Workers decontaminate land in Date, Fukushima Prefecture, in 2013. (Asahi Shimbun file photo)
A nuclear physicist who has drawn attention for tweeting about fallout from the Fukushima nuclear disaster has admitted that he and a colleague underestimated radiation doses in an article for an international scientific journal.
Ryugo Hayano, professor emeritus at the University of Tokyo, said the error, which he recognized on Jan. 8, was “unintentional.”
The article, carried in the Journal of Radiological Protection’s online edition in July 2017, listed average radiation doses that were one-third of the actual levels for people in Date, a city around 60 kilometers northwest of the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, he said.
Hayano’s admission came after an atomic nucleus expert submitted a letter to the editor of the journal last year to point out unnatural data carried in the report.
The radiation doses in the article were based on dosimeters worn by Date residents after the nuclear accident unfolded in March 2011.
“Even if residents lived in the most contaminated area of Date for 70 years, the median of the doses would not exceed 18 millisieverts,” the article concluded.
However, Shinichi Kurokawa, professor emeritus with the High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, an institute jointly used by national universities, raised doubts about the data presented in some sections of the report.
When Hayano and his colleague re-examined the figures, they found that they mistook a monthly dose recorded on a dosimeter as the figure for three months of exposure.
“Even after the error was fixed, I believe the average of annual doses will be within the 1-millisievert mark,” Hayano said.
The benchmark upper limit for radiation exposure among ordinary people is 1 millisievert a year.
Hayano has frequently tweeted about radiation levels and doses from the nuclear disaster.
He was also involved in another research paper that analyzed radiation doses among people in Date. Kurokawa also questioned the veracity of a chart in the second report.
The second report has often been cited in discussions by the government’s Radiation Council on setting standards for protecting people from radiation.
The two research papers were produced after the Date city government provided Hayano’s research team with data on radiation doses of about 59,000 residents.
But it has emerged that data for 27,000 citizens were provided without their consent.
The city plans to set up an investigation panel to find out why it occurred.
Late last year, the US government accidentally revealed that a sealed complaint had been filed against Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks. Shortly before this was made public, the FBI reconfirmed its investigation of WikiLeaks was ongoing, and The Wall Street Journalreported that the US Department of Justice was optimistic that it would be able to extradite Assange.
Soon after, portions of sealed transcripts leaked that implicate WikiLeaks and Assange in directing hackers to target governments and corporations. The charges against Assange have not been officially revealed, though it’s plausible that the offences are related to Russian hacking and the DNC emails.
The alleged offences in the complaint notwithstanding, the US government has an abundance of datato work with: Over a dozen WikiLeaks’ computers, hard drives and email accounts, including those of the organisation’s current and former editors-in-chief, along with messages exchanged with alleged Russian hackers about DNC emails.
Through a series of search warrants, subpoenas, equipment seizures and cooperating witnesses, the US federal government has collected internal WikiLeaks data covering the majority of the organisation’s period of operations, from 2009 at least through 2017.
The filing that committed a copy and paste error revealing charges against Assange.
In some instances, the seized data has been returned and allegedly destroyed, such as in the case of David House, a technologist and friend of Chelsea Manning when she famously became a source for WikiLeaks.
A copy of a chat log between Chelsea Manning and a WikiLeaks staff member IDed as Assange by government prosecutors and witnesses.
Other seizures gave authorities a deeper view of the internal workings of WikiLeaks, including one of the earliest known seizures of WikiLeaks-related data, executed on 14 December 2010, when the messages and user information of several WikiLeaks-linked Twitter accounts were ordered.
This search-and-seizure order included direct messages associated with WikiLeaks and its founder, former Army private first class and WikiLeaks source Chelsea Manning, WikiLeaks editor Rop Gongrijp, former WikiLeaks associate Jacob Appelbaum, and former WikiLeaks associate and Icelandic MP Birgitta Jonsdottir, between 1 November 2009, and the order’s execution.
A court order for information relating to people associated with WikiLeaks. Click on the link for the rest.
MARK CRISPIN MILLER ON HIS FORBIDDEN BOOKSHELF SERIES The Forbidden Bookshelf is a series of formerly banned books with the stated aim of “filling in the blanks of America’s repressed history by resurrecting books that focused on issues and events that are too often left in the dark, including abortion, organized crime, the CIA and financial inequality.”
In this installment of “Leonard Lopate at Large,” Leonard talks to NYU professor of media studies Mark Crispin Miller who curated the series, about why he chose the works he did and discusses the complicated history behind some of the selections.
