They are from a book of similar drawings titled "UNFORGETTABLE FIRE".
--Toshiko Kihara, Age 17 at time of bombing, 47 at time of drawing.
"THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A SAFE DOSE OF RADIATION."
-- BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS [BAS]
"Worldwide, an unknowing and unsuspecting public is being randomly exposed to radiation without any opportunity for informed consent. People can choose whether or not to have x-rays, to reduce the radon exposure in their homes, or to fly. However, the public has no choice, and certainly inadequate knowledge, about radiation exposure from nuclear power and nuclear weapons.
The trend throughout the nuclear age has been a growing recognition that there is no “safe” or “harmless” dose of radiation."
In 2006 the National Academies’ National Research Council published a comprehensive report, “Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR VII – Phase 2)” stating that radiation exposure has a linear relationship to the development of cancer. The report concluded that even low doses of ionizing radiation are likely to pose some health risks; there is no threshold of exposure below which the risk drops to zero."
Radioactive contamination can enter the body through ingestion, inhalation, absorption, or injection. This will result in a committed dose of radiation.
The ICRP [International Commission on Radiological Protection] states "Radionuclides incorporated in the human body irradiate the tissues over time periods determined by their physical half-life and their biological retention within the body.
Thus they may give rise to doses to body tissues for many months or years AFTER the intake.
Intake of radioactive materials into the body tends to increase the risk of cancer, and possibly other stochastic effects."
A Google search of the phrase "no safe dose of radiation" in ONLY 'scholarly journals' returned "About 494,000 results (0.09 sec)".
"The real issue is that the use of nuclear power and nuclear weapons is forcing humankind, and indeed the whole ecosystem, to participate in a particularly cruel and totally uncontrolled experiment.
Given the scientific evidence that there is no safe dose of radiation, this is an experiment that has already gone awry. Indeed, if this were a true scientific experiment, it would have been halted a long time ago.
The real question is whether we, as a human race, can afford in good conscience to risk annihilation with our continued reliance on nuclear technology. Can we continue to despoil our environment with long-lived radioactive materials that are scattered to the wind and embedded in our precious soil, randomly exposing large populations, and foisting health impacts on unsuspecting future generations who have no choice in this matter?
We must choose to halt this process. To do this we need to quickly abolish all nuclear weapons, and make a dramatic and rapid retreat from the use of nuclear power to generate electricity. Only then will we demonstrate that we recognize and appreciate the true meaning of Einstein’s prophetic words: “The splitting of the atom has changed everything save our mode of thinking. Thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.”
WHO ARE 'THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS'?
THEY WERE MEN WHO ONCE WORKED WITHOUT THOUGHT OF WHAT RADIATION FROM NUCLEAR TESTING FALLOUT OR FROM PLUTONIUM AND ENRICHED URANIUM WOULD DO TO ALL HUMANITY, MEN WHO BUILT THE BOMB, WHO THEN DECIDED TO SPEAK OUT ABOUT THE 'BROKEN', OFTEN CORRUPT 'NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION' (NRC), THE REAL DANGERS OF ALL/ANY RADIATION AND THE LONG, ONGOING COVER-UPS BY THE U.S., INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY ORGANIZATIONS, AND BY THE CIA.
THEIR 'BULLETIN' IS AN AWARD-WINNING, INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED, DEDICATED PIECE OF WORK, AND WITH THEIR CONTACTS AND CREDENTIALS, THEY CERTAINLY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THERE IS NOTHING SAFE ABOUT RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS OR NUCLEAR FISSION.
"A recent report of a task force formed by the NRC to examine its OWN safety regulations, however, reached the troubling conclusion that the existing system of public regulation is, as a PDF article shows us, a “patchwork” with serious “gaps” that needed an overarching framework."
What the NRC mainly "regulates" is the TRUTH, which they often bend over backward to conceal from the public.
Rather than shine a spotlight on the failures and intentional disregard of 'regulations' by the nuclear energy giants and our federal government, the NRC merely imposes a fine here and there, often not even collecting payment of those fines from Big Nuke, and turns its back on violations, known corruption within the industry and bribes and pay-offs to many elected and non-elected 'officials'.
"The nuclear power industry exists only because governments agreed to take on the risk of accidents. One legitimate reaction to this uneconomic state of affairs would be to shut the industry down, or dramatically scale back reliance on nuclear power. In theory, reducing the number of reactors lowers the risk of accidents, and reducing the number to zero eliminates the risk.
