Monday, January 30, 2012

Ocean Acidification Helps Scientists Evaluate Effects of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

Major Study of Ocean Acidification Helps Scientists Evaluate Effects of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide On Marine Life

ScienceDaily (Jan. 23, 2012) — Might a penguin's next meal be affected by the exhaust from your tailpipe? The answer may be yes, when you add your exhaust fumes to the total amount of carbon dioxide lofted into the atmosphere by humans since the industrial revolution. One-third of that carbon dioxide is absorbed by the world's oceans, making them more acidic and affecting marine life.

A UC Santa Barbara marine scientist and a team of 18 other researchers have reported results of the broadest worldwide study of ocean acidification to date. Acidification is known to be a direct result of the increasing amount of greenhouse gas emissions. The scientists used sensors developed at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego to measure the acidity of 15 ocean locations, including seawater in the Antarctic, and in temperate and tropical waters.
As oceans become more acidic, with a lower pH, marine organisms are stressed and entire ecosystems are affected, according to the scientists. Gretchen E. Hofmann, an eco-physiologist and professor in UCSB's Department of Ecology, Evolution & Marine Biology, is lead author of the recent article in PLoS ONE that describes the research.
"We were able to illustrate how parts of the world's oceans currently have different pH, and thus how they might respond to climate changes in the future," said Hofmann. "The sensors allowed us to capture that." The sensors recorded at least 30 days of continuous pH values in each area of the study.
Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, human activities have accelerated the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide mixes with water. The two molecules combine to become carbonic acid, making seawater more acidic. As billions of molecules combine and go through this process, the overall pH of the oceans decreases, causing ocean acidification.
Acidification limits the amount of carbonate forms that are needed by marine invertebrates, such as coral, urchins, snails, and shellfish, to make their skeletons. As the concentration of carbonates decreases in acidified water, it is harder to make a shell. And, the structures of some organisms may dissolve when water chemistry becomes too unfavorable.
"The emerging pH data from sensors allows us to design lab experiments that have a present-day environmental context," said Hofmann. "The experiments will allow us to see how organisms are adapted now, and how they might respond to climate change in the future." Hofmann researched the Antarctic, where she has worked extensively, as well as an area of coral reefs around the South Pacific island of Moorea, where UCSB has a Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) project. She also studied the coastal waters of Santa Barbara, in conjunction with UCSB's Santa Barbara Coastal LTER. The research team provided 30 days of pH data from other ocean areas around the world.
The researchers found that, in some places such as Antarctica and the Line Islands of the South Pacific, the range of pH variance is much more limited than in areas of the California coast that are subject to large vertical movements of water, known as upwellings. In some of the study areas, the researchers found that the decrease in seawater pH being caused by greenhouse gas emissions is still within the bounds of natural pH fluctuation. Other areas already experience daily acidity levels that scientists had expected would only be reached at the end of this century.
"This study is important for identifying the complexity of the ocean acidification problem around the globe," said co-author Jennifer Smith, a marine biologist with Scripps. "Our data show such huge variability in seawater pH, both within and across marine ecosystems, making global predictions of the impacts of ocean acidification a big challenge."
Todd Martz, a marine chemistry researcher at Scripps, developed the sensor. "When I arrived at Scripps, we re-engineered my prototype design, and since then I have not been able to keep up with all of the requests for sensors," said Martz. "Because every sensor used in this study was built at Scripps, I was in a unique position to assimilate a number of datasets, collected independently by researchers who otherwise would not have been in communication with each other. Each time someone deployed a sensor, they would send me the data, and eventually it became clear that a synthesis should be done to cross-compare this diverse collection of measurements." Hoffman worked with Martz to put together the research team to create that synthesis.
The team noted that the Scripps sensors, called "SeaFET" and "SeapHOx," allow researchers to continuously and autonomously monitor pH from remote parts of the world, providing important baselines from which scientists can monitor future changes caused by ocean acidification.
Despite surveying 15 different ocean regions, the authors noted that they only made observations on coastal surface oceans, and that more study is needed in deeper ocean regions farther away from land.
Hofmann is the director of the Center for the Study of Ocean Acidification and Ocean Change, a UC multi-campus initiative. Hofmann participated in writing a report on ocean acidification while on the National Research Council's Ocean Acidification Committee, and she is currently participating as a lead author on the National Climate Assessment. Hofmann is a member of the National Science Foundation's Office of Polar Programs Advisory Panel, and she is an Aldo Leopold Fellow.
In addition to Hofmann, Martz, and Smith, co-authors include Emily B. Rivest and Pauline Yu of UCSB; Uwe Send, Lisa Levin, Yuichiro Takeshita, Nichole N. Price, Brittany Peterson, and Christina A. Frieder of Scripps; Paul Matson and Kenneth Johnson of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute; Fiorenza Micheli and Kristy Kroeker of Stanford University; Adina Paytan and Elizabeth Derse Crook of UC Santa Cruz; and Maria Cristina Gambi of Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn in Naples, Italy.
Funding for instrument development and related field work came from several sources, including the National Science Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the University of California, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Nature Conservancy, the WWW Foundation, Scott and Karin Wilson, the Rhodes family, and NOAA.

NASA Discovers Our Galaxy 'Loaded' With Exoplanets

MOFFETT FIELD, California, January 27, 2012 (ENS) - The Kepler spacecraft has discovered 11 new planetary systems hosting 26 confirmed planets, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, announced Thursday. These discoveries nearly double the number of verified planets and triple the number of stars known to have more than one planet that passes in front of its star. These exoplanets, outside the Earth's solar system, orbit close to their host stars and range in size from 1.5 times the radius of Earth to larger than Jupiter, the largest planet in Earth's solar system.
"Prior to the Kepler mission, we knew of perhaps 500 exoplanets across the whole sky," said Doug Hudgins, Kepler program scientist at NASA Headquarters in Washington.
Artist's concept of the KOI-961 star, a red dwarf with the smallest exoplanets yet discovered in its orbit (Image courtesy NASA/JPL-Caltech)
"Now, in just two years staring at a patch of sky not much bigger than your fist, Kepler has discovered more than 60 planets and more than 2,300 planet candidates," said Hudgins. "This tells us that our galaxy is positively loaded with planets of all sizes and orbits."
Of the more than 700 exoplanets now confirmed, only a handful are known to be rocky, like the Earth.
In size, 15 of the newly discovered planets are between Earth and Neptune, which is 17 times the mass of Earth.
The exoplanets orbit their host stars once every six to 143 days. All are closer to their host stars than Venus is to our Sun.
"Astronomers are just beginning to confirm thousands of planet candidates uncovered by Kepler so far," said Hudgins. "Finding one as small as Mars is amazing, and hints that there may be a bounty of rocky planets all around us."
Kepler identifies planet candidates by repeatedly measuring the change in brightness of more than 150,000 stars to detect when a planet passes in front of the star. That passage casts a small shadow toward Earth and the Kepler spacecraft.
Each of the new confirmed planetary systems contains two to five closely spaced transiting planets.
In tightly packed planetary systems, the gravitational pull of the planets on each other causes some planets to accelerate and some to decelerate along their orbits. The acceleration causes the orbital period of each planet to change.
The Kepler spacecraft and its field of view near by constellation Cygnus (Image courtesy NASA)
Kepler detects this effect by measuring the changes, or so-called Transit Timing Variations, TTVs.
Planetary systems with TTVs can be verified without requiring extensive ground-based observations, accelerating confirmation of planet candidates. The technique also increases Kepler's ability to confirm planetary systems around faint, distant stars.
Five of the systems (Kepler-25, Kepler-27, Kepler-30, Kepler-31 and Kepler-33) contain a pair of planets where the inner planet orbits the star twice during each orbit of the outer planet.
Four of the systems (Kepler-23, Kepler-24, Kepler-28 and Kepler-32) contain a pairing where the outer planet circles the star twice for every three times the inner planet orbits its star.
"These configurations help to amplify the gravitational interactions between the planets, similar to how my sons kick their legs on a swing at the right time to go higher," said Jason Steffen, the Brinson postdoctoral fellow at Fermilab Center for Particle Astrophysics in Batavia, Illinois, and lead author of a paper confirming four of the systems.
Artist's concept of the Kepler-35 planetary system, in which a Saturn-size planet orbits a pair of stars. (Image by Lynette Cook courtesy NASA)
Kepler-33, a star that is older and more massive than our Sun, had the most planets yet discovered. The system hosts five planets, ranging in size from 1.5 to five times that of Earth.
"The approach used to verify the Kepler-33 planets shows the overall reliability is quite high," said Jack Lissauer, planetary scientist at NASA Ames Research Center at Moffett Field, California, and lead author of the paper on Kepler-33. "This is a validation by multiplicity."
The decrease in the star's brightness and duration of a planet's transit in front of its star, combined with the properties of its host star, present a recognizable signature, the scientists say.
When astronomers detect planet candidates that exhibit similar signatures around the same star, the likelihood of any of these planet candidates being a false positive is very low.
At least three transits are required to verify a signal as a planet. Follow-up observations from ground-based telescopes confirm the discoveries.
These findings are published in four separate papers in the "Astrophysical Journal" and the "Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society."
Click here to view more than a dozen NASA videos of the Kepler spacecraft and its exoplanet discoveries.
In early December, NASA announced Kepler-22b, the mission�s first confirmed habitable zone planet and later in the month, announced Kepler-20e and Kepler-20f, the first Earth-size planets discovered around a Sun-like star.
NASA's Ames Research Center in Moffett Field manages Kepler's ground system development, mission operations and science data analysis. NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California, managed the Kepler mission's development.
Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corp. in Boulder, Colorado, developed the Kepler flight system and supports mission operations with the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado, Boulder.
The Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore archives, hosts and distributes Kepler science data. Kepler is NASA's 10th Discovery Mission and is funded by NASA's Science Mission Directorate at the agency's headquarters in Washington.