In this installment of “Leonard Lopate at Large,” Leonard talks to NYU professor of media studies Mark Crispin Miller who curated the Forbidden Bookshelf series.
Co-published by the American Prospect Superintendent Austin Beutner and his allies have made it clear they do not believe that the L.A. Unified School District in its current incarnation is worth investing in – or even preserving.
Sometimes strikes are exactly what they seem to be – battles over wages and working conditions, with relatively few implications for anything or anyone else. But sometimes a strike is about something much bigger: a fundamental clash over vision and values, with repercussions that extend far beyond the warring parties. Call it a meta-strike.
If Los Angeles teachers walk off the job January 14, as widely expected, it will be a meta-strike with extremely high stakes not only for teachers, students and parents in L.A., but for public education across the U.S. The stalemated negotiations over wages, class size, staffing and other issues matter – but they are proxies for an epic fight that has been playing out in American school districts for more than a decade.
The head of the country’s second-largest school district is aggressively advancing a controversial blueprint that could make LAUSD almost unrecognizable.
On one side of this divide are those who believe that public education as an institution should be preserved more or less in its current form, with a greater infusion of money to address chronic underfunding and understaffing. On the other side is an array of forces that want to radically restructure public schools, and who have made it clear they do not believe that the L.A. Unified School District in its current incarnation is worth investing in – or even preserving.
Austin Beutner, LAUSD’s superintendent, is nothing if not a proponent of radical restructuring. He was appointed to his post not because of his experience in education – he has never held a position in that field – but because he is a fervent advocate of an approach that has its roots in the private sector, where he spent the bulk of his career. Beutner made his considerable fortune in business, starting at the powerhouse private equity firm Blackstone and then co-founding the investment banking company Evercore Partners.
Selected by a divided school board in May, Beutner is now arguably the most powerful figure in the national movement to upend traditional public education. As head of the country’s second-largest school district, he is aggressively advancing a controversial blueprint that could make LAUSD almost unrecognizable.
Though Beutner has yet to unveil his proposal, he has tipped his hand in a big way with the hiring of consultant Cami Anderson, the former superintendent of Newark, New Jersey public schools. In Newark, Anderson pushed through a disruptive plan called the “portfolio model.” As the L.A. Times reported in November, under the portfolio model the district would be divided into 32 networks. These networks, observed reporter Bill Raden on this site, “would be overseen like a stock portfolio. A portfolio manager would keep the ‘good’ schools and dump the ‘bad’ by turning them over to a charter or shutting them down much like a bum stock. The changes in Newark included neighborhood school closures, mass firings of teachers and principals, a spike in new charters and a revolt by parents that drove out . . . Anderson.”
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters on Saturday that the government under Venezuela’s recently re-inaugurated president Nicolas Maduro is “illegitimate”, and that “the United States will work diligently to restore a real democracy to that country.”
Pompeo’s remarks, which were echoed by Trump’s National Security Advisor John Bolton, are interesting for a couple of reasons. The first is because Venezuela’s presidential election in May of last year (which incidentally was found to have been perfectly legitimate by the international Council of Electoral Experts of Latin America) was actively and aggressively meddled in by the US and its allies. The second is that while the US government is openly broadcasting its intention to keep interfering in Venezuela’s political system, it continues to scream bloody murder about alleged Russian interference in its own democratic process two years ago.
What is the difference between the behavior of the United States, which remains far and away the single worst offender in foreign election meddling on the planet, and what Russia is accused of having done in 2016? According to a comment made by former CIA Director James Woolsey last year, it’s that the US interferes in foreign democracies “for a very good cause.”
And that’s really the only argument that empire loyalists have going for them on this subject. The US is different because the US has moral authority. It’s okay for the US to continue to interfere in the political affairs of foreign nations while it would be an unforgivable and outrageous “act of war” for a nation like Russia to do the exact same thing, because the US is countering the interests of the Bad Guys while Russia is countering the interests of the Good Guys. Who decided who the Good Guys and Bad Guys are in this argument? The US.
This “What we do is good because we’re the Good Guys” faith-based doctrine was regurgitated with full-throated zealotry in a recent speech given by Pompeo in Cairo, in which he cited “America’s innate goodness” in making the absolutely ridiculous claim that “America is a force for good in the Middle East” which has been “absent too much” from the region previously. America’s nonstop deadly interventionism in the Middle East is “good”, because America is “innately good”.