Any firm attempting to build a new nuclear plant would then be forced to confront the real risk of nuclear accidents, which means it would be forced to spend enough on safety to reduce the risk to the level that made the reactors insurable — if such a risk level is achievable."
NRC 'inspections' are a joke.
Ask a nuclear power plant employee.
They don't get much 'protection' from the NRC, either.
Another source of facts and databases of problems with, failures and hazards of nuclear power plants can be found at "Nuclear Power Plant Database FAQ: Background information on the most common safety-related issues at U.S. nuclear power plants."
That website is maintained by 'The Union of Concerned Scientists'.
One article there tells the story of an intruder who drove into the Three Mile Island nuclear facility at 6:53 am on February 7, 1993. Workers responded to the unauthorized entry by locking the doors to the control room and declaring a Site Area Emergency—the second most serious emergency of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) four classifications. The intruder was found more than four hours later hiding in the turbine building.
IN AN ARTICLE A FEW DAYS AGO, THE BULLETIN AND OTHERS TRIED TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE WIPP FACILITY FAILURES IN NEW MEXICO AND TO LOS ALAMOS' PART IN IT.
"Waste makes haste: How a campaign to speed up nuclear waste shipments shut down the WIPP long-term repository."
June 28, 2018
"Just before midnight on Valentine’s Day 2014, a nuclear waste canister burst open deep in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) underground repository in Carlsbad, New Mexico – the final resting place for the United States’ transuranic military wastes.
The drum had been shipped to WIPP from Los Alamos National Laboratory, the US Energy Department lab famous for building the Manhattan Project’s first atomic bombs.
WIPP was contaminated and closed for nearly 35 months.
Waste shipments to the repository from across the country were backed up.
The Energy Department’s accident investigators concluded that the scientific cause of the “drum breach” at WIPP was something called thermal runaway: the buildup of heat and pressure in waste drum #68,660 due to exothermic reactions between its nitrate salt waste contents and the wheat-based kitty litter, Swheat Scoop, not the inorganic zeolite clay kitty litter recommended to them, that had been added to it at Los Alamos’ Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility (WCRRF) in 2013.
Nine days earlier, a truck used for hauling salt caught on fire underground at WIPP.
It was the Los Conchas wildfires in 2000 that came within three-and-a-half miles of Area G, where Los Alamos lab stored transuranic radioactive waste – in some cases, in above-ground tents -- had taken the homes of hundreds of local families and damaged laboratory buildings.
The fires had prompted the lab to develop “Quick to WIPP,” a project for accelerating the shipment of transuranic waste to the Carlsbad repository.
In short, a perfect storm was brewing."
THEY PUSHED THINGS TOO QUICKLY, BUT AS THE ARTICLE STATES, NO MATTER WHAT, "The show must go on."
MEN LIKE OPPENHEIMER CAME TO VIEW WHAT THEY HAD DONE AS MORALLY WRONG, BUT THEY WERE ALSO THE VERY ONES WHO HAD CONDUCTED SECRET EXPERIMENTS USING OUR MILITARY AND AMERICAN CITIZENS LIKE LAB RATS.
WHO BETTER TO KNOW WHERE TO LOOK FOR COVER-UPS, FOR LOOPHOLES TO EXPOSE WHAT GOES ON BEHIND CLOSED DOORS?
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Jan. 1958, page 22:
Geneticists are convinced there is NO dose too low to produce mutations in human cells...i.e., ALL radiation will cause genetic/DNA damage, which will appear within the first generation after exposure, or can appear all the way up to hundreds of generations later on.
REALIZATION, TOO LATE ...
Many of those atomic scientists, who were the very ones who worked so hard to give us the atomic bomb, realized their mistake and began to publish their "Bulletin" to enlighten the American public.
Early on, in 1958, they noted that 'natural radiation' is NOT the cause of the vast number of mutations seen today, NOT the cause of so many radiation-induced cancers, disorders, etc, worldwide, but that MANKIND's use of radioactive materials, in bombs or otherwise, has been THE cause of this rise.
They note that NUCLEAR FALLOUT, no matter the source, is, in fact, damaging and life-threatening to present and future generations.
In the Bulletin from 1958 cited above, they stated,
"We can be SURE that a large number of persons yet to be born WILL DIE, or be deformed, or diseased, or otherwise impaired by bomb-testing.