Global Warming Threatens World's Wheat Crop

New Study: Global Warming Threatens World's Wheat Crop

It could be much more difficult than we thought to feed everyone in a warmer world.

- Common Dreams staff
A study released Sunday afternoon finds that wheat crop yields could plunge due, in part, to climate change.
Extreme temperatures are already cutting wheat yields in India (Narinder Nanu/AFP) The study, published in Nature Climate Change, researchers warn that current projections underestimate the extent to which hotter weather in the future will accelerate this process. Extreme heat causes wheat crops to age faster and reduce yields, the Stanford University-led study shows, underscoring the challenge of feeding a rapidly growing population as the world continues to warm.
* * *
New Scientist magazine reported Sunday:
It could be much more difficult than we thought to feed everyone in a warmer world. Satellite images of northern India have revealed that extreme temperatures are cutting wheat yields. What's more, models used to predict the effects of global warming on food supply may have underestimated the problem by a third.
Two-thirds of wheat in poor countries, and 23 per cent in rich countries – nearly half the world's total crop – is at risk from warming.In India's breadbasket, the Ganges plain, winter wheat is planted in November and harvested as temperatures rise in spring. David Lobell of Stanford University in California used nine years of images from the MODIS Earth-observation satellite to track when wheat in this region turned from green to brown, a sign that the grain is no longer growing.
He found that the wheat turned brown earlier when average temperatures were higher, with spells over 34 ºC having a particularly strong effect. [...]
Lobell's work suggests losses could be sooner and greater. "This is an early indication that a situation that was already bad could be even worse," says Andy Challinor of the University of Leeds, UK.
Two-thirds of wheat in poor countries, and 23 per cent in rich countries – nearly half the world's total crop – is at risk from warming, says Hans-Joachim Braun of CIMMYT. Previous estimates suggested that by 2050, warming could cut wheat yields by 30 per cent in places like India – a figure that may now be optimistic. Yet global yields need to rise 50 per cent by then to feed the growing population.
* * *
Reuters reports:
Extreme heat can cause wheat crops to age faster and reduce yields, a U.S.-led study shows, underscoring the challenge of feeding a rapidly growing population as the world warms.
Scientists and farmers have long known that high heat can hurt some crops and the Stanford University-led study, released Sunday, revealed how the damage is done by tracking rates of wheat aging, or senescence.
Depending on the sowing date, the grain losses from rapid senescence could reach up to 20 percent, the scientists found in the study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change. [...]
Climate scientists say that episodes of extreme heat are becoming more frequent and more prevalent across the globe, presenting huge challenges for growing crops.
Wheat is the second most produced crop in the world after corn and the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization says global food production must increase by 70 percent by 2050 to feed a larger, more urban and affluent population.
Wheat is particularly sensitive to temperature and is typically sown in late autumn or early winter and harvested before the heat of summer.
* * *
In November, the UN's climate science panel concluded that man-made climate change has boosted the frequency or intensity of heat waves, and that such extreme weather events are virtually certain to increase in the future.Agence France-Presse adds:
Wheat also faces another possibly climate-related threat: aggressive new strains of wheat rust disease have decimated up to 40 percent of harvests in some regions of north Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia.
Wheat rust is a fungal disease that attacks the stems, grains and especially the leaves of grains including wheat, barley and rye.
Global warming and increased variability of rainfall have weakened the plants even as these emerging rust strains have adapted to extreme temperatures not seen before, scientists say.
In November, the UN's climate science panel concluded that man-made climate change has boosted the frequency or intensity of heat waves, and that such extreme weather events are virtually certain to increase in the future.
If greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated, one-in-20-year heat peaks would likely occur every five years by about 2050, and every year or two by the end of the century, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said in a 1,000-page report.

2012: Chinese Year of the Dragon

01/23/2012 - 02/09/2013 (Water)
According to the Chinese Zodiac, the Year of 2012 is the Year of the Dragon, which begins on January 23, 2012 and ends on February 9, 2013.  The Dragon is the fifth sign of the Chinese Zodiac, which consists of 12 Animal signs.  The Dragon is a creature of myth and legend.  In ancient China, the celestial Dragon represents an emperor and  power. Today, it  is the ultimate auspicious symbol signifying success and happiness.   May the celestial Dragon bring great good luck to everyone.
In Sung Dynasty (a Chinese imperial dynasty lasting from AD 960 - 1279) texts, the dragon is described as having the head of an ox, muzzle of a donkey, eyes of a shrimp, horns of a deer, body of a serpent covered with fish scales, and feet of a phoenix.  The dragon usually clutches a pearl symbolic of its super-natural powers.  Invariably accompanied by thunder and rain, dragons move like lightning and whirlwinds - - all powerful yet totally unpredictable.
The Sign of the Dragon
People born in the Year of the Dragon share certain characteristics:  Innovative, enterprising,  self-assured, brave, passionate, conceited, and quick-tempered. The Dragons are the free spirits of the Chinese Zodiac. Restrictions blow out their creative spark that is ready to flame into life.  So, they must be free and uninhibited.  The Dragon is a beautiful creature, colorful and flamboyant.  An extroverted bundle of energy, gifted and  irrepressible, everything Dragons do is on a grand scale - big ideas and extreme ambitions.  However, this behavior is natural and isn't meant for show.  Because they are confident, fearless in the face of challenge, they are almost inevitably successful. 
People born in the Year of the Dragon usually make it to the top.  But, they must be aware of that too much enthusiasm can leave them tired and unfulfilled.  They find pleasure in helping others, and you can always count on their help.  Even though they are willing to assist when necessary, their pride can often impede them from accepting the same kind of help from others.  Their generous personalities give them the ability to attract friends, but they can be rather solitary people at heart.  Their self-sufficiency can mean that they have no need for close bonds with other people.
Dragon people tend to take thrilling risks, and burn the candle at both ends so they are fortunate to be blessed with good health.  However, they can suffer bad health as a result of excess stress.  Symtoms of their personalities often stem from emotional outbursts and can range from tension headaches to depression to hypertension.  They can remedy these problems by maintaining their cool, implementing a routine in their daily lives, and practice meditation, Tai Chi or Yoga that soothe the mind and spirit as well as tone the body.
The Dragon is not the most domesticated of the Animal signs.  So, people born in the Year of the Dragon  prefer enjoying outdoor activities rather than staying at home.  They are extroverts who have a deep love for nature. Their homes should be as large and majestic as their personalities, providing space for the fiery temperament or emotional eruptions that accompany their character. They have true and sincere love, which comes from the depths of their hearts.
Dragon people are quite imaginative, always able to see new paths and will take a radical approach.  They have innate explorative spirit and  try to succeed at one stroke. They are very adaptable and are fit for various occupations, especially if those occupations allow them to take the limelight. They work hard, but would rather give orders than receive them.  They should avoid jobs that encompass too much routine, and should move toward jobs in which their self-reliance can be an asset.
People born in the Year of the Dragon like to spend money and are charitable themselves as well as with others.  Many Dragon people will take big chances with their finances.  It is very rare that  they remain poor for long.  They will always be straightforward in financial dealings and can always be trusted. 
Dragon Years:  02/19/1904 to 02/03/1905 (Wood), 02/03/1916 to 01/22/1917 (Fire), 01/23/1928 to 02/09/1929 (Earth), 02/08/1940 to 01/26/1941 (Metal), 01/27/1952 to 02/13/1953 (Water), 02/13/1964 to 02/01/1965 (Wood), 01/31/1976 to 02/17/1977 (Fire), 02/17/1988 to 02/05/1989 (Earth), 02/05/2000 to 01/23/2001 (Metal), 01/23/2012 to 02/09/2013 (Water).
Famous Dragon People: Calista Flockhart, Colin Farrell, Courtney Cox, Courtney Love, Dinah Shore, Isabella Rossellini, Julia Ormond, Juliette Binoche, Reese Witherspoon, Roseanne Barr, Sandra Bullock, and Wynonna Judd.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Topless Protesters At 2012 Davos Forum



