Translate

Monday, May 22, 2017

19 DEAD, 50 INJURED BY EXPLOSION AT CONCERT IN MANCHESTER, ENGLAND

IMPORTANT UPDATE:
An emergency number is available for those who are concerned about loved ones or anyone who may have been in the area - 0161 856 9400


Casualty figures update: Now 59
Posted at 21:23 IN LONDON BY THE BBC
The North West Ambulance Service has given an update on the number of casualties from the Manchester Arena explosion.
https://twitter.com/NWAmbulance


9:09 PM, U.S. CENTRAL TIME, MAY 22, 2017
UPDATES WILL BE POSTED AS COMMENTS IN THE COMMENTS SECTION BELOW THIS BLOG ENTRY.
THAT MAKES FOR EASIER, FASTER UPDATES.

AS OF NOW, IT IS A 'SUSPECTED TERRORIST ATTACK"...

UNTIL THE POLICE ISSUE A CALL NUMBER FOR FAMILIES OF THOSE ATTENDING THE CONCERT, FACEBOOK HAS ACTIVATED ITS "SAFETY CHECK", SO TRY THAT IF YOUR LOVED ONES HAVE A FACEBOOK ACCOUNT.


FOR PARENTS OR FAMILY OR FRIENDS OF THOSE ATTENDING, IT MAY HELP TO DO A GOOGLE IMAGE SEARCH FOR ' 19 DEAD CONCERT MANCHESTER ', WHICH SHOWS MANY, MANY PHOTOS OF THOSE WHO SURVIVED THE BLAST STANDING OUTSIDE THE ARENA, BEING HELPED BY MEDICS AND POLICE...SOME ARE CLOSEUP PHOTOS.
I PRAY YOUR LOVED ONES ARE SAFE.

Greater Manchester Police is working to set up a contact number for relatives.

FROM THE BBC, WHICH ALSO HAS VIDEO OF THE PANIC AND CHAOS AS THOUSANDS EVACUATE THE ARENA...
Manchester explosion: Latest updates

BBC Home Affairs Correspondent Daniel Sandford said senior counter-terrorism officers were assembling in London and liaising with the Home Office.

Unconfirmed reports from two unnamed US officials suggested the attack was carried out by a suicide bomber.

British Transport Police say the explosion was in the foyer area of Manchester Arena.

The BBC's Tim Ashburner, who is at the scene, spoke to some volunteer paramedics who treated the injured for "shrapnel-like injuries".


Police say that 19 people have been killed and 50 others injured after explosions at a concert by the singer Ariana Grande in Manchester.

The 23-year-old pop star was performing her 'Dangerous Woman Tour' at the Manchester Arena on Monday (22 May) when explosions were heard towards the end of the show around 10.35pm.

Shortly after the blast Manchester Victoria station, which is close to the concert venue, was closed and all trains cancelled.

The arena foyer connects with Victoria train and tram station, a major hub on the northern edge of the city centre.

Greater Manchester Police carried out a precautionary controlled explosion in the Cathedral Garden area of the city at about 01:32. The force confirmed it was not a suspicious item.

Andy Holey, who had gone to the arena to pick up his wife and daughter who had been at the concert, said: "As I was waiting, an explosion went off and it threw me about 30ft from one set of doors to the other set of doors.

"When I got up I saw bodies lying on the ground. My first thought was to go into the arena to try to find my family.

"When I couldn't find them, I went outside with the police and fire and looked through some of the bodies to try and find my wife and daughter.

"I managed to find them eventually and they're OK.

"It was definitely an explosion and it was some force. It happened near the box office at the entrance to the Arena."

Emma Johnson said she and her husband were at the arena to pick up their daughters, aged 15 and 17.

"We were stood at the top of the stairs and the glass exploded - it was near to where they were selling the merchandise.

"The whole building shook. There was a blast and then a flash of fire afterwards. There were bodies everywhere."

A wide area around the venue itself has been completely taped off, and the crime scene appears to be widening, with police pushing people further and further back.

"The police are treating it as a live site, we don't know if this is the end or there are other incidents in that area... we don't know at the moment."

Within an hour of reports of the incident emerging, people began offering spare rooms and beds to people stranded in the city using the hashtag #RoomForManchester.

Hundreds of tweets offering places to stay are being shared and re-tweeted thousands of times.




//WW

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

EMERGENCY AT HANFORD NICLEAR FACILITY, MAY 2017

ABOVE IMAGE: Nuclear reactors line the riverbank at the Hanford Site along the Columbia River in January 1960.
The N Reactor is in the foreground, with the twin KE and KW Reactors in the immediate background. The historic B Reactor, the world's first plutonium production reactor, is visible in the distance.

The federal government produced plutonium for the country’s nuclear weapon program at Hanford for more than 40 years, creating huge amounts of radioactive and chemically hazardous waste.

An estimated 444 BILLION gallons of [JUST] contaminated liquid was dumped into the soil, causing extensive groundwater contamination. (Image: U.S. Department of Energy)


ABOVE PHOTO: A 20-foot by 20-foot hole in the roof of a storage tunnel at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation near Richland, Wash., Tuesday, May 9, 2017. The tunnel with the collapsed roof was built in 1956 over a rail spur. (CREDIT:U.S. Department of Energy via AP)  


A September 1990 Department of Energy dangerous waste permit application for the two storage tunnels revealed that some of the parts stored inside were spewing radioactivity at the rate of 5 rem to 25 rem per hour.
THE MAXIMUM "ALLOWABLE" RADIATION DOSE USED TO BE JUST 1 REM PER YEAR, CHANGED TO 5 REMS PER YEAR IN 1981 (SEE PG. 10 OF THAT ACTUAL DOCUMENT BY THE EPA, PG. 16 OF THE PDF), AND FOR NUCLEAR FACILITY WORKERS...50 REMS FOR HANDS AND 30 REMS FOR OTHER ORGANS PER YEAR, BUT REMAINED AT 5 REMS PER YEAR FOR EYES AND GONADS.  
ACCORDING TO THE NRC, IT IS STILL 5 REMS, WHOLE BODY, PER YEAR.
SEE:

Title 10, Part 20, of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 20), "Standards for Protection Against Radiation," establishes the dose limits for radiation workers. Although the limits vary, depending on the affected part of the body, the annual total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) for the whole body is 5,000 mrem (5 rem).

NOT PER HOUR, PER YEAR.


AND ABOUT THAT "STORAGE TUNNEL"...
THAT TUNNEL WAS NEVER DESIGNED TO STORE RADIOACTIVE ANYTHING.
IT WAS BUILT TO TRANSPORT NUCLEAR WASTE AND FUEL BY RAIL, THAT RAILWAY BEING AN ABOVE-GROUND SYSTEM COVERED ONLY BY DIRT.
THERE IS IMPROPER SHIELDING FOR LONG-TERM STORAGE OF SUCH HIGHLY RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS AS ARE NOW STORED THERE.


ACCORDING TO NBC NEWS, THE HOLE WAS NOT DISCOVERED FOR DAYS AFTER THE CAVE-IN:

"The large sinkhole that caved in a tunnel filled with radioactive waste at a sprawling Washington state nuclear waste repository may have gone unnoticed for days before its discovery because workers do not patrol tunnel sites daily, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Energy said Thursday.

The cave-in could have happened as many as four days before its discovery on Tuesday, said energy department spokesman Mark Heeter.

"We don't know exactly when it occurred," Heeter said."


The tunnel collapse reinforced longstanding criticism that toxic remnants at Hanford are being stored in haphazard and unsafe conditions, and time is running out to deal with the problem.

The most dangerous waste at Hanford is 56 million gallons stored in 177 underground tanks, some of which have leaked."

THEY DON'T PATROL THOSE TUNNELS DAILY? 
THEY DON'T MONITOR THE TUNNELS DAILY? 
THEY DON'T KNOW WHEN THE THING COLLAPSED?
HOW INSANE IS THAT AT THE NATION'S MOST TOXIC NUCLEAR FACILITY WITH THAT HUGE AMOUNT OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL JUST 8 FEET UNDERGROUND?


