Image above: Common Ragweed is becoming resistant to glyphsate applications in Nebraska. Ragweed plants from a glyphosate-resistant (left) and susceptible population (right) three weeks after application of 44 ounces per acre of Roundup PowerMax (that is one ounce per thousand square feet). From (https://cropwatch.unl.edu/glyphosate-resistant-common-ragweed-confirmed-nebraska).
Lawyers involved in a California lawsuit against Monsanto claim to have "explosive" documents concerning the Bayer-owned agrochemical giant's activities in Europe, according to Euronews.
"What we have is the tip of the iceberg. And in fact we have documents now in our possession, several hundreds documents, that have not been declassified and some of those are explosive," said US lawyer Robert Kennedy Jr, adding - "And many of them are pertinent to what Monsanto did here in Europe. And that's just the beginning."
Monsanto - bought by Germany's Bayer AG in June for $66 billion, was ordered in August to pay a historic $289 million to a former school groundskeeper, Dewayne Johnson, who said Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller gave him terminal cancer. Monsanto says it will appeal the verdict.
Environmental lawyers have been in Brussels in order to address a European Parliament special committee on the issue.
"They are fighting a fight for more democracy and for transparency and to get a better insight in how big corporation such as Monsanto act and try to manipulate the facts," said Belgium MEP Bart Staes.
Last November EU approved the use of glyphosate - a key chemical in Roundup, following five years of heated debate over whether it causes cancer. While it was approved for just five years until 2022 vs. the usual 15 years, there are now rumors that they will withdraw Roundup's license this year altogether.
Labeled a carcinogen by the EPA in 1985, the agency reversed its stance on glyphosate in 1991. The World Health Organization's cancer research agency, however, classified the compound as "probably carcinogenic to humans" in 2015. California, meanwhile, has the chemical listed in its Proposition 65 registry of chemicals known to cause cancer.
Image above: Demonstrators protesting merger of GMO companies Monsanto and Bayer. From original article.
On what plane of reality is it possible that two of the world’s most morally bankrupt corporations, Bayer and Monsanto, can be permitted to join forces in what promises to be the next stage in the takeover of the world’s agricultural and medicinal supplies?
Warning, plot spoiler: There is no Mr. Hyde side in this horror story of epic proportions; it’s all Dr. Jekyll.
Like a script from a David Lynch creeper, Bayer AG of poison gas fame has finalized its $66 billion (£50bn) purchase of Monsanto, the agrochemical corporation that should be pleading the Fifth in the dock on Guantanamo Bay instead of enjoying what amounts to corporate asylum and immunity from crimes against humanity.
Such are the special privileges that come from being an above-the-law transnational corporation.
Unsurprisingly, the first thing Bayer did after taking on Monsanto, saddled as it is with the extra baggage of ethic improprieties, was to initiate a rebrand campaign.
Like a Hollywood villain falling into a crucible of molten steel only to turn up later in some altered state, Monsanto has been subsumed under the Orwellian-sounding ‘Bayer Crop Science’ division, whose motto is: "Science for a better life."
Yet Bayer itself provides little protective cover for Monsanto considering its own patchy history of corporate malfeasance. Far beyond its widely known business of peddling pain relief for headaches, the German-based company played a significant role in the introduction of poison gas on the battlefields of World War I.
Despite a Hague Convention ban on the use of chemical weapons since 1907, Bayer CEO Carl Duisberg, who sat on a special commission set up by the German Ministry of War, knew a business opportunity when he saw one.
Duisberg witnessed early tests of poison gas and had nothing but glowing reports on the horrific new weapon: “The enemy won’t even know when an area has been sprayed with it and will remain quietly in place until the consequences occur.”
Bayer, which built a department specifically for the research and development of gas agents, went on to develop increasingly lethal chemical weapons, such as phosgene and mustard gas. “This phosgene is the meanest weapon I know,”
Duisberg remarked with a stunning disregard for life, as if he were speaking about the latest bug spray. “I strongly recommend that we not let the opportunity of this war pass without also testing gas grenades.”
Duisberg got his demonic wish. The opportunity to use the battlefield as a testing ground and soldiers as guinea pigs came in the spring of 1915 as Bayer supplied some 700 tons of chemical weapons to the war front.
On April 22, 1915, it has been estimated that around 170 tons of chlorine gas were used for the first time on a battlefield in Ypres, Belgium against French troops. Up to 1,000 soldiers perished in the attack, and many more thousands injured.
In total, an estimated 60,000 people died as a result of the chemical warfare started by Germany in the First World War and supplied by the Leverkusen-based company.
According to Axel Koehler-Schnura from the Coalition against BAYER Dangers: “The name BAYER particularly stands for the development and production of poison gas.
Nevertheless the company has not come to terms with its involvement in the atrocities of the First World War. BAYER has not even distanced itself from Carl Duisberg’s crimes.”
The criminal-like behavior has continued right up until modern times. Mike Papantonio, a US attorney and television presenter discussed one of the more heinous acts committed by this chemical company on Thomas Hartmann’s program, The Big Picture: “They produced a clotting agent for hemophiliacs, in the 1980s, called Factor VIII.
This blood-clotting agent was tainted with HIV, and then, after the government told them they couldn’t sell it here, they shipped it all over the world, infecting people all over the world. That’s just part of the Bayer story.”
Papantonio, citing Bayer’s 2014 annual report, said the company is facing 32 different liability lawsuits around the world. For the 2018 Bayer liability report, click here.
Before flushing your Bayer products down the toilet, you may want to put aside an aspirin or two because the story gets worse.
One of the direct consequences of the ‘Baysanto’ monster will be a major hike in prices for farmers, already suffering a direct hit to their livelihood from unsustainable prices.
“Farmers have already experienced a 300% price increase in recent years, on everything from seeds to fertilizer, all of which are controlled by Monsanto,” Papantonio told Hartmann. “And every forecaster is predicting that these prices are going to climb even higher because of this merger.”
Yet it’s hard to imagine the situation getting any worse for the American farmer, who is now facing the highest suicide rate of any profession in the country. The suicide rate for Americans engaged in the field of farming, fishing and forestry is 84.5 per 100,000 people - more than five times that of the broader population.
This tragic trend echoes that of India, where about a decade ago millions of Indian farmers began switching from farming with traditional farming techniques to using Monsanto’s genetically modified seeds instead.
In the past, following a millennia-old tradition, farmers saved seeds from one harvest and replanted them the following year. Those days of wisely following the rhythms and patterns of the natural world are almost over.
Today, Monsanto GMO seeds are bred to contain 'terminator technology', with the resulting crops ‘programmed’ not to produce seeds of their own. In other words, the seed company is literally playing God with nature and our lives.
Thus, Indian farmers are forced to buy a new batch of seeds – together with Monsanto pesticide Round Up - each year and at a very prohibitive cost. Hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers
But should the world have expected anything different from the very same company that was involved in the production of Agent Orange for military use during the Vietnam War (1961-1971)?
More than 4.8 million Vietnamese suffered adverse effects from the defoliant, which was sprayed over vast tracts of agricultural land during the war, destroying the fertility of the land and Vietnam’s food supply.
About 400,000 Vietnamese died as a result of the US military’s use of Agent Orange, while millions more suffered from hunger, crippling disabilities and birth defects.
This is the company that we have allowed, together with Bayer, to control about one-quarter of the world’s food supply. This begs the question: Who is more nuts? Bayer and Monsanto, or We the People?
It’s important to mention that the Bayer – Monsanto convergence is not occurring in a corporate vacuum. It is all part of a race on the part of the global agrochemical companies to stake off the world’s food supplies.