DAVOS, Switzerland — Three topless Ukrainian protesters were detained Saturday while trying to break into an invitation-only gathering of international CEOs and political leaders to call attention to the needs of the world's poor. Separately, demonstrators from the Occupy movement marched to the edge of the gathering.
After a complicated journey to reach the heavily guarded Swiss resort town of Davos, the Ukrainians arrived at the entrance to the complex where the World Economic Forum takes place every year.
With temperatures around freezing in the snow-filled town, they took off their tops and tried to climb a fence before being detained. "Crisis! Made in Davos," read one message painted across a protester's torso, while others held banners that said "Poor, because of you" and "Gangsters party in Davos."
Davos police spokesman Thomas Hobi said the three women were taken to the police station and told that they weren't allowed to demonstrate. He said they would be released later Saturday.
The activists are from the group Femen, which has become popular in Ukraine for staging small, half-naked protests to highlight a range of issues including oppression of political opposition. They have also conducted protests in some other countries.
"We came here to Switzerland to Davos to explain the position of all poor people of the world, to explain that we are poor because of these rich people who now sit in the building," said Inna Schewcenko.
Protesters from the Occupy movement that started with opposition to practices on Wall Street held a separate demonstration in Davos on Saturday. A small group of protesters are camped in igloos in Davos to call for more help for the needy.
About 40 Occupy protesters gathered in front of the town hall. Some held placards with slogans such as "If voting would change anything, it would be illegal" and "Don't let them decide for you, Occupy WEF."
They then marched toward the forum, prompting about a dozen police officers to hastily erect a mobile barrier as Saturday shoppers looked on with bemusement.
The demonstrators chanted anti-capitalist slogans, remaining about 100 feet (30 meters) from police lines.
One member of the Occupy camp was invited to speak at a special event outside the forum on Friday night to discuss the future of capitalism; British opposition leader Ed Miliband was also speaking.
Soon after the panel discussion began, some activists in the audience jumped up and started chanting slogans, and the protester panelist walked off the stage.
Other members of the audience told the activists to "shut up" and arguments disrupted the panel for about 20 minutes. The discussion then resumed, without the Occupy panelist.

U.S.A. pushing world to the brink of world war

U.S. pushing world to the brink of world war

09.01.2012 20:55
U.S. pushing world to the brink of world war. 46327.jpeg
Iranian Navy in military exercises
While local U.S. police use excessive force and violence against OWS protesters, the U.S. government continues to attempt to spread "freedom and democracy" of this exact same kind around the world. Reports come in daily about beatings, clubbings, tasering, a female having her bicycle thrown at her and disabled veterans being abused.
Meanwhile, Libya attempts to free itself from this "freedom and democracy" scourge brought to Libya by thousands of terrorists: murderers, psychopaths, head chopping nut cases that enjoy bodily mutilation even when the body is already dead, raping women, looting, burning. Oh, the joy of freedom and demon-crazy compliments of NATO Nazis.
NATO literally dumped this murderous trash into the country, to fight alongside local criminals and traitors in order to plunder the country's resources. So NATO did more than drop illegal weaponry, including chemical and biological agents...white phosphorous, depleted uranium, sarin. Outbreaks have occurred of tuberculosis due to biological weapons.
The water supply has both been bombed out of operation and poisoned. Western citizen taxpayer money was spent to "break the backs" of Libyans who will not submit to the terrorist government of NTC.
Now to move on to the brinkmanship being created with the Islamic Republic of Iran. My logic tells me that since that government of Iran gave its support to NATO and NATO's terrorists in Libya, a fruitless, thankless ill-conceived decision, that they should be cut loose from my efforts at defense for the innocent. But my sense of humanity won't allow me to do that and abandon them as they abandoned Libya to NATO terrorism.
One has a human duty to stand between murderer and victim. One has a human duty to expose lies that get people killed. One has a human duty to protect those being falsely accused.
The people are not the government. These people are descendants of a great culture and civilization who have shown compassion and kindness to their neighbors in distress. They don't deserve to suffer the fate of other victims of western/U.S. imperialism. We can keep trying to succeed where our efforts did not prevent these horrors in the past.
No matter what, imperialism, colonialism and greedy capitalist exploitation must be opposed on every front it rears its ugly head. Other sectarian concerns must be set aside. The left has to get their collective heads out of the sand (I wanted to say something more personal here). Where, pray tell, is the anti-war movement?
Most Americans and westerners, when thinking of Iran, only see images of "hostages" being held, tbey've been taught to moan, groan and whine about it, but mostly to hate, without thinking about what precipitated that event.
They have have been led to believe that their countries were innocent victims of BAD, bad people and that their countries never do anything wrong, anything bad, anything evil when the opposite is true.
You see, Iran had elected a democratic, nationalistic government, that of Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh. His government didn't think it was exactly fair that Iran get only 15% of the profits from their own oil, while the remainder went to British interests. They nationalized Iranian oil for the benefit of the Iranian people.
Therefore, a coup against Mossadegh, perpetrated by the United States, put the bloody dictator, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, into power. He was only too happy to please his benefactors with agreements beneficial to them.
The Shah's government got the help and guidance of the CIA in creating the Iranian SAVAK, a vicious, brutal, fearsome secret police, something that the Iranian people can hardly forget.
Then the United States armed and instigated Iraq to attack Iran, with the unspoken goal of weakening both countries. They provided the very chemical and biological weapons they demonized Sadaam Hussein for. They also introduced nuclear energy to Iran. How's that for irony?
The U.S. is fast becoming a hopeless case unless the people wake up. All presidental candidates want war with Iran with the exception of one (not likely to be elected either probably for that very reason).
Western instigated wars are fought to keep the military industrial complex booming, read rolling in cash, controlled by the one percent elite, while everyone else has to pay the enormous costs that allow that privileged elite to get richer, fatter and more arrogant.
In the process, jobs are lost, taxes go up, homes are lost to foreclosure, people are denied a health care system because millions are spent on the propaganda designed to create the illusion that hard working fellow citizens don't deserve health care if they cannot afford it, it's just that horrid thing known as socialism.
But the same people think nothing of the multi-million billion trillion dollar welfare handouts to the banks and corporations. They think nothing of the trillions being spent for war operations, bombs and keeping bases overseas...but heaven forbid a poor person get a stinking $100 bandaid in an emergency room with a national health insurance.
There have been a succession of incidents that in essence are acts of war against the Islamic Republic. First, there were the Twitter terrorist attacks at election time. There was the Stuxnet cyber attack.  There have been explosions on Iranian military facilities. Several Iranian scientists have been murdered. Then the drone flights to conduct espionage which culminated with Iran's downing one such craft.
The west moves for more and more crippling sanctions. Never forget to learn from history...that every war has begun with the imposition of sanctions. The result? We stand precariously on the brink of confrontation...
The senior commander in Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Ali Ashraf Nouri, said that the Iranian government has made the decision to close the Strait of Hormuz where a significant portion of the world's oil passes if the country's oil exports are blocked. There is nothing that gives justification for such a blockage.
Then from the other side, an American threat:
"We made very clear that the United States will not tolerate the blocking of the Straits of Hormuz," Panetta told CBS television. "That's another red line for us and that we will respond to them."
Really, the Americans should take that "red line" and cram it where the sun don't shine, who gave them the right to cross the ocean thousands of miles away and bother these people who have done nothing to no one?
U.S. behavior in making threats and taking actions against Iranian rights to develop peaceful nuclear energy are in violation of the Nuclear Non Prolifteration Treaty and the UN Charter in threatening war. Yet the mainstream western corporated media does not communicate these facts to the public.
With all the ships converging in close proximity in the Strait of Hormuz, an ideal opportunity presents itself: The sinking of the USS Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin, the Korean ship sinking they tried to blame on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea... American or Israeli ships or aircraft can be given Iranian markings and attack a U.S. ship in order to serve as a false flag pretext for starting a war with Iran.
Millions of lives will be lost in the process as the U.S. and Israel are conducting operations in close proximity to Russia, making it entirely possible for the atmospheric contamination to carry over by weather patterns onto the territory of Russia. Russia cannot tolerate this situation.
In Libya, we have seen how drug addicts, alcohol fiends, psychos and rapists have been used as cheap short cuts to achieve resource grabbing. The world is already quite familiar with the lies, the false flag operations, the need to create an excuse to start something frequently used by the U.S.A.
The world community needs to cut them off immediately in such an instance, and not give them any sympathy or support, just the opposite. If people allow these things to happen and progress as in the past...2012, if the world manages to survive until the end of it, will be a year fraught with unknown danger.
Anybody fancy waking up in the morning as a glow in the dark vaporized skeleton? Very possible, very possible...!
Lisa Karpova

The State of Our Planet

What About the State of Our Planet, Mr. President?

