skip to Main Content
arr-addison@nukiemole.com

anti-nucleaRist bloG #260/ 09 Aug 2019 Is the New Rome Fascist or Plutocracy for the cRiminal Elites

anti-nucleaRist bloG #260/ 09 Aug 2019

Is the New Rome Fascist or Plutocracy for the cRiminal Elites

 

I sure would like to know, as that way I could cower in the corner near cool concrete uprights off government monies supports of interstate freeways conducive to the flowing vehicular traffic of the R-O-N-G phooel, and shoot heroin, which was, evidently bought into existence to cure the ills of morphine. And at this point I shall not wish you a have a happy-Day, non-Rhetorical. We do not ask why the fanatic-penataGooons constantly fRenetic, we know they are in a “plutocratic-Rage”. They are “fRetful” about being totally psychopathologic, about fright will never be overcome because they are shallow-Minded, short-Term: gains, their one-someness desire? All they have to do, is listen to what we know they are not. They have no transliteral-Sense. Thus, we know they are not, defense. We know them as the department-of-Offense.       “R”

 

“The story of my alienation from the “democratic socialist” movement is similar to how the typical left-leaning person has become estranged from the Democratic Party establishment: I’ve found that despite the left-leaning rhetoric of this strain’s leaders, they don’t intend to make the changes that would actually give power to the poor and working classes. This isn’t to say these two categories are equivalent; the Sanders Democrats aren’t outright neoliberal like the old guard is, and they support many social programs that the party establishment doesn’t. But the Sanders strain has nonetheless failed to provide a revolutionary opposition to capitalism and imperialism, and has thus given me a sense of disaffection.

This unease started when I began to see how the main leader of the American “democratic socialist” movement has largely enabled the imperialist narratives of the Trump era. Sanders has failed to challenge the debunked “gas attack” narratives that have enabled Trump’s Syria strikes, while saying he supports an effort to get rid of Bashar al-Assad. He’s also claimed that Assad is the one responsible for the bloodshed from the Syrian war, effectively blaming the Syrian government and its people for defending themselves from an invasion by U.S.-backed terrorists. Sanders’ promotions of the cold war narratives about Russia have also helped enable America’s recent aggressions abroad, as well as Sanders’ failure to speak out against the lies that the Trump administration has been using to carry out violence against the people of Venezuela. These cases have reminded me of Sanders’ past examples of enabling war, like when he supported the horrific bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 or when he voted for the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.

 

As these recent events have developed, I’ve come to realize that Sanders’ embrace of imperialism isn’t just an unfortunate anomaly within the mainstream American progressive movement; it’s an integral part of the pro-capitalist worldview that this movement is mired within. In fact, the “democratic socialism” that figures like Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez label themselves with is a rebranded version of social democracy, the very much pro-imperialist ideology that the modern Scandanavian countries operate under. In contrast to democratic socialism, and even more in contrast to Marxist-Leninist socialism, social democracy calls for expanding social services within a system that retains its capitalist structure. This has naturally led to social democracies historically enabling imperialism.

To sell their agenda to left-leaning people, social democrats portray it as a necessary alternative to both neoliberal capitalism and Soviet-style socialism. The vague but confident language that they use to do this makes their brand easily appealing to the average person who desires a change from our current economic paradigm; one meme which advertises for Sanders’ agenda reads: “Socialism without capitalism is communism. Capitalism without socialism is fascism. Democratic socialism is balance.”

The fact that statements like these completely gloss over the differences between democratic socialism and social democracy gives us a clue as to just how little social democrats want people to understand the economic terms they talk about. A basic overview of the objectives of socialism shows that socialism, as Marx articulated it, is an integral step towards communism, one where the workers seize control of the means of production so that society can transition towards communism’s goal for a classless, stateless society. But the rhetoric of the social democrats steers people away from becoming informed about this fact, or from studying the other aspects of Marxism.

 

It does this by framing the subject of socialism within the quintessentially American anti-communist worldview. This worldview, which claims that communism is an inherently bad thing that’s “killed 100 million people,” goes unchallenged by social democrats. And this lets them present a “socialist” vision that’s fundamentally anti-socialist.

It lets them claim that “socialism” is best represented by FDR’s New Deal and the Scandanavian welfare states, which Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez often point to as models for what they want. It makes it seem like significant social programs are the only criteria for a society to be “socialist,” and that the class inequality and imperialism which characterize both the Scandanavian countries and mid-century America aren’t worth taking note of. When one approaches politics and history from this perspective, capitalism and imperialism seem like crucial aspects of society, and actually opposing them is seen as a dangerous endorsement of the unquestionably evil ideology of communism.”[1]

 

The above statement’s, awesomely tRuth, and excoriates the paranoia by capitalist-Totalitarian’s that “we-Socialists” are wanting blood-anarchism-military-Revolution and total chaos. Where Radionuclides are always prescient, I became an american-Socialist and they, “democratic-Socialists” are not allocating, any but stoic-Embrace of capitalist-Totality as they winde their neurotic-Ways from not providing their “theoretics” and thus get waylaid by empiricism. That Sen. Sanders ought dwell upon one socialist-Party theory, has not been done, thus his is rambling and the above statement: “Socialism without capitalism is communism. Capitalism without socialism is fascism. Democratic socialism is balance” remains intact and negates furtive needs of social and political change. His ‘stasis’ is static. Why does not not justly state, “all-American-Socialists are anti-War” and dispense w his hypocrisy which is in crisis mode as well as need of honest rapprochement.