ChemChina has bought out Switzerland’s Syngenta for $43 billion, for example, while Dow and DuPont have forged their own $130 billion empire.
However, none of those companies carry the same bloodstained reputations as Bayer and Monsanto, a match made in hell that threatens all life on earth.
Chelsea Manning was released from the Military Corrections Complex at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas on Wednesday—nearly three decades before the Army private's sentence was up for leaking classified military documents to WikiLeaks.
The intelligence analyst, who left the barracks at 2am (CDT), was court-martialed and convicted of leaking more than 700,000 documents and video about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. She came out as a transgender woman shortly after being handed an unprecedented 35-year prison sentence in 2013.
Then-President Barack Obama commuted Manning's term in January and set a May 17 release date. Manning, whom President Trump has called a "TRAITOR" on Twitter, had been in prison longer than any other US leaker convicted under the Espionage Act. She was eligible for parole in six years.
Because Manning's conviction is under appeal, she is to remain in the military on "excess leave in an active-duty status" entitling her to healthcare, the military said. If she loses her appeal, she might be dishonorably discharged and could lose her healthcare and other benefits.
Neither the military nor Manning's supporters said where she would be living. But Manning tweeted in January she would return to Maryland, where she previously resided.
"I am looking forward to so much! Whatever is ahead of me is far more important than the past. I’m figuring things out right now—which is exciting, awkward, fun, and all new for me," Manning said in a statement.
Manning said in a petition to Obama that she "did not intend to harm the interests of the United States or harm any service members." Among other reasons, she wanted to be released in order to continue her transition-related healthcare. A White House online petition saw more than 100,000 people demand that Obama commute Manning's sentence.
"It has been my view that, given she went to trial, that due process was carried out, that she took responsibility for her crime, that the sentence that she received was very disproportionate relative to what other leakers had received. It made sense to commute, and not pardon, her sentence," Obama said of Manning's commutation during the final days of his presidency.
Manning enlisted with the Army in 2007 and leaked the documents at a Barnes & Noble in suburban Maryland. The classified files, which were on a camera's memory stick, were uploaded during a 2010 mid-tour leave from Iraq.
At trial, Manning testified about a classified video of a 2007 Apache helicopter attack in Iraq that was ultimately found to have killed civilians and a Reuters journalist. "For me, that was like a child torturing an ant with a magnifying glass," Manning said. Using Tor, Manning uploaded the video and documents to WikiLeaks. The video went viral and is known as the "collateral murder" video.
In the days before Obama commuted Manning's sentence, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said he would surrender to US authorities if Obama showed Manning mercy. Assange is living in a self-imposed exile in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London amid fears he could be charged in the US for exposing the secrets Manning leaked.
However, Assange weaseled out of his pledge, saying he meant he would surrender only if Obama allowed Manning to leave the brig immediately, not on May 17.
Pretty much every official statement emanating from the U.S. government these days is a deception, fabrication, or outright lie. I understand that this is a hard thing for a U.S. citizen to admit, but as James Baldwin so accurately stated:
“Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.”
So let’s go ahead and face the facts. Governments lie. Governments have always lied. Extremely corrupt, imperial governments overseeing societies in deep economic and cultural decline lie even more. This isn’t conspiracy theory, it’s what obviously happens when you combine tremendous power with human nature.
Although I’ve been questioning the Trump administration’s fairytale narrative about the recent Syria gas attack from day one, I don’t have the expertise to sufficiently examine the evidence and put some meat on the bones.
In contrast, Professor Emeritus of Science, Technology, and National Security Policy at MIT, Theodore A. Postol does, and he’s published a series of reports over the past week calling out what he believes is a deliberate deception by members of the Trump team.
IB Publisher's note: A section of this report has been omitted as it duplicates our reporting, on 14 April 2017, of Professor Postol's analysis. You can see that material, if you have not read it here Ea O Ka Aina: Source of Sarin gas attack faked? Michael Krieger goes on to say: That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Take a look at the “Summary and Conclusions” section from his third report courtesy of Naked Capitalism:
Summary and Conclusions It is now clear from video evidence that the WHR (White House Intelligence Report) was fabricated without input from the professional intelligence community.
The press reported on April 4 that a nerve agent attack had occurred in Khan Shaykhun, Syria during the early morning hours locally on that day. On April 7, The United States carried out a cruise missile attack on Syria ordered by President Trump. It now appears that the president ordered this cruise missile attack without any valid intelligence to support it.
In order to cover up the lack of intelligence to supporting the president’s action, the National Security Council produced a fraudulent intelligence report on April 11 four days later. The individual responsible for this report was Lieutenant General H. R. McMaster, the National Security Advisor.
The McMaster report is completely undermined by a significant body of video evidence taken after the alleged sarin attack and before the US cruise missile attack that unambiguously shows the claims in the WHR could not possibly be true. This cannot be explained as a simple error.
The National Security Council Intelligence Report clearly refers to evidence that it claims was obtained from commercial and open sources shortly after the alleged nerve agent attack (on April 5 and April 6). If such a collection of commercial evidence was done, it would have surely found the videos contained herein.
This unambiguously indicates a dedicated attempt to manufacture a false claim that intelligence actually supported the president’s decision to attack Syria, and of far more importance, to accuse Russia of being either complicit or a participant in an alleged atrocity.
The attack on the Syrian government threatened to undermine the relationship between Russia and the United States. Cooperation between Russia and the United States is critical to the defeat of the Islamic State. In addition, the false accusation that Russia knowingly engaged in an atrocity raises the most serious questions about a willful attempt to do damage relations with Russia for domestic political purposes. We repeat here a quote from the WHR:
An open source video also shows where we believe the chemical munition landed—not on a facility filled with weapons, but in the middle of a street in the northern section of Khan Shaykhun. Commercial satellite imagery of that site from April 6, after the allegation, shows a crater in the road that corresponds to the open source video.
The data provided in these videos make it clear that the WHR made no good-faith attempt to collect data that could have supported its “confident assessment.” that the Syrian government executed a sarin attack as indicated by the location and characteristics of the crater.
This very disturbing event is not a unique situation. President George W. Bush argued that he was misinformed about unambiguous evidence that Iraq was hiding a substantial store of weapons of mass destruction. This false intelligence led to a US attack on Iraq that started a process that ultimately led to the political disintegration in the Middle East, which through a series of unpredicted events then led to the rise of the Islamic State.
On August 30, 2013, the White House produced a similarly false report about the nerve agent attack on August 21, 2013 in Damascus.
This report also contained numerous intelligence claims that could not be true. An interview with President Obama published in The Atlantic in April 2016 indicates that Obama was initially told that there was solid intelligence that the Syrian government was responsible for the nerve agent attack of August 21, 2013 in Ghouta, Syria. Obama reported that he was later told that the intelligence was not solid by the then Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper.
Equally serious questions are raised about the abuse of intelligence findings by the incident in 2013. Questions that have not been answered about that incident is how the White House produced a false intelligence report with false claims that could obviously be identified by experts outside the White House and without access to classified information.
There also needs to be an explanation of why this 2013 false report was not corrected. Secretary of State John Kerry emphatically testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee repeating information in this so-called un-equivocating report. On August 30, 2013 Secretary of State Kerry made the following statement from the Treaty Room in the State Department:
Our intelligence community has carefully reviewed and re-reviewed information regarding this attack[Emphasis added], and I will tell you it has done so more than mindful of the Iraq experience. We will not repeat that moment. Accordingly, we have taken unprecedented steps to declassify and make facts available to people who can judge for themselves.
It is now obvious that this incident produced by the WHR, while just as serious in terms of the dangers it created for US security, was a clumsy and outright fabrication of a report that was certainly not supported by the intelligence community.