The truth about industrial agriculture and climate change

In his state of the union address this week, President Obama talked about the American promise -  the promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement.
“The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive,” he said. “No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important.” 
Climate scientists might beg to differ. 
Most of the President’s speech focused on economic reforms. He proposed energy reforms almost exclusively in the context of adding jobs and growing the economy. 
But what good is a healthy economy on a planet too sick to sustain human life? 
The state of our union may be weak or strong, depending on which economist or politician is doing the talking. 
But the state of our planet is dismal.  
Last  November, the International Energy Agency warned again that the world is accelerating toward irreversible climate change. If we don’t take bold action to sharply reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the next five years, the agency said, it will be too late. 
That’s fewer than 1800 days. And counting. 
For years - and again in the President’s speech - we’ve heard calls for more investment in green energy. For years, leaders of the energy reform movement have called for cap and trade, a carbon tax, a ban on coal and tar sands, stronger emissions standards, more energy efficiency. The failed climate conferences in Kyoto, Copenhagen, Cancun, and Durban concentrated most of their energy and effort on fossil fuel emissions. 
None of this would be surprising - or troubling - except for this one fact: Recent research and reports conclude that factory farming in the U.S. is responsible for more GHG emissions than the entire transportation and industrial sector combined; including cars, trucks, buses, airplanes, trains, boats, and factories. 
Yet when was the last - or even the first - time you heard the call for agricultural and food policy reform as a means to reduce GHG emissions - and save the planet?  
Of course we need more environmentally responsible energy choices and we should push for those choices as soon as possible. 
But we must - and we can - do much more. 
As we’ve just seen again, leadership on  this issue won’t come from the top. Partly because a large segment of the population hasn’t yet made the connection between the food on their plates and our looming climate catastrophe. 
But more likely because our politicians are in bed with Big Food and Big Ag lobbyists. 
The good news is we have the power - through individual choice and collective action - to force change. We can reverse our suicidal food and farming system by taking decisive action, not only in the political policy realm and through our growing street protests and occupations - but also by voting with our farms, gardens, and forks for an organic, sustainable, and re-localized food and farming system. 
If the U.S. population would reduce its addiction to unhealthy, environmentally destructive, and climate destabilizing foods by 57.5% in the next 35 years, (the same way we've reduced smoking) we could reduce our greenhouse gas emissions in the same way we reduced the incidence of lung cancer, emphysema, osteoporosis, and chronic bronchitis when tobacco habits were broken. 
But we must act now.  If we don’t - if we allow the infamous "1%" to continue with business as usual, if we allow the U.S. and global fossil fuel/military industrial/corporate agribusiness economy to keep turning up the planet's delicately balanced thermostat, raising average global temperatures by two degrees Celsius or more, we will soon arrive at civilization's last stop: climate hell.  
The truth about industrial agriculture and climate change 
Our current agriculture system is both abusive and bankrupt, kept on life support with government subsidies and corporate handouts. Government funding and corporate dominance enable the U.S. food system to contribute heavily to all forms of climate destruction, including water pollution, oceanic dead zones, excessive greenhouse gas emissions, and soil and water degeneration.  
Nowhere is this destruction more evident than when it comes to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 
In studies conducted between 2004 and 2009, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) all reported relatively low estimates for how much US industrial agriculture contributed to the country’s total amount of CO2 and other GHG emissions. Their estimates ranged from only 7% (USDA) to 18% (FAO). 
Unfortunately, all three agencies repeatedly underestimated emissions from billions of factory-farmed animals (burps, farts, manure) and from the manufacture of nearly 25 billion pounds-per-year of synthetic fertilizer. 
Shockingly, all three agencies completely neglected to include GHG’s emitted from petroleum-fueled farm vehicles (trucks, tractors, combines and other motorized farming equipment), from freezing, cooling and heating foods, or from shipping the foods to market. The fact that transportation and storage emissions were not included is especially deceptive, given that food in the U.S. travels anywhere from 1500 to 3000 miles - and that it must be either cooled or frozen while in transit or during storage. 
Research scientists at the normally conservative World Bank tell another story. They argue that the FAO, U.S. EPA and the USDA have greatly underestimated the dangerous emissions from industrial farming. According to their research, animal agriculture alone was responsible for 51% of the worlds greenhouse gasses.
Other non-government scientists estimate that from 30% to 40% of U.S. GHS's are are emitted from factory farms. This is still the highest for any industrial sector - and dramatically higher than the 7% to 18% that the federal agencies and the UN estimate for farming. 
As numbers of factory farms rise, so goes the earth’s temperature 
Factory farming apologists argue that 51% (the World Bank’s estimate for factory farming’s share of GHG emissions) is a ridiculously high estimate. But is it? Consider this: In 2010, more than 95% of hogs, 96% of broiler chickens, 95% of laying hens, 99% of turkeys, and 78% of beef cows were raised on confinement farms. 
Today, significantly more than 80% of U.S. agriculture is devoted to livestock, and hundreds of millions of acres are growing livestock feed, according to the USDA National Agricultural Statistical Service.
The result? Factory farming is now one of the largest sources of CO2 and the single largest source of both methane and nitrous oxide emissions. 
Factory-farming  is highly energy-intensive. It requires feeding huge amounts of grain and water to farmed animals, slaughtering them, processing them, then transporting and storing the meat - all of which creates CO2 emissions. Mountains of animal manure also emit large quantities of CO2. 
And that’s only part of the story. In order to grow crops for millions of factory-farmed animals, we destroy vast acres of forest, causing the CO2 stored in the trees to be released into the atmosphere.  
While CO2 receives most of the attention and analysis when it comes to global warming, scientists have concluded that methane has a Global Warming Potential (GWP) 25 times more damaging than carbon dioxide when measured over a 100-year period and 72 times more destructive when measured over a 20-year period.
In 1995, 75% of U.S. hogs were raised in outside pens or on pasture. In 2010, that number fell to 5% - with the other 95% being raised on confinement farms. The dramatic increase in confinement animal practices since 1995 has greatly increased methane emissions.  
Then there’s nitrous oxide, which receives even less attention than CO2 or methane. Yet on a per-ton basis, nitrous oxide emissions are likely the most destructive of all. When measured over a 100-year period, nitrous oxide is 298 times more damaging than CO2. Five hundred years after being emitted, nitrous oxide emissions are still 153 times more damaging than CO2.
Synthetic fertilizers and sewage sludge destroy earth, air and water. 
The National Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS) of the USDA reports that U.S. farmers used an average of 24 billion, 661 million pounds of nitrogen fertilizer per year from 1998 to 2007.  
So, they must know  - if they bothered to connect the dots - that chemical corporations emitted 162,769,000,000 pounds of nitrous oxide-related GHG’s just to manufacture the nitrogen that NASS claimed farmers used every year.  
In addition to the greenhouse gasses emitted in manufacture, we must also include those attributable to the transportation and application of this mountain of fertilizer every year.  (24,661,000,000 pounds of fertilizer is equal to 12,330,000 one-ton pallets, which would cover 10,960 football fields-that is almost half of the football fields in the U.S.). 
Industrial fertilizer manufacture alone is estimated to emit 6.6 pounds of nitrous oxide for each pound of nitrogen produced. Yet in its infinite wisdom, our government attributes those numbers to manufacturing - not agriculture.  
Since the 1950’s, there has been an enormous increase in the use of nitrogen fertilizers, mostly to raise grains for meat and milk animals. As a result, the U.S. soil pool’s capability to sequester carbon as deteriorated drastically.  The soil pool should be a sink for excess carbon but since it has lost about 50% of its organic matter it is less than half as effective as it was 50 years ago.  
Recent studies on the University of Illinois 'Morrow Plots' (the oldest continuously farmed experimental plots in the U.S.) have shown that since 1955, when synthetic nitrogen was first used, from 40% to 190% too much nitrogen was applied and yet yields dropped and organic matter declined dramatically. These problems on the Morrow plots are writ large on millions of acres of agricultural soils that have been degraded by synthetic fertilizer all over this country, according to an article in the Journal of Environmental Quality.
Synthetic nitrogen fertilizer is also responsible for the nitrate poisoning of two-thirds of the U.S. drinking water supply. It is also the major cause of the 405 oceanic dead zones around the world, including the Gulf of Mexico, the Chesapeake Bay, and the coasts of California and Oregon. Synthetic Nitrogen fertilizer is a killer of soil life, including earthworms and microorganisms, such as bacteria, viruses, fungi, and actinomicetes, according to an article by Robert J. Diaz at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science.
Nitrogen fertilizer can be costly for industrial farmers - so in order to fertilize more land, more cheaply, industrial farms are increasingly using sewage sludge as fertilizer. Sixty percent of all the sludge produced in the U.S. - which amounts to 100 billion pounds of sewage sludge - is applied to millions of acres of farmland, according to the Carlisle Group.  
Sewage sludge contains all manner of industrial chemicals, medical waste, resistant bacteria, resistant viruses, and flame-retardants. It is also an increasingly worrisome greenhouse gas emitter. Yet U.S. regulation of sludge is near the worst in the world. Why is its use on the rise? Because the powerful Carlisle Group controls the hauling. Unless we stop this practice we could render millions of acres sterile because of heavy metal concentrations and high resistant bacteria and viral populations.  
Grab your forks and pitchforks - let’s fix this before it’s too late. 
As farmers, we know from our experience that we can address these problems readily and rapidly by replacing the dangerous, unhealthy practices of industrial agriculture with sustainable organic techniques, and more locally focused production and marketing strategies. If farmers do change, farmland could become a significant sequester pool for greenhouse gasses and provide carbon credits to farmers who convert. 
But we can’t do it alone - we need consumers, too. With food, as with tobacco, we don't need a massive infrastructure development to change our consumer habits. There is an abundance of safe organic food on the market today, and thousands of growers willing to grow it if the demand increases. As with tobacco, the public and especially the kids need to be educated about the relationship between chemically produced food and climate change, and the direct relationship between factory-farmed food and cancer, diabetes, obesity, and heart disease.
Reduce meat consumption
If U.S. consumers cut their meat consumption from the current 12 ounces to 6 ounces per day it would be the equivalent of taking almost 50 million cars off the road. Six ounces of meat is still more than twice the world average, so cutting our consumption in half would give consumers their meat, while cutting in half the environmental damage. We especially must stop eating factory-farmed meat, because it is the most damaging to both the environment and our bodies.
Boycott factory farming
Since 90% of meat comes from CAFOs and confinement operations, this means boycotting all factory-farmed meat, eggs, and dairy. Nearly all scientists agree with that conclusion. While we rail about coal, and gasoline, and diesel, and jet fuel, the biggest part of the problem is sitting at our dinner tables. Our diets, our habits, our excesses are a major part of the problem, and a major part of the solution. Our bad food choices, our food over-consumption, and our enormous food waste (we throw away more than a third of our food, most of which ends up non-composted in municipal landfills, releasing enormous amounts of methane) are the elephants in the room.
Buy organic
It is not just factory-farmed meat that we need to reduce in our diets; we also need to cut out the majority of overly processed carbohydrates that we habitually consume. That means white bread, white flour pastas, corn, cane, beet syrups and sugars, and fake sugars (Aspartame-Equil, Saccharin, Splenda, etc.), colas, and other soft and power drinks. The U.S. diet currently consists of more than 80% processed, junk, and fake foods. That is not a sustainable food system. While it is profitable for the food processing giants, it is devastating for the environment and our health.
Buy local
Since a significant portion of the carbon dioxide emitted by industrial farming comes from long distance transportation, heating, freezing, and processing; consumers can greatly reduce the CO2 emissions they are responsible for by purchasing their food from local organic growers.Transport equals 20% of food-based greenhouse gas emissions. Local food from a farmers’ market or a veg box scheme travels a much shorter distance than supermarket food from all over the world. Even when supermarkets display “local” food, it has often travelled further than you might think - because even if it is produced just down the road, as it has to be packaged centrally. And buying soft fruits from California has an enormous carbon cost, as the fruit has to be flown in. Local food often has a lot less packaging and if it’s from a market it can often go straight in your bag.
Cook from scratch
As a general rule, the more ingredients in a meal, the higher the emissions from processing the food. This means it is better to cook your meals from scratch – something we would have done without thinking 50 years ago. This is where eating local food really wins out – most processed and ready-meals have ingredients that come from all over the world. If we want to be sure of eating local food, we need to cook more from scratch, which is creative, fun and delicious!
The organic food and farming movement must join ranks with the climate justice movement and the Occupy movement to bring about fundamental change, a shift of political and economic power from the corporatocracy - the 1% - to the grassroots majority. By creating a new agro-ecological system we can drastically reduce GHG emissions, and at the same time naturally sequester billions of tons of climate-destabilizing greenhouse gases, in our soils, plants, and trees, according to Paul Hepperly, New Farm Research Manager, The Rodale Institute.  
This "Great Transition" in agriculture will have to be driven by mass consumer demand for farm products that are organic, locally or regionally-produced, and climate friendly. 
It’s time to vote with our farms, gardens, and forks for an organic, sustainable, and re-localized food and farming system.
Will Allen
Will Allen is an organic farmer in Vermont, a community organizer, anti-war activist, and occasional author. His book, The War on Bugs was published by Chelsea Green in 2008. He is a policy advisory board member of the Organic Consumers Association, and a board member of Willing Hands (a local Vermont food bank). You can reach him at: or visit his farm's website -- Cedar Circle Farm.