Yes, because the differences between democratic socialism and social democracy are plentiful-Enough to subsume theirs, plutocracy and new-Rome is not launched, but merely decadent. We know that too. What can I say? Learn the above, admonish the word-Usages and recollect that there are usuries and impugning “amalgamated as mistrust” and that means for the proletariat and professional-pRoletariat. The seventeen intel-Gence agencies that are not the US-military-Hegemony when we establish fact, cannot be forgotten, as their removal of our-Rights are and have been anti-Human: R-O-N-G-S.       “R”

 

“But to establish whether fascism has any relevance today we must identify the nature of this inter-war fascism in its most developed “classical” forms, and examine the elements of continuity and discontinuity with the current period. The key analysis of fascism then was provided by the Russian Marxist Leon Trotsky, who identified the specific nature of fascism and the unique threat it embodied even compared to other forms of authoritarian reaction. Crucially, Trotsky grasped that fascism was not a direct political representation of the core of the capitalist class. It was not simply an “instrument of big capital” as the Stalinist Communist parties insisted.4 Trotsky’s analysis combined a number of interdependent elements.

Fascism is an extreme form of counter-revolution

The aim of fascism is the permanent annihilation of all working class organisation, from revolutionary through to conservative. This goes beyond mere repression and terror, or even the physical destruction of the most militant sections of the working class. Fascism therefore aims at the most thoroughgoing counter-revolution. As Trotsky noted:

Fascism is not merely a system of reprisals, of brutal force, and of police terror. Fascism is a particular governmental system based on the uprooting of all elements of proletarian democracy within bourgeois society… To this end the physical annihilation of the most revolutionary section of the workers does not suffice. It is also necessary to smash all independent and voluntary organisations, to demolish all the defensive bulwarks of the proletariat, and to uproot whatever has been achieved during three-quarters of a century by social democracy and the trade unions.5

 

Trotsky’s warnings to the German working class proved tragically prescient. Within four months of Hitler being made chancellor on 30 January 1933 not just the German Communist Party but also the Social Democratic Party (SPD) had been banned and subjected to a wave of terror from the Brownshirts and the state that destroyed them. Trade unions, including Christian unions, were taken over by the Nazis and liquidated as independent organisations.6 The Nazis succeeded in “razing to their foundation” all the “institutions of proletarian democracy”.7

Fascism develops as a mass movement

Achieving this task required more than conventional forms of authoritarian reaction reliant on the existing state—the police, army, etc. It required the creation of a paramilitary army of zealots that can physically contest the streets with the left and ultimately smash and atomise any organisation independent of the state. By 1930, when the Nazis made their national electoral breakthrough, their paramilitary wing, the SA (Sturmabteilung), was already 100,000 strong, growing to 400,000 by 1933, with the Nazi Party itself rapidly expanding from under 100,000 at the start of 1928 to 850,000 by 1933.8

To weld its supporters together, fascism projected an ideological vision of a restored homogenous nation in which “national” capital and labour could be reconciled and small producers would predominate, and which could reverse national decline. This reactionary utopia could only be achieved through purging those elements seen as threatening this imaginary national unity—workers’ organisations that foster class antagonism, liberal democratic institutions that “tolerate” this antagonism and those the Nazis saw as “alien” racial minorities such as Jewish people.

 

Trotsky argued that the core of such a mass movement was drawn from the petty bourgeoisie, those small producers and independent professionals standing between organised labour and big capital, who in a time of crisis fear being pushed down into the working class below and resent big business above them. The development of such an independent reactionary mass movement gives fascism what Ugo Palheta calls a “relative autonomy” from the ruling class.

Thus the Nazis disguised a counter-revolutionary movement with claims to being a revolutionary, anti-capitalist force. Such radical language combined with the existence of an independent mass movement that developed outside the structures of the capitalist class, whatever the backing it received from some individual capitalists, meant that the Nazis were far from the first choice of the ruling class. Indeed, Germany’s rulers feared that the stormtroopers might be turned not just against the workers’ movement and Jewish businesses but against the wider ruling class, whatever Hitler’s reassurances. They also feared that Hitler’s all-out assault on the workers’ movement might provoke an explosion from below—precisely what would happen in France in 1934-6, when there was a massive mobilisation of workers after French fascist “leagues” brought down the government. Similarly, General Franco provoked an insurrection from below when he seized power in Spain in 1936.

