http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/The%20Zionist%20Plan%20for%20the%20Middle%20East.pdf
http://info.publicintelligence.net/NATO-STRATCOM-Libya.pdf
http://info.publicintelligence.net/LibyaRendition.pdf
http://www.northcom.mil/FOIA/docs/Con%20Plan%203501-08%20DSCA.pdf
http://www.northcom.mil/FOIA/docs/USNORTHCOM%20J2%20MIP%20UFR%20Manpower.pdf
http://info.publicintelligence.net/USArmy-InternmentResettlement.pdf
http://www.wsws.org/en/media/documents/legacy/DN_report20120708.pdf
https://w2.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/RFID/RFID_Position_Statement.pdf
http://findingaids.library.emory.edu/documents/sclc1083/printable/
https://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/infoaccessapall.pdf
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/atf_investigation_01_111207.pdf
http://www.citizensgrandjury.com/pdf/121101-Citizens%20Grand%20Jury%20Indictment.pdf
http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/DCCC-fundraiser.pdf
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/402523/doc-28-white-supremacy-amp-suicide-terrorism.pdf
http://www.arnierosner.com/are/gras/politics/natural_born_citizen.pdf
https://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/infoaccessapall.pdf
http://servv89pn0aj.sn.sourcedns.com/~gbpprorg/obama/Barack_Hussein_Obama_Sr_Immigration_Files.pdf
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/pdf/uscode08/lii_usc_TI_08_CH_12_SC_III_PA_III_SE_1481.pdf
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Impeach Obama: A National Imperative
Impeach Obama: A National Imperative
3
2
0
10
2
0
10
America’s Declaration of Independence states:
“(W)hen a long train of abuses and
usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to
reduce them under absolute Despotism, (it’s the right of the people,
it’s) their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new
Guards for their future security.”
Straightaway as president, Obama violated his sacred trust. He
betrayed his constituents. He’s a serial liar. He broke every major
promise made. He serves illegitimately.He institutionalized tyranny. He’s a war criminal multiple times over. He’s guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.
He menaces humanity. He’s heading America for WW III. He wants America’s social contract destroyed. He wants millions impoverished, unemployed, left hungry and homeless. He’s beholden to powerful monied interests that own him.
He spurns fundamental civil and human rights. He mocks democratic values. He’s contemptuous of essential needs.
Law Professor Francis Boyle is unequivocal. He told Progressive Radio News Hour listeners he should be impeached. He urged House Republicans to do so.
He’s offering his services pro bono. On December 9, Boyle spoke at the Puerto Rican Summit Conference on Human Rights.
US militarism threatens WW III, he said. A century after earlier imperial aggressions, “neoconservative Republican Bush Junior administration and the neoliberal Democratic Obama administration are now threatening” global war.
He cited his teacher, mentor and friend, Professor Hans Morgenthau. Earlier he warned about “unlimited imperialism.” His seminal book “Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace” discussed it.
His cardinal tenet was darkly Hobbesian. He said international law and world organizations are “irrelevant” in conflicts of national interest between nations. Ignore “reality” and perish, he stressed.
Imperial priorities are disastrous. They destroy societies and human life. They make it “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.”
No law or justice exists, no sense of right or wrong, no morality. Imperial madness prioritizes war. Absolute power is sought no holds barred.
Boyle cited the US Army Field Manual (FM) 27-10 – The Law of Land Warfare. Paragraph 498 says any person, military or civilian, who commits a crime under international law is responsible for it and may be punished.
Paragraph 499 defines a war crime. Paragraph 500 refers to a conspiracy, attempts to commit it, and complicity with respect to international crimes.
Paragraph 501 says all high level civilian and military officials in any way involved in crimes against peace are personally responsible for war crimes.
Paragraph 509 denies the defense of superior orders in the commission of a crime. Paragraph 510 denies the defense of an “act of state” to absolve them.
Obama, other high administration officials, and their subordinates “are responsible for the commission of crimes against peace,” said Boyle.
The Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles, other international laws, and FM 27-10 define them.
