Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » Liberation Angel Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
Liberation Angel's Journal
Posted by Liberation Angel in General Discussion: Presidency
Sat Dec 19th 2009, 06:22 PM
I have just reread the Huffington Post piece with Al Franken's perspective on this bill.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/19/f...

As I look at various provisions it appears that MANY of the items I support are in this bill and that it accomplishes many things I never really dreamed were possible.

IF what is happening is that Obama and his team have actually outmaneuvered the republicans and the centrist dems to get some dramatic changes made that actually amount to REAL PROGRESS then Obama may have accomplished a health care and political coup.

We progressives who have been screaming and shouting that the bill is NOT progressive may wake up to find that the final bill (even with the mandates and withour the public option) is awesomely progressive in MANY respects.

AGAIN, I am relying on Franken's perspective in the article linked and as someone who is way too naive on the details. I am only just HOPING that I am right:

Obama MAY have just done a DAMN GOOD THING!

He MAY have actually gotten the reform that will take us on the road to BETTER and BETTER care for all of us.

I HOPE I am not mistaken...

I just felt with all the negativity here at DU that this needed to be said.
Read entry | Discuss (48 comments) | Recommend (+14 votes)
Posted by Liberation Angel in General Discussion: Presidency
Sat Dec 05th 2009, 10:50 PM

Please sign this petition to political leaders and negotiators:

Your signature will be printed out on an individual petition postcard, which will be handed in by our delegation in Copenhagen.

During the Copenhagen Summit, you will be responsible for reaching a new international climate agreement. It is of the utmost importance that this agreement should set ambitious targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and should define appropriate solutions to limit climate change and to enable our communities to adapt to its impacts.

Therefore, I ask you to reject nuclear energy as a "clean" technology, and to oppose its inclusion in the mechanisms to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, for the following reasons:

Nuclear power is a totally inappropriate solution for the reduction of those emissions: its contribution can only be very small, would come too late and be negligible compared to the contribution from energy saving and renewable energies. Moreover, nuclear power is very expensive and deprives the real solutions from funding. Choosing the nuclear option will thus mean losing the fight against climate change.
Nuclear energy is a dangerous and polluting technology. The risk of major accidents is real and increases with the number of reactors. Radioactivity poses a serious threat to health, and there is no solution to the problem of nuclear waste management.
You owe it to all of us to advocate the real solutions for climate change!

To sign the petition



http://www.dont-nuke-the-climate.org/spip....
Read entry | Discuss (8 comments) | Recommend (<0 votes)
Posted by Liberation Angel in Editorials & Other Articles
Wed Dec 02nd 2009, 12:11 PM
Iraq vet forced interrogation threatened beating for defending health rights

I approached the Army when I got back from Iraq and I was like hey I need to talk to somebody, I need some help, they said come back in two months." (Michael Kern, Iraq Veterans Hold Candlelight Vigil, NVIC, November 11. 2009)

I helped murder people in Iraq for nothing. These are things I'm not proud of whatsoever, and I want to be able to turn this around and bring the people ultimately responsible for this to justice. Because had I known back then what I know now, I never would have signed up in the first place. (Dupre, Resisting soldiers, the New American heroes, Examiner, June 4, 2009)

As the Army conducts a probe into the Fort Hood shootings, units return to prepare for Afghanistan deployment, the newly released Woody Harrelson film, THE MESSENGER (trailer below) depicts hidden pain of U.S. casualties, and Robert Greewald's RETHINK AFGHANISTAN gains viewer momentum, Iraq Veterans Against War (IVAW) members are being targeted for being outspoken about health care needs of fellow soldiers, one threatened with a physical beating by commanding officers for wearing his IVAW shirt, and then forcibly held and interrogated according to IVAW today.