AND ONE MUST WONDER HOW THE MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL BURIED IN THOSE HUNDREDS OF ACRES CAN BE CLASSIFIED AS "MOST AND LEAST" DANGEROUS AND WHO DOES THE CLASSIFYING.
AFTER ALL, IT'S BEEN LONG-ADMITTED THAT NO ONE KNOWS WHAT ALL IS BURIED AT HANFORD NOR HOW MUCH IS BURIED THERE NOR EVEN WHERE RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL FROM THE EARLIEST DAYS WERE HASTILY STUFFED AS AMERICA HURRIED TO DEVELOP THE BOMB. 


HOW BAD WAS THIS LATEST "MISHAP" AT THE HANFORD NUCLEAR "SUPER-FACILITY" IN WASHINGTON STATE?

SO BAD THAT THEY DETECTED THE SPIKE IN RADIATION AT SOME DISTANCE FROM THE COLLAPSED TUNNEL, EVACUATED AND/OR SHELTERED IN PLACE THOUSANDS OF WORKERS, AND WARNED-OFF AIRCRAFT FLYING ABOVE AND NEAR THE WASTE DUMP SITE.

THE RADIATION LEAK OBVIOUSLY EXTENDED THAT HIGH ABOVE GROUND.

"Officials requested that the Federal Aviation Administration put a temporary flight restriction in place, according to the FAA."

[NOTE: The Statesman Journal also reported this temporary no-fly zone over Hanford, stating it began Tuesday morning, May 9, and would extend for 24 hours: Checking the FAA website, I find NO restriction and wonder why.]

THE TUNNEL HAS A 20-FOOT WIDE GAPING HOLE, VISIBLE BY AERIAL VIEW OF THE FACILITY, AND INSIDE IS THE EQUIVALENT AMOUNT OF RADIOACTIVE CESIUM-137 THAT WAS RELEASED BY FUKUSHIMA ON THE DAY THE JAPANESE POWER PLANT FIRST EXPLODED.

AND YET THE NRC ACCEPTED THE STATEMENT FROM THE SELF-MONITORING FACILITY THAT THERE WAS "NO IMMEDIATE DANGER TO THE ENVIRONMENT".

I ASK YOU, WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
RADIATION SPIKE DETECTED AT A DISTANCE FROM THE TUNNEL COLLAPSE, RADIATION ABOVE THE HOLE LEFT BY THE COLLAPSE, EVACUATION OF WORKERS, A NO-FLY ZONE WAS CREATED, AS MUCH RADIATION INVOLVED AS THE INITIAL MELTDOWN AT FUKUSHIMA, BUT WE'RE JUST FINE, THANKS...REALLY?
NO!
THAT'S A BLATANT LIE, ISN'T IT?
IS THERE ANY LOGIC TO THE STATEMENT "NO HARM TO THE ENVIRONMENT"?


The tunnel was filled and sealed in 1964, and a second, parallel, and much longer tunnel was built next to it. That one was filled with radioactive equipment contaminated with plutonium, americium, cesium and strontium as the site’s bomb-making factory was dismantled. It was sealed in 2000.
It is unclear when contractors running the plant first became concerned that gamma radiation, which changes the molecular structure of wood cell walls, would significantly weaken the first tunnel’s timbers.
As early as 1971 the integrity of the wood was checked and determined to be sound.

The 1980 study said however that said the wood’s strength had deteriorated to 64.5 percent of its original strength. It predicted that the structure should be sound until at least 1982, by which time the authors anticipated it would be cleaned out.
A September 1990 Department of Energy dangerous waste permit application for the two storage tunnels revealed that some of the parts stored inside were spewing radioactivity at the rate of 5 rem to 25 rem per hour.

“This alarming emergency compels us to take immediate action — to hold the federal government accountable to its obligation to clean up the largest nuclear waste site in the country,” Maia Bellon, director of the Washington Department of Ecology, said Wednesday in a written statement.


“It’s not acceptable that the hole could have been open for four days,” said Alex Smith, the nuclear waste manager for the Ecology Department, according to an AP report.
A Department of Ecology inspection in 2015 noted that because the tunnels were closed up, “no permanent emergency equipment, communications equipment, warning systems, personal protective equipment, or spill control and containment supplies” were located inside — deficiencies that could complicate emergency efforts in the case of a tunnel fire or other safety incident.

A Government Accountability Office estimate in 2016 placed the total cost of cleaning up the toxic legacy of the U.S. nuclear weapon program at more than $250 billion.

IN 2015, TIME MAGAZINE WROTE WHAT AMOUNTS TO AN EXPOSE' OF THE BAD PRACTICES AND DISREGARD FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BY THE HANFORD SITE'S CONTRACTORS AND THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S FAILURE TO MEET DEADLINES FOR CLEANUP AND FOR USING BETTER METHODS TO KEEP LEAKS AND RADIATION LEVELS DOWN.

"Unfortunately, the Justice ruling—to scrimp on radioactive waste management while the DOE spends lavishly on bombs—makes for business as usual in the history of Hanford. 
It’s never been a matter of knowing the danger.

In 1944, Hanford designers understood that the radioactive by-products issuing from plutonium production were deadly.
Executives from DuPont, which built the Hanford plant for the Manhattan Project, called plutonium and its by-products “super poisonous” and worried about how to keep workers and surrounding populations safe.


At the same time, DuPont engineers were rushing to make plutonium for the first Trinity test in Nevada in 1945, and they did not pause to invent new solutions to store radioactive waste.
Plant managers simply disposed of the high-tech, radioactive waste the way that humans had for millennia.
They buried it.
Millions of gallons of radioactive effluent went into [OPEN] trenches, ponds, holes drilled in the ground and into the Columbia River.
The most dangerous waste was conducted into underground single-walled tanks meant to last ten years.


Knowing the tanks would corrode, as the high-level waste ate through metal, Hanford designers planned to come up with a permanent solution in the future.

But, as the years passed, no new answer surfaced to safely store nuclear waste.

The Atomic Energy Commission, which was in charge of bomb production, left radioactive garbage to its private corporate contractors.
For two decades, the AEC had no office to oversee waste management, nor any regulation.

AEC officials didn’t know how much radioactive waste there was or where it was located. They also didn’t pay much fiscal attention to the problem. The AEC allocated to General Electric, which took over from DuPont in 1946, $200,000 a year for waste management, small change in nuclear-weapons accounting.

In the early 1960s, the first tank sprang a leak. Dozens followed suit leaching into the ground a million gallons of high-level waste. From 1968 to 1986, Hanford managers built 28 new, double-walled tanks, designed to last from 20 to 50 years.
What was the major design innovation after two decades of experience?
An extra tank wall.

Since the '40s, Hanford contractors had enjoyed a free hand to produce plutonium and pollute with little AEC/DOE oversight. And for six decades reports of radioactive discharges were denied. It is hard to fix a problem one cannot see—and that’s been, by any measure, an expensive lesson."
 

ADDED TO ALL THIS ARE THE REPEATED WARNINGS TO THE FACILITY MANGERS OVER THE PAST 30 YEAR, THREE DECADES, THAT THE TUNNEL HAS BEEN AND CONTINUES TO BE A KNOWN HAZARD, AN "ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN".
HANFORD'S MANAGERS DECIDED TO DO...ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO PREVENT THIS.


"A series of warnings by state and federal experts, stretching back more than thirty years, preceded this week’s cave-in of a tunnel in Hanford, Washington, that holds lethally radioactive debris from the U.S. nuclear weapons program, according to government documents.
A report in 1980 for the Energy Department, which oversees safety and cleanup work at the site, said that wooden beams holding up the tunnel had lost a third of their strength by then.
A contractor for the department pointed to the issue again in 1991, warning that by the year 2001, the beams would be further degraded.