If ALL the victims could be identified and assembled in one place at the same time, we would all regard it as a horrible tragedy."
They spoke from experience when they stated...
"THE MORE IMPORTANT THE ISSUE, THE GREATER THE SECRECY."
"NUCLEAR SAFEGUARDS PROGRAMS PROVIDE NEITHER TIMELY WARNINGS NOR SANCTIONS."
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May, 1995, page 34:
"It would take $230 Billion just to stabilize, [NOT clean up], the nuclear weapons testing complex sites."
At the time that was written, 3/4ths of those sites had not even been evaluated for cleanup yet!
It was estimated then, in 1995, that it would take at least 70 years to assess the leaks and bio-hazards from all those testing sites.
NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS WERE NOT PART OF THE ESTIMATED COST, EITHER.
ONE CAN'T STABILIZE SOMETHING THAT LEAKS AND THAT MUST RELEASE SOME RADIATION EVERY SINGLE DAY.
"THERE IS NO KNOWN REMEDY OR TECHNIQUE FOR DECONTAMINATING GROUNDWATER."
In 1995, just from test sites alone, we were trying to come up with ways to dispose of over 106 million gallons of HIGH-level radioactive waste, 260 metric tons of spent fuel, 107,000 cubic meters of transuranic waste, 1,800,000 cubic meters of "low-level" nuclear waste, and 780,000 cubic meters of "mixed" (chemicals plus radioactive) waste.
OMITTED FROM THE BUDGET, OMITTED FROM PROPOSED STABILIZATION AND/OR CLEANUP COSTS WERE THE COLUMBIA RIVER SYSTEM'S HANFORD NUCLEAR FACILITY IN WASHINGTON STATE, THE CLINCH RIVER (OAK RIDGE) SITE IN TENNESSEE, AND SAVANNAH RIVER SITE IN SOUTH CAROLINA.
[SEE: Radioactivity lingers at Oak Ridge]
[SEE "Deadly legacy: Savannah River site"]
WHY WERE THESE 3 'MEGA-SITES' IGNORED?
SIMPLE...THEY ARE JUDGED IMPOSSIBLE TO 'REMEDIATE', THERE IS NO 'FIX' , THERE IS NO WAY TO DESTROY RADIONUCLIDES IN THE ENVIRONMENT, SO THE EXTENT OF POLLUTION AND CONTINUAL LEAKING IS JUST TOO GREAT TO IMAGINE THEM EVER BEING STABILIZED OR CLEANED UP.
THOSE RIVER SYSTEMS, THOSE AREAS OF THE COUNTRY ARE SIMPLY DOOMED TO REMAIN AS UNENDING RADIOACTIVE NIGHTMARES.
SO SAY THE VERY SCIENTISTS WHO GAVE US NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
Every stage of removal technology produces ADDITIONAL waste and contamination.
EACH gram of plutonium, each container of enriched uranium produced at any point in time will remain with us forever.
They must be completely and safely isolated for hundreds of centuries.
NO way currently exists to accomplish that.
"Stored" wastes still produce more waste, still remain radioactive, are still considered toxic contaminants.
The last significant assessment of the potential cost of major accidents in the United States was made soon after Three Mile Island.
NOTHING is said about the cost in human lives.
BETWEEN 1943 AND 1970, NUCLEAR WASTE WAS HANDLED LIKE ANY OTHER WASTE, MUCH WAS SIMPLY DUMPED INTO THE EARTH OR RIVERS OR HOLDING PONDS, PUMPED INTO FLIMSY UNLABELED CONTAINERS THAT WERE NEVER DESIGNED TO CONTAIN THE RADIATION. WE DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHERE ALL THE WASTE FROM THOSE 27 YEARS IS.
[SEE PGS 35-41]
ALL NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS LEAK OR 'VENT' RADIATION EVERY SINGLE DAY...
FROM THE NRC, THE ADMISSION..
"Nuclear power plants release varying amounts of tritium, depending on the amount of liquid waste discharged via normal and abnormal release discharge paths and the type of reactor.
At individual U.S. nuclear power plants, the amount of Sr-90 released is low... usually at or below the minimum detectable activity of sensitive detection equipment.
As with any industrial facility, a nuclear power plant may deviate from normal operation with a spill or leak of liquid material.
In the U.S., nuclear reactor operators have the AUTHORITY, given by the NRC, to vent radioactive steam or hydrogen gas as conditions warrant.