A new Army mental health survey of soldiers in Afghanistan shows morale is down and mental stress increases with increased number of deployments that President Obama continues to commit with disinformation to Americans about ME war increasing national secuirty documented by Robert Greenwald in RETHINK AFGHANISTAN. There is one mental health specialist for approximately 1,100 troops in Afghanistan. The Army says it hopes to improve that ratio to one for every 700 soldiers in Afghanistan, "obviously inadequate" for mental injuries the illegal war causes according to IVAW


More at Link





http://www.examiner.com/x-10438-Human-Righ...
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments) | Recommend (+1 votes)
Posted by Liberation Angel in Editorials & Other Articles
Wed Dec 02nd 2009, 12:03 PM


Obama with Blood on His Hands

By Nicolas J S Davies
December 2, 2009

Editor’s Note: For many Americans, the promise of the new Obama administration was that finally the United States would reject the neocon concept that America can ignore international law and use indiscriminate violence around the world to assert its interests. That hope was largely snuffed out Tuesday when President Obama gave his hawkish generals and the neocon pundits most of what they wanted by expanding the eight-year-old Afghan War and guaranteeing more violations of the laws of war, as Nicolas J S Davies writes: President Barack Obama carefully avoided describing his decision to dispatch 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan as an "escalation," but that is what he announced.

So what will his decision to pour more troops, weapons and tons of ammunition into this already war-ravaged country really mean, for Americans and for the people of Afghanistan?

On Sept. 4, German forces in Kunduz province in northern Afghanistan called in a U.S. air strike on two fuel tankers that had been captured by "anti-coalition forces" (ACF). German officials knew that there was a crowd of civilians around the tankers helping themselves to a windfall of free fuel, but they called in the air strike anyway. This was a clear violation of the laws of war, which prohibit attacking civilians even when there are believed to be combatants amongst them.

In the aftermath of the attack, it was found that 142 people had been killed, and that the great majority of them were civilians. General Wolfgang Schneiderhan, the Chief of Staff of the German Army, and Franz Josef Jung, who was the Defense Minister at the time, were both forced to resign, and Peter Wichert, the junior civilian official who approved the air strike, was suspended....


More at Link...

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/120209a...
Read entry | Discuss (10 comments) | Recommend (+7 votes)
Posted by Liberation Angel in General Discussion
Fri Sep 11th 2009, 12:38 PM
Nuclear emissions LEGALLY can DOUBLE your exposure to radiation (as compared to natural background, excluding radon)

The energy bill discussions are heating up again and Barbara Boxer (D- California) has stated that she supports nuclear power subsidies in the energy bill.

I have, thanks to being challenged by the pronuclear industry contingent here (or should I say shills, without naming names?) been compelled to do MORE research on the actual amounts which we are currently PERMITTED legally to be exposed to by a commercial nuclear plant. EACH PLANT can expose us EVERY YEAR to radiation pollution, effluents and emissions and waste which are EQUAL to the total average background radiation from cosmic and terrestrial sources (not man made or produced and excluding exposure to radon which varies from place to place).

Does the fact that our government ALREADY PERMITS us to be exposed to TWICE the level of radiation than what we get from the sun and the stars and the earth concern us?

We KNOW that such radiation is ALREADY mutagenic and cancer causing and debilitating and harmful. Yet the NUCLEAR LOBBY (including Cheney and Halliburton which have or have had control of huge sectors of construction and operation of nuclear opertions globally) CONTINUES to subvert our government and get DEMOCRATS to go along with subsidies to these larely right wing ontrolled industries (which also produce nuclear weapons thus making them the most powerful industries on the face of the panet and EVER in history)

I hesitate to take them on because they are dangerous. But the facts need to be addressed. The energy bill wil include subsidies for nuclear power UNLESS the progressive community becomes aware of the problems and issues and fights to keep these subsidies out. BTW I oppose coal and believe renewables are the ONLY long term solution. Nuclear is deadly to ALL of us.

Yet they can legally expose us at EVERY NUCLEAR PLANT BUILT to as much radiation as we ALREADY get from the sun and the stars and the earth EVERY YEAR. It is a far deadlier radiation as well because we consume it and eat it and drink it and absorb it into our skin and bones and teeth and bone marrow and internal organs where it mutates our cells and causes cancer and death and it does not just "bounce off" us when it "shines". It floats down in little particles and gets into the sandboxes where our children play and into the beach sand and surf where the waves vaporize it so we breathe it in. HELP stop this insanity and death by mutation caused by the right wing industrialists who run the nuclear arsenal and all its deadly poisons and voluminous death machines.