.. The tension between the search for respectability and the need to assert its independence and counter-revolutionary radicalism constantly created fissures inside the Nazis, at times threatening to tear the organisation apart. The tragedy of the German left is that the Nazis were able to overcome such crises in the absence of effective mass opposition from the German workers’ movement.”[2]

The Stalinist view, of many social wRitors today, choose to equate Marxism w the mass-Murderer: dictator. I for one have not assumed that manner to any but the emergence of Conditionalism, as arms dealors of capitalist countries did sell to the Communist party for Russia Revolution, but also for leverage to counter-revolution from 1918 thru 1923. How did the deceitful-Measures of Stalin w other countries that joined hands w the Soviets, bolster the unity for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Were those countries democracy-Warring Republics or anti-War non-Democracy oriented Republics, as democracy does not always make a governing-Republic into a socialist-Democratic, republic? What then is the purpose of communism in the face of Universalist-Socialism?

Stalin was quite afraid of proletariat knowing the universal dominion of socialism as well as the theoretical for the proletariat. Lenin and Trotsky were, to the greater-Extent for movements toward Universalism or toward Marxism, has been the concerted question, since 1923, for us-Americans. Josef Stalin was very much a predecessor, if we will that human-History has our humanoid-Imprint—ever- so caustically. One of the contexts of The World Book dictionary on RAGE is: to act violently; move, proceed, or continue with great violence. The US-military-Hegemony is predicated upon the penataGooons being irrational, and oxymoronic.           “R”

 

“In a series of announcements barely reported in the media, Canada’s Liberal government has intensified its right-wing, militarist and anti-refugee policies.

The Liberals’ budget, delivered Tuesday, confirmed that Canadian Armed Forces’ (CAF) military training operations in the Middle East and Ukraine will be extended, for two and three years respectively. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Minister for Border Security, Bill Blair, has revealed he is in talks with Washington to fast-track the expulsion of refugee claimants who flee Trump’s brutal anti-immigrant crackdown by crossing into Canada.

Tuesday’s budget commits Ottawa to investing some $1.39 billion over the next two years to maintaining Canada’s participation in the US-led war in Iraq and Syria, and in advancing Canadian imperialist interests throughout the oil-rich region. Since Canada joined the latest Iraq-Syria war in 2014 under the previous Conservative government of Stephen Harper, it has played a critical role in facilitating the death and destruction wrought by US-led military operations in both countries. This includes abetting deadly air strikes that claimed the lives of thousands of civilians and the almost total destruction of Mosul, Iraq’s third largest city, and Raqqa in Syria.

Conscious of the widespread opposition to the Mideast war, the Trudeau government in February 2016 recalibrated the mission, ordering the withdrawal of fighter jets and the deployment of additional Special Forces troops and command personnel. Deployed to northern Iraq in what was ostensibly a “training” mission, the Special Forces troops provided frontline advice and support to Kurdish peshmerga forces in operations close to Mosul during the ruinous onslaught on that city.

 

The Liberals subsequently expanded Canada’s military involvement in Iraq as part of a stepped up Canadian role in NATO that has seen the CAF take the lead role in a new “forward deployed” NATO battalion in Latvia, on Russia’s border. At NATO’s 2018 annual summit, Canada agreed to take command of a new NATO mission to train Iraqi troops fighting for the central government in Baghdad for one year. This has now been extended until the end of March 2021.

The Ukraine mission, which is being promoted by the government and media as the defence of “democracy” against “Russian aggression,” is to be extended for a further three years, at a cost of an additional $105 million.

Canadian troops were first deployed to Ukraine, with the aim of training Ukrainian Army and National Guard forces to wage war in the east against pro-Russian separatists, by the previous Tory government following the 2014 Western-orchestrated, fascist-led coup in Kiev and Russia’s subsequent annexation of Crimea.

Like the Middle East deployment, Trudeau’s Liberals picked up seamlessly from where Harper’s Conservatives left off, extending the Ukrainian training mission when it came up for renewal in 2016 and providing full-throated support for NATO’s belligerent moves against Russia.

In highly-provocative comments made during a 2016 visit to Ukraine, Trudeau said the 200 CAF personnel deployed there are preparing its soldiers to “liberate” Ukrainian “territory”—a clear reference to Russian-controlled Crimea and other predominantly Russian-speaking areas in eastern Ukraine that have revolted against Kiev’s ultra-nationalist government.

Behind all of the rhetoric about a “feminist” and “humanitarian” foreign policy, the Liberals’ actions in the Middle East and Eastern Europe demonstrate their role as a bludgeon for advancing the Canadian ruling elite’s global predatory interests.

They also underscore Trudeau’s commitment to deepening Canadian imperialism’s strategic partnership with Washington and Wall Street, even as they pursue incendiary military-strategic offensives in the Middle East, against Russia and China, and threaten Venezuela with invasion.[3]

 

One must find that there is an enmity to not being aggressive “militarily” by our northern neighboring country, as Iraq, as Syria, as Ukraines would most likely produce more “rage like US-military-Hegemony”. One excuse after the other is what the tyrannical and transposited effect, that garnering affectation from rage-penataGooons has constantly been to the we-People of u.s.a. Again, that affectation is merely impunity AND usury. Whereupon, the lies for propaganda are most deceitful in terms of peace and freedom, as well as “nuclear-Doctrine: nucleaRism, again and again, never discussed as three-Types of nuclear-Molecular enterprises that the “deep-State”wants to maintain the plutocracy, which since the assuage that the US-constitution will never nebe for the we-People but for the capitalist-tyRannic insistency for power, for control, and thus eventfully, along came propaganda, since 1932 invasion of Nicaragua, by US-marines. Imperialist nations are all stoic-embrace of the new-Rome catharsis not to abide by peace-Premises and diplomatic-Legacy. The opposite is RAGE not to do such.          “R”