In this case, the president, supported by his staff, made a decision to launch 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian air base. This action was accompanied by serious risks of creating a confrontation with Russia, and also undermining cooperative efforts to win the war against the Islamic State.
I therefore conclude that there needs to be a comprehensive investigation of these events that have either misled people in the White House, or worse yet, been perpetrated by people to protect themselves from domestic political criticisms for uninformed and ill-considered actions.
Sincerely yours, Theodore A. Postol Professor Emeritus of Science,Technology, and National Security PolicyMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyEmail: postol@mit.edu
The U.S. government is completely rogue and determined to drive the U.S. into an unwinable war based on false pretenses, which doesn’t serve the national interest. These lunatics must be stopped.
Image above: American UN Ambassador Colin Powell holding up a vial with powder that could be used to hold anthrax, in his presentation to the UN in February 2003, ahead of the Iraq invasion. Did he really think we'd believe he brought a vial of anthrax into the United Nations General Assembly hall. A lying sack of shit. Photograph by Timothy A Clary From (https://www.commondreams.org/views/2013/02/28/how-bush-administration-sold-war-and-we-bought-it)
After detailed decimation of President Trump’s ‘intelligence’ ‘justifying’ his invasion of Syria, the MIT specialist on such intelligence-analysis, Dr. Theodore Postol, concludes:
I have worked with the intelligence community in the past, and I havegrave concerns about the politicization of intelligence that seems to be occurring with more frequency in recent times – but I know that the intelligence community has highly capable analysts in it. And if those analysts were properly consulted about the claims in the White House document they would have not approved the document going forward.
I am available to expand on these comments substantially. I have only had a few hours to quickly review the alleged White House intelligence report. But a quick perusal shows without a lot of analysis that this report cannot be correct, and it also appears that this report was not properly vetted by the intelligence community.
This is a very serious matter.
President Obama was initially misinformed about supposed intelligence evidence that Syria was the perpetrator of the August 21, 2013 nerve agent attack in Damascus. This is a matter of public record.
President Obama stated that his initially false understanding was that the intelligence clearly showed that Syria was the source of the nerve agent attack. This false information was corrected when the then Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, interrupted the President while he was in an intelligence briefing. According to President Obama, Mr. Clapper told the President that the intelligence that Syria was the perpetrator of the attack was “not a slamdunk.”
The question that needs to be answered by our nation is how was the president initially misled about such a profoundly important intelligence finding?
Will they hide from the U.S. public his disproof of the U.S. regime’s latest such scam backing the actual perpetrators of a war-crime — will they do now as they did then?
This issue presents a challenge to the U.S. ‘news’ media, to finally show some integrity, some honor, and expose the operations of the gang at the U.S. government’s top, instead of simply continuing to pump that gang’s propaganda.
Without the continuing cooperation of America’s ‘news’media, we would not now be heading toward World War III — global nuclear war. What would be the time when these ‘news’media will do their job, instead of do what they’re being paid to do, if that time is not now.
Close your eyes, click your heels three times, and tell me if you actually know what the fuck is happening in Syria. There’s an awful lot about the poison gas attack that doesn’t add up for the casual observer.
It was only a week ago that the US enunciated a new policy that we would be content for Bashar al Assad to remain in power presiding over the Syrian government — after years of grousing and threats against him.
Apparently Trump Central had concluded that Assad was a better alternative than another failed state in the Middle East with no government at all.
That policy change was a yuge benefit for Assad since it removed any pretext for US subterfuge or “black box” mischief against him. He was rather busy fighting a civil war, after all.
Against whom?
A mash-up of Jihadi forces ranging from Isis (so-called), to al Qaeda and Jabhat al Nusra, its spinoff gang dedicated specifically against Assad personally.
Assad’s relations with Isis were ambiguous and complex. Isis had used Syria as a staging area for its operations next door in Iraq. It was rumored that Assad purchased oil from Isis.
Yet Isis had participated in actions against Assad. In any case, all of the Jihadis were Sunni, in opposition to Assad’s Iran-leaning regime.
Assad himself belongs to the Alawite sect of Islam, a twig on the Shia branch. Syria as a whole is a majority Sunni population, so Assad and his father Hafez before him (President 1971 – 2000) have represented a minority (12 percent) in an era of inflamed Sunni-Shia passions.
Trusting that your are not additionally confused by all this, why would Assad choose this moment — only days after the US granted him a pass on remaining in power — to do the one thing guaranteed to bring the wrath of the US down him, namely, kill a lot of civilians, including women and children, with poison gas? Either Assad is inconceivably stupid or possibly the gas attack is not exactly what happened.
Russia has claimed that Assad’s air force attempted to bomb a “rebel” (al Qaeda? Al Nusra? Isis?) ammunition depot that apparently contained supplies of Sarin nerve gas.
Neither the US government or the American media has presented any arguments to counter that hypothesis. The New York Times banged the war drum as loudly as possible in the days after the incident.
And now, of course, Trump Central has fired $60 million worth of cruise missiles at Assad’s main air force base. Assad’s spokesmen denied responsibility for the attack and the Russians are still asking for conclusive evidence via the UN Security Council.
The current incident appears to be — or was engineered to be — a replay of the August 2013 gas incident that left President Barack Obama looking weak and indecisive for not carrying out retaliation against Assad “crossing a line in the sand” against human decency.
And so you have Mr. Trump, who may feel now that he cannot afford to appear weak and indecisive — above all other considerations, including the truth about what really happened at Khan Sheikhoun, Idlib province of Syria.
So he bombed an airport, after warning the Russians to remove their personnel from the vicinity.
In the event that the world ever does learn what actually occurred at Khan Sheikhoun, and the truth turns out differently than the current narrative, Mr. Trump can say, “We only bombed some Syrian air force infrastructure… no biggie… no women and children harmed.”
The outstanding question remains: what might have possibly motivated Bashar al Assad to turn upside down a situation of great advantage to himself mere days after he achieved it? It will be interesting to see if a credible response emerges from the hall of mirrors that US policy has become.
Likely False Flag in Syria
SUBHEAD: Ron Paul says Ron Paul: "Zero Chance" Assad Behind Chemical Weapons Attack In Syria.
According to former Congressman Ron Paul, the chemical weapons attack in Khan Sheikhoun that killed 30 children and has led to calls for the Trump administration to intervene in Syria could have been a false flag attack.
As Paul Joseph Watson details, pointing out that the prospect of peace in Syria was moving closer before the attack, with ISIS and Al-Qaeda on the run, Paul said the attack made no sense.
“It looks like maybe somebody didn’t like that so there had to be an episode,” said Paul, asking, “who benefits?”
“It doesn’t make any sense for Assad under these conditions to all of a sudden use poison gases – I think there’s zero chance he would have done this deliberately,” said Paul.
he former Congressman went on to explain how the incident was clearly being exploited by neo-cons and the deep state to enlist support for war.
“It’s the neo-conservatives who are benefiting tremendously from this because it’s derailed the progress that has already been made moving toward a more peaceful settlement in Syria,” said Paul.
Many have questioned why Assad would be so strategically stupid as to order a chemical weapons attack and incite the wrath of the world given that he is closer than ever to winning the war against ISIS and jihadist rebels.
Just five days before the attack, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said, “The longer-term status of President Assad will be decided by the Syrian people,” implying a definite shift in U.S. foreign policy away from regime change in Syria.
Why would Assad put such assurances in jeopardy by launching a horrific chemical attack, allowing establishment news outlets like CNN to once against use children as props to push for yet another massive war in the Middle East? .