HOW SAFE ARE OUR AGING REACTORS?
The "safety disadvantages" of the Mark I boiling water reactors, the same type that exploded in Japan's Fukushima meltdowns, were highlighted in an internal memo at the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission —the precursor to the NRC—as far back as 1972. The NRC nonetheless permits their use and has not forced compliance of the rule to "harden" those vents.
WHAT ABOUT SPENT FUEL CELLS?
In the U.S., because of a lack of a long-term plan for dealing with such nuclear waste, spent-fuel pools are even more densely packed than those at Fukushima's plant, making it easier for a meltdown to occur in the event of a loss of water.
IN 2011:
Radioactive leaks found at 75% of US nuke sites - CBS News
THEY WERE LOOKING FOR TRITIUM AND DID NOT ANALYZE DAILY "ALLOWABLE VENTINGS" INTO THE ATMOSPHERE AT THE NUKE SITES.
THERE ARE OVER 100 RADIOACTIVE GASES/CHEMICALS EMITTED BY NUCLEAR REACTORS.
TRITIUM WAS FOUND IN LOCAL DRINKING WATER SOURCES AT 75% OF PLANTS.
Since the 2011 investigation, other leaks have been discovered at nuke plants and medical and/or storage facilities in Illinois, New York, Florida, California, New Mexico, Alabama, Texas, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Tennessee.
U.S. NEWS, March 15, 2016,
"Nuclear Plants Leak Radiation, and Regulator Faces Scrutiny"
At the same time, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has repeatedly weakened federal regulations to allow plants to keep operating, despite THOUSANDS of problems ranging from corroded pipes to cracked concrete and radioactive leaks.
Late last month, seven NRC engineers went public with a petition urging the agency to fix a critical design flaw in the electrical systems of all but one of the nation's nuclear plants – a highly unusual move for federal employees.
Since finalizing new standards, the NRC has reportedly inspected and approved just two of the country's 61 plants for compliance: one in Tennessee, the other in Virginia, Bloomberg BNA found.
It's also unclear whether new equipment for maintaining power at the plant during a prolonged outage will even work, experts say
Types of nuclear waste generated from nuclear power station:
"When the radioactivity of the waste [at nuclear power plants] has diminished to a very low level, it would be released to the environment on condition that it would not exceed the permissible limit.
The gaseous waste is released to the environment after treatment via the stack.
The liquid waste is mixed and diluted with the effluent from the plant after treatment before discharging into the sea."
WHO MONITORS AND REPORTS RESULTS OF THESE 'PERMISSIBLE RELEASES'?
THE OWNERS OF THE POWER PLANTS, THEIR EMPLOYEES.
DO YOU SEE THE POSSIBILITY FOR FALSE REPORTS?
I DO.
LOCAL CITIZENS DON'T EVEN HAVE TO BE INFORMED THAT THE VENTINGS TOOK PLACE.
THEY MAY FIND OUT IN OTHER WAYS, AS SHOWN BELOW...
"In California, the average Strontium-90 level found in baby teeth has risen with time, increasing 50.2 percent for children born in 1994-97 from the levels found in children born in 1986-89.
After the halt of above-ground atom bomb testing in 1963, the average Strontium-90 levels fell, but they began to rise again in the 1980s and ’90s.
And, according to the Academy study, there is only one source of this isotope not found in nature: the federally-permitted radioactive emissions from all operating US reactors.
“This should be a concern for any nuclear reactor and its health risks, whether it’s been operating for a day or 30 or 40 years because these reactors create over 100 cancer-causing chemicals; much of it is stored as waste at the plant, but a portion of it is released into the environment and gets into human bodies through the food chain," said the study's author.
The Academy study cites previous research conducted from 1996 to 2006 by RPHP, which remains the only analysis of radioactivity levels within the bodies of Americans who live close to nuclear reactors.
RPHP tested about 5,000 baby teeth and found consistent elevation levels of Strontium-90 in the teeth of children born in counties closest to nuclear reactors and a consistent rise in these levels over time."
NRC ADMITS 'SERIOUS GAPS'...
A recent report of a task force formed by the NRC to examine its safety regulations, however, reached the troubling conclusion that the existing system of public regulation is a “patchwork” with serious “gaps” that needed an overarching framework.