A group of academic experts, working under contract to the department, said more alarmingly in a 1,969-page report in August 2015 that the roof of the tunnel in question had been seriously weakened and that a “partial or complete failure” could expose individuals even 380 feet away to dangerous levels of radiation.

No action was taken by the department in response, and earlier this month — the precise date remains uncertain because conditions at the site were not closely monitored — a portion of the roof collapsed at the tunnel, creating a 20-foot square hole.
Afterward, the managers of the Hanford site were forced on May 9 to order 3,000 workers to shelter indoors.
But instead of shoring up the beams inside the tunnel in question, they poured in 54 new truckloads of dirt."


THAT WAS CRIMINAL, TO IGNORE THE REPEATED WARNINGS AND DO NOTING TO SAFEGUARD RESIDENTS AND WORKERS WHO WERE UNAWARE OF THIS IMPENDING COLLAPSE.

"The tunnel was one of two at the Energy Department’s Hanford reservation used as dumping grounds from 1960 to 2000 for radioactive machine parts, vessels, and other equipment. It was, in short, a tangible expression of the department’s policy of covering over some of its nuclear bomb-making detritus and effectively pretending it isn’t there.


"Fixing the damaged tunnel could prove difficult. The Energy Department said on its Web site that officials are looking at options that would provide a barrier between the contaminated equipment in the tunnel and the outside air that would not cause the hole in the tunnel’s roof to widen further."

RAIN.
HOW ABOUT A HEAVY RAIN, WOULD THAT WIDEN THE HOLE?
AS OF 5:35 PM, PDST, RAIN IS IN THE FORECAST.
WOULDN'T RAIN INTO THAT TUNNEL ALSO MEAN WATER OUT INTO THE GROUND SURROUNDING THE BREACH?

WHAT ABOUT PREVAILING WINDS?
WHICH DIRECTION IS THE RADIATION BLOWING?
A SOUTHERLY WIND IS CARRYING ANY RADIATION PLUME TO THE NORTH OF THE FACILITY TONIGHT, WITH A CHANGE TO A MORE EASTERLY FLOW TOMORROW.

A LOCAL TV STATION HAS REPORTED THAT THE HOLE HAS BEEN BACK-FILLED, BUT WILL ANOTHER 8 FEET OF DIRT ON TOP OF ALL THAT RADIOACTIVE GARBAGE MEAN RESIDENTS ARE SAFE?

NO. EVEN LEAD SHIELDING WOULD ALLOW SOME LEAKAGE.
AS A PHYSICIST EXPLAINED AFTER THE FUKUSHIMA DISASTER:
"There are two reasons why lead isn't enough. First is that the lead might develop cracks that let radiation leak through. Second is that the lead isn't actually "removing" any radiation."

Radiation shielding usually consists of barriers of lead, boron, concrete or water.
NOT DIRT.


In fact in some cases an inappropriate shielding may even worsen the radiation situation instead of protecting people from the ionizing radiation.

Structural materials of pressure vessel and reactor internals are damaged especially by fast neutrons. Fast neutrons create structural defects, which in result lead to embrittlement of material of pressure vessel.

In nuclear power plants the central problem is to shield against gamma rays and neutrons, because the ranges of charged particles (such as beta particles and alpha particles) in matter are very short.
On the other hand we must deal with shielding of all types of radiation, because each nuclear reactor is a significant source of all types of ionizing radiation.

Gamma rays travel at the speed of light and they can travel thousands of meters in air before spending their energy.
Since the gamma radiation is very penetrating in matter, it must be shielded by very dense materials, such as lead or uranium.

AGAIN, NOT DIRT, AND THE ABOVE, BTW, IS FROM NUCLEAR ENERGY ENGINEERS THEMSELVES, FROM THEIR OWN WEBSITE.


AS FOR SHIELDING FROM NEUTRON RADIATION, FORGET IT WHEN YOU USE PLAIN OLD DIRT, BECAUSE DIRT SIMPLY ABSORBS IT AND BECOMES RADIOACTIVE.
OR, AS THOSE ENGINEERS PUT IT:
"In short, neutrons make matter radioactive."


Materials Used in Radiation Shielding
" Gamma and X-ray Shielding

Lead is particularly well-suited for lessening the effect of gamma rays and x-rays due to its high atomic number.
However, it is important to remember that there is still potential for some rays making it through the shielding, and that an absolute barrier may not be possible in many situations.

Lead is quite ineffective for blocking neutron radiation, as neutrons are uncharged and can simply pass through dense materials."

NOW, FOR OVER 50 YEARS, HANFORD HAS HAD SOME VERY HIGHLY CONTAMINATED NUCLEAR WASTE/GARBAGE SITTING IN A DILAPIDATED, CRUMBLING, VERY CONTAMINATED TUNNEL, COVERED BY A LOUSY 8 FEET OF IRRADIATED DIRT.

THIS REDEFINES THE WORD 'INSANITY'.

YET THEY WANT US TO BELIEVE THAT ALL WAS AND IS WELL, EVEN THOUGH, ONCE THEY FINALLY DETECTED THE LEAK, THEY SHELTERED THEIR EMPLOYEES ALL OVER THAT SITE, SENT OUT AN ALARM AND ASKED THE FAA TO STOP AIRCRAFT FROM FLYING THOUSANDS OF FEET OVERHEAD.

IF RADIATION WAS LIKELY AT 10,000 FEET EVEN, WHERE DID IT GO FROM THERE?
HAVE THEY TRAINED IT TO HOVER DIRECTLY OVER HANFORD AND NOT DRIFT AWAY?
DO THEY WANT US TO BELIEVE THEY HAVE IT TRAPPED IN THAT ROTTING TUNNEL UNDER A FEW FEET OF DIRT?


HANFORD IS THE WORST OF THE WORSE IN AMERICA, AND ONE OF THE WORST IN THE WORLD FOR LEAKS AND "ACCIDENTS" AND "NUCLEAR EVENTS", BUT IT IS BY NO MEANS THE ONLY MAJOR LEAKER.

HARDLY ONE DAY GOES BY IN AMERICA WITHOUT SOME TYPE OF "NUCLEAR EVENT", THOSE SMALL TO LARGE "ACCIDENTS", HUMAN ERRORS, FAILURES OF EQUIPMENT, OR JUST THE DILAPIDATED BUILDINGS LEAKING QUIETLY INTO OUR AIR, WATER AND SOIL...INTO US.

AMERICANS, FOR THE MOST PART, ARE BLISSFULLY UNAWARE WHEN THINGS GO WRONG AT PLACES WHERE RADIATION CAN ESCAPE, ALTHOUGH MOST EVENTS ARE MADE PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE ON THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'S WEB PAGE.

THEY HAVE A "READING ROOM" WHERE ANYONE CAN SCAN THE "EVENTS LOGS" AND SEE WHAT HAPPENED, WHERE, AND WHY DURING EVERY SINGLE MONTH, MONTH AFTER MONTH, YEAR AFTER YEAR.

FROM A MISSING RADIOACTIVE NUT OR BOLT, TO THE MISAPPLICATION OF "RADIATION THERAPY" AT HOSPITALS, TO AN "OOPS MOMENT" AT A RESEARCH FACILITY AND ALL THE WAY UP TO EMERGENCY SHUT-DOWN OF ONE THE 100 NUCLEAR REACTORS IN THE U.S., THEY'RE LISTED...IF THE OFFENDING PARTY CHOOSES TO REPORT TO THE NRC...NOT ALL DO.

FACILITIES HAVE BEEN 'BUSTED' FOR FAILURE TO REPORT, BUT THEY PAY THE FINES AND GO RIGHT ON WITH BUSINESS AS USUAL, KNOWING THERE WILL BE LITTLE, IF ANY, INTERFERENCE FROM THAT 'REGULATORY COMMISSION' WHICH REGULATES VERY LITTLE EXCEPT FINES AND ITS BANK ACCOUNT.