If anyone doubts that Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid, he
should read the report “Israeli Practices towards the Palestinian People
and the Question of Apartheid” commissioned by the United Nations
Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA).
The report
released on the 15th March 2017 and posted on the ESCWA
website has now been removed on the orders of the UN Secretary-General,
pressurized, it is alleged, by the governments of Israel and the United
States both of whom have denounced the report in harsh terms.
The withdrawal of the report prompted the ESCWA Executive Secretary
and UN Under-Secretary-General Dr. Rima Khalaf, to submit her
resignation. In her words, “I resigned because it is my duty not to
conceal a clear crime and I stand by all the conclusions of the report.”
It is worth noting that the report carried a clear disclaimer that “the
findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this publication
are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of
the UN or its officials or Member States.”
The report was co-authored by two distinguished American scholars —
Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus of International Law Princeton
University who, from 2008 to 2014, also served as UN Special Rapporteur
on the situation of human rights in Palestinian territories occupied
since 1967, and Virginia Tilley, Professor of Political Science at
Southern Illinois University and author of Beyond Occupation: Apartheid Colonialism and International Law in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
Carefully worded, incisively analyzed and succinctly articulated, the
report is a significant milestone in the endeavor to understand one of
the longest political conflicts in modern times.
Using international human rights law as a basis, the report provides
ample evidence to show why Israel practices apartheid in various facets
of governance. Land policy is one example.
Land occupied by Israel
between 1948 and 1967 can only be owned and used by Jews and by law
excludes non-Jews some of whom have documentary claims to the land that
go back a few centuries.
An even more insidious mechanism employed by the Israeli regime to
exercise control and domination is the fragmentation of the Palestinian
population into various categories.
The authors of the report call them
‘domains.’ Domain 1 comprises those who are citizens of the state of
Israel. They receive inferior social services, limited budget
allocations, and are subjected to restrictions on jobs and professional
opportunities.
They live in segregated residential areas and are aware
that access to public benefits are by and large reserved for those who
qualify as citizens under the Citizenship Law and the Law of Return,
meaning by which Jews. This creates a system of covert racism and
renders Palestinians second-class citizens.
Domain 2, also under Israeli rule, is made up of Palestinian
residents of occupied East Jerusalem. They are also victims of
discrimination like their counterparts in Domain 1. They have limited
access to good educational and health care facilities.
In addition, a
Palestinian resident of East Jerusalem can have his residency revoked if
he cannot prove that Jerusalem is his “center of life.” Between 1996
and 2014, residency was revoked for more than 11,000 Palestinians.
Palestinians living in Gaza and the West Bank, territories occupied
by Israel since 1967, would constitute Domain 3. They are governed by
military law. Though Hamas has limited authority over Gaza, it is Israel
that has exclusive control over its borders.
And since 2007, Israel has
imposed a blockade upon Gaza that affects all aspects of life in that
tiny peninsula. While the residents of both West Bank and Gaza are
subject to military law, the 350,000 Jewish settlers in the West Bank
are governed by Israeli civil law.
This dual legal system underscores
stark racial discrimination which manifests itself in many other ways.
In contrast to the parlous state of Palestinians living in the West Bank
and Gaza, Jewish settlements continue to flourish.
Jews from all over
the world are offered various incentives to move to these well-endowed
settlements,including employment guarantees, agricultural subsidies,
school grants and special recreational facilities.
Unlike the first three domains, Palestinians in Domain 4 are the only
ones who are not under Israeli control. These are Palestinians who are
refugees from the wars and expulsions since 1948 and their descendants
who have been living outside original Palestine, in Jordan, Lebanon,
Syria, Iraq, Egypt and a number of other countries in West Asia and
North Africa (WANA). There are some who for generations have been
staying in Europe and North America.
All of them are affected by one
vital dimension of Israeli policy. They are barred from returning home.
While they are prohibited from returning to the land of their ancestors,
a Jew who does not have the flimsiest link to Israel or Palestine is
encouraged to settle down in these territories.
This is yet another
blatant example of apartheid.
The report prepared by Falk and Tilley argues eloquently that the
emergence of the domains and the apartheid practiced by various Israeli
governments cannot be separated from the desire and the drive in the
Zionist movement from the turn of the 20th century to
establish an exclusive Jewish state in Palestine.
Bringing in Jewish
immigrants long before the Israeli state was created, the wars, the
expulsions and the laws to prevent Palestinians from returning to their
land were all part of that mission.
Indeed, there has been deliberate
ethnic cleansing of Palestine — a point which has been elaborated with
much lucidity by the outstanding Israeli historian, Ilan Pappe in his
ground breaking book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.
In its conclusion, the Falk-Tilley report establishes, “on the basis
of scholarly inquiry and overwhelming evidence that Israel is guilty of
the crime of apartheid.” It then proposes that an international tribunal
examine the report and make an assessment that will be truly
authoritative.
If such an authoritative assessment concurs with the
finding of the report, the UN and its agencies, regional outfits and
national governments should act. They have a collective duty to
de-legitimise an apartheid regime and render it illegal. They cannot
allow such a regime to continue.
The report also urges civil society groups and non-state actors to
step up their campaign against apartheid Israel. Some of them are
already doing quite a bit through the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions
(BDS) movement. They should organize and mobilize much more through the
alternative media.
That the media has given so little attention to the contents of the
report on apartheid Israel is an indication of the power and influence
of the states and vested interests that do not want the truth about
Israel to be known to the world.
This is what we have to struggle
against in order to ensure that truth triumphs and justice is done to
the people of Palestine.
• Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is the President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST). Malaysia. .
Image above: Illustration of DU shell and radioactive warning symbol. From original article.
Despite vowing not to use depleted uranium (DU) weapons in its military action in Syria, the US government has now admitted that it has fired thousands of the deadly rounds into Syrian territory. As Foreign Policy Magazine reports:
US Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesman Maj. Josh Jacques told Airwars and Foreign Policy that 5,265 armor-piercing 30 mm rounds containing depleted uranium (DU) were shot from Air Force A-10 fixed-wing aircraft on Nov. 16 and Nov. 22, 2015, destroying about 350 vehicles in the country’s eastern desert.
Operation Inherent Resolve spokesman John Moore said in 2015 that:
US and coalition aircraft have not been and will not be using depleted uranium munitions in Iraq or Syria during Operation Inherent Resolve.
Now we know that is not true.
Numerous studies have found that depleted uranium is particularly harmful when the dust is inhaled by the victim. A University of Southern Maine study discovered that:
...DU damages DNA in human lung cells. The team, led by John Pierce Wise, exposed cultures of the cells to uranium compounds at different concentrations.
The compounds caused breaks in the chromosomes within cells and stopped them from growing and dividing healthily. 'These data suggest that exposure to particulate DU may pose a significant [DNA damage] risk and could possibly result in lung cancer,' the team wrote in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology.
We should remember that the United States is engaged in military activities in Syria in violation of international and US law. There is no Congressional authorization for US military action against ISIS in Syria and the United Nations has not authorized military force in violation of Syria's sovereignty either.
The innocent citizens of Syria will be forced to endure increased risks of cancer, birth defects, and other disease related to exposure to radioactive materials. Depleted uranium is the byproduct of the enrichment of uranium to fuel nuclear power plants and has a half-life in the hundreds of millions of years. Damage to Syrian territory will thus continue long after anyone involved in current hostilities is dead. .
I would like to thank Rayne Raygush for alerting us to relevant entries from the Federal Register published since the last issue of The Environmental Notice that relate to military weapons testing near Kauai.
The article below is derived from this that notice, including details of the notification by NOAA of ongoing damage to marine mammals. This is occurring now during the month of October and November and is being conducted by the US Air Force for testing of weapons systems in the waters around Kauai.