UK tops global league table for sustainable corporations

/top_stories/spotlight/43917/printThe UK has topped the annual global league table that measures and ranks the world's largest sustainable corporations.
The Global 100 is an extensive data-driven corporate sustainability assessment and inclusion is limited to a select group of the top 100 large-cap companies in the world.

Companies are selected based on their performance against 11 indicators covering environmental performance and corporate citizenship such as leadership diversity, greenhouse gas emissions and payment of corporate taxes.
The list includes companies from 22 countries encompassing all sectors of the economy, with collective annual sales in excess of $3.02 trillion, and 5,285,645 million employees.
Among the 22 countries, the United Kingdom led the way with 16 Global 100 companies, an increase of five from the year before. Japan followed with 11 (down from 19 in 2011).
France and the United States tied for third place with each claiming the headquarters of
eight Global 100 companies.

Rounding out the top ten scoring countries with at least three Global 100 companies were: Australia (seven), Canada (six), Germany (five) Switzerland (five), Denmark (four), Netherlands (four), Norway (four), Sweden (four), and Brazil (three). Sixty-eight per cent of the 2011 companies remained on the list in 2012.
The leading sustainable company in the UK was listed as BG Group plc (ranked sixth), followed by Centrica, BT Group and Logica.
Andy Green, CEO of Logica said, "Like all organisations, we're on a journey to ensure we are the most sustainable business we can be, but the significant improvement in our ranking in the Global 100 Most Sustainable Companies is an important milestone for us.
"Ethics and the environment are at the heart of our business and we firmly believe that only truly sustainable businesses will prosper in a time when public opinion and trust in business is at a low."
Toby Heaps, CEO of Corporate Knights, said: "in a year in which Wall Street was occupied and capitalism became a bad word, the Global 100 companies serve as ambassadors for a better, cleaner kind of capitalism which, it also turns out, is more profitable." From its inception on February 1, 2005, to December 31, 2011, the Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations has achieved a total return of 41.70%, outperforming its benchmark, (the MSCI All Country World Index at 29.30%) by more than 11%.
The Global 100 was recently recognized for its industry-leading standard of transparency and objectivity by a meta-study of corporate sustainability rankings.
The number one ranked company in the Global 100 the world for 2012 was Novo Nordisk. The Danish pharmaceutical firm, which had revenues of DKK 60.7 billion (US$10.5 billion) in 2010, is on record that access to essential medicines is a human right, and sells human insulin (the most basic kind) to 33 of the world's poorest countries, at no more than 20 per cent of the average price in the western world.
Article continues:

Nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East

Nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East
Friday, January 27, 2012 at 8:47AM
Gilad Atzmon in Iran, Israel, Jewish Power, Zionism
In May 2010, all 189 signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – including Iran – tacitly agreed to a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East and called for a conference in 2012 in Finland.  But Israel has refused to support a nuclear weapons-free zone for the region, reluctant to give up its own. Israel also is not a signatory to the NPT. These facts have arguably destabilized the region, leaving open the possibility of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East reported today that former Saudi intelligence chief has called for a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. Prince Turki Al Faisal urged the five permanent U.N. Security Council members to guarantee a nuclear security umbrella for Mideast countries that agree to a nuclear weapons-free zone and impose sanctions on countries that develop or maintain nuclear weapons.
Though it is clear that an Iranian nuclear weapons program would certainly be a concern to Saudi Arabia, it also must be mentioned that the opinion of the U.S. intelligence community, the Obama administration, and the latest IAEA report is that Iran’s enrichment is so far civilian in nature.
It seems as if Israel and its relentless lobbies are the biggest threat to world peace.
Article originally appeared on Gilad Atzmon (

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Has Rothschild Jewry Infiltrated The Local Police?

see url:


Global Economic Collapse: 1st to Europe then to U.S. and the World

New Prediction – Economic Collapse: 1st to Europe then to U.S. and the World

Glenn took time today to breakdown a new theory and prediction on what was facing the globe as economic conditions across the country continue to decline. Many will remember that last year Glenn predicted the Arab Spring would sweep the Middle East and Europe before leading to protests in the United States. He was right. Tonight on GBTV, he laid out what he predicts is coming next.
Last year when the protests started to erupt in Egypt, Glenn went on the record early and said the following:
1) Groups from the hardcore socialist left, and extreme Islam will work together because of the common enemy of Israel.
2) Groups from the hardcore socialist left and extreme Islam will work together because of the common enemy of capitalism.
3) Groups from the hardcore socialist left, and extreme Islam will work together to overturn relative stability, because in the status quo, they are both ostracized from power and the mainstream in most of the world.
He predicted that those protests would become contagious, cascade, sweep the Middle East, and begin to destabilize Europe and the rest of the world.
That sure sounds a lot like the Arab Spring and the Occupy Wall Street movement, doesn’t it?
Tonight, Glenn’s new theory was revealed.

It follows:
Economic Collapse is coming. First to Europe, then to the U.S. and the rest of the world.
As a result:
1) The dollar will no longer be gold standard.
2) Civil War, unlike Civil War of the 1860s, will be fought in our inner cities led by radicals (anarchists, communists, revolutionaries, and Islamists)
3) This conflict will be fed and fueled by those in power in Washington D.C. and in our universities
4) Global War is coming
5) Radical Islamists and Communists will seek violence in our cities and on our border as they pour in from South America and Mexico to reclaim land
6) Farmers will be urged to farm collectively
7) Violence and famine will follow

How will this happen?
Glenn explained by taking a look at war, collapse, hate, and government control already taking place in society and in the news across the world.

Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation

Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation

Global Research, January 25, 2012

Note to Readers: Remember to bookmark this page for future reference.
Please Forward the GR I-Book far and wide. Post it on Facebook.
[scroll down for I-BOOK Table of Contents]

Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War
The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation
Michel Chossudovsky (Editor)
I-Book No. 3, January 25  2012
Global Research's Online Interactive I-Book Reader brings together, in the form of chapters, a collection of Global Research feature articles and videos, including debate and analysis, on a broad theme or subject matter. 
In this Interactive Online I-Book we bring to the attention of our readers an important collection of articles, reports and video material on the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe and its impacts (scroll down for the Table of Contents).

The World is at a critical crossroads. The Fukushima disaster in Japan has brought to the forefront the dangers of Worldwide nuclear radiation.
The crisis in Japan has been described as "a nuclear war without a war". In the words of renowned novelist Haruki Murakami:
"This time no one dropped a bomb on us ... We set the stage, we committed the crime with our own hands, we are destroying our own lands, and we are destroying our own lives."
Nuclear radiation --which threatens life on planet earth-- is not front page news in comparison to the most insignificant issues of public concern, including the local level crime scene or the tabloid gossip reports on Hollywood celebrities. 
While the long-term repercussions of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster are yet to be fully assessed, they are far more serious than those pertaining to the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine, which resulted in almost one million deaths (New Book Concludes - Chernobyl death toll: 985,000, mostly from cancer Global Research, September 10, 2010, See also Matthew Penney and Mark Selden  The Severity of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster: Comparing Chernobyl and Fukushima, Global Research, May 25, 2011)
 Moreover, while all eyes were riveted on the Fukushima Daiichi plant, news coverage both in Japan and internationally failed to fully acknowledge the impacts of a second catastrophe at TEPCO's (Tokyo Electric Power Co  Inc) Fukushima Daini nuclear power plant.
The shaky political consensus both in Japan, the U.S. and Western Europe is that the crisis at Fukushima has been contained.
The realties, however, are otherwise. Fukushima 3 was leaking unconfirmed amounts of plutonium. According to Dr. Helen Caldicott, "One millionth of a gram of plutonium ingested causes cancer".  
An opinion poll in May 2011 confirmed that more than 80 per cent of the Japanese population do not believe the government's information regarding the nuclear crisis. (quoted in Sherwood Ross, Fukushima: Japan's Second Nuclear Disaster, Global Research, November 10, 2011)

The Impacts in Japan
The Japanese government has been obliged to acknowledge that "the severity rating of its nuclear crisis ... matches that of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster". In a bitter irony, however, this tacit admission by the Japanese authorities has proven to been part of  the cover-up of a significantly larger catastrophe, resulting in a process of global nuclear radiation and contamination:
"While Chernobyl was an enormous unprecedented disaster, it only occurred at one reactor and rapidly melted down. Once cooled, it was able to be covered with a concrete sarcophagus that was constructed with 100,000 workers. There are a staggering 4400 tons of nuclear fuel rods at Fukushima, which greatly dwarfs the total size of radiation sources at Chernobyl." ( Extremely High Radiation Levels in Japan: University Researchers Challenge Official Data, Global Research, April 11, 2011)
Fukushima in the wake of the Tsunami, March 2011
Worldwide Contamination
The dumping of highly radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean constitutes a potential trigger to a process of global radioactive contamination. Radioactive elements have not only been detected in the food chain in Japan, radioactive rain water has been recorded in California:
"Hazardous radioactive elements being released in the sea and air around Fukushima accumulate at each step of various food chains (for example, into algae, crustaceans, small fish, bigger fish, then humans; or soil, grass, cow's meat and milk, then humans). Entering the body, these elements - called internal emitters - migrate to specific organs such as the thyroid, liver, bone, and brain, continuously irradiating small volumes of cells with high doses of alpha, beta and/or gamma radiation, and over many years often induce cancer". (Helen Caldicott, Fukushima: Nuclear Apologists Play Shoot the Messenger on Radiation, The Age,  April 26, 2011)
While the spread of radiation to the West Coast of North America was casually acknowledged, the early press reports (AP and Reuters) "quoting diplomatic sources" stated that only "tiny amounts of radioactive particles have arrived in California but do not pose a threat to human health."
"According to the news agencies, the unnamed sources have access to data from a network of measuring stations run by the United Nations’ Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization. ... 
... Greg Jaczko, chair of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, told White House reporters on Thursday (March 17) that his experts “don’t see any concern from radiation levels that could be harmful here in the United States or any of the U.S. territories”.
The spread of radiation. March 2011
Public Health Disaster. Economic Impacts
What prevails is a well organized camouflage. The public health disaster in Japan, the contamination of water, agricultural land and the food chain, not to mention the broader economic and social implications, have neither been fully acknowledged nor addressed in a comprehensive and meaningful fashion by the Japanese authorities. 
 Japan as a nation state has been destroyed. Its landmass and territorial waters are contaminated. Part of the country is uninhabitable. High levels of radiation have been recorded in the Tokyo metropolitan area, which has a population of  39 million (2010) (more than the population of Canada, circa 34 million (2010)) There are indications that the food chain is contaminated throughout Japan:
Radioactive cesium exceeding the legal limit was detected in tea made in a factory in Shizuoka City, more than 300 kilometers away from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Shizuoka Prefecture is one of the most famous tea producing areas in Japan.
A tea distributor in Tokyo reported to the prefecture that it detected high levels of radioactivity in the tea shipped from the city. The prefecture ordered the factory to refrain from shipping out the product. After the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, radioactive contamination of tea leaves and processed tea has been found over a wide area around Tokyo. (See 5 More Companies Detect Radiation In Their Tea Above Legal Limits Over 300 KM From Fukushima, June 15, 2011)
Japan's industrial and manufacturing base is prostrate. Japan is no longer a leading industrial power. The country's exports have plummeted. The Tokyo government has announced its first trade deficit since 1980.
While the business media has narrowly centered on the impacts of power outages and energy shortages on the pace of productive activity, the broader issue pertaining to the outright radioactive contamination of the country's infrastructure and industrial base is a "scientific taboo" (i.e the radiation of industrial plants, machinery and equipment, buildings, roads, etc). A report released in January 2012 points to the nuclear contamination of building materials used in the construction industry, in cluding roads and residential buildings throughout Japan.(See  FUKUSHIMA: Radioactive Houses and Roads in Japan. Radioactive Building Materials Sold to over 200 Construction Companies, January 2012)
A "coverup report" by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (May 2011), entitled "Economic Impact of the Great East Japan Earthquake and Current Status of Recovery"  presents "Economic Recovery" as a fait accompli. It also brushes aside the issue of radiation. The impacts of nuclear radiation on the work force and the country's industrial base are not mentioned. The report states that the distance between Tokyo -Fukushima Dai-ichi  is of the order of 230 km (about 144 miles) and that the levels of radiation in Tokyo are lower than in Hong Kong and New York City.(Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, Impact of the Great East Japan Earthquake and Current Status of Recovery, p.15). This statement is made without corroborating evidence and in overt contradiction with independent radiation readings in Tokyo (se map below). In recent developments, Sohgo Security Services Co. is launching a lucrative "radiation measurement service targeting households in Tokyo and four surrounding prefectures".