 

“I became aware of Dr. John Gofman in the 1980s from reading the 1982 paperback edition of Leslie Freeman’s fascinating and frightening book,

Nuclear Witnesses: Insiders Speak Out In the Author’s Note, Ms. Freeman (Ph.D. from Columbia University and in 1981 a teacher at the New York Institute of Technology) explained, “It is the premise of this book that if the American people knew the truth about radiation there would be no nuclear issue.” Along with  Nuclear Witnesses

I also absorbed Rosalie Bertell’s incisive and profound 1985 book,

No Immediate Danger: Prognosis For a Radioactive Earth

This extended my concern and understanding of the complexities and dangers I initially read about in  Nuclear Witnesses. Reading Leslie Freeman’s interview of Dr. Gofman, I was especially struck by, and have never forgotten, his observation andwarning about how nuclear power creates a mountain of radioactivity. From pages 110-111: (Note: all foot notes within Nuclear Witnesses are denoted with “nw” following the footnote number.)

Nuclear Power: A Simple Question

Many people think nuclear power is so complicated it requires discussion at a high level of technicality. That’s pure nonsense. Because the issue is simple and straightforward.There are only two things about nuclear power that you need to know. One, why do you wantnuclear power? So you can boil water. That’s all it does. It boils water. And any way of boilingwater will give you steam to turn turbines. That’s the useful part.

JWG, His Life & Research on the Health Effects of Exposure to Ionizing Radiation3

 

The other thing to know is, it creates a mountain of radioactivity, and I mean a mountain:

astronomical quantities of strontium-90 and cesium-137 and plutonium—toxic substances that willlast—strontium-90 and cesium for 300 to 600 years, plutonium for 250,000 to 500,000 years—and still be deadly toxic. And the whole thing about nuclear power is this simple: can you or can’t youkeep it all contained? If you can’t, then you’re creating a human disaster. You not only need to control it from the public, you also need to control it from the workers. Because the dose that federal regulations allow workers to get is sufficient to create a genetic hazard to the whole human species. You see, those workers are allowed to procreate, and if you damage their genes by radiation, and they intermarry with the rest of the population, for genetic purposes it’s just the same as if you irradiate the population directly.[27nw] So I find nuclear power this simple: do you believe they’re going to do the miracle of containment that they predict? The answer is they’re not going to accomplish it. It’s outside the realm of human prospects. You don’t need to discuss each valve and each transportation cask and each burial site. The point is, if you lose a little bit of it—a terribly little bit of it—you’re going to contaminate the earth, and people are going to suffer for thousands of generations. You have two choices: either you believe that engineers are going to achieve a perfection that’s never been achieved, and you go ahead; or you believe with common sense that such a containment is never going to be achieved, and you give it up. If people really understood how simple a problem it is—that they’ve got to accomplish a miracle—no puffs like Three Mile Island—can’t afford those puffs of radioactivity, or the squirts and the spills that they always tell you won’t harm the public—if people understood that, they’d say, “This is ridiculous. You don’t create this astronomical quantity of garbage and pray that somehow a miracle will happen to contain it. You just don’t do such stupid things!”[4]

 

We the boomer-Generation, used to have massive gatherings in protest against the tyranny-of-the-State, the system is Plutocracy yet remaining and retaining “nuclear-Doctrine as fact necessitating taking from us out freedom and now our strength as Ionizationing destroys further the human temperament as though we were all injected w a serum to have worsening health. Thus, w the doctrine came indoctrinationing, especially that we are a democracy and that we can “invade to protect other nations from people w.i. who desire to have democracy-Principles w.i. their own free-will i.e. fReedom-Ranks. We in u.s.a. are also being indoctrinated, by the constant chemicalizing from aero-Jets the past 21-years—a long, costly procedure which includes Ionizing upper and lower atmosphere-Levels w their garbage is Exceptionalist “cRapola”.          “R”

 

“It is often claimed that disabled persons are invisible, disregarded by mainstream society, and irrelevant to the workings of society. This analysis has attempted to explain that the “unemployables” have been deliberately shut out of the labor force due to a capitalist economy that so far has dictated their exclusion by measure of economic calculations that favor the business class. It further posits that disabled persons are further oppressed in capitalist societies by having been purposely shifted onto social welfare or segregated into institutions for similar reasons – to keep workers who could not be profitably employed out of the mainstream workforce but also to exert social control over the entire labor supply.

Karl Marx explains that capitalism is a system of “forced labor – no matter how much it may seem to result from free contractual agreement.”1 It is coercion because capitalists own the means of production and laborers do not. Without ownership of factories and other means of production, workers lack their own access to the means of making a livelihood. By this very fact, workers are compelled to sell their labor to capitalists for a wage because the alternative is homelessness or starvation or both. Deborah Stone in The Disabled State convincingly argues that in order to restructure the workforce for the demands of early capitalist production, it was first necessary to eradicate all viable alternatives to wage labor for the mass population.