ISSUER:
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of Commerce Department.
WHO:
U.S. Air Force 86 Fighter Weapons Squadron (86 FWS)
WHAT:
Notice of issuance of an incidental harassment authorization for Air Force.
WHERE:
Barking Sands Underwater Range Extension (BSURE) area of the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF) at Kauai, Hawaii.
WHEN:
This authorization is effective from October 1, 2016, through November 30, 2016.
INFORMATION:
Laura McCue, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
BACKGROUND:
Law direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking (killing) of small numbers of marine mammals of a species or population stock, by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review.
An authorization for incidental takings (killings) for marine mammals shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting of such taking are set forth.
NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.”
The US Air Force 86 Fighter Weapons Squadron plans to conduct an air-to-surface mission in the BSURE area of the PMRF. The Long Range Strike Weapons System Evaluation Program (LRS WSEP) test objective is to conduct operational evaluations of long range strike weapons and other munitions as part of operations to properly train units to execute real-world operational expectations in a time of war.
Due to threats to national security, increased missions involving air-to-surface activities have been directed by the Department of Defense (DoD).
86 FWS proposes actions that include LRS WSEP test missions of the Joint Air-To-Surface Stand-off Missile (JASSM) and the Small Diameter Bomb-I/II (SDB-I/II) including detonations at the water surface. These activities qualify as military readiness activities under the MMPA.
IMPACTS:
The following aspects of the planned LRS WSEP training activities have the potential to take marine mammals: Munition strikes and detonation effects (overpressure and acoustic components). Take, by Level B harassment of individuals of dwarf sperm whale, pygmy sperm whale, Fraser's dolphin, and minke whale could potentially result from the specified activity.
Additionally, 86 FWS has requested authorization for Level A Harassment of one individual dwarf sperm whale. 86 FWS's LRS WSEP training activities may potentially impact marine mammals at or near the water surface. In the absence of mitigation, marine mammals could potentially be injured or killed by exploding and non-exploding projectiles, falling debris, or ingestion of military expended materials.
HARM LEVELS: Level B Behavioral Response could result from exposure to explosive detonations that cause disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering.
TTS is Temporary Threshold Shift that can affect how an animal behaves in response to the environment, including reactions to predators, and prey.
PTS is Permanent Threshold Shift that results from exposure to explosive detonations that is irreversible and is considered this to be an permanent injury.
Note Table 5 above indicates in the case of pygmy and dwarf whales that permanent damage could be done to an individual whale over 4 miles from an explosion and temporary damage could be inflicted almost 13 miles from an explosion. These species could even experience behavior disruption over 35 miles from an explosion.
TABLE 7: NUMBER OF MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
Species
Mortality
Level A: PTS
Permanent
Level B: TTS
Temporary
Level B:
Behavioral
Dwarf Sperm Whale
0
1
9
64
Pygmy Sperm Whale
0
0
3
26
Frasier's Dolphin
0
0
1
0
Mincke Whale
0
0
1
2
Humpback Whale
0
0
3
9
TOTAL
0
1
17
101
BOTTOM LINE
Needless to say, the US military continues its war against the Pacific Ocean and its inhabitants. The damage weapons testing will do is only estimated.
These damage estimates to not include damage to non-mammals, (fish, squid, etc.) that are the prey of many whales, dolphins and seals. Those numbers are uncountable and probably have an impact on marine mammal health and levels of stress.
These estimates also do not include how unpleasant the environment becomes to these mammals as a result of ocean explosions, particularly to damaging chaotic sound nearby to animals capable if hearing across the ocean; like having a airport runway for a frontyard.
That the Navy and Air Force of the United States is making the Hawaiian Islands a place that does not welcome marine mammals, including whales, dolphins and seals is a crime against life itself.
It’s been a good couple of days for the global two-tiered justice system and its political beneficiaries. Just yesterday, the world gasped in horror as Hillary Clinton was given her much anticipated “get out of jail free card,” further clarifying the similarities between herself and her lawless banker patrons. As I wrote in yesterday’s piece, “What Difference Does It Make” – Thoughts on the Non-Indictment of Hillary Clinton:
Unless you’re some kind of cultist and view Hillary Clinton as your leader and savior, you cannot read the above and not be extremely concerned that this person could in very short order be elected President. Indeed, let’s focus in on that last paragraph. Comey admits that other people under similar circumstances might face consequences, but that Hillary Clinton will not. So once again, due to her position of influence and power, she will face zero accountability for her actions. What difference does it make.
It’s not just Hillary, of course. Politicians and corporate executives the world over escape justice on a daily basis. Although this has always been true to varying degrees throughout history, it’s the current in your face boldness of it all as the general public suffers from a rigged and broken economy, which is leading to populists movements all across the Western world. The latest example of elite immunity comes courtesy of America’s “special ally” across the pond: Great Britain.
Earlier today, the findings from a seven year UK inquiry into the run up to the Iraq War and its disastrous aftermath were revealed. Reuters reports:
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s justification, planning and handling of the Iraq War involved a catalogue of failures, a seven-year inquiry concluded on Wednesday in a scathing verdict on Britain’s role in the conflict.
Eight months before the 2003 invasion, Blair told U.S. President George W. Bush “I will be with you, whatever”, eventually sending 45,000 British troops into battle when peace options had not been exhausted, the long-awaited British public inquiry said.
More than 13 years since the invasion, Iraq remains in chaos, with large areas under the control of Islamic State militants who have claimed responsibility for attacks on Western cities.
Many Britons want Blair to face criminal action over his decision to take military action that led to the deaths of 179 British soldiers and more than 150,000 Iraqi civilians over the following six years.
Despite all of that, absolutely nothing will happen to Tony Blair. Just like nothing happened to Hillary Clinton, or mega bank CEOs. Are you picking up on a pattern yet?
Critics also say it fuelled a deep distrust in politicians and the ruling establishment. The report was issued 13 days after Britons delivered a stunning blow to their political leaders by voting to leave the European Union.
Well yeah, why do you think the British people voted for Brexit despite all the experts lecturing them about how stupid that decision would be.
The inquiry, which was given unprecedented access to confidential government documents and took longer to complete than British military involvement in the conflict itself, said Blair had relied on flawed intelligence and determined the way the war was legally authorised was unsatisfactory.
The threat posed by Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s supposed weapons of mass destruction – the original justification for war – had been over-hyped and the planning for the aftermath of war had been inadequate, it found.
“It is an account of an intervention which went badly wrong, with consequences to this day,” said the inquiry chairman, former civil servant John Chilcot.
In light of all this, you’d think Tony Blair might express some regret about his decision to go to war. You’d be wrong.
In a lengthy and passionate defence lasting almost two hours, Blair explained his decision to back Bush and go to war alongside the United States in March 2003, at a time when the inquiry said Saddam posed no imminent threat.
“I did not mislead this country. There were no lies, there was no deceit, there was no deception,” the former prime minister told reporters, looking gaunt and strained but growing animated as he responded to questions.
“But there was a decision, and it was a controversial decision … to remove Saddam and to be with America. I believe I made the right decision and the world is better and safer as a result of it.”
Sounds a lot like all the economists and central bankers who continually assure us that things would’ve been “so much worse” if we didn’t bail out the bankers with zero strings attached. He then proceeds to rewrite history and pretend his war didn’t have the obvious effects it did.
Blair said he would take the same decisions again, and that he did not see the action as the cause of terrorism today, blaming outside forces for continuing sectarian violence in Iraq and the legacy of the Arab Spring for the emergence of Islamic State militants.