THE WHOLE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY-REGULATORY COMMISSION SCENARIO IS VERY MUCH LIKE HIRING A KNOWN BURGLAR TO WATCH YOUR HOME WHILE YOU GO ON VACATION.

WE'VE TRUSTED THE NRC TO "PROTECT" US FOR DECADES NOW, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO PROTECT THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY INSTEAD.

THE EPA IS NO BETTER.
THEY LITERALLY SOLD US OUT IN 1981 BY INCREASING THE "ALLOWABLE" DOSE RATE PER YEAR FIVE-FOLD.
EVEN JAPAN ALLOWED ONLY 1 REM PER YEAR FOR ITS CITIZENS UNTIL 2011, WHEN IT BEGAN PUSHING FOR HIGHER DOSES.
OUR OWN NRC AND EPA JUMPED RIGHT ON THAT BANDWAGON AND MAINSTREAM MEDIA FELL IN LINE WITH THE CRY THAT HIGHER DOSE ALLOWANCES WERE JUST FINE.

WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANYONE, ANY AGENCY ANYWHERE IN GOVERNMENT THAT GIVES A SOLITARY DAMN IF WE ALL GLOW IN THE DARK OR NOT.

THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY AS WELL AS THE NRC AND MAINSTREAM MEDIA OFTEN USE VARIOUS MEASUREMENTS OF RADIATION TO MAKE THINGS SEEM NOT AS BAD AS THEY REALLY ARE.  I'VE POINTED THIS OUT BEFORE.

I FOUND A WEBSITE THAT OFFERS A "CHEAT-SHEET" SO WE CAN ALL BETTER INTERPRET ALL THOSE DIFFERENT "READINGS" AND SEE FOR OURSELVES WHERE WE REALLY STAND.

Important: Radiation is accumulative and you must know if the measurements you are looking at is for a single dose or a per hour dosage - This will make a significant difference to the danger you are in at the time. Radiation exposure intensity over X time can vary the outcome of possible health risks.
Breathing in radiation or eating contaminated food/drink is a lot worse than direct body exposure.

"NOW, I AM BECOME DEATH..." ~ J. ROBERT OPPENHEIMER IN A TELEVISED STATEMENT IN 1965.

THOSE OLD ATOMIC SCIENTISTS OF THE 1930s TO 1950s OPENED PANDORA'S BOX AND LET LOOSE THE MONSTER WE CALL "NUCLEAR ENERGY", INITIATED THE BUILDING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS TO CREATE THE MATERIALS NEED FOR "THE BOMB" AND FROM THAT POINT TO NOW, WE ARE BEYOND SCREWED.

THERE'S NO GOING BACK.

THERE IS, HOWEVER, A WAY TO STOP THINGS WHERE THEY ARE NOW AND NOT SEE IT ALL INTENSIFY TO THE POINT THAT THERE IS NO STOPPING.

I WAS WRITING A POST TO THIS BLOG ABOUT THE SUDDEN UP-TICK IN THYROID CANCERS IN AMERICA AND ACROSS THE GLOBE WHEN THE CDC BEGAN ISSUING NEW DIRE WARNINGS ABOUT "ZIKA VIRUS" AGAIN.

OHHHH, THE HORROR!

"ZIKA, ZIKA, ZIKA!"

IT WILL CAUSE STERILIZATION, BIRTH DEFECTS, FATAL ILLNESS, SO DON'T HAVE SEX, LET THE CDC COLLECT YOUR URINE, SPERM, SALIVA, AND PRAY FOR A NEW VACCINE.

BUT THEN IT OCCURRED TO ME...THYROID CANCERS, BIRTH DEFECTS, STERILITY... HMMM...WHAT ELSE CAUSES ALL THAT?

R-A-D-I-A-T-I-O-N...RADIATION.

WHAT'S BEEN LEAKING INTO OUR ENTIRE ENVIRONMENT FOR DECADES NOW?

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS, NUCLEAR MEDICAL FACILITIES, NUCLEAR EVERYTHING.

SO I SPENT ABOUT A WEEK READING AT THE NRC WEBSITE'S LITTLE READING ROOM, THEIR  "NUCLEAR EVENTS LOGS".

AND THEN HANFORD HAD A MAJOR "EVENT" AND ALL HELL BROKE LOOSE IN WASHINGTON STATE...

BUT ALSO ELSEWHERE, MANY ELSEWHERES....

FOR NOW, LET'S REFOCUS ON THE LATEST "HANFORD MOMENT".

MAY 9, 2017
HANFORD NUCLEAR FACILITY, RICHLAND, WASHINGTON 
["THE MOST RADIOACTIVE-CONTAMINATED PLACE ON EARTH"] 
FROM CBS

"The Department of Energy declared a state of emergency at the Hanford nuclear site after a tunnel storing contaminated radioactive materials collapsed.

The agency said in a statement that the 20-foot section is part of a tunnel that is hundreds of feet long and is “used to store contaminated materials.” The tunnel is one of two that run into the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Facility, also known as PUREX. The section that collapsed was “in an area where the two tunnels join together,” the department said.

The PUREX facility, once used to extract plutonium from spent nuclear fuel, has been idle for years but remains “highly contaminated,” the agency said.

[NOTE: Hanford is the world’s most polluted nuclear weapons production site. The site has been spewing radiation since it was built. The Tea Room has written much about Hanford, with extensive documentation. See <here>, <here> and <here>.]

THE USUAL LIE..
.
The Energy Department claims no radioactive contamination has been reported so far from Tuesday’s tunnel collapse.

But Edwin Lyman from the Union of Concerned Scientists said, "Collapse of the earth covering the tunnels could lead to a considerable radiological release."

An August 2015 report by Vanderbilt University’s civil and environmental engineering department said the PUREX facility and the two tunnels had “the potential for significant on-site consequences” and that “various pieces of dangerous debris and equipment containing or contaminated with dangerous/mixed waste” had been placed inside the tunnels.

Now the Washington state Department of Ecology’s Nuclear Waste Program has announced on Twitter that it has taken legal action against Hanford.

Former Energy Department official Robert Alvarez said that remotely controlled rail cars once carried spent fuel from a reactor to the PUREX chemical processing facility, which then extracted dangerous plutonium. He said the plant lies near the middle of the sprawling 580-square mile Hanford site and was “a very high-hazard operation.”

Many contaminated pieces of equipment, including the rail cars, have simply been left in the tunnels, he said.
In an email, Alvarez added that “the tunnels now store contaminated train cars and a considerable amount of highly radioactive, ignitable wastes including possible organic vapors.”
And while the older tunnel is reinforced with timber, Alvarez said, “according to a 1997 DOE report, inspection of the tunnels ‘is not feasible because of radiation levels in excess of five roentgens per hour.’ ”
A roentgen, or rad, is a measure of radioactive exposure; five roentgens is the annual limit for a U.S. nuclear worker.

The Vanderbilt report said that there were eight rail cars in the older tunnel and 28 in the newer one."
ACCORDING TO THE STATESMAN JOURNAL:
The two tunnels combined have about as much or more of the isotope cesium-137 than was released in the environment during the Fukushima accident."


Some of the other nuclear sites with high-level radioactive waste include the site at Savannah River, South Carolina, and a long-closed nuclear reprocessing plant in West Valley, New York.

Tom Carpenter, executive director of Hanford Challenge, which advocates for workers at the Hanford nuclear site,
called Tuesday’s cave-in a “wake-up call.”“They’ve got 177 underground nuclear-waste tanks, most of them were built in the 1940s,” Carpenter said. “If this were a tank that had collapsed that would be much, much worse than anything you hear right now. They need to get on top of their risks.”

FROM REUTERS:
Hanford nuclear site accident puts focus on aging U.S. facilities

May 12, 2017


The collapse of a tunnel used to store radioactive waste at one of the most contaminated U.S. nuclear sites has raised concerns among watchdog groups and others who study the country's nuclear facilities because many are aging and fraught with problems.