Labor is a resource to be manipulated like capital and land. Stone writes, “The disability concept was essential to the development of an exploitable workforce in early capitalism and remains indispensable as an instrument of the state in controlling labor supply.”2

 

Class Interests Regulating the Labor Supply in Disability Policy

Regulating the composition of the labor force through social policy became key to ensuring an ongoing exploitable labor supply. Disability became an important boundary category through which persons were allocated to either the work-based or needs-based system of distribution. In the United States, disability came to be defined explicitly in relation to the labor market. For instance, in some workers’ compensation statutes, a laborer’s body is rated by impairment according to its functioning parts.3 In Social Security law, disabled means medically unable to engage in work activity.4

Our institutions (particularly medical and social welfare institutions) have historically held disablement to be an individual problem, not the result of economic or social forces.5 They have equated disability with physiological, anatomical, or mental “defects” and hegemonically held these conditions responsible for the disabled person’s lack of full participation in the economic life of our society. This approach presumed a biological inferiority of disabled persons.6 Pathologizing characteristics such as blindness, deafness, and physical and mental impairments that have naturally appeared in the human race throughout history became a means of social control that has relegated disabled persons to isolation and exclusion from society.7 By placing the focus on curing the so-called abnormality and segregating the incurables into the administrative category of disabled, medicine bolstered the capitalist business interest to shove less exploitable workers with impairments out of the workforce.

This exclusion was rationalized by Social Darwinists, who used biology to argue that heredity (race and disability status) prevailed over the class and economic issues raised by Marx and others. Just as the inferior weren’t meant to survive in nature, they weren’t meant to survive in a competitive society. For 19th century tycoons, Social Darwinism proved a marvelous rationale for leaving the surplus population to die in poverty. Capitalism set up production dynamics that devalued less exploitable or nonexploitable bodies, and Social Darwinism theorized their disposability. If it was natural that disabled persons were not to survive, then the capitalist class was off the hook to design a more equitable economic system – one that would accommodate the body that did not conform to the standard worker body driven to labor for owning-class profit.

 

Social analysts describe the disability needs-based system as a privilege because “as an administrative category, it carries with it permission to be exempt from the work-based system.”8 In conservative terms, disability can be described “an essential part of the moral economy.”9 In the public debate over redistribution of societal resources, public assistance is viewed as legitimate for those deemed unable to work, but the disabled individuals on public benefits under U.S. capitalism do not have any objective right to a decent standard of living, even with privileged status, nor is the definition of disability etched in stone. As Stone pointed out, the definition of disability is flexible; the state (which evaluates disability status) controls the labor supply by expanding or contracting the numbers of persons who qualify as disabled, often for political and economic reasons.10

Neither privilege nor morality theories adequately describe the function of the needs-based system. A political economy analyst would ask what role do public disability benefits play to further the machinations of production and wealth accumulation?

 

The vast majority of those on Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), the deserving workers involuntarily severed from their wages, are not privileged. They are financially oppressed by less than adequate aid. Public disability benefits hover at what is determined an official poverty level. In 2000, the Department of Health and Human Services set the poverty threshold for one at $8,350. Because $759 was the average per month benefit that a disabled worker received from SSDI and $373 was the average federal income for the needs-based Supplemental Security Income (SSI), the annual income of more than 10 million disabled persons on these programs was between $4,000 and $10,000 that year. The extremely low SSI benefit was set up for those with no work history or not enough quarters of work to qualify for SSDI: the least valued disabled members of society.

It would not accurately describe the depth of poverty faced by those on disability benefits, however, without explaining that the current system of measuring poverty dates back to the 1960s. Government has never adjusted the equation to take into account the sharp rise in housing, medical care, and child-care costs of the following decades that have altered the average household’s economic picture. The Urban Institute concluded that in order to be comparable to the original threshold, the poverty level would have to be at least 50% higher than the current official standard. If basic needs were refigured to the modern market, almost a quarter of the American people would be deemed to be living in poverty.”[5]

Poverty is one huge socio-Political dilemma, and US-military-Hegemony is caustic, as that intersperses the ominous affecting against the ominous conflicting, i.e. those who do, not may want, but who do ensconce w.o. ameliorations the lawful abiding. Those abidances w chemicalizing and Ionizationing, are not laws, but to the greater extent 85-100% are purposefully, overlooked, since there is not a US-congressional overview. This does mean that there is, definitely, a deep-State of a black-Ops: type-Governance. Like, I see 1.5 mile long choo-Choo’s going past, on one of this nation’s continental railroads, as I almost stare in dumbfounded disbelief that many of those cars are handling “strontium-90 plus chemicals of high-Toxicity” that will be dumped atop our heads, grasses and automobiles—simultaneously daily! Industry is beyond the sleaze of the new-Rome’s plutocracy as the system is corrupted w short-Term: gains.        “R”

 

“From the South and North Poles, to the deepest ocean trenches, human-made radioactive material is being discovered in new places. Two recent studies reveal the distances that radioactive effluent and fallout have been dispersed. One international research team found radioactivity in all 17 glaciers they tested in both

of the Earth’s hemispheres.

