What is it about the US government that causes it to insist on interfering in the affairs of other nations, when it has proved itself incapable of humanely managing its own internal affairs?
Today, yet another headline:
Syria crisis: Obama condemns ‘outrageous’ use of force.”[1]
Does anyone truly believe that events like these…
…could never again happen in America?
Click images to enlarge
Only last week the US upset China by once again criticizing its human rights record.
“We advise the US side to reflect on its own human rights issues and not to position itself as a preacher of human rights,” said a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei.[2]
Yes, America, what about Bradley Manning and Jose Padilla? Not to mention the inhumanities perpetrated at Guantanamo Bay – thank you for breaking yet another promise, Mister Obama. There was a time a United States president could be relied on to keep his word. Or, was there? Certainly not Richard Nixon. I’m sorry, for a moment there I was dreaming.
No-one in their right mind could approve of Syria’s actions against its own countrymen, or China’s treatment of dissidents, but for any nation to behave as a self-righteous prig, while overtly using similar inhumane behavior to its own devious ends, is the worst form of hypocrisy.
What is more, with America its so obvious.
Does the US government really believe no-one notices?
The state of Texas is in a state. They’re running out of water. It hasn’t rained for three months. Wildfires have destroyed 1.8 million acres of land.
The Texas state governor is evangelical Christian Republican, Rick Perry.
Good old Rick can always be relied on to save the day. He’s found an answer to the problem of the drought.
No, he’s not going to call on Congress to take all the emergency action necessary to avert the climate change that’s causing the drought. He’s not even going to demand laws that force the corporate polluters to desist from their actions.
Instead, he’s issued a proclamation:
I, RICK PERRY, Governor of Texas, under the authority vested in me by the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Texas, do hereby proclaim the three-day period from Friday, April 22, 2011, to Sunday, April 24, 2011, as Days of Prayer for Rain in the State of Texas. I urge Texans of all faiths and traditions to offer prayers on that day for the healing of our land, the rebuilding of our communities and the restoration of our normal way of life.”[1]
Well, good on you, Rick. That’s exactly what’s needed. A bit of Divine intervention.
Just one question, Rick: did God cause the drought? Because, if so, he must have had His good reasons.
Perhaps it’s His way of showing you what happens when you and your fat-cat buddies continue to destroy the planet for the sake of acquiring a quick buck or two.
If so, He may not be too receptive to your prayers, Rick.
With the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor catastrophe looming, an appeal has been set up to pay for a huge new sarcophagus to cover the site. So far, the fund is still twenty-five percent short of its goal.[1]
As Japan struggles with its own nuclear crisis at Fukushima, the world is once more debating the problems of nuclear power. Many are using official figures for the death toll at Chernobyl to argue that nuclear energy is not as harmful as some would have us believe.
Even the great green campaigner, George Monbiot, of the Guardian newspaper has attempted to convince us that nuclear is best. His argument, that a stop to building nuclear reactors would result in a swing back towards coal and gas-fired power stations, does hold some water.[2]
Where Monbiot caves on his principles is in suggesting one evil is somehow more preferable than another.
The numbers associated with Chernobyl: deaths from the immediate accident, deaths resulting from the acute effects of the accident, long-term sufferers, and birth defects resulting from the accident, have been bandied about for the last twenty-five years.
One favorite among scientists (and we don’t know how many of them are employed by the nuclear industry) is that rises in disease incidence cannot be directly linked to Chernobyl. There could be other causes. Unfortunately, they don’t seem too keen to ascertain just what these ‘other causes’ might be.
Monbiot, himself, discusses an article by the Guardian’s environment editor, John Vidal:
On a visit to Ukraine in 2006, he saw “deformed and genetically mutated babies in the wards … adolescents with stunted growth and dwarf torsos; foetuses without thighs or fingers”. What he did not see was evidence that these were linked to the Chernobyl disaster.”[2]
Just what the hell else are they likely to be linked to?
Monbiot quoted one sentence from Vidal’s article. He could, at least, have had the grace to continue the next paragraph:
This was 20 years after the accident but we heard of many unusual clusters of people with rare bone cancers. One doctor, in tears, told us that one in three pregnancies in some places was malformed and that she was overwhelmed by people with immune and endocrine system disorders. Others said they still saw caesium and strontium in the breast milk of mothers living far from the areas thought to be most affected, and significant radiation still in the food chain. Villages testified that “the Chernobyl necklace” – thyroid cancer – was so common as to be unremarkable; many showed signs of accelerated ageing.”[3]
No link to Chernobyl? Where else could the caesium and strontium have come from?
Ukraine needs one billion dollars to finance its massive new radiation shield over the Chernobyl reactor. It has raised three-quarters of that figure. The European Union is about to cough up another $153 million.
If Chernobyl is not significantly dangerous, why, in this age of European recession, is one billion dollars being spent on encasing it?
According to the Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych:
“The catastrophe has affected millions of people; thousands died and tens of thousands continue to suffer.”[1]
He should know, shouldn’t he?
The argument over nuclear power will likely rumble on for a long time. Radiation is an invisible enemy. Its effects may not surface for years, by which time no-one can speak with certainty as to the cause. That’s quite handy, if you’re the one to be sued for millions of dollars in compensation.
Personally, I’ll adhere to the words of Dr. Alexey Yablokov, co-author of “Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment,” and a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
He cautioned against the downplaying of the seriousness of the radiation releases at Fukushima:
When you hear ‘no immediate danger’ then you should run away as far and as fast as you can.”[4]
Pots and kettles
Fat-cat clowns
Big fight over tiny atom