"A map of citizens' measured radiation levels shows radioactivity is distributed in a complex pattern reflecting the mountainous terrain and the shifting winds across a broad area of Japan north of Tokyo which is in the center of the of bottom of the map."

"Radiation limits begin to be exceeded at just above 0.1 microsieverts/ hour blue. Red is about fifty times the civilian radiation limit at 5.0 microsieverts/hour. Because children are much more sensitive than adults, these results are a great concern for parents of young children in potentially affected areas.

The fundamental question is whether the vast array of industrial goods and components "Made in Japan" -- including hi tech components, machinery, electronics, motor vehicles, etc -- and exported Worldwide are contaminated? Were this to be the case, the entire East and Southeast Asian industrial base --which depends heavily on Japanese components and industrial technology-- would be affected. The potential impacts on international trade would be farreaching. In this regard, in January, Russian officials confiscated irradiated Japanese automobiles and autoparts in the port of Vladivostok for sale in the Russian Federation. Needless to say, incidents of this nature in a global competitive environment, could lead to the demise of the Japanese automobile which is already in crisis.

While most of the automotive industry is in central Japan, Nissan's engine factory in Iwaki city is 42 km from the Fukushima Daiichi plant. Is the Nissan work force affected? Is the engine plant contaminated? The plant is within about 10 to 20 km of the government's "evacuation zone" from which some 200,000 people were evacuated (see map below).
Safe? This map shows cities within the evacuation zones surrounding Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant
 Nuclear Energy and Nuclear War
The crisis in Japan has also brought into the open the unspoken relationship between nuclear energy and nuclear war.
Nuclear energy is not a civilian economic activity. It is an appendage of the nuclear weapons industry which is controlled by the so-called defense contractors. The powerful corporate interests behind nuclear energy and nuclear weapons overlap.
In Japan at the height of the disaster, "the nuclear industry and government agencies [were] scrambling to prevent the discovery of atomic-bomb research facilities hidden inside Japan's civilian nuclear power plants".1  (See Yoichi Shimatsu, Secret Weapons Program Inside Fukushima Nuclear Plant? Global Research,  April 12, 2011)
It should be noted that the complacency of both the media and the governments to the hazards of nuclear radiation pertains to the nuclear energy industry as well as to to use of nuclear weapons. In both cases, the devastating health impacts of nuclear radiation are casually denied. Tactical nuclear weapons with an explosive capacity of up to six times a Hiroshima bomb are labelled by the Pentagon as "safe for the surrounding civilian population".
No concern has been expressed at the political level as to the likely consequences of a US-NATO-Israel attack on Iran, using "safe for civilians" tactical nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state.
Such an action would result in "the unthinkable": a nuclear holocaust over a large part of the Middle East and Central Asia. A nuclear nightmare, however, would occur even if nuclear weapons were not used. The bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities using conventional weapons would contribute to unleashing another Fukushima type disaster with extensive radioactive fallout. (For further details See Michel Chossudovsky, Towards a World War III Scenario, The Dangers of Nuclear War, Global Research, Montreal, 2011)
The Online Interactive I-Book Reader on Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War
In view of the official cover-up and media disinformation campaign, the contents of the articles and video reports in this Online Interactive Reader have not trickled down to to the broader public. (See Table of contents below)
This Online Interactive Reader on Fukushima contains a combination of analytical and scientific articles, video reports as well as shorter news reports and corroborating data.

Part I focusses on
The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: How it Happened? Part II  pertains to The Devastating Health and Social Impacts in Japan. Part III  centers on the "Hidden Nuclear Catastrophe", namely the cover-up by the Japanese government and the corporate media. Part IV focusses on the issue of  Worlwide Nuclear Radiation and Part V reviews the Implications of the Fukushima disaster for the Global Nuclear Energy Industry.
In the face of ceaseless media disinformation, this Global Research Online I-Book on the dangers of global nuclear radiation is intended to break the media vacuum and raise public awareness, while also pointing to the complicity of  the governments, the media and the nuclear industry. 
We call upon our readers to spread the word.

We invite university, college and high school teachers to make this Interactive Reader on Fukushima available to their students.

Michel Chossudovsky, January 25, 2012


The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: How it Happened
Nuclear Apocalypse in Japan
Lifting the Veil of Nuclear Catastrophe and cover-up
- by Keith Harmon Snow - 2011-03-18
Humanity now faces a deadly serious challenge coming out of Japan -- the epicenter of radiation.
VIDEO: Full Meltdown? Japan Maximum Nuclear Alert
 Watch now on GRTV
-by Christopher Busby- 2011-03-30
Fukushima: Japan's Second Nuclear Disaster
- by Sherwood Ross - 2011-11-10
Secret Weapons Program Inside Fukushima Nuclear Plant?
U.S.-Japan security treaty fatally delayed nuclear workers' fight against meltdown
- by Yoichi Shimatsu - 2011-04-12
The specter of self-destruction can be ended only with the abrogation of the U.S.-Japan security treaty, the root cause of the secrecy that fatally delayed the nuclear workers' fight against meltdown.
Fukushima: “China Syndrome Is Inevitable” … “Huge Steam Explosions”
“Massive Hydrovolcanic Explosion” or a “Nuclear Bomb-Type Explosion” May Occur
- by Washington's Blog - 2011-11-22
VIDEO: New TEPCO Photographs Substantiate Significant Damage to Fukushima Unit 3
Latest report now on GRTV
- by Arnie Gundersen - 2011-10-20

The Devastating Health and Social Impacts in Japan
VIDEO: Surviving Japan: A Critical Look at the Nuclear Crisis
Learn more about this important new documentary on GRTV
- by Chris Noland - 2012-01-23
Fukushima and the Battle for Truth
Large sectors of the Japanese population are accumulating significant levels of internal contamination
- by Paul Zimmerman - 2011-09-27
FUKUSHIMA: Public health Fallout from Japanese Quake
“Culture of cover-up” and inadequate cleanup. Japanese people exposed to “unconscionable” health risks
- by Canadian Medical Association Journal - 2011-12-30
VIDEO: Cancer Risk To Young Children Near Fukushima Daiichi Underestimated
Watch this important new report on GRTV
- by Arnie Gundersen - 2012-01-19
 Tokyo Water Unsafe For Babies, Food Bans Imposed - by Karyn Poupee - 2011-03-23