Yet you wonder why the world’s in the wretched state it’s in. With “leaders” like these, what do you expect? They’re all corrupt, incompetent, militaristic and completely incapable of learning from their mistakes.
Oh and while Tony Blair is busy reminding everybody about how much better the world is from his plush surroundings, here’s what some Iraqis had to say about, you know, their actual lives:
“I wish Saddam would return; he executed many of my family but he is still better than these politicians and clerics who got Iraq to the way it is,” said Kadhim Hassan al-Jabouri, an Iraqi who was filmed attacking Saddam’s statue with a sledgehammer after the invasion.
Iraqis say they’re not satisfied that the head of Britain’s Iraq War inquiry has not recommended prosecuting former British Prime Minister Tony Blair for war crimes. Many Iraqis are still mourning the loss of more than 175 people killed in a massive weekend bombing in Baghdad claimed by the Islamic State group.
Ali al-Saraji, a Baghdad resident, says Blair, “destroyed our country,” and should be prosecuted as a war criminal for his involvement in bringing about the Iraq war.
The instability that the 2003 U.S.-led invasion unleashed in Iraq persists to this day and has left more than 100,000 Iraqis dead, tens of thousands wounded and millions displaced.
Al-Saraji says “since 2003 until now, our country has been a scene of destruction, killing, massacres, explosions and sectarianism.”
The rise of al-Qaeda in Iraq following the 2003 invasion later morphed into the militants who call themselves the Islamic State group.
Juma al-Quraishi, an Iraqi journalist, says “everyone who took part in the war against Iraq should be condemned, either Britain or others.”
But never mind, Tony Blair tell us he made the right choice.
Meanwhile, it’s this level of gross incompetence and lack of accountability that is leading to populist revolts around the world. Earlier today, I was stunned to read that Italy’s 5-Star Movement is now the most popular party in the country.
Fresh from its successes in last month’s local elections, the anti-establishment 5-Star Movement (M5S) is now Italy’s most popular party and would easily win power if a national election were held now, opinion polls show.
Three polls this week said M5S had overtaken Prime Minister Matteo Renzi’s Democratic Party in voter preferences, reaching around 30 percent of the vote and continuing a long trend of rising support while Renzi’s popularity ebbs. Italy’s next national election is scheduled for 2018.
But all recent polls show that under the new electoral system M5S would easily win in the second round ballot if the election were held now.
The strength of M5S in second-round ballots was reflected in mayoral elections last month, when it won in 19 of the 20 run-offs it contested, including the capital Rome.
The 5-Star Movement, founded by comedian Beppe Grillo in 2009, bases its appeal on the fight against Italy’s rampant corruption and pledges to break down the privileges of its political and business elite.
[IB Author's note: Below is the written text of the talk I gave (see video above) at the Oceans4Peace presentations and discussion. The evening program as hosted by Gorden Labedz and included; Technology Effects on Whales - Kalasara Setaysha - Oceans4Peace, The Threats to Coral - Dr. Katherine Muzik - Marine Biologist NTBG, Expansion of US Militarism in the Pacific - Juan Wilson - Kauai Sierra Club]
OCEANS4PEACE PACIFIC PIVOT PRESENTATION
By Juan Wilson
Aloha All,
I am a retired architect/planner and a member of the executive committee of the Kauai Group of the Sierra Club. My wife Linda and I publish IslandBreath.org - an online website focussing on peace, sustainability, and living local.
I'm speaking in place of Koohan Paik who planned to make a presentation on the US military buildup in the Pacific Ocean and the so called "Pacific Pivot". However, she could not be here, as she is in South Korea.
I must say that Koohan works tirelessly on the issues we will speak about tonight. She was the first one that brought to me the importance of the Strategic Islands of of the United States - specifically in the Pacific Ocean. She is knowledgable of the policies and actions the US implements in achieving its imperial goals as well as the impacts they have on local cultures and ecosystems.
Koohan's presentation for our panel discussion before RIMPAC two years ago is pertinent today. In fact it was prescient:
I think it's worth revisiting. She said in part:
The U.S. is attempting to stake its claim on the Asia-Pacific region. Hillary Clinton, a huge cheerleader for the militarization, has called the 21st century “America’s Pacific Century.
RIMPAC is only a small piece of a huge, systemized, federal project of destruction called “the Pacific Pivot.” The Pacific Pivot is a plan to reorient the U.S. military away from Europe and the middle-east, and toward the Asia-Pacific region. We are now in its beginning stages. New bases are being built, new military agreements are being forged with Pacific-rim nations, PMRF is ramping up for more rocket launches, the obnoxious Osprey helicopters are coming to Hawaii; and huge swaths of ocean have been targeted by the Pentagon for continual year-round bombing and detonations. Our region is now witnessing an acceleration of militarization that resembles all-out war. And from an environmental point of view, it is no different from all-out war, because the training exercises, rife with every kind of explosion imaginable, never stop. Even PMRF Commander Hay bragged how, “Our ability to train like we would actually fight exists here”. For the natural world, the Pacific Pivot is nothing short of an environmental holocaust. Bio-diverse ecosystems… totaling over three million square miles of supposedly “wild” ocean have been officially set aside to be systematically poisoned, dredged, detonated, torpedoed and bombed into nonexistence -- all in service of “military preparedness.” Over three million square miles of open seas – that’s roughly three-quarters the size of the entire United States of America. We in Hawaii are at the center of this ecocide. We are not only at the center geographically – we are also at the center of control.
In 2014 at during the same panel discussion I said:
In recent decades several weapon systems have been developed and tested from the PMRF here on Kauai. Those systems include submarine based ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. The PMRF is the wheelhouse for many activities of RIMPAC. Ocean, reefs, beaches, dunes, valleys, plains are strewn with lead and depleted-uranium munitions as well as pollutants such as bilge oil, hydraulic fluid, defoliants, and countless other contaminants used in war - and in war games. RIMPAC is a demonstration to our "partners" and "enemies" that we will do anything to maintain military control over the vastness of the Pacific Ocean.
Image above: Image above: Map of Hawaiian Range Complex and inset showing it's position within a temporary operating area that is now part of the two-million square mile HIRC (Haweaiian Island Range Compex. From Source: (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/permits/hrc_bo.pdf) Page 7. Click for larger map with legend.
THAT WAS THEN - THIS IS NOW
A point I would like to make this evening is that what maintains American domination of the Pacific are not the alliances and trade agreements with partner nations. That is not where the real power lies.
The power lies in the strategic military bases we maintain throughout the Pacific that are the muscle that allows those alliances, trade deals and policies to be enforced. And the force that runs through those muscles is delivered by nuclear reactor power and the threat of the use of nuclear weapons.
Nuclear power propels about 100 nuclear submarines and leads 10 nuclear carrier strike groups with access to thousands of state of the art nuclear weapons. During RIMPAC 2016 one of those US Carrier Strike Groups will lead 45 ships and four submarines throughout the Hawaiian Islands.
My case to you tonight is that the United State's domination throughout the Pacific during the last 70 years rests on two foundations of nuclear engineering - Nuclear Reactors and Nuclear Weapons.
According to GlobalSecurity.org the mission of the PMRF is to facilitate Training, Tactics Development, and Test & Evaluations for air, surface, and sub-surface weapons systems and Advanced Technology Systems. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/pmrf.htm)
The PMRF will be a crucial asset in coordination, communication, telemetry, intelligence, evaluation, and recording the events during RIMPAC 2016 and any future Pacific War.
The map I brought with me is an update of a map I put together with Koohan to demonstrate aspects of the Pacific Pivot. It shows the the vast area of the Pacific Ocean used for testing, developing and deploying weapons systems. It stretches east-west from the Philippines to California and north-south from Japan to Australia.