In “international legal terms,” said Boyle, “the United States government” is guilty of “serial wars of aggression, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and war crimes that are legally akin to those perpetrated by the former Nazi regime in Germany.”
US citizens are constitutionally empowered to resist, says Boyle. They’re entitled to challenge their own government. They should “prevent, impede, thwart, or terminate (its) ongoing criminal activities….”
“Today’s civil resisters are the sheriffs! The US government officials are the outlaws!”
They “disobeyed fundamental principles of international law as well as US criminal law, and thus committed international crimes and US domestic crimes as well as impeachable violations of the United States Constitution.”
“The American people must insist upon the impeachment, dismissal, resignation, indictment, conviction, and long-term incarceration of all US government officials guilty of such heinous international and domestic crimes.”
Fundamental rule of law principles apply to all US military and civilian personnel. They include top commanders, the Secretary of Defense, his subordinates, CIA and other intelligence officials, as well as the president and vice president of the United States.
No one is exempt. Rule of law principles are inviolable. Imperial aggression is lawless. So is extrajudicial killing, torture, and other high crimes.
No president should be allowed to get away with them, says Boyle. Lawbreaking demands accountability. Doing so invites intolerable consequences. Disaster awaits.
We the People must act. Institutionalized tyranny approaches. It’s a hair’s breath away. Freedom’s on the chopping block for elimination. Humanity may not survive Obama’s second term.
Articles of impeachment are essential. Growing calls say so. In August 2011, Veterans for Peace (VFP) urged it. Waging illegal direct and proxy wars were cited.
“Therefore Be It Resolved,” said VFP, “that Veterans For Peace call on the US House of Representatives to immediately begin impeachment proceedings against President Barack H. Obama for failure to uphold his sworn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies foreign and domestic, and for his commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity, obstruction of justice and the violation of numerous national and international laws, treaties and conventions.
Impeach Obama Campaign.com has a White House Watch page. It urges readers to support impeachment.
Another page headlines “NEW ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT.” It states:
“ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
RESOLVED, That Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following article of impeachment to be exhibited to the Senate:
ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT EXHIBITED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE NAME OF ITSELF AND OF ALL OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AGAINST BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IN MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT OF ITS IMPEACHMENT AGAINST HIM FOR HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS IN USURPING THE EXCLUSIVE PREROGATIVE OF CONGRESS TO COMMENCE WAR UNDER ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 11 OF THE CONSTITUTION.”
Other detailed information followed. Obama violated his oath of office. It mandates he “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
He “mock(s) the rule of law.” He “unilaterally” commits aggression. He “endanger(s) the very existence of the Republic” and freedom. He’s guilty of “impeachable high crime(s) and misdemeanor(s).”
The UN Charter explains conditions under which waging war is justified.
Article 2(3) and Article 33(1) require peaceful settlement of international disputes. Article 2(4) prohibits force or its threatened use.
Article 51 allows the “right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member….until the Security Council has taken measures to maintain international peace and security.”
Justifiable self-defense is permissible. Articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 prohibit unilaterally threatening use of force not:
specifically allowed under Article 51;
authorized by the Security Council; and
permitted by constitutional and US statute law provisions.
Three General Assembly resolutions prohibit non-consensual belligerence:
the 1965 Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty;
the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations; and
the 1974 Definition of Aggression.
Nuremberg Tribunal’s Justice Robert Jackson called aggressive war “the supreme international crime against peace.” Guilty Nazi war criminals were hanged.
The Constitution’s Article 1, Section 8 lets Congress alone declare war. December 8, 1941 was the last time. Subsequent wars were illegal. Responsible officials were and are war criminals.
The 1973 War Powers Resolution (WPR) limits presidential warmaking powers. It requires consulting with Congress before authorizing troop deployments for extended periods.
Section 4(a)(1) requires presidents to inform Congress within 48 hours about deploying troops to areas of ongoing or imminent hostilities.
He must explain why they’re sent, constitutional or legislative authority for doing so, estimated duration of involvement, and whatever other information Congress requests.