"They're fighting a losing battle to keep these plants from falling apart," said Robert Alvarez, a former policy adviser at the U.S. Department of Energy who was charged with making an inventory of nuclear sites under President Bill Clinton.

"The longer you wait to deal with this problem, the more dangerous it becomes," said Alvarez, a senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies, where he focuses on nuclear energy and disarmament.
The Energy Department did not respond to requests for comment.
The state of facilities in the U.S. nuclear network has been detailed by the Department of Energy, Government Accountability Office and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. They have noted eroding walls, leaking roofs, and risks of electrical fires and groundwater contamination.

In 2016, Frank Klotz, head of the National Nuclear Security Administration, an Energy Department agency overseeing maintenance of nuclear warheads, warned Congress about risks posed by aging facilities.

Decontaminating and demolishing the Energy Department's shuttered facilities will cost $32 billion, it said in a 2016 report. It also noted a $6 billion maintenance backlog.
In the 1940s the U.S. government built Hanford and other complexes to produce plutonium and uranium for atomic bombs under the Manhattan Project.

“That was an era when the defense mission took priority over everything else," said Edwin Lyman, a senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "We’re dealing with the legacy of that.”
[NOTE: FOR A MORE IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION OF THE MANY FAILINGS AND NRC's RELUCTANCE TO ACTUALLY MONITOR AND INSPECT AND FINE OR CLOSE THE MOST HAZARDOUS NUCLEAR FACILITIES, PLEASE READ "U.S. REGULATORS OPENING UP ON FLAWED NUCLEAR PLANT POLICING"... IT HAS SOME VERY ALARMING DOCUMENTATION.]

REUTERS CONTINUED...


HOW MANY CLOSED SITES IN AMERICA ARE STILL CONTAMINATED AND A THREAT TO CIVILIANS?

A 2009 Energy Department survey found nearly 300 shuttered, contaminated and deteriorating sites.

Six years later it found that fewer than 60 had been cleaned up.


A 2015 Energy Department audit said delays in cleaning contaminated facilities "expose the Department, its employees and the public to ever-increasing levels of risk."
Risks identified at the sites included leaking roofs carrying radioactivity into groundwater, roof collapses and electrical fires that could release radioactive particles.
A 2014 Energy Department audit noted a high risk of fire and groundwater contamination at the shuttered Heavy Element Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, which is surrounded by homes and businesses near California's Bay Area.

Problems have also been identified at active facilities including the Savannah River Site, a nuclear reservation in South Carolina.
A 2015 report by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board found "severe" erosion in concrete walls of an exhaust tunnel used to prevent release of radioactive air.

A 2016 Energy Department audit of one of the United States' main uranium handling facilities, the Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, warned that "intense precipitation or snow" could collapse parts its roof, possibly causing an accident involving radioactivity.
"It sounds crazy, but it's true," said Don Hancock, who has studied the Tennessee facility in his work at the Southwest Information and Research Center, an Albuquerque nonprofit that monitors nuclear sites.

Nationwide, part of the risk comes from having to maintain and safeguard so many sites with different types of nuclear waste, said Frank Wolak, head of Stanford University's Program on Energy and Sustainable Development.

"You’re asking for trouble with the fact that you've got it spread all over the country," he said. "The right answer is to consolidate the stuff that is highly contaminated, and apply the best technology to it."


Did It Take a Fire and an Oil Spill to Get Serious About Closing a Dangerous Nuclear Threat to 20 Million New Yorkers?
HOW MANY OF THOSE MILLIONS KNEW THERE WAS A THREAT

THE NRC's WEBSITE IS A JOKE.

EVEN THE 'READING ROOM' WHICH LISTS REPORTED "EVENTS" DOESN'T TELL THE READER THAT SOME EVENTS GO UNREPORTED, THAT SOME HAVE ONLY COME TO LIGHT WHEN LOCAL RESIDENTS DISCOVERED A PROBLEM, OR WHEN WHISTLEBLOWERS SPOKE UP.

THE RARE TIMES, AND THEY HAVE BEEN FEW AND FAR BETWEEN, THAT THE NRC PROPOSED ANYTHING THAT WOULD MAKE THOSE DAMNABLE CRUMBLING NUKE SITES SAFER, MAINSTREAM MEDIA HAS STEPPED IN AND MADE IT SEEM THAT THE NRC IS OVER-REACTING OR MAKING IT TOO HARD ON THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY, THAT IT WOULD BE"TOO EXPENSIVE FOR PLANT OPERATORS TO COMPLY WITH STRICTER REGULATIONS".

LOOK AT THE FORBES ARTICLE THAT ALL BUT CHOKED ON THE NRC PROPOSING LOWER ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF RADIATION FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS.
ALL FORBES COULD THINK OF IS HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST NUKE PLANTS TO COMPLY....TO HELL WITH AMERICANS' HEALTH AND SAFETY.

AND SO IT GOES...JUST AS IT HAS FOR OVER 60 YEARS.
THE BIG BOMB BOYS MADE DAMNED SURE WE'D ALL BE FORCED TO LIVE WITH NUCLEAR RADIATION FOR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS, JUST TO MAKE BOMBS, TO BE KING OF THE NUKES, TO DOMINATE OTHER NATIONS AND BE ABLE TO DESTROY THE ENTIRE WORLD.

WHEN YOU FACTOR IN THE EXORBITANT COST OF STORING, MONITORING, DISPOSING OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND WASTE, YOU FIND THAT NUCLEAR POWER IS THE MOST EXPENSIVE ENERGY SOURCE ON EARTH.

IT DOESN'T TAKE A PHYSICS MAJOR TO FIGURE OUT THE HIGH COST OF NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL PLUS THE VERY HIGH COST OF OBTAINING NUCLEAR FUEL AND ALL THE COMPONENTS OF A NUCLEAR REACTOR.

New nuclear power in UK would be the world's most costly, says report


WHAT IT COSTS IN HUMAN LIVES IS HIDDEN FROM US, DENIED, MADE LIGHT OF AND RIDICULED BY THOSE WHO BOW AND SCRAPE TO THAT CURSED INDUSTRY.  

WE, THE COMMON PEOPLE, ARE EXPENDABLE...WALL STREET IS NOT.


“If the NRC does not do its job, the American people will demand the shutdown of old nuclear power plants."
(What it took to force the closure of San Onofre in California.)

AND HOW DID THAT TURN OUT?
WE STILL HAVE LEAKING, FAILING, LETHAL POWER PLANTS AND LOOKS LIKE WE ALWAYS WILL BECAUSE AMERICANS JUST WILL NOT READ AND RESEARCH AND SEE THE REAL AND GROWING DANGERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ATOM. 

WHY?
WELL, LOOK AT THE ESTIMATED COST TO CLEAN UP HANFORD...$250 BILLION.
THAT IS WHY HANFORD WILL NEVER BE CLEANED UP...AMERICANS JUST WON'T DEMAND IT BECAUSE WE'RE TOLD IT WOULD BANKRUPT THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY AND MAYBE EVEN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. 

THERE ARE 100+ DECREPIT NUKE SITES ON AMERICA AND EACH ONE WILL REQUIRE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO DECOMMISSION AND CLEAN UP, IF WE WANT TO BELIEVE THEY CAN BE CLEANED UP.

100+ TIMES EVEN $3 BILLION PER CLEANUP...NOPE, THE INDUSTRY WILL NEVER SPEND THAT!
WE ARE SCREWED!


I FOR ONE DON'T GIVE A DAMN IF IT BANKRUPTS THE WORLD... WE NEED TO BURY AS DEEPLY AS WE CAN EVERY NUKE FACILITY THERE IS SO THAT FUTURE GENERATIONS ARE GUARANTEED, NOT JUST HOPED FOR, AND SO THEY WON'T HAVE TO WONDER WHEN RADIATION LEAKS WILL CAUSE THEM TO DEVELOP CANCER  OR WHEN A NUCLEAR PLANT WILL BLOW AND END THEIR LIVES.