ALSO, the US Energy Department’s Accident Investigation Board accident report of the WIPP accident in 2014 criticized how Los Alamos’ execution of the 3706 Campaign was marked by “high workload and time stress” and “focused on budget, financial and schedule performance versus operational oversight”
(SEE: Energy Department 2015 Energy Department. 2015. “Accident Investigation Report, Phase 2: Radiological Release Event at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, February 14, 2014.” Office of Environmental Management, April. http://www.wipp.energy.gov/Special/AIB_WIPP%20Rad_Event%20Report_Phase%20II.pdf [Google Scholar]).
It noted how a June 2013 Energy Department assessment concluded that “in relation to the 3706 campaign [at Los Alamos], the team’s observation of work at times appeared harried.” But the DOE's coverage of 3706 was extremely limited. The campaign was mentioned zero times in the AIB’s 18-page Executive Summary. In the 394-page pdf document, the number 3706 appeared only ten times.
The campaign was left out of its “Conclusions and Judgments of Need” table. It was first broached in a short paragraph under “Relevant LANL and WIPP History” on Page 19 – the pdf’s 55th page. Casting the 3706 Campaign as an infrequently mentioned sideline item, the AIB failed to identify it as a “local root,” “systemic root,” or “contributing” cause of the accident.
Had the Energy Department requested an independent investigation – one that included political analysts, behavioral economists, anthropologists, or sociologists – the 3706 Campaign’s crucial social, political and financial details would not have been treated as [mere] noise in the system, but rather as central to its analysis. This could have taught important lessons.
What is certain, though, is that in failing to grasp how the 3706 Campaign’s self-described “regulatory partnership” became a self-defeating regulatory breakdown, the Energy Department may not have learned difficult lessons that could, someday, help prevent similar accidents. It may pay the price for this in the future."
IT WON'T BE THE ENERGY DEPARTMENT'S PEOPLE IN HARM'S WAY NEXT TIME, NEXT DISASTER, NEXT 'ACCIDENT'.
THERE WILL BE A NEXT TIME...FOREVER.
THERE WILL ALWAYS BE COVER-UPS.
In 1951, when the general manager of the Eastman Kodak Company called the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to complain about high levels of radiation detected at the Kodak plant in Rochester, New York, during a snowstorm. Kodak executives were concerned that radiation could damage their film. The AEC confirmed that a nuclear test had taken place two days earlier in Nevada, and offered to send Kodak warnings before future tests, including maps predicting where the heaviest fallout would occur.
Meanwhile, the AEC failed to give any warning to farmers, families with children who would drink contaminated milk, or pregnant mothers — and instead released a statement to the Associated Press that “there is no possibility of harm to humans or animals.”
Other gross examples include the cover-up of the Kyshtym disaster by the US and the Soviet Union, and the failure to inform the general public of the Chernobyl crisis during the first three days that it was happening.
IN "SECRECY AND NUCLEAR POWER " WE READ...
November, 1968, the Liberian freighter 'Scheersburg', was allegedly hijacked at sea and its cargo of 200 tons of uranium 'disappeared'.
EURATOM (the European community's 'nuclear agency') DID NOT REPORT THIS TO ANYONE FOR ALMOST A YEAR!
The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission was the last informed, December, 1969.
Mossad was named suspect in the hijack, but why would Israel hijack a shipment of ore that they could have easily purchased from France?
Why didn't the U.S.or other nations make a media circus of it at the time?
Complicity?
Also in that issue of the Bulletin (pg. 38), read about the finding of a U.S. Senator in 1977 that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) covered up for at least a decade how impossible they found it to trace diversions of nuclear material from bulk handling facilities. That investigation also uncovered evidence of how American and European governments assisted Pakistan in obtaining nuclear capability.
In 1977, the New York Times offered its guess as to what happened regarding the Scheersburg.
In yet another 'mystery of missing nuclear material', there is NUMEC.
From the website 'Foreign Policy', March, 2015:
The Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC), located in Apollo, Pennsyvania, just 33 miles down the road from Pittsburgh, was the site at which the Westinghouse Corporation had helped construct the world’s first nuclear submarine, and in Apollo, NUMEC consequently manufactured the requisite nuclear fuel.
NUMEC closed its doors in 1983, and in the mid-1990s, the federal government swooped in and declared several city blocks contaminated.
Various agencies rolled in with bulldozers, razed the plant, and carted off the radioactive pieces, barrel by barrel, for disposal.
Ever since, Apollo’s residents have been grappling with fears that NUMEC poisoned their town.