Section 5(b) mandates withdrawal within 60 days plus an additional 30 exit period unless Congress extends the time frame for another 30 days, declares war, or unavoidable circumstances require more time. Unlimited amounts are prohibited.
One exception applies. As commander-in-chief, presidents may introduce US forces unilaterally into conflict areas in case of a national emergency if America, its territories, possessions, or military is attacked.
Under all circumstances, Congress must be kept fully informed. It has final say. Since passage, presidents exceeded their constitutional and WPR authority.
All US wars are illegal. Congress violates its own mandate. Accountability is null and void.
The Constitution’s Article 2, Section 4 states:
“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
In 1793, George Washington said:
“The Constitution vests the power of declaring war with Congress, therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject, and authorized such a measure.”
In 1805, Thomas Jefferson said:
“Congress alone is constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition from peace to war.” Warmaking is “exclusively (for Congress) to yield or deny.”
Thomas Paine said:
“In America, the law is king. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king, and there ought to be no others.”
John Jay was America’s first Supreme Court chief justice. He said:
“(A)bsolute monarchs will often make war when their nations are to get nothing by it, but for the purposes and objects merely personal, such as thirst for military glory, revenge for personal affronts, ambition, or private compacts to aggrandize or support their particular families or partisans.”
“These and a variety of other motives, which affect only the mind of the sovereign, often lead him to engage in wars not sanctified by justice or the voice and interests of his people.”
Alexander Hamilton called impeachable offenses those “which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the violation or abuse of some public trust. They are of a nature which with peculiar propriety may be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done to society itself.”
James Madison said:
“Of all the enemies of public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other.”
“War is the true nurse of executive aggrandizement. No nation (can) preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
“In no part of the Constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department.”
In 1974, the House Judiciary Committee voted three articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon. They charged actions “subversive of constitutional government.”
Obama exceeds the worst of all previous presidents. He’s guilty of multiple high crimes and misdemeanors. Holding him accountable is essential. Do it now before it’s too late. Humanity may not get a second chance.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”
http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour
http://www.dailycensored.com/impeach-obama-a-national-imperative/
Google Moves to Destroy Online Anonymity … Unintentionally Helping Authoritarian Governments
Google Moves to Destroy Online Anonymity … Unintentionally Helping Authoritarian Governments
88
85
40
283
85
40
283
Governments Move to Destroy Online Anonymity
Some of the world’s leading social critics and political critics have used pen names.As Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge points out (edited slightly for readability):
Though often maligned (typically by those frustrated by an inability to engage in ad hominem attacks), anonymous speech has a long and storied history in the United States. Used by the likes of Mark Twain (aka Samuel Langhorne Clemens) to criticize common ignorance, and perhaps most famously by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay (aka publius) to write the Federalist Papers, we think ourselves in good company in using one or another nom de plume.But governments – especially authoritarian governments – hate anonymity.
Particularly in light of an emerging trend against vocalizing public dissent in the United States, we believe in the critical importance of anonymity and its role in dissident speech.
Like the Economist magazine, we also believe that keeping authorship anonymous moves the focus of discussion to the content of speech and away from the speaker – as it should be. We believe not only that you should be comfortable with anonymous speech in such an environment, but that you should be suspicious of any speech that isn’t.
A soon-to-be-released book by Google executive Eric Schmidt - called “The New Digital Age” – describes the desire of authoritarian governments to destroy anonymity. The Wall Street Journal provides an excerpt:
Some governments will consider it too risky to have thousands of anonymous, untraceable and unverified citizens — “hidden people”; they’ll want to know who is associated with each online account, and will require verification at a state level, in order to exert control over the virtual world.Last December, China started requiring all web users to register using their real names.
But the U.S. is quickly moving in the same direction. As Gene Howington reported last year:
Do you have a right to anonymous political free speech?Indeed, valuing online privacy could even get you labeled as a potential terrorist.
According to the Supreme Court, you do. According to the Department of Homeland Security, you don’t. They’ve hired General Dynamics to track U.S. citizens exercising this critical civil right.