MEANWHILE, AGENCIES LIKE THE CDC WILL INVENT NEW REASONS WHY OUR BABIES ARE STILLBORN, BORN WITH NEURAL TUBE DISORDERS AND HORRIBLE BIRTH DEFECTS, WHY SO MANY AMERICANS ARE BEING RENDERED STERILE, WHY SO MANY ARE GETTING CANCERS WHO LIVE NEAR A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, WHY ANIMALS AND PLANTS ARE DEFORMED NEAR THOSE PLACES, AND WHY WE MUST BLAME LUDICROUS THINGS LIKE THE ZIKA VIRUS FOR WHAT IS THE FAULT OF RADIATION... RADIATION, NOT VIRUSES.

BELOW, AT THE END OF THIS BLOG ENTRY, AT THE TRIPLE ASTERISKS *** , FIND VERY PERTINENT AND PERHAPS EVEN LIFE-SAVING INFORMATION THAT I JUST DISCOVERED AND WISH I HAD BEEN ABLE TO MAKE AVAILABLE HERE YEARS AGO.
IT'S A LOT OF READING, BUT MAYBE YOU'RE LIKE ME, YOU THINK OUR LIVES ARE WORTH WHATEVER IT TAKES TO SAFEGUARD THEM... READING, CALLING CONGRESS, TRYING TO FORCE THE NRC TO ENFORCE THEIR WORTHLESS REGULATIONS... WHATEVER IT TAKES TO LIVE WITHOUT DAMNED NUCLEAR POWER.

WE HAVE NOT HEARD THE LAST FROM HANFORD...BE PREPARED.





______________________________________________
FURTHER READING AND IMPORTANT INFORMATION ON THE REAL EFFECTS OF ALL RADIATION:

~THE POLITICS OF NUCLEAR POWER.
HOW NUCLEAR INDUSTRY LOBBIES AND CONTROLS CONGRESS AND MANIPULATES THE MEDIA AND THE LAWMAKERS.

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2003/12/11/3148/politics-energy-nuclear-power


~ A FAIRLY GOOD SUMMARY OF ONE'S CHANCES FOR SURVIVING A NUCLEAR DISASTER, A NUCLEAR EXPLOSION, ETC, FROM A MOST UNLIKELY SOURCE.
http://www.businessinsider.com/nuclear-explosion-fallout-radiation-survival-shelter-2017-3



*** ~ THE FOLLOWING IS FROM A BOOK BY THE INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE, NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS, Washington, D.C., 1995:
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES OF SCIENCES, ENGINEERING AND MEDICINE.
THE EXTENSIVE QUOTE BEGINS AT CHAPTER 49.

THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST IN-DEPTH AND INFORMATIVE THINGS I HAVE EVER READ ABOUT RADIATION'S EFFECTS.
I SINCERELY HOPE YOU CAN FOLLOW THE LINK AND READ IT ALL, BUT HERE ARE SOME HIGHLIGHTS:

Humans receive an average radiation dose of 300 to 450 mrems per year from both natural (about 82%) and man-made (about 18%) sources.

Depending on their physical state, radionuclides may enter the body by ingestion, inhalation, or by absorption through the skin. They may also enter the body through breaks in the skin.
Rapidly dividing cells are the most sensitive to ionizing radiation.

The fetus, with its rapidly dividing cells, is especially radiosensitive.

(THIS IS WHY RADIATION EXPOSURE IN UTERO IS SO DANGEROUS FOR DEVELOPING HUMAN AND ANIMAL FETUSES AND WHY YOUNG CHILDREN ARE ALSO MOST AT RISK.)

Genetic effects due to ionizing radiation are well documented in animals and other nonhuman forms of life.
No reason exists to assume that humans are exempt from radiation-induced genetic effects.

Radiation exposure in these life forms results in congenital abnormalities and mutations that are transmitted to immediate and remote offspring. In experimental animals, the frequency of genetic effects due to radiation exposure generally increases as a linear-non-threshold function of dose.

In children born to survivors of the atomic bomb detonations, a pronounced association exists between gestational age at the time of exposure and the risk of neurodevelopmental effects. Exposure occurring during the first 7 weeks of gestation did not result in increased risks for mental retardation, reduced IQ, or seizure disorders. Exposures greater than 50 rad during gestational weeks 8 to 15, when nerve development and migration are greatest, showed linear dose-effect relationships for each of the above three endpoints and for microcephaly. This gestational period (i.e., 8 to 15 weeks) is recognized as the most sensitive for the development of fetal neurologic effects (see Case Studies in Environmental Medicine: Reproductive and Developmental Hazards). A no-effect threshold for adverse neurodevelopmental effects during this gestational period could not be determined.

Cytotoxicity from radiation varies among cell types and tissues. In general, rapidly dividing cells that are poorly differentiated are most radio-sensitive.

For example, lymphocytes, primitive stem cells of the bone marrow, mucosal crypt cells of the gastrointestinal tract, spermatogonia, and granulosa cells of the ovary are particularly affected by radiation.
Endothelial cells of the microcirculation and epithelial cells of many organs have an intermediate sensitivity. Muscle cells, neurons, erythrocytes, and polymorphonuclear granulocytes are relatively resistant to radiation. In most cases, maximum organ damage becomes evident as injured progenitor cells fail to replace the lost mature cells.

The first radiation-induced malignancy to appear in the atomic bomb survivors was leukemia. The latent period between radiation exposure and clinical recognition of leukemia ranged from 2 to 15 years.

In the Japanese survivors, increased incidences for solid cancers appeared considerably later than the excess of leukemia. Carcinoma of the thyroid was the first of the solid tumors noted. An increased incidence of multiple myeloma and cancers at the following sites was also found: breast (female), lung, stomach, esophagus, small intestine, colon and rectum, brain and nervous system, ovary, uterus, urinary tract, and salivary glands. In populations irradiated occupationally or primarily for medical reasons, an increased incidence of cancers at these sites has also been reported, as well as at other specific sites including liver [due to internally deposited radionuclides], skeleton (BONE), and skin.

As with leukemia, the risks for solid tumors in the Japanese survivors are greater in persons who were younger at the time of exposure. The latency period for solid tumors due to radiation exposure is generally one or more decades.

The radionuclides in the environment of greatest potential concern are cesium-137, iodine-131, plutonium-239, radon-222, strontium-90, tritium, and uranium-238.

As of 1990, 113 nuclear power plants were operating in the United States.

In addition, 75 nuclear reactors were being used for training and research, while about 70 reactors were operating at U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, and at least 100 were used to power military submarines, cruisers, and aircraft carriers.


Supporting these reactors are mines, mills, processing plants, and storage sites for spent fuel, all of which are potential sources of radiation exposure.

The current deposits of radioactive waste generated by production and use of atomic weapons and nuclear power reactors will remain a potential exposure hazard for 10,000 years or more.

Worldwide, more than 1 billion medical diagnostic X-ray examinations, more than 300 million dental X-ray examinations, and about 4 million radiation therapy procedures or courses of treatment are performed annually.
In the United States, over half of the population is exposed to X radiation each year, and more than half of these are diagnostic procedures, including dental diagnosis.

The rest experience X radiation during fluoroscopy, radiation therapy (Table 3), and nuclear medicine (Table 4).

Criticality accidents (due to uncontrolled nuclear fission) have occurred at Los Alamos, New Mexico, in 1958; Oak Ridge, Tennessee, in 1958; Hanford Works, Richland, Washington, in 1962; and Wood River Junction, Rhode Island, in 1964.

In addition, two early experiments (in 1945 and 1946) at the Los Alamos site resulted in uncontrolled nuclear fission.
These accidents caused three early fatalities of workers closest to the nuclear reactions; the 22 other workers in the vicinity of the accidents were irradiated at doses less than 465 rem, and all survived for at least 5 years.
The radiation from these accidents would have affected a larger area and a greater number of people if conditions during criticality had also resulted in the explosive release of large amounts of energy, which they did not.