Hidden Nuclear Catastrophe: Cover-up by the Japanese Government and the Corporate Media
VIDEO: Japanese Government Insiders Reveal Fukushima Secrets
GRTV Behind the Headlines now online
- by James Corbett - 2011-10-06
Fukushima and the Mass Media Meltdown
The Repercussions of a Pro-Nuclear Corporate Press
- by Keith Harmon Snow - 2011-06-20
Emergency Special Report: Japan's Earthquake, Hidden Nuclear Catastrophe
- by Yoichi Shimatsu - 2011-03-13
The tendency to deny systemic errors - "in order to avoid public panic" - is rooted in the determination of an entrenched Japanese bureaucracy to protect itself...
The Dangers of Radiation: Deconstructing Nuclear Experts
- by Chris Busby - 2011-03-31
"The nuclear industry is waging a war against humanity." This war has now entered an endgame which will decide the survival of the human race.
Engineers Knew Fukushima Might Be Unsafe, But Covered It Up …
And Now the Extreme Vulnerabilty of NEW U.S. Plants Is Being Covered Up
- by Washington's Blog - 2011-11-12
COVERUP: Are Fukushima Reactors 5 and 6 In Trouble Also?
- by Washington's Blog - 2011-11-14

The Process of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation
VIDEO: Japan's Nuclear Crisis: The Dangers of Worldwide Radiation
- by Dr. Helen Caldicott - 2012-01-25
An Unexpected Mortality Increase in the US Follows Arrival of Radioactive Plume from Fukushima, Is there a Correlation?
- by Dr. Joseph J. Mangano, Dr. Janette Sherman - 2011-12-20
In the US, Following the Fukushima fallout, samples of radioactivity in precipitation, air, water, and milk, taken by the U.S. government, showed levels hundreds of times above normal...
Radioactive Dust From Japan Hit North America 3 Days After Meltdown
But Governments "Lied" About Meltdowns and Radiation
- by Washington's Blog - 2011-06-24
VIDEO: Fukushima Will Be Radiating Everyone for Centuries
New report now on GRTV
- by Michio Kaku, Liz Hayes - 2011-08-23
Radiation Spreads to France
- by Washington’s Blog - 2011-11-15
Implications for the Global Nuclear Energy Industry
VIDEO: Radiation Coverups Confirmed: Los Alamos, Fort Calhoun, Fukushima, TSA
New Sunday Report now on GRTV
- by James Corbett - 2011-07-04
VIDEO: Why Fukushima Can Happen Here: What the NRC and Nuclear Industry Don't Want You to Know
Watch now on GRTV
- by Arnie Gundersen, David Lochbaum - 2011-07-12
VIDEO: Safety Problems in all Reactors Designed Like Fukushima
Learn more on GRTV
- by Arnie Gundersen - 2011-09-26
VIDEO: Proper Regulation of Nuclear Power has been Coopted Worldwide
Explore the issues on GRTV
- by Arnie Gundersen - 2011-10-05
VIDEO: New Nuclear Reactors Do Not Consider Fukushima Design Flaws
Find out more on GRTV
- by Arnie Gundersen - 2011-11-24
Nuclear Energy: Profit Driven Industry
“Nuclear Can Be Safe Or It Can Be Cheap … But It Can’t Be Both”
- by Washington's Blog - 2011-12-23
VIDEO: Fukushima and the Fall of the Nuclear Priesthood
Watch the new GRTV Feature Interview
- by Arnie Gundersen - 2011-10-22
Why is there a Media Blackout on Nuclear Incident at Fort Calhoun in Nebraska?
- by Patrick Henningsen - 2011-06-23

Startling Revelations about Three Mile Island Disaster Raise Doubts Over Nuke Safety
- by Sue Sturgis - 2011-07-24
Radioactive Leak at Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Station
- by Rady Ananda - 2011-07-01
VIDEO: US vs Japan: The Threat of Radiation Speculation
Dangerous double standards examined on GRTV
- by Arnie Gundersen - 2011-06-25

Additional articles and videos on Fukushima and Nuclear Radiation are available at
Global Research's Dossier on The Environment

 Nuclear Radiation: Categorization
At Fukushima, reports confirm that alpha, beta, gamma particles and neutrons have been released: 
"While non-ionizing radiation and x-rays are a result of electron transitions in atoms or molecules, there are three forms of ionizing radiation that are a result of activity within the nucleus of an atom.  These forms of nuclear radiation are alpha particles (α-particles), beta particles (β-particles) and gamma rays (γ-rays).
Alpha particles are heavy positively charged particles made up of two protons and two neutrons.  They are essentially a helium nucleus and are thus represented in a nuclear equation by either α or n1.  See the Alpha Decay page for more information on alpha particles.
Beta particles come in two forms: n2 and n3n3 particles are just electrons that have been ejected from the nucleus.  This is a result of sub-nuclear reactions that result in a neutron decaying to a proton.  The electron is needed to conserve charge and comes from the nucleus.  It is not an orbital electron.  n2particles are positrons ejected from the nucleus when a proton decays to a neutron.  A positron is an anti-particle that is similar in nearly all respects to an electron, but has a positive charge.  See the Beta Decay page for more information on beta particles.
Gamma rays are photons of high energy electromagnetic radiation (light).  Gamma rays generally have the highest frequency and shortest wavelengths in the electromagnetic spectrum.  There is some overlap in the frequencies of gamma rays and x-rays; however, x-rays are formed from electron transitions while gamma rays are formed from nuclear transitions. See the Gamma Rays  for more" (SOURCE: Canadian Nuclear Association)

"A neutron is a particle that is found in the nucleus, or center, of atoms. It has a mass very close to protons, which also reside in the nucleus of atoms. Together, they make up almost all of the mass of individual atoms. Each has a mass of about 1 amu, which is roughly 1.6×10-27kg. Protons have a positive charge and neutrons have no charge, which is why they were more difficult to discover." (SOURCE:
Neutron Radiation)

"Many different radioactive isotopes are used in or are produced by nuclear reactors. The most important of these are described below:
1. Uranium 235 (U-235) is the active component of most nuclear reactor fuel.
2. Plutonium (Pu-239) is a key nuclear material used in modern nuclear weapons and is also present as a by-product in certain reprocessed fuels used in some nuclear reactors. Pu-239 is also produced in uranium reactors as a byproduct of fission of U-235.
3. Cesium (Cs-137 ) is a fission product of U-235. It emits beta and gamma radiation and can cause radiation sickness and death if exposures are high enough. ...
4. Iodine 131 (I-131), also a fission product of U-235, emits beta and gamma radiation. After inhalation or ingestion, it is absorbed by and concentrated in the thyroid gland, where its beta radiation damages nearby thyroid tissue  (SOURCE: Amesh A. Adalja, MD, Eric S. Toner, MD, Anita Cicero, JD, Joseph Fitzgerald, MS, MPH, and Thomas V. Inglesby MD,
Radiation at Fukushima: Basic Issues and Concepts, March 31, 2011) 

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (Emeritus) at the University of Ottawa. He is the Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal and Editor of the website. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America's "War on Terrorism"(2005). His most recent book is entitled Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War (2011). He has taught as Visiting Professor at universities in Western Europe, South East Asia, Latin America and The Pacific, acted as adviser to governments of developing countries and as a consultant to several international organizations. Prof. Chossudovsky is a signatory of the Kuala Lumpur declaration to criminalize war and recipient of the Human Rights Prize of the Society for the Protection of Civil Rights and Human Dignity (GBM), Berlin, Germany. He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages.

This Interactive Online Reader (I-BOOK No. 3)  is made available to Global Research readers with a view to curbing the flow of media disinformation regarding nuclear radiation  

Please consider making a donation to Global Research.
Order directly from Global Research
Towards a World War III Scenario

by Michel Chossudovsky

The Globalization of War: The "Military Roadmap" to World War III
- by Michel Chossudovsky, Finian Cunningham - 2012-02-05
The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the world simultaneously.
Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation
- by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky - 2012-01-25
While the long-term repercussions of the Fukushima nuclear disaster are yet to be fully assessed, they are far more serious than those pertaining to the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, which resulted in almost one million deaths
Libya and "The Arab Spring": Neoliberalism, "Regime Change" and NATO's "Humanitarian Wars"
- by Michel Chossudovsky, Finian Cunningham, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - 2011-12-25
Washington's agenda for Egypt and Tunisia was to hijack the protest movement; what prevails in Egypt is the maintenance of a de facto military regime. In Tunisia, following the October 2011 parliamentary elections, the neoliberal policy framework remains unscathed.