The history of anonymous political free speech in America dates back to our founding. The seminal essays found in “The Federalist Papers” were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay under the nom de plume of “Publius” although this was not confirmed until a list of authorship complied by Hamilton was posthumously released to the public. As previously discussed on this blog, the right to anonymous political free speech has been addressed by the Supreme Court. Most notably in the cases of Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960) and McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 514 U.S. 334 (1995). In Talley, Justice Hugo Black writing for the majority said that, “Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind. Persecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all.” In McIntyre, Justice John Paul Stevens writing for the majority said that, “Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. [… ] an author’s decision to remain anonymous, like other decisions concerning omissions or additions to the content of a publication, is an aspect of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment.” That seems clear enough in defining that citizens do have a Constitutionally protected right to anonymous political free speech.
The full DHS policy statement regarding its activities can be viewed in the DHS Privacy Compliance Review of the NOC Media Monitoring Initiative (November 15, 2011), but rt.com’s summary spells out the basics:
“Under the National Operations Center (NOC)’s Media Monitoring Initiative that came out of DHS headquarters in November, Washington has the written permission to retain data on users of social media and online networking platforms.This question about the right to anonymous political free speech is also asked over the background of the Electronic Privacy Information Center filing a FOIA request against the DHS to find out the details of the agency’s social network monitoring program.
Specifically, the DHS announced the NCO and its Office of Operations Coordination and Planning (OPS) can collect personal information from news anchors, journalists, reporters or anyone who may use “traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed.”
According to the Department of Homeland Security’s own definition of personal identifiable information, or PII, such data could consist of any intellect “that permits the identity of an individual to be directly or indirectly inferred, including any information which is linked or linkable to that individual.” Previously established guidelines within the administration say that data could only be collected under authorization set forth by written code, but the new provisions in the NOC’s write-up means that any reporter, whether someone along the lines of Walter Cronkite or a budding blogger, can be victimized by the agency.
Also included in the roster of those subjected to the spying are government officials, domestic or not, who make public statements, private sector employees that do the same and “persons known to have been involved in major crimes of Homeland Security interest,” which to itself opens up the possibilities even wider.
The department says that they will only scour publically-made info available while retaining data, but it doesn’t help but raise suspicion as to why the government is going out of their way to spend time, money and resources on watching over those that helped bring news to the masses.” – rt.com
***
As part of recent disclosures related to the EPIC suit, it is revealed that the DHS has hired and instructed General Dynamics to monitor political dissent and the dissenters. The range of websites listed as being monitored is quite impressive. Notably, jonathanturley.org is not on this list [Howington's essay is a guest blog on constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley's website], but equally of note is that this list is by the DHS’ own admission “representative” and not “comprehensive”.
***
Some of the more high profile and highly trafficked sites being monitored include the comments sections of The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, Newsweek, the Huffington Post, the Drudge Report, Wired, and ABC News. In addition, social networking sites Facebook, MySpace and Twitter are being monitored. For the first time, the public not only has an idea who the DHS is pursuing with their surveillance and where, but what they are looking for as well. General Dynamics contract requires them to “[identify] media reports that reflect adversely on the U.S. Government, DHS, or prevent, protect, respond government activities.” The DHS also instructed General Dynamics to generate “reports on DHS, Components, and other Federal Agencies: positive and negative reports on FEMA, CIA, CBP, ICE, etc. as well as organizations outside the DHS.” In other words, the DHS wants to know who you are if you say anything critical about the government.
Anybody thinking of the name “Goebbels” at this point is not out of line.
Google Moving to Help Destroy Anonymity
Google’s motto is “Do No Evil“. And Google notes in a patent application:When users reveal their identities on the internet, it leaves them more vulnerable to stalking, identity theft and harassment.So you might assume that Google is fighting to protect anonymity on the web.