Releases of iodine-131 to air and water occurred at nuclear power plants in Hanford, Washington, during the period from 1943 to the 1960s and at Three Mile Island in 1978. The release of radioactivity at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant resulted in an average radiation dose to the surrounding population of about 8 mrem over a radius of 10 miles and about 2 mrem over a radius of 50 miles from the reactor.

Accidental releases of radioactive materials may also occur during transport of radionuclides or at sites storing them. Currently, low-level radioactive waste can be accepted at two commercial storage sites: Barnwell, South Carolina, and Hanford, Washington. The storage site at Beatty, Nevada, no longer accepts shipments of radioactive waste. No repository has yet been designated as a permanent storage site for high-level radioactive waste such as spent fuel from nuclear reactors.

Approximately half of those receiving a radiation dose of 500 rem will die within 30 days if untreated. Below 1000 rem, deaths are attributable to failure of the hematopoietic system. For doses between 1000 and 10,000 rem, death occurs due to ulceration and bleeding in the gastrointestinal tract. Doses above 10,000 rem immediately affect the cells of the nervous system. Depending on the exposure dose, these subsyndromes (i.e., hematopoietic, gastrointestinal, and neurovascular), which make up the acute radiation syndrome, may be discrete or overlapping (Table 6).

Lymphocytes are a biologic marker for radiation exposure.

If whole-body radiation has occurred, several hematologic parameters can be used to predict biologic effects, as well as to estimate physical dose. The earliest indicator is a fall in the lymphocyte count, which may reach its nadir within 48 hour.

Table 6. Acute effects of whole-body doses of ionizing radiation...

rem*

0–25

No detectable clinical effects; small increase in risk of delayed cancer and genetic effects


25–100

Temporary reductions in lymphocytes and neutrophils; sickness not common; long-term effects possible


100–200

Minimal symptoms; nausea/vomiting/diarrhea/fatigue in a few hours; reduction in lymphocytes and neutrophils, with delayed recovery; possible bone growth retardation in children


200–300

Nausea and vomiting on first day; following latent period of up to 2 weeks, symptoms (loss of appetite and general malaise) appear but are not severe; hematopoietic subsyndrome; recovery likely in about 3 months unless complicated by previous poor health


300–600

Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea in first few hours, followed by latent period as long as 1 week with no definite symptoms; loss of appetite, general malaise, and fever during second week, followed by hemorrhage, purpura, inflammation of mouth and throat, diarrhea, and intestine destruction in third week; some deaths in 2–6 weeks; possible eventual death to 50% of those exposed


600–1000

Vomiting in 100% of victims within first few hours; diarrhea, hemorrhage, and fever toward end of first week; rapid emaciation; almost certain death


1000–5000

Vomiting within 5–30 minutes; 100% incidence of death within 2–4 days


>5000

Vomiting immediately; 100% incidence of death within a few hours to 2 days


Also
>15 In men yields temporary sterility



>300 In women yields permanent sterility


*rem=rad equivalent in man or mammal

Adapted from: Goldman M. Ionizing radiation and its risks. In: Occupational disease—new vistas for medicine. West J Med 1982;137:540–7.


Table 1. Units of radiation measurement


Characteristic

Unit

Description


Energy

electron volt (eV)

(also ergs, joule)

Kinetic energy of an electron as it moves through a potential difference of 1 volt.


Rate of radioactive decay

curie (Ci)

Radioactivity emitted per unit of time (1 Ci=3.7×1010 disintegrations per second).


Air exposure

roentgen (R)

Amount of X and gamma radiation that causes ionization in air. One roentgen of exposure will produce about 2 billion ion pairs per cubic centimeter of air.


Absorbed dose

rad

Dose resulting from one roentgen of ionizing radiation deposited in any medium, typically water or tissue. One rad results in the absorption of 100 ergs of ionizing radiation per gram of medium.


Biologic effectiveness

rem

Dose of any form of ionizing radiation that produces the same biological effect as 1 roentgen; 1 rem=1 rad x Radiation Weighting Factor (RWF), where the value of RWF depends on the type of radiation as follows:


X radiation=1.0

gamma radiation=1.0

beta=1.0

alpha=20

neutrons=5 to 20, depending on their energy


A new System Internationale (SI) nomenclature has been adopted, which is used by international, as well as many domestic, professional organizations and journals (Table 2).

Table 2. Equivalency of international units


Unit

Symbol

Equivalency


Gray

Gy

1 Gy=100 rad


Sievert

Sv

1 Sv=100 rem


Becquerel

Bq

1 Bq=2.7×10−11 Ci (or 1.0 disintegration per second)

A useful and sensitive biomarker for dose estimation in acute whole-body radiation exposures, as well as to predict the long-term health risks in large populations exposed to low levels of radiation, is the chromosome aberration assay. Radiation induces several nonspecific but characteristic chromosomal abnormalities, particularly dicentric chromosomes. By scoring the frequency of these abnormalities in lymphocytes in the peripheral blood or bone marrow and comparing the frequency to aberrations


produced by irradiating peripheral blood in vitro, a relatively accurate estimation of radiation dose can be made. Chromosomal aberrations are visible within hours after radiation exposure, and the optimum time to perform the assay is within the first few weeks after exposure. Details of sample preparation and the names of laboratories able to perform cytogenetic assays for radiation exposure can be obtained from REAC/TS (telephone: [615]–576–3131 [day]; [615] 481–1000 [24-hour hotline]).

Indicators of internally deposited radionuclides will depend on the biologic fate and the biologic half-life of the radioactive substance. If the metabolic pathway and biologic and physical half-lives are known, an estimate of dose to the target organ can be made by bioassay. Methods for measuring the amount of radioactivity in the body include urinalysis, fecal analysis, whole body scans, and thyroid scans for exposure to radioactive iodine.

The recommendation in 1934 of the U.S. Advisory Committee on X-Ray and Radium Protection (now the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements [NCRP]) was to restrict whole-body exposures to less than 0.1 R/day. From 1950 to 1960, attention centered on genetic effects of radiation exposure, and recommendations were proposed to limit exposure to the equivalent of 5 rem/year, which applied to both the general public and workers.

Because any amount of radiation exposure poses some risk, all standards now employ a philosophy that radiation exposures should be limited to levels that are as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) and consistent with the benefits of radiation to society.

Regulatory agencies in the United States that are involved in radiation control include the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Department of Transportation, Food and Drug Administration, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the General Accounting Office. EPA has also established a standard for drinking water of 5 pCi/L, which applies to radioactivity from radium-226 and radium-228 combined.
A new drinking water standard of 20 pCi/L each for radium-226 and radium-228 has been proposed.


Table 7. Summary of recommendations for ionizing radiation


Dose Limits for Workers*

ICRP, 1991

NCRP, 1993


Based on stochastic effects§ (e.g., cancer and genetic damage)

5 rem (50 mSv) annual effective dose limit

and

10 rem (100 mSv) as 5-year cumulative effective dose limit

5 rem (50 mSv) annual effective dose limit

and

1 rem (10 mSv) times age in years cumulative effective dose limit


Based on nonstochastic effects§ (e.g., lens cataracts and fertility impairment)

15 rem (150 mSv) equivalent dose limit to lens of eye

and

50 rem (500 mSv) annual equivalent dose limit to skin, hands, and feet

15 rem (150 mSv) annual equivalent dose limit to lens of eye

and

50 rem (500 mSv) annual equivalent dose limit to skin, hands, and feet


Dose Limits for the Public*

ICRP, 1991

NCRP, 1993


Based on stochastic effects

0.1 rem (1 mSv) annual effective dose limit, and, if needed, higher values provided that the annual average over 5 years does not exceed 0.1 rem

0.1 rem (1 mSv) annual effective dose limit for continuous exposure and 0.5 rem (5 mSv) annual dose limit for infrequent exposure


Based on nonstochastic effects

1.5 rem (15 mSv) annual equivalent to lens of eye and 5 rem (50 mSv) annual equivalent dose limit to skin, hands, and feet

5 rem (50 mSv) annual equivalent dose limit to lens of eye, skin, and extremities


Embryo-fetus

0.2 rem (2 mSv) equivalent dose to the woman’s abdomen once pregnancy has been declared

0.05 rem (0.5 mSv) equivalent dose limit in a month once pregnancy is known


*The dose limits for both workers and the public exclude medical and natural background exposures. Note that the dose limits for the public are lower, in general, than those for workers. Workers, by virtue of the ability to work, tend to be a healthier population than the public, which includes susceptible populations, the elderly, and children.