America’s constant military interventionism, election interference and other nastiness are painted as Good Things done by Good Guys to fight the Bad Guys. The argument, when you boil it right down, is that if America wasn’t constantly starting wars, invading sovereign nations, staging coups, sponsoring proxy conflicts, arming terrorists, bombing civilians, torturing people, implementing starvation sanctions on impoverished populations, pointing nuclear weapons everywhere, spying on us all with a globe-spanning Orwellian surveillance network, interfering in foreign elections, and patrolling the skies with flying death robots, the Bad Guys might win.
Sort of makes you wonder who the Bad Guys really are, huh?
About a month ago, I noted that, if you search "India polio cases Gates" on DuckDuckGo, you find broad coverage of the Gates' catastrophic polio vaccine campaign in India,resulting in the deaths or paralysis of 47,500 people; whereas, if you search those same terms on Google, you get two pieces on that "mishap," buried in the midstof many paeans to the program, most of them from Gates himself or his p.r. machine—"India Records One Year Without Polio Cases" (from the Gates Foundation); "'Ending polio in India is the world's greatest health achievement,' says Bill Gates" (from theTelegraph); "The Secret To Polio Eradication In India" (from Forbes), and on and on and on.
Since propaganda largely works by telling us what we prefer to hear, the probableeffect of that first page of Google search results was to wash away those two discordant headlines, casting them as cranky deviations from the happy (fake) consensus that the Gates campaign was (a) benign and (b) a great humanitarian success. The only readers likely to think otherwise would be those few who know enough already not to swallowthat "consensus," presuming that those two "eccentric" pieces can't be true.
I called that item, "Google is a propaganda tool for Bill Gates and Big Pharma (among other evils)," which you may find here: http://markcrispinmiller.com/2018/12/google-is-a-propaganda-tool-for-bill-gates-and-big-pharma-among-other-evils/Thus it was primarily a piece on thought control, and only tacitly about whatGates had really done in India, and why—as to which, a friend has passed alongJean Perior's new essay in New Eastern Outlook, on the eugenics program that Bill Gates bluntly advocated not so long ago, and that other, larger players have been pursuing aggressively for decades, all over the world.
"So, with all these facts being known to the media for a long time," Perier concludes, "how much longer will it take for the international community to prosecute the criminal activities of Western financial elites aimed at the extermination of the population of our planet?"
Unfortunately, the answer to that question is, "A whole lot longer," because those "facts" are "known to" a "free press" that only buries them, with Google helping them to hide the awful truth.
The population of the Earth today is just over 7.6 billion people. Up until the 1970s, the world’s population would grow in accordance with a hyperbolic formula discovered by the Austrian physicist Heinz von Foerster.
Most recently, as sociologists were bracing for a demographic record, birth rates have suddenly come to a stall. Since the 90s, there’s been a noticeable slowdown in the growth of the population of the planet. Previously, it was predicted that by 2015 the world’s population would exceed 9.3 billion people, but in reality it barely reached 7.5 billion people. The UN would regularly issue forecasts titled World Population Prospects, with the latest of them stating that by 2030 the world’s population may reach 8.6 billion people, closing to 9.8 billion mid-century.
One can observe a noticeable decline in birth rates even in those regions of the world where one couldn’t expect it to occur at all, that is Africa, Southeast Asia, the Caribbean. In turn, the United States, Canada, and all of Europe has been in the negative for decades, facing grim depopulation prospects. Over the past 15 years, in many countries, the traditional large families would be replaced by the so-called statistical average: that is, families that have no more than 6-7 kids per family today would have [had] 12–14 children born two decades ago.
These days, one can come across all kinds of articles written by so-called futurologists that explain that the globalization process has come to a close, thus arguing that the planet doesn’t need as many workers as it used to, as one machine would replace ten people. Therefore, they argue, dropping birth rates is nothing but a natural process.
However, such assessments do nothing to encourage Europe, especially against the background of the skyrocketing migration rates that occur against the backdrop of a massive decline in birth rates across the Old World. Thus, the EU is facing an impending identity change in the coming years.
In order to try and increase the birth rates, a country can use a complicated set of tactics and tools. Among them are educational plans and financial benefits that are provided to the growing families. In Northern Europe, for example, governments would try to boost birth rates by allowing erotical content to enter the mass media back in the 80s. Back then it seemed promising that as cold climates are usually associated with lower birth rates, but this tactic failed to produce the expected result.
Today, the problem of fertility has become, perhaps, one of the more important aspects of sociological, political, and military research.