But Schmidt’s new book reveals that Google will support the destruction of anonymity (via Wall Street Journal):
Within search results, information tied to verified online profiles will be ranked higher than content without such verification, which will result in most users naturally clicking on the top (verified) results. The true cost of remaining anonymous, then, might be irrelevance.Search Engine Journal explains:
[Passages from Schmidt's book] confirm what many industry writers have been passionately clattering away about for months now. Google+ is an identity verification network. As the network continues to grow, content associated with a verified identity will rise to the top of Google search rankings.(Google+ is now the world’s second most popular social network.)
In other words, Schmidt acknowledges (in the first quote above) that authoritarians want to destroy anonymity … and Google will help them do so.
We are not saying that Google likes authoritarians. (Potential ties between Google and the government are beyond the scope of this essay.) However, Google will do business with anyone … and will cowtow to authoritarians they happen to do business with.
Google is doing this to make money. Remember, Google gathers information across all of its platforms, and personalizes search engine results based upon what you’ve looked for in past searches.
After all, Google is primary an advertising company … not a search company. See this, this, this and this.
As the Daily Mail reported last year:
A former Google executive has lambasted his ex-employer … claiming that the search company has been turned into an ‘ad company’ obsessed with harvesting people’s private information.The bottom line is that anonymity reduces Google’s ability to monetize personal information and sell it to its advertisers. So Google is on a campaign to destroy anonymity … and unintentionally helping tyrants in the process.
James Whittaker, a current Partner Development Manager at Microsoft and ex-Engineering Director at Google, posted the 1328-word attack on Google on his Microsoft blog this week.
‘Perhaps Google is right,’ writes Whittaker, ‘Perhaps the future lies in learning as much about people’s personal lives as possible.
‘The Google I was passionate about was a technology company. The Google I left was an advertising company.’
***
The move comes in the wake of Google’s controversial new ‘privacy policy’, which allowed the search giant to ‘pool’ information from 60 separate services including Gmail, Google Search and Android phones, to create ‘personalised’ advertising.
As INeedHits laments:
We knew a day would come when privacy was a thing of the past, but Schmidt clearly spells out that day is sooner than we had expected.
70,000 U.S. Troops Radiation Poisoned due to Fukushima Nuclear Lies
70,000 U.S. Troops Radiation Poisoned due to Fukushima Nuclear Lies
Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:23
“They’ve got leukemia, they have growths, they’re undergoing surgery to remove lesions in their brains, a couple of them have had them and have lost the sight in their eye,” Attorney Paul C. Garner said in a Nuke Radio interview last week.
Garner is representing U.S. service members in Japan after March 11 during the humanitarian Operation Tomodachi.
(See: US Navy sailors sue Japan for radiation fraud)
“One guy has testicular cancer. He was aboard the Reagan,” Garner said. “He’s 21. He had one of his testicles removed already.”
Garner was speaking to Christina Consolo on Nuked Radio, an internet radio program that began on the 1-year anniversary of Fukushima, and now airs 2 days each week, on Tuesdays and Thursdays.
The nuclear industry catastrophe occurred March 13, 2011 when a 9.0 earthquake and tsunami struck the area of Japan that is home to the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant.
Operation Tomodachi was a humanitarian mission conducted in Japan after the massive quake, tsunami, and nuclear catastrophe began and lasted 80 days.
"70,000 US servicemen and women from the Navy, Airforce, Army & Marines delivered food, blankets & water in areas of devastation," explains Consolo. "What they didn't know was the severity of radiation exposure they received since TEPCO refused to acknowledge the extent of what was happening at the Fukushima plant.
"A registry was created to track subsequent health problems by the Department of Defense, but that program was recently abandoned," Consolo says. "As many servicemen and women have already begun to exhibit severe health issues a lawsuit was filed in San Diego Federal Court against TEPCO by Environmental Law Attorney Paul Garner, to establish a medical fund for the servicemen and women who were involved in this operation as well as their families in Japan."
Consolo spoke with Mike Seybourn about what it was like to work in a highly radioactive environment and what the future might hold for him and his family in terms of health, a distubing discussion.