Another global study found the first evidence of fallout from bomb tests in marine life in the deepest place on Earth. With unabated production of radioactive waste, runoff, gases, and accidents, it’s no surprise to find it farther away and deeper than ever.

Fallout Found from High Glacier to Deep Ocean

The first study found measured amounts of radioactive cesium-137 and americium-241 in glacial sediments thousands of times greater than expected. “Our samples are exceptional in terms of the levels of fallout radionuclides that we find outside of nuclear exclusion zones” (contaminated “no-go” areas), said Caroline Clason, a member of the study team and a lecturer in Physical Geography at the Univ. of  Plymouth, UK. “We’re talking about weapons testing from the 1950s and 1960s onwards, going right back in the development of the bomb,” Clason told Agence France-Presse. “If we take a sediment core you can see a clear spike where Chernobyl was [in April 1986], but you can also see quite a defined spike in around 1963 when there was a period of quite heavy weapons testing.” While most of the fallout from Fukushima has yet to return to land, evidence is already appearing.”

After an accident or explosion, radioactive particles travel through the atmosphere and fall to Earth as radioactive rain or snow. Radioactive particles in snow fall on glaciers settling into the temporarily stable environment. However, Clason warned, “we all know that glaciers are increasingly melting and that material has to go somewhere.” The study did reveal some good news: the unique glacial sediment where radioactive particles settle is very efficient at accumulating those contaminants and may provide opportunities for bioremediation.    

 

As radioactive glacial sediments enter the ocean, it will affect marine life which has already been doused with radioactivity. That is the subject of “Penetration of Bomb Carbon-14 into the Deepest Ocean Trench,” published in April by the American Geophysical Union (AGU). (If carbon-14 sounds familiar, you may remember that it is used to determine the age of geological samples using carbon dating.) An AGU news release explains, “Thermonuclear weapons tests conducted during the 1950s and 1960s doubled the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere when neutrons released from the bombs reacted with nitrogen in the air.” Bomb test carbon has been recorded in marine life at the ocean’s surface since the late 1950s. As these animals die and fall to the ocean floor, deep sea crustaceans as far as seven miles (11 kilometers) below the surface of the Pacific Ocean in the Mariana Trench, feed on their remains and the radioactivity is passed through the food web. “However, the penetration of bomb [test] carbon-14 into the deepest fauna has not been reported until now,” the study said.

The amount of human-made radioactivity moving into the Pacific is mushrooming. New concern is being raised by the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres over a leaking concrete dome built in the Marshall Islands. The concrete covers a large volume of radioactive debris that was collected from the detonation of 67 bomb tests done by the US, contaminating the islands and their people. Radioactive materials from the testing were pushed into an unlined pit and capped with the concrete. Mr. Guterres recently visited the islands, amplifying the voices of Marshall Islanders worried about radioactivity leaching into the ocean through the bottom of the hole, and the increasing potential for damage to the concrete dome by tropical storms.

From the depths of the oceans to the polar regions, more areas are being impacted by the radioactive legacy of humans, impacts accelerated with climate change which itself is rapidly accelerating.”[6]

 

The Polynesian Islanders were a minority-Populous sooo the federal-Government used “nuclearism” as a tool to maintain their “Doctrine” by impugning against these people, in the same, insane weigh-ins and ill-bred mannerisms of mistreatment to the continent’s (north Americas), as was done and continues to this day since 1840’s against indigenous-Tribals. They are humans in case you’ve never been to those scattered about reduced in immense-Size, so-called “reservations”. That “the Center for Constitutional Rights” needs our personal and public admonishing how well they are progressing, as Universal support, is no longer a question, but a major concern. The impudence against other industries in the u.s.a. has been the same tactics to maintain monopolization of monies, market and Wall Street for far too long—at least since 1977.        “R”

 

“For over 17 years, Moath al-Alwi has been held at Guantánamo Bay without charge. A Yemeni citizen, al-Alwi is one of Guantánamo’s “forever prisoners,” those whom the U.S. government has not charged with a crime but is unwilling to release. On June 10, the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal in his case, the latest setback in al-Alwi’s long effort to obtain due process rights. Even though the court wouldn’t take al-Alwi up, Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote that it would only be a matter of time before the court had to grapple with the forever prisoners and the scope of the government’s power to hold them.

The Supreme Court rejection — and Breyer’s comments — briefly brought al-Alwi’s case back to national attention. Little noted, however, were the eyebrow-raising assertions that the government has made in this case about its powers to indefinitely detain not just al-Alwi, but anyone — including U.S. citizens.

In a filing with the Supreme Court this April, lawyers for the Justice Department argued that the United States can continue to hold al-Alwi indefinitely without charging him. They also embraced the power to detain a U.S. citizen as an “enemy combatant”, an assertion they haven’t advanced openly since the era of President George W. Bush. Notably, the lawyers seemed to indicate, for the first time in a filing with the Supreme Court, that the government could even detain a U.S. citizen for as long as it has held al-Alwi, 17 years and counting, without charge.”