At the congress of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) that took place in 2006 in Kuala Lumpur, participants highlighted the rising rates of undeveloped pregnancies, while the latest FIGO congress in Rio de Janeiro devoted most of its time to this topic. There’s no answer as to why [the] fetus would stop developing in healthy women. As FIGO states, the rate of undeveloped pregnancies across the globe has increased significantly: in recent years, the number of reported non-developing pregnancies has increased from 20% to 46%. Every year there are more and more such cases registered across the world and physicians are now forced to recognize this phenomenon as an epidemic. But if epidemics of the past had an underlying natural cause, no one seem to be able to spot it here. Nothing seem to affect the growing severity of this problem.
In this situation, one can’t help but recall the US secret service programs on depopulation, the purpose of which was to artificially reduce the population according with the ideas of the 18th century English political economist Thomas Robert Malthus. Involuntarily, one starts thinking about the rhetoric voiced by the founder of Microsoft, Bill Gates, who argued that the population of our planet must be reduced to the “golden billion”, thus advocating eugenics. Gates made his remarks to the invitation-only Long Beach, California TED2010 Conference, in a speech titled, “Innovating to Zero!.” Back then he stated that he would expect vaccines to be used to reduce population growth. It’s been humorously noted that when Bill Gates speaks about vaccines, he speaks with authority.
In particular, one could remind the reader that back in 1974, at the request of the Nixon administration, the DoD, the CIA and the National Security Council developed the so-called National Security Study Memorandum 200, that identified ways in which Washington would try to trigger depopulation on a global scale. Among the targets of this approach were the so-called Third World countries and, above all, those states that the US regards as its colonies.
One’s suspicions about the involvement of US intelligence agencies in the deliberate reduction of the world’s population have been confirmed by a great many incidents that have occurred across the globe over recent decades. In particular, such countries as Mexico and the Philippines suffered a terrible fate in the mid-90s, when the US used the WHO channels to ship vaccines to these countries that were allegedly aimed at protecting local population from tetanus. However this so-called assistance led to a drastic increase in the number of registered miscarriage pregnancies. A study of the vaccine showed that it contained human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) hormone that would stop the natural development of the fetus, leading to miscarriage. Back then the US government would quickly adopt a law that would stop any foreign entities from prosecuting the Big Pharma for the shipment of this vaccine.
Yet another example of criminal meddling aimed at the reduction of the world’s population is the recent scandal in Kenya that revealed that Western doctors would sterilize millions of women across Africa under the guise of tetanus vaccination program conducted by the World Health Organization and UNICEF. Those accusations were voiced by the Association of Catholic Doctors of Kenya, which found in the same hCG in the vaccines shipped to the Dark Continent.
As noted in the report of the Association of Catholic Doctors of Kenya, African countries have been a test site for the Big Pharma for decades that would test the effects of vaccinations, genetic changes associated with certain drugs, reactions to various infections, viruses, and so on the local population without even notifying it, let alone obtaining informed consent. These “studies” are run by private pharmaceutical companies, the Pentagon’s Infectious Diseases Service, the CIA, the so-called biolabs that American intelligence agencies would scatter all across the world, like the notorious Richard Lugar Center in Georgia, funded by the well-known Bill Gates Foundation.
Recent media reports have also revealed that tobacco plantations across the United States have been artificially infected with an unknown virus that increases the risk of lip, mouth, throat and lung cancer in smokers. Those reports can be confirmed by a simple comparison of the incredibly low number of lung cancer cases in smokers pre-1950 in comparison with today’s figures. There’s also reports that Malathion, a nervous gas developed by the Nazis during the Second World War, would be sprayed from helicopters along the densely populated areas of Arizona and California. The official explanation is that the gas kills pests arriving from the Mediterranean. But the paradox is that gas would sprayed on residential areas instead of fields.
As reported in a publication of The Age magazine, an Australian microbiologist and Nobel laureate Sir Frank Macfarlane Burnet urged the Australian government to develop biological weapons against “over-populated countries of Southeast Asia” in 1947. During a secret meeting in 1947 with The New Weapons and Equipment Development Committee microbiologists recommended “to form a research group tasked to create biological weapons that could be unleashed by contaminating foods supplies in order to control the population of Indonesia and other countries.”
Also, a secret program under the codename Project Coast was established in South Africa by US intelligence services to pursue pretty much the same goals back in 1984. Under this program the viruses known as Marburg and Ebola were tested on the black population of South Africa under the direct supervision of the US Centers for Disease Control.
By the way, an abrupt increase in the volumes of GMO modified products being planted and the recent UN forecast predicting a rapid increase in food prices are hardly a coincidence, those are also a part of the program aimed at artificially reducing the world’s population.
So, with all these facts being known to the media for a long time, how much longer will it take for the international community to prosecute the criminal activities of Western financial elites aimed at the extermination of the population of our planet?