The 'no-harm low-level radiation' lie that keeps on killing
“You know what their talking points are, the Tepco people and those in power?” Garner asked Consolo, also now known as RadChick. “It’s all low-level radiation, nothing to worry about. It’s too little to worry about.”
Prominent human rights defenders and scientists have expressed outrage over the Fukushima lies by industry and government since the catastrophe began. These include a long list, including people such as Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, Dr. Alexey Yablokov, Dr. Helen Coldicott, Arnie Gundersen of Fairwinds, and Dr. Mark Sircus.
(See: Nuclear whistleblowers: Stop lying about Fukushima, and Radiating Americans: Fukushima rain, Clinton's secret food pact, and Experts: Fukushima 'off-scale' lethal radiation level infers millions dying, and Am women pay high price for Fukushima cover-up: 35% more dead babies, and Fukushima worst confirmed, radiated children need evacuation)
Each of the above-listed rights defenders and scientists and many others have repeatedly warned that consequences of the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan is comparable to or potentially greater than health and environmental consequences of the Chernobyl reactor explosion on April 26, 1986 in Ukraine.
“If they get away with this then what did we fight Watergate for?” Garner asked Consolo.
The independent nuclear specialists have warned that long-term risk of radiation due to internal exposure would be worse due to lies and cover-up of the catastrophe presently used to protect the nuclear energy industry.
After over a year of that lying about the hazard of low-level radiation, as the U.S. government also has, last October, TEPCO acknowledged it had played down safety risks at the facility “out of fear that they would lead to a plant shutdown,” CNN reported.
The United Nations has also been complicit.
At a press conference almost two years ago, in March 2011, Dr. Yablokov, who had been holding a daily vigil in front of the World Health Organization headquarters due to its alleged false reporting of Chernobyl, explained:
"We are seeing something that has never happened... a multiple reactor catastrophe including one using plutonium fuel as well as spent fuel pool accidents, all happening within 200 kilometers of a metropolis of 30 million people. Because the area is far more densely populated than around Chernobyl, the human toll could eventually be far worse in Japan."
"The World Health Organization cannot make any comment or decision regarding nuclear energy without deferring to the International Atomic Energy Agency which actively promotes nuclear power," according to Beyond Blue.
Words of warning by Fukushima whistleblowers seemingly fell on deaf ears of the pubic and all of those government agencies meant to protect the public, in Japan and in the U.S.
Garner described to CNN in December the illnesses as "major health issues."
"Our best and brightest -- who were hired to perform top service to our Navy -- went there to provide humanitarian tasks and did not want to bargain their health and well being," Garner told Consolo. "But the people running the power plant lied to them."
The suit against Tokyo Electric Power Company alleged a series of failures, including lying. It was filed Dec. 21 in U.S. District Court Southern District of California, alleging that the sailors -- among some 5,500 who were aboard the USS Ronald Reagan providing humanitarian aid to the stricken zone – were sickened from exposure to radiation that escaped from the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant.
"The Plaintiffs must now endure a lifetime of radiation poisoning and suffering which could have and should have been avoided," Gardner said.
The question remains regarding how many other unwitting individuals will suffer from lies about radiation, not only from Fukushima and other nuclear energy facilities, but also from the fossil fuel industry that is continually exposing the public to radiation that is also “played down” – lied about.
70,000 US Service Personnel Exposed To Radiation: Operation Tomodachi 3/11: http://youtu.be/kjuWYA4nQko via @youtube
Note: If the reader was involved in Operation Tomodachi and hase questions or concerns about personal health status, contact Paul Garner at 760.600.0081 or email him at pcg@garnerlaw.com or his associate daryljbrooks@roadrunner.com.
Support the work of human rights news reporter Deborah Dupré by purchasing a copy of her latest book, "Vampire of Macondo, Life, crimes and curses in south Louisiana that Powerful Forces Don't want you to know," over 1000 references and 450 pages packed with censored stories about the BP-wrecked Macondo Prospect in the Gulf of Mexico that continues causing hidden catastrophic human and environmental devastation.