View of the entrance to Supreme Court “There is no bar to this Nation’s holding one of its own citizens as an enemy combatant,” the filing read. Were al-Alwi a citizen, they argued, he “would pose the same threat of returning to the front during the ongoing conflict.” There were no “constitutional questions” raised by this hypothetical, they maintained.

 

The continued detention of al-Alwi has been justified by the government under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, a law passed in the days after 9/11. That AUMF entered the country into a state of war that seems to have no particular end point. It has also allowed the creation of a permanent state of legal exception that opens the door to practices like indefinite detention without trial. These legal powers are now being asserted by government lawyers almost 18 years after the law was passed to ensure that they extend even to Americans potentially detained as enemy combatants in the future.

“Detention without charge under the laws of war is meant to be finite, temporary, and exceptional — but that exception is becoming the rule. We’re now talking about a claim that detention can last potentially for life,” said Pardiss Kebriaei, an attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, a legal advocacy organization. Kebriaei has represented Guantánamo detainees in the past, including men now released from the prison. She argues that the ongoing detention of most prisoners — there are 40 still at Guantánamo — has little to do with security concerns.

“The idea that lifelong imprisonment of detainees is strictly necessary for U.S. national security, that there is no other way but imprisonment to mitigate any risk, is a farce,” said Kebriaei. “It continues to be sanctioned in part because the public cannot see for themselves the senselessness of continuing to hold these detainees. Five of them have been cleared for transfer by the government itself. Others are sick, aging, changed people who are close to two decades removed from the actions the government has used to justify their detentions.”

 

In the same filing in which the U.S. government reserved the right to indefinite detention, government lawyers also asserted that were al-Alwi caught in Afghanistan today, he could be held elsewhere — a reference, al-Alwi’s lawyer’s say, to rendition, the practice of covertly moving detainees across international borders, often to countries where they are at risk of maltreatment. In the April filing, government lawyers said that current legal agreements did “not deprive the United States of the authority to detain petitioner elsewhere.”

 

Imprisoned in his mid-20s, al-Alwi is now over 40 years old. During his time in Guantánamo, he has protested his detention by various means, including years long periods when he refused food and was subjected to painful force-feeding procedures. At one point during a hunger strike, his weight dropped to less than 100 pounds. More recently, he has begun making artwork, some of which was recently displayed at an event at the City University of New York School of Law. The government had previously tried to prevent the release of his art, which includes several model ships he built at Guantánamo using cardboard, plastic bottle caps, and other reclaimed or discarded materials.

Model of a Ship made by Moath al-Alwi in Guantanamo– 2015

Moath al-Alwi made this model of a ship from scraps of material, including cardboard, old t-shirts, and parts of the plastic housing of shaving razors.

“Moath has been struggling against the injustice of his imprisonment at Guantánamo without charge or fair process for over 17 years,” said Ramzi Kassem, a professor at CUNY School of Law who represents al-Alwi along with a group of students through the school’s Immigrant and Non-Citizen Rights Clinic. “He has done that against all odds, most recently by expressing his thirst for freedom through his virtuosic ship models and in his other artwork, which the Department of Defense tried to censor.”[7]

The insidiousness of paying $1,000 to somebody in Afghanistan to detain and/or arrest a neighbor or supporter of “freedom and governance not hierarchical-Religion” was the heinous-Act by the fanaticism of the penataGooons bRass, cRass mis-leadership for propaganda-Always, imperialism behind us. We are living in a continually beset and unsettling paunch of circumstances that must, somehow, always, Exceptionalism. That new-Rome ethicality is immoralist to state the obvious.        “R”

 

“Israel’s presence in the Persian Gulf may lead to a war in the region, Islamic

Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy Commander Rear Admiral Alireza Tangsiri

told Lebanese TV channel Al Mayadeen.

“The United States and the United Kingdom must assume responsibility for the Zionist regime’s illegal presence in the Persian Gulf waters.”

“Any presence of the Zionist regime in the Persian Gulf waters is illegal, as it may result in war and confrontation in the region,” Tangsiri warned.

Tangsiri alleged that the US and UK are responsible for the situation in the Persian Gulf, mostly by fabricating the various scenarios that they use as justification for their deployments.

Admiral Tangsiri said the IRGC Navy is responsible for ensuring the security of the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, and “we don’t need the presence of foreigners.”

“The security of Persian Gulf is among Iran’s priorities, and we believe Iran’s shipping lanes must remain international,” he added.

 

“Iran is the flag-bearer of security in the Persian Gulf, but that hinges on the export of our oil and the country’s ability to use the region. We’ll ensure the security of Persian Gulf as long as our own security is ensured,” the Admiral concluded.

Finally, Tangsiri warned that any vessel that Iran wishes to seize in the Persian Gulf or the Strait of Hormuz could easily be seized and the US or UK couldn’t impede it. This goes in line with a recent video released of Iranian speed boats chasing a warship in the Persian Gulf.

Around the same time, Iran unveiled a new air defense system – the Khorad 15, according to ISNA.

“The ‘Khordad 15’ air defense system is a symbol of self –esteem, manufactured by Iranian experts,” Defense Minister Amir Hatami said, “It’s an important defensive and advanced achievement, based on today’s world technology.”