Image above: A overall map of the Pacific Ocean showing the areas under US control and used to develop, test and train military systems and weapons. It also shows the Marine National Monuments and US restricted fishing areas that not only greatly overlap with the military test range, but with the islands used for nuclear weapons testing from the end of World War II to the Cubal Missile Crisis. Click to see full size.
With a red outline the map identifies the boundaries of millions of square miles of range complexes for shooting rockets, testing sonar, exploding ordinance, and other destructive behavior.
There are 2,000,000 square miles of it around the Hawaiian Islands alone for use by RIMPAC 2016 participants.
The map also shows two "Transit Corridors" in dotted red crossing the Pacific from San Diego to Hawaii and from Hawaii over the Marshall Islands all the way to the Mariana Islands.
These corridors are used to test experimental planes, intercontinental missiles and space vehicles. The PMRF is at the center of where these corridors meet.
There are also restricted fishing areas (in red) and Marine National Monument areas (in gray) that surround American controlled Pacific Islands in order to keep people out.
Lynn McNutt is on the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council. Regarding the expansion of the Marine National Monument area around the Northwest Hawaiian Islands she said recently:
"The military is not subject to ANY of the conservation rules, and by allowing them to operate sonar in the Monument area and continue missile launches and at sea training, the conservation rules are meaningless. Recently, the PMRF has been expanding its territorial restrictions on fisherman due to rocket firing and missile testing. If the proposal that the Marine Monument boundary of the Northwest Hawaiian Island area was expanded to 200 miles out from Nihoa Island, then Niihau and part of Kauai would be off limits to fisherrman, and the boundary line would conveniently come right up to the restricted area around PMRF. Since there is talk of making PMRF and active military base and since recent test activity took place in an expanded range restriction, fisherman are very concerned that expanded military use will result in further restrictions."
MISTREATING THE PACIFIC SINCE WWII
Starting in 1946 America, and its allies Britain and France, conducted what in effect was a nuclear war in the Pacific Ocean. This involved detonating over 160 nuclear devises over, near or on islands in the Pacific Ocean This included Bikini Island, Baker Island, Enewetak Atoll, Christmas Island, and Johnston Island (merely 700 miles from Kauai).
The United States conducted 106 atmospheric and underwater nuclear tests in the Pacific, many of which were of extremely high yield. While the Marshall Islands testing composed an estimated total yield of around 210 million tons of TNT, with the largest being the 15 mega-tons Castle Bravo shot of 1954 which spread considerable nuclear fallout on many of the islands, including several which were inhabited, and some that had not been evacuated. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Proving_Grounds)
The Navy's introduction to Kauai's Barking Sands was in 1956, near the height of the nuclear tests when the Air Force's Bonham Air Force Base granted it a five year revocable license to use 37 acres.
Two years later the Pacific Missile Range Facility was formally established.
The nuclear tests continued.
In 1962 the Navy's PMRF was becoming the principal user of Bonham Air Force Base, and formal negotiations began to transfer the base to the Navy. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/pmrf.htm)
Meanwhile, in Wisconsin cows started delivering milk containing Strontium-90 that they ingested from eating grass. The atmospheric testing of hydrogen bombs soon stopped.
In 1964, negotiations were completed, and Bonham Air Force Base officially transferred all its 1,885 acres to the Navy.
By this time, the PMRF had established a chain of stations throughout the Pacific.
Besides Barking Sands and Kokee, several down range stations under the PMRF included: South Point, Hawaii; Midway Island; Wake Island, Eniwetok Atoll; Tern Island; Christmas Island; Canton Island; and the recovery ships, USS Longview and USS Sunnyvale.
TRIDENTS AND TOMAHAWKS
These facilities were crucial in the development and testing of submarine launched nuclear weapons like the Trident, Tomahawk missiles systems.
The Trident is a high altitude ballistic missile with multiple independently targetable reentry nuclear warheads or MIRVs. The Trident has a 6,000 mile range.
The Tomahawk is a low altitude radar avoiding cruise missile that can follow a flight plan independently.
Beginning in 1968 the Navy built ten Nimitz Class nuclear powered aircraft carriers to lead Strike Groups with the capability of launching nuclear missiles or planes with nuclear bombs to anywhere on Earth.
Beginning in the 1970's a new fleet of nuclear powered submarines designed to replace the older Polaris subs. Eighteen of the Ohio Class and 39 Los Angeles Class are now operational and fitted with either Trident or Tomahawk nuclear missiles.
Image above: Partial map from a "industry" handout of the Barking Sands underwater test area. This came from a briefing to military contractors on the features of the PMRF (a key player in RIMPAC 1016 activities) when its BSURE hydrophone array was first added. Note the yellow "Fake Island" in the BARSTUR area. Is this some kind of target simulation? From (http://www.ceros.org/documents/FY10%20Industry%20Day%20Briefings/PMRF_CEROS%20Industry%20Day%2020100930.pdf). Click to see full page larger. Below is back side of this handout. Image above: Partial map of the Barking Sands underwater test area. This came from a briefing to military contractors on the features of the PMRF (a key player in RIMPAC 1016 activities) when its BSURE hydrophone array was first added.
PMRF MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
The PMRF is now the world's largest instrumented, multi-dimensional testing and training range. PMRF is the only range in the world where subsurface, surface, air and space vehicles can operate and be tracked simultaneously.
This capability allows range users extraordinary flexibility in planning and conducting realistic multi-participant, multi-threat freeplay operations to train crews, evaluate tactics, and test weapon systems.
But since nuclear war was found impractical most nuclear activity in recent decades has turned to building nuclear power plants. Asian nuclear power plant building has been aggressive. China, India, Japan, and South Korea have become enthusiastic advocates. (http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/others/asias-nuclear-energy-growth.aspx).
Needless to say many US weapons contractors also got involved with the nuclear power industry. American government and corporations pushed nuclear power technology on allies as well as defeated enemies.
In the 1970s, the first light water reactors were built in Japan in cooperation with American companies. These plants were bought from vendors such as General Electric and Westinghouse with contractual work done by Japanese companies. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan)
A FEW NUCLEAR TECH COMPANIES
General Electric, Westinghouse, Bechtel, Babcock & Wilcox, American Atomics, Nuclear Fuel Services, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, GenCorp Aerojet, Huntington Ingalls, and Lockheed Martin, Babcock & Wilcox, Bechtel, and Honeywell.
Many of these organizations (and others like Sandia Labs) are still represented here on Kauai at the PMRF. The place is not so much a naval base as it is an industrial park for developing lethal weapon systems managed by guys in navy whites guarded by the private security firm ITT.
The results of their work are nuclear armed fleets which have dominated the Pacific Ocean (and the world) for over half a century with the fear of annihilation of life on Earth. The biannual celebration of this armada of destruction has been RIMPAC.
But that's only half the story QUESTION: Which came first - the reactor or the bomb? ANSWER: Reactors.
Ex-WWII general and US President Dwight D. Eisenhower proposed that nuclear technology be used for peace instead of war. He proposed the "Atoms for Peace" program that would transform the power of the atom to make electricity. It would also give many large military industrial corporations something to do after 1953 other than wage war. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoms_for_Peace#Legacy)
In the early 1950's it was recognized that the weapons program would require more plutonium than could be furnished by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). One suggestion, made by Dr. Charles A. Thomas, then executive vice-president of Monsanto Chemical Company, was to create a dual purpose plutonium reactor, on which could produce plutonium for weapons, and electricity for commercial use (http://www.neis.org/literature/Brochures/weapcon.htm)
Atoms for Peace created the ideological background for the creation of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, but also gave political cover for the U.S. nuclear weapons build-up, and the backdrop to the Cold War arms race. Under Atoms for Peace related programs the U.S. exported over 25 tons of highly enriched uranium (HEU) to 30 countries, mostly to fuel research reactors, which is now regarded as a proliferation and terrorism risk. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoms_for_Peace#Legacy)
Nuclear reactors are needed to make the material for nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons keep the US in a dominating position throughout the world. In addition, nuclear reactors power the aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines that deliver the nuclear weapons to their targets.