SO : here is the law that says what you can be exposed to every year (by EVERY plant in operation):

Subpart D--Radiation Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public

Source: 56 FR 23398, May 21, 1991, unless otherwise noted.

§ 20.1301 Dose limits for individual members of the public.

(a) Each licensee shall conduct operations so that —

(1) The total effective dose equivalent to individual members of the public from the licensed operation does not exceed 0.1 rem (1 mSv) in a year, exclusive of the dose contributions from background radiation...
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collecti... ...

(.01 rem = 100 millirems or 100 thousandths of a rem. 1 mSv (one thousandth of a Sievert) = 100 millirems (mrems). a Sievert equals 100 rems.

Rem means Roentgen equivalent man. Roentgen and Sievert are the scientists who figured out how to measure the dose we receive when exposed to radiation and are just fancy naes given to the units of measurement for how mauch radiation we absorb when exposed. One critical distinction is that internal and external exposures have different impacts even with these measurements and units so that if you breathe in or eat or drink radiation from these plants it wil be absorbed into your blood and bones and organs and begin to mutate these as they decay and irradiate the cells in your bodies.


"Background" radiation from ALL sources is currently approximately 350 millirems a year (this includes all sources from radon, cosmic, sun, soil, xrays, medical procedures, tv, etc.

Cosmic and terrestrial (excluding radon and other sources) is approximately, on average, 100mrems per year. (See link below)

The current nuclear regulations permit the public to be exposed to up to 100 mrems PER YEAR PER PLANT. Workers in plants can get exposed many times that amount legally.
.
So we can get an additional 100 mrems increasing our total exposure to 450 mrems a year (unless one is downwind of more than one plant, as where i grew up) where this number may be multiplied by several factors of multiples of 100mrems).

That means we can legally be exposed to MORE than 100% MORE radiation per year by nuclear power plant operations than from cosmic/terrestrial sources (excluding radon which accounts for on average another 100 or more mrems per year).

That is because in order to operate nuclear plants create and must vent and spew effluents and emissions of radiationuclides into our lives and gardens and water and air and communities.

Natural background radiation causes genetic mutations as it is.

Do you even understand that INCREASING a mutagenic substance in the environment by these amounts will INCREASE mutations?

Also, these are doses which we ingest when we breathe, eat and drink and bathe. The half life is often decades if not hundreds or thousands of years. So it is CUMULATIVE in your organs and bones and then in your bone marrow and blood. It stays in the body and continues mutating the cells of your internal organs and dna and reproductive genes. And it is passed on to future generations (if they survive the onslaught of radiation exposure to procreate).

It affects ALL future generations with mutated genes and perished genetic lines.

You support THAT?

Background radiation from natural i.e. cosmic/terrestrial sources (excluding radon, which is variable depending on where you live) is about 100 mrems (millirems) SO the nuclear industry is actually DOUBLING out exposure from natural background radiation. if you live in a high radon area you will increase this by another 100% or more).


http://www.rerf.or.jp/glossary_e/backgrou....



BTW one Sievert equals 100 rems so one mSievert (one thousandth of a Sievert) equals 100 mrems.

The reason it is so easy to obfuscate and confuse and mislead people is that the terminology and the technology is difficult to grasp without studying it carefully and really focussing on it.

Once you become aware that the nuke indstry can LEGALLY DOUBLE the dose of radiation you would otherwise get from natural background radiation (which we know already causes cancer and mutations) then folks begin to grasp WHY ingesting effluents and emissite particles from radiation spewing into our homes nd lives and water and air and soil and food is SO deadly and why we have so many cancers and brth defects and spontaneous abortions and thyroid diseases.

I have been studying this problem for more than thirty years in college, in graduate school, in the industry and with whistleblowers (as well as a staffer on the Hill which working for a Congressman whose committee had jurisdiction over nuclear safety issues) I also worked in litigation on these issues (on both sides of the industry).
Read entry | Discuss (28 comments) | Recommend (0 votes)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
StarStarStarStarStar
I. GOT. A. JOB!!!
169 recs : By northofdenali
Grovelbot's Moderating Tips
101 recs : By EarlG
Bush Crime Family - Illustrated
100 recs : By Octafish
StarStarStarStar
YES!!!!! SUCK IT, STUPAK!!!
63 recs : By backscatter712
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.