According to the defense minister, the system is capable of detecting fighter jets and combat drones at the distance of 150 kilometers and tracking them within 120 kilometers.

The advanced system can also detect stealth targets up to 85 kilometers away and engage and destroy them within 45 kilometers.”[8]

Iran is a nation of 90-million persons and the oldest, last remnant “civilization” yet surviving w their traditional-Ties to 3,500 years past. The build-ups were caused by the US-military advances, somewhat, not wholly, part in part. That one fact has caused Russia to update their Military, altho Red China did that and Russia and they have written agreements on tRade—also includes BRICS. The difference is that the US-inductry is plutocratic, As the admins of the new-Rome have, since 1977 predicated an offensive-Measure, never backing from the Doctrine of nucleaRism, in an insouciance of and for manipulation of the populous, we have either had to stand our ground of stand-Aside, and allow their “constant-of-tRyanny”. What keeps us going is our collective-Consciousness, altho that is senselessly be whittled by the laxity of daily-Askance for “health-Medicare” to be opened-up as the initial 1961 Medicare Act had allowed.

An African animal, mammal, the warthog is built low to the ground, razor-Sharp tusks—as those of boars in the once-Wilds of bitchen-Cal. Does this ensure good use of words or naught? Naught, of course, since ur-238 of the US-military cheap-skate indemnity is never, ever depleted, but that is why the STUFF is called “dirty lil Ace”. The dirty is dirtier and not vacuumed-up, ever, is why they used the STUFF. The A-10 Thunderbolt is called the warthog, uses ur-238 all d-Day long. Shoots from a superfast, hydraulic gatling called the GAU-8. The dirty is dirtier and not vacuumed-up, ever! Why they used the STUFF, remains virtually that we have to obey the US-constitution, but do they? No. The A-10 Thunderbolt is called warthog, uses ur-238 all d-Day long. Shoots from a super-fast, hydraulic gatling called the GAU-8. The full-Life of Radionuclide ur-238 is 44.5 billion years.

“R”

 

do we want peace in the world or merely losing Democracy abrogationing,

 

the peace-Warrior,   “R” Addison

 

Tags/ Social Democrats, pacifying, the Left, Senator Sanders, international socialism, Canada extends military, missions, Ukraine and Mideast, Dr. John W. Gofman, Disablement, Oppression, and Political Economy, Bomb Test Fallout Spread, Farther and Deeper, Than We Knew, U.S. Citizens can be, Indefinitely Detained, U.S. Government Asserts, Iran warns that IDF presence, would lead to war, in Persian Gulf, region,

[1] “How Social Democrats Like Sanders Are Pacifying The Left With False Socialist Rhetoric” ‘the Socialist’  24 Jun 2019, by Rainer Shea https://www.thesocialist.us/how-social-democrats-like-sanders-are-pacifying-the-left-with-false-socialist-rhetoric/

[2] “‘international socialism’ “Fascism in Europe today” Issue: 162, posted on 18 Apr 2019, Mark L Thomas

[3] “Canada extends military missions in Ukraine and Mideast, allies with Trump in refugee crackdown” WSWS

23 March 2019 by Roger Jordan https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/03/23/ukca-m23.html

[4] “Dr. John W. Gofman – His Life, and Research on the Health Effects of Exposure to Ionizing Radiation” Dave Ratcliffe https://www.academia.edu/35665425/Dr._John_W._Gofman_-_His_Life_and_Research_on_the_Health_Effects_of_Exposure_to_Ionizing_Radiation

[5] “Disablement, Oppression, and Political Economy” ‘socialist Project’ poverty 07 Aug 2019 by Marta Russell https://socialistproject.ca/2019/08/disablement-oppression-and-political-economy/

[6] “Bomb Test Fallout Spread Farther and Deeper Than We Knew” Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2019–by Kelly Lundeen

[7] “U.S. Citizens can be Indefinitely Detained U.S. Government Asserts” by Staff -June 22, 2019 [#]460 http://911truth.org/detain-us-citizen-indefinitely/

[8] “IRAN WARNS THAT ISRAELI PRESENCE IN PERSIAN GULF WOULD LEAD TO WAR” ‘southfront’ 12 Aug 2019 https://southfront.org/iran-warns-that-israeli-presence-in-persian-gulf-would-lead-to-war/

"R" Addison

I started into believing that I would be able to show my data and my photogRapHics in 1996. By 1998 I was learning computers would gain ascendant methods thru technics of programming for a future connected to data and information. That was nuclear-Molecular finding(s) to share and my personal-Activism w first account specifics and engendering(s).

As cameras went 'digital-Tech' I fond that editing was also to follow in 2004. Then, in 2005 my first digital camera had replaced usage(s) of s.l.r. 35 mm's. I have no mercy nor pity for the thieves who have stolen my hard werk, as anxiety of what I allowed was mid-stReam--anyway! Those asshole-Pukes have cost me $1,000's on a fixed income and I remain single, sole-Survivor of two-Families w.o. offspring!

This Post Has 0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back To Top
×Close search
Search