Beginning in the early 1960s, investigators from the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), the agency that regulated U.S. nuclear facilities at the time, began to question how large amounts of highly enriched, weapons-grade uranium had gone missing from NUMEC in Apollo.
Between 1952 and 1968, lax standards at 20 of the country’s commercial nuclear sites resulted in an apparent loss of 995 kilograms (2,194 pounds) of uranium-235.
But investigators found that at NUMEC, hundreds of pounds went missing, more than at any other plant.
Fifty years after investigations began—they have involved, at various times, the AEC and its successors, Congress, the FBI, the CIA, and other government agencies—NUMEC remains one of the most confounding puzzles of the nuclear era.
The residents of Apollo have suffered from various cancers: lung, thyroid, prostate, brain. They have argued that years of radiation soaking into their soil, air, water, clothes, and homes had led to their afflictions. To date, owners of the NUMEC property have shelled out tens of millions of dollars in compensation to locals who’ve filed suit.
After all those years, suddenly one day in September 2011, several SUVs, with blue U.S. Homeland Security decals emblazoned on their sides stationed armed men on the road just five miles north, in Parks Township.
In Parks, PA, a second NUMEC facility had produced plutonium starting in 1960, but it also had served another purpose: nuclear disposal.
From 1961 to 1970, the corporation dug at least 10 shallow trenches, spread across about 44 acres, into which it dumped radioactive waste; some locals speculate that other companies around the country shipped their waste to Parks to be buried too.
Although the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) had been put in charge of cleaning up the site in 2002, under congressional authorization, the process didn’t begin until almost a decade later—right before the madness on the road into Parks.
The following year, the USACE uncovered an unexpected variety of “complex” radioactive contaminants in the ground, but it didn’t say what all it had found or how much of it.
In a December 2014 report, the USACE noted that among the contaminants it expects to find are several “radionuclides of concern,” including americium-241, radium-228, uranium-235, and various types of plutonium, which, under the right conditions, could be used as ingredients for a dirty bomb.
It seems the material buried at Parks is more dangerous than anyone had previously imagined.
The USACE immediately ceased the excavation and established a 24-hour patrolled security perimeter that’s still in effect today."
Just 6 years ago headlines blared the reality of lax security again at Oak Ridge...
"Nuclear site ends security contract following nun's break-in | Reuters"
"The government’s “Fort Knox” of weapons-grade uranium storage has ended a contract with a unit of an international security firm two months after an 82-year-old nun and other nuclear activists broke into the site."
THERE ARE NO REAL 'SAFEGUARDS' FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY OR WEAPONS...THAT IS A LIE, A MYTH USED TO PERSUADE A GULLIBLE PUBLIC THAT EVERYTHING NUCLEAR IS 'SAFE'.
THE CIA's PART IN ONGOING AND PAST COVER-UPS REGARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS CAPABILITY OF SEVERAL OTHER NATIONS WAS ALSO REVEALED IN 1978 BY A CIA CLERICAL ERROR.
THE DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION OF SAFEGUARDS WAS BUSTED IN A BLATANT LIE, THAT ALL U.S. 15 WEAPONS FACILITIES HANDLING NUCLEAR MATERIAL WERE SAFE.
THE TRUTH WAS THAT NINE OF THE 15 HAD BEEN CLEARLY FOUND TO BE NOT SECURE AND COULD EASILY BE BREACHED BY MEN ARMED WITH MERE HANDGUNS.
THIS DID NOT STOP CONGRESS FROM THEN RULING THAT 'IMPROVEMENTS TO SECURITY HAVE BEEN MADE AT ALL SITES AND SO EMERGENCY SAFEGUARDS ARE UNWARRANTED".
As the authors stated, all that it reported in that entire issue on SECRECY within the nuclear industry merely scratched the tip of the iceberg of coverups and deceptions.
HOW BIG IS THAT ICEBERG?
WE MAY NEVER KNOW.
_______________________________
FURTHER READING:
-- Unheeded cybersecurity threat leaves nuclear power stations open to attack...
There has been a rising number of security breaches at nuclear power plants over the past few years, according to a new Chatham House report which highlights how important systems at plants were not properly secured or isolated from the internet.
-- US Nuclear Weapons Site in Europe Breached
-- Report finds many nuclear power plant systems “insecure by design
-- Nuclear Plant Leak Threatens Drinking Water Wells in Florida
//WW
No comments:
Post a Comment