that concluded that: "There is no safe level or threshold of ionizing radiation exposure." There have been numerous similar reports...

...Plutonium is the most lethal of all radioactive substances. There is no level "actually very low." A millionth of a gram inhaled, a microscopic particle, is all that's needed to produce lung cancer. Furthermore, there is no "natural plutonium contamination in this country."

Plutonium is a manmade substance. It was discovered by Glenn Seaborg in 1941 and used in the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki and almost all atomic weapons since. Plutonium-239 is what Uranium-238 can become when in the proximity of fission.

Nuclear power plants build up 500 to 1,000 pounds of plutonium every year. Indeed, the concept for nuclear power plants came from the plutonium production reactors built at the Hanford reservation in the state of Washington during the Manhattan Project crash program of World War II to build atomic bombs. Also produced in those reactors were large amounts of heat. With the war over, seeking to do more with nuclear technology than just build more nuclear weapons, the scientists, engineers and corporate contractors of the Manhattan Project--which became the Atomic Energy Commission--pushed a scheme to use that heat to boil water to turn a turbine and generate electricity..."

http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=626416


Fake Crisis, Deficit (never mentioned for the last 8 years while it was manufactured) demands everyone's attention and is used to rape the American people again.

Real Crisis, Radiation dispersal from Fukushima (crisis still ongoing, limit is unknown) is now ignored in favor of fake crises, while the Japanese people suffer and we await our fate.




"...Me, I'm waiting so patiently

Lying on the floor

I'm just trying to do my jig-saw puzzle

Before it rains anymore..."

Jagger/Richards

[flamingdem]

2. Waiting for the pro-nuke asshats to show up and talk about radiating bananas nt

[anneboleyn]

3. Thank you for a great post. I have been wondering about the media coverage of this disaster

and it *has* seemed positively Orwellian. It seems to me that the "information" we continued to receive was straight out of the 1982 book you describe (imho, of course). I just feel so terribly for all of those people, and all of their pets (we saw a bit last night about the hundreds of lost pets wandering around, looking for food and help), homes, possessions, everything pertaining to their lives, now in the disaster zone.

[robdogbucky]

4. It has been raining off and on all morning here

and I wonder is there any reliable source to get a sense of how much radiation is now being deposited into my backyard and my garden?

I suppose I could investigate sources at UC Berkeley, but, wait, that is where most of the nation's nuclear research has taken place. I wonder how reliable they are at this point? Want to think things are okay, nothing to worry about, but the "safe," levels have just been raised and I am not a science major and cannot interpret the raw data from places like EURAD,

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread681003/pg1

Any ideas?




"...Me, I'm waiting so patiently

Lying on the floor

I'm just trying to do my jig-saw puzzle

Before it rains anymore..."

Jagger/Richards

[Agony]

7. Japanese Nuclear Emergency: EPA's Radiation Monitoring

This might be what you are looking for?

http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/index.html Monitoring Home page


http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/data-updates.html Daily Data Summary

:hi:

Cheers,
Agony

[upi402]

5. Their false claim: Renewables can't 100% replace nuclear

I'm sooo sick of it. Or trying to imply that there aren't enough batteries for when sun is down.

DUH!

So... tidal, biomass, wind, algal, etc!

We need to do it all and promulgate the smart grid to interconnect those DER (Distributed Energy Resources).

[DCKit]

8. Seems "they" have given up on us... finally, thank dog. nt

[Mnemosyne]

6. K&R for more visibility. n/t