These two engineering disciplines are joined at the hip. One needs the other for survival.
Our former enemy and current ally Japan has suffered from both disciplines.
They, unfortunately, have the distinction of being victims of the two worst nuclear catastrophes in history.
As an enemy, in 1945, Japan suffered having two cities being destroyed by atomic bombs within days of one another.
As an ally Japan is suffering now from worst nuclear meltdown in history - following the March 11th 2011 earthquake and tsunami, there was complete meltdown of three of the six reactors supplied by the General Electric for the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
Put in perspective the destruction and radiation sickness caused by the single atomic bomb that landed on Hiroshima was generated with just a few pounds of Uranium 235.
But each of the nuclear reactors that melted down at Fukushima Daiichi had more than 600 pounds of reactor fuel for a total of about 1,800 pounds.
Moreover, in the case of Fukushima Reactor #3 it is reported that, despite regulations, the fuel used was mixed oxide - which is about 7% plutonium. Plutonium is more toxic than uranium for a considerably longer time.
In the 1960s US President Nixon had proposed we build "Breeder Reactors" using the MOX fuel. They were named "Breeders" because they make more refined uranium than they consume from the plutonium.
The Fukushima Daiichi Reactors #1, #2 and #3 had complete meltdowns that included the breaching of their reactor vessels.
More horrifying, the fuel has likely completely burned through the four foot thick concrete slabs of their containment buildings and into the ground.
Ground water passing over the unreachable melted cores are picking up radioactive elements. This is producing about 300 tons of highly radioactive water that enters into the Pacific Ocean everyday.
It is unlikely that this process will not be stopped in the lifetime of anyone in this room.
In the case of reactor #2 there is evidence of a steam explosion tearing apart the reactor vessel. More ominously, in the case of reactor #3 the evidence points to a run away nuclear chain reaction (or criticality) of the MOX fuel.
In effect, the detonation of a plutonium bomb.
Tiny black grains of plutonium were blown into the atmosphere over Japan (including Tokyo) as well as out over the Pacific Ocean on the wind. Plutonium can be carried on the surface of the ocean supported by carbon soot buckyballs.
At the time of the March 11th tsunami the US Carrier Strike Group led by the USS Ronald Reagan was nearby. It was decided the Reagan and elements of the carrier group would provide logistical support.
The ships steamed to the eastern shore of Japan off Fukushima. When the two reactors exploded the Reagan and other ships were swallowed by a radioactive plume of soot, steam and ash that stretched across the ocean from the plant.
“I was standing on the flight deck, and we felt this warm gust of air, and, suddenly, it was snowing [...] We joked about it: ‘Hey, it’s radioactive snow! I took pictures and video [...] Japan didn’t want us in port, Korea didn’t want us, Guam turned us away. We floated in the water for two and a half months [until Thailand took them in] “People were suffering from excruciating diarrhea and shitting themselves in the hallways].”
On top of that the Reagan had replenished its water tanks that it desalinated for washing cooking and drinking. It did not realize the water contained radioactive elements.
Since 2011 about 400 young healthy service persons from the carrier group have become unexplainably ill. Several have died.
The USS Ronald Reagan was severely contaminated. The Reagan was taken out of service and drydocked for 18 months in Bremerton, Washington in order to be decontaminated.
The ship was back on duty in time to be a flagship for RIMPAC in 2014. After the war games the Reagan was reassigned from San Diego to the strategic forward naval base at Yokosuka, Japan, near Tokyo.
The participants for RIMPAC 2016 include Canada, Chile, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Singapore, South Korea, Tonga, and the United States. It also includes three NATO allies France, Germany, and the Netherlands, (http://www.cpf.navy.mil/rimpac/participants/)
It seems ominous to me that NATO allies are participating in RIMPAC. France, Germany and the Netherlands are NATO members obligated to supporting other NATO nations if attacked. With tensions rising in the South China Seas it seems ill advised to make the Pacific Ocean part of NATO's responsibility.
Does anyone hear remember SEATO? The Southeast Asia Treaty Organization? SEATO was in effect after the Korean War and was used through the Vietnam War era to keep "friendly" nations in the area on the same page. But after America lost the Vietnam War SEATO withered away and was disbanded by 1977.
SEATO, like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) committed participants to join in a war if any party were attacked. NATO commits America and its partners to joining in war in Europe against what was the USSR and is now Russia. SEATO was aimed primarily at Red China.
There has been a heating up of Chinese sovereignty claims to the South China Sea with its oil and gas reserves. RIMPAC 2016 may now be morphing into alliance not unlike the now defunct SEATO.
So it is no surprise that RIMPAC 2016 includes so many exSEATO nations and and a Chinese navy observation boat. Maybe it's time to rename it RIMCO.
What are our real strategic priorities?
If it is not obvious yet, but it should be soon. There is only so much more easily obtained conventional energy in the form of gas, oil and coal fossil fuels. These three sources are critical to modern industrial civilization.
• They are crucial for refining steel, aluminum and other metals.
• They are the source material for creating asphalts, plastics, fertilizers, pharmaceuticals, and lubricants.
• They are the source of about 75% of the energy we use.
We now know that burning all the available fossil fuels are causing uncontrollable runaway global warming - with climate change and rising oceans. We are already experiencing the bow waves of those effects.
We must be very judicial in determining what we will do with these resources.
One thing to consider is that without abundant available gas, oil and coal we cannot safely maintain operating the world's almost 500 nuclear power plants. It is likely that without a massive effort - starting now - we will not even be able to safely shut them down. (http://www.nei.org/Knowledge-Center/Nuclear-Statistics/World-Statistics)
WPP IT GOOD
Many may not realize that the only facility for storing nuclear waste in the US is no more. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (or WPP) in New Mexico, closed in 2014. That was due an accident that created an uncontrolled plutonium fire.
It seems that before shipping technicians at Los Alamos National Labs packed a 55 gallon steel drum of waste plutonium with the wrong kitty litter (used as a filler) that ignited the fire and incapacitated the plant. Who knew? Atomic scientists?
There is now no place for the US to process and store waste nuclear fuel or weapon.
The most most important thing our blue water Navy could do is find another agenda than turning the Pacific Rim into an ashtray. Perhaps they could find a way to safely put away their nuclear devices while there is still the industrial capability to do it.
And rather than implementing a current plan to turn the PMRF from a research facility into a regular military base further suggestions.
Perhaps the Navy could make a new list of priorities in the Pacific Ocean that could be incorporated into future RIMPAC activities.
For example:
Tackle the problem of hundreds of tons of highly radioactive water entering the Pacific daily from the Fukushima Nuclear Plant.
Commit whatever is required to saving ocean reefs from acidification and bleaching.
Strictly enforce international regulations to keep fisheries sustainable and healthy.
Take care of the gigantic Pacific gyres of plastic, flotsam and jetsam.
Rescue Pacific islanders threatened by rising seas due to global warming
We invite articles submitted by our readers. You can add an article (subject to editorial approval) by emailing the publisher with what you want to post.
We will include your name as the author, or, if you are forwarding another's words, we will add you as the source.