Watch the "Vampire of Macondo" video book trailer at www.vampireofmacondo.com.
Follow Dupré on Twitter @DeborahDupre. For interviews, email info@DeborahDupre.com.
I HATE ALL OBAMA LOVERS
YOU WILL PAY FOR WHAT YOU DID TO MY NATION NOW IT IS NOT NICE TO HAVE ME THIS MAD
AND YOU ALL GET WHATS COME IN
I WILL NOT STOP
I CRUSE YOU ALL
I CRUSE YOU AND ALL YOUR CHILDREN DEATH
FUCK YOU ALL
I HOPE YOU DIE
I HOPE YOU DIE
I HOPE YOU DIE
BY BY NOW
SUCK MY FUCKING DICK WATCH HOW EVIL I AM
FUCK YOU ALL YOU GET WHATS COME IN
AND YOU ALL GET WHATS COME IN
I WILL NOT STOP
I CRUSE YOU ALL
I CRUSE YOU AND ALL YOUR CHILDREN DEATH
FUCK YOU ALL
I HOPE YOU DIE
I HOPE YOU DIE
I HOPE YOU DIE
BY BY NOW
SUCK MY FUCKING DICK WATCH HOW EVIL I AM
FUCK YOU ALL YOU GET WHATS COME IN
WHEN THE FUCK ARE YOU GOING TO STEP UP AN AREST OBAMA FOR DOING THIS TO OUR NATION
WHAT KIND OF SICK FUCKERS ARE YOU CANT YOU SEE WHAT HE IS DOING
Wants To Do 'Serious Damage To Our Military Capabilities'
HE CANT GET MONEY TO FUND OUR TROOPS BUT KEEPS BY IN WEAPONS FOR HOME LAND SECRITY
HE IS NOT JESUS HE IS EVIL
BY THE TIME ALL YOU RETARDS IN HOLLY WOOD WAKE UP YOU WILL BE DEAD TOO DID HE TELL YOU ABOUT THE AIR YOU ARE BREATHING IS KILLING YOU
DID HE TELL YOU ABOUT THE ISLAMIC TERRORIST HE LET IN OOUR NATION
ALL OUR TAX MONEY HE GAVE TO TERRORIST
THIS IS A ACT OF TREASON
BUY THE TIME YOU GREW A BRAIN CELL IT WILL BE TOO LATE
I WONT PROTECT YOU
TO ME YOU ALL ARE DEAD I HOPE THE MASTER YOU PICKED HELPS YOU
FOR ALL THE LIFES THAT ARE LOST BECAUSE YOU WANTED OBAMA TO GIVE YOU FREE PHONE WELFARE AND FOOD STAMPS IT ILL BE TOO LATE
YOU WILL BE GETTING THE RFID CHIP
I WILL NOT FOR GIVE ANY OF YOU
I TOLD YOU ALL ANY ONE WHO PROTECTS OBAMA AND SEES WHAT HE IS DOING TO OUR NATION AND YYOU STAND BY AND LET HIM I WILL SEE YOU WILL BE JUDGED TOO
what obama is doing to our Military is treason
Cheney: Obama Wants To Do 'Serious Damage To Our Military Capabilities'
Cheney: Obama Wants To Do 'Serious Damage To Our Military Capabilities' | Cheney | Fox Nation http://nation.foxnews.com/cheney/2013/02/12/cheney-obama-wants-do-serious-damage-our-military-capabilities?intcmp=fly
Real Clear Politics)- "With respect to Chuck Hagel and - and Brennan, at Defense and C.I.A. - just in the last week, their performance in front of the committees that have to confirm them has been pretty poor. And that's, you know, not my judgment. That's the judgment, as well, of senators on both sides of the aisle. My guess is, if you look at what the President's motives are for picking Chuck Hagel, I think he wants a Republican to go be the - the foil, if you will, for what he wants to do to the Defense Department, which is I think to do serious, serious damage to our military capabilities," former Vice President Dick Cheney said in an interview with Charlie Rose of CBS News.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)