†International Commission on Radiological Protection. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, ICRP Publication 60, Annals of the ICRP 21. Elmsford, New York: Pergamon Press, 1991.


¶National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP). Limitation of exposure to ionizing radiation. Bethesda, Maryland: NCRP, 1993. NCRP Report No. 116.



§Stochastic effects are those effects for which the probability of occurrence, rather than the magnitude of the effect, is proportional to dose. Not all irradiated persons show such effects; however, the probability that they will can be described by a dose-response curve that extends to zero with no threshold.
Nonstochastic effects are proportional in severity to the magnitude of the absorbed dose; they probably have a threshold below which no effect will be observed because simultaneous injury to many cells is required.







//WW

Friday, May 12, 2017

CYBER ATTACKS SPREAD TO 150 NATIONS, WILL ESCALATE MONDAY, EUROPOL

Sunday, May 7, 2017

ERDOGAN THREATENS TO FIRE ON U.S. TROOPS IN SYRIA. WHERE ARE U.S. NUCLEAR BOMBS?

ABOVE: AMERICAN B-61 NUCLEAR WARHEADS, KNOWN TO BE IN TURKEY. WHAT ISN'T KNOWN TO THE U.S. PUBLIC IS HOW MANY ARE THERE AFTER ERDOGAN SEIZED CONTROL OF THE BASE LAST YEAR DURING THAT ALLEGED 'COUP'. 

The nuclear yield of the B-61 can be adjusted to suit a particular mission. The bomb that destroyed Hiroshima had an explosive force equivalent to about fifteen kilotons of TNT. In comparison, the “dial-a-yield” of the B-61 bombs at Incirlik can be adjusted from 0.3 kilotons to as many as a hundred and seventy kilotons. 

THE U.S. CLAIMS THE BASE IN TURKEY IS ITS LARGEST STORAGE FACILITY FOR THE 'H-BOMB' IN ALL OF EUROPE.
THIS SITE LIES A MERE 70 MILES FROM THE SYRIAN BORDER. 
ADD TO THAT THE TURMOIL WITHIN TURKEY SINCE ERDOGAN TOOK POWER.

ABOVE: WHO CONTROLS WHAT IN SYRIA.
...

ABOVE: THE EMBLEM OF THE AIR FORCE BOMBER WING AT INCIRLIK AIR BASE, TURKEY. 
"Bigger than LIFE"? THAT MAKES IT A BIG TARGET, RIGHT?


WHILE THE THREATS MADE LAST WEEK BY TURKEY'S MAD-MAN, ERDOGAN, TO STRIKE U.S. TROOPS WHO ARE AIDING KURDISH FIGHTERS ALONG THE NORTHERN SYRIAN BORDER WAS REPORTED BY A VERY FEW MAINSTREAM AMERICAN MEDIA, THE REPORT BY AL JAZEERA IS, BY FAR, MORE IN-DEPTH:
30 APRIL 2017


'Turkish forces last week carried out deadly air strikes on military positions belonging to the Syrian Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG), angering the US and sparking days of border clashes with the Kurdish fighters.

Turkey views the YPG as a "terrorist" organisation and an extension of the Kurdish PKK group that has waged a three-decade insurgency against Turkey for greater independence.

But Washington views YPG as its most effective ground partner in the fight against Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Syria.


Pictures posted by pro-Kurdish activists on Twitter show military convoys flying U.S. and YPG flags passing through the mostly Kurdish-controlled city of Qamishli.

The difference of opinion over YPG has cast a shadow over US-Turkish relations for some time

"We will bring this up when we meet Mr President on May 16," said Erdogan.
"This needs to be stopped right now. Otherwise it will continue to be a bother in the region and for us."

Erdogan reaffirmed that Turkey could again bomb YPG positions any time it wanted.
"I said yesterday: 'We can come unexpectedly in the night'. I really meant that. We are not going to tip off the terror groups and the Turkish Armed Forces could come at any moment. Better they live in fear than we have worries," he said.

Redur Khalil, YPG's spokesman in Syria, said Turkey is reinforcing its border posts opposite Tal Abyad as well as other areas.
"We hope that this military mobilisation is not meant to provoke our forces or for another purpose linked to entering Syrian territories. We don't want any military confrontation between us, since our priority is to fight Daesh [ISIL] in Raqqa and Tabqa," Khalil told The Associated Press in text messages.

THE U.K.'S TELEGRAPH REPORTED HOW CLOSE AMERICA TROOPS WERE FROM THE STRIKE THAT KILLED AT LEAST 25 KURDISH FIGHTERS, ALLIES OF THE U.S.:

U.S. troops on the ground were only a few miles from where the Turkish jets struck, and Washington was reportedly only given a 52-minute warning.

The International Crisis Group (ICG) said in its latest report on the Syria crisis that the U.S. had "a singular dilemma" on the future of its relationship with the YPG.
It said the YPG "is indispensable" to defeat Isil but there is also "no avoiding the fact" that the US is backing a force "led by PKK-trained cadres in Syria while the PKK itself continues an insurgency against a Nato ally."

It said that Turkey had pressed ahead with the air strikes despite U.S. objections and this "should serve as a warning for what could lie in store." 

THE MAIN QUESTION IN MY MIND IS 'WHERE ARE OUR NUKES THAT WERE STORED AT INCIRLIK AIR BASE IN TURKEY AND WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THEM?

WAY BACK IN 2005, THE GUARDIAN CONFIRMED THERE WERE 110 AMERICAN NUCLEAR WARHEADS THERE IN BRITAIN.
MOST REPORTS SAY THAT WE HAVE 50 IN TURKEY, BUT FOREIGN SOURCES HAVE SAID THAT THERE ARE 90.
ONE IS TOO MANY!


DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS OBTAINED BY A EUROPEAN 'THINK TANK' STATED THAT TURKISH WAR PLANES WERE CAPABLE OF DROPPING AMERICAN NUCLEAR BOMBS.
WHY HAS AMERICA ENTRUSTED THAT NUCLEAR STRIKE CAPABILITY TO A MADMAN LIKE ERDOGAN?

MUCH TO THEIR SURPRISE, THE GUARDIAN LEARNED THAT AMERICA HAS ALMOST 500 SUCH WEAPONS DEPLOYED ALL ACROSS EUROPE, NOT JUST 200, AND GAVE THE FOLLOWING LIST:

'The US has more than 100 nuclear weapons at its Lakenheath base in Suffolk, three times the number previously thought, a respected U.S. research agency said yesterday.
  

The 110 tactical nuclear bombs kept at the East Anglian base - the home of American F-15 strike jets - are among as many as 480 such weapons the US still deploys in Europe, says the Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC), a private arms control and environmental group.

The assumption for years was that the US kept about 200 nuclear weapons in Europe, Hans Kristensen, the report's author, said.

Around 150 bombs are kept at three bases in Germany, 90 at Incirlik, south-eastern Turkey, 90 in Italy and 20 each in Belgium and the Netherlands, the NRDC says, adding that there is no justification for such stockpiles since the Soviet threat no longer exists.


The weapons are all free-fall, or "gravity" bombs.

"The fact that the United States has some 480 nuclear weapons still stationed in Europe will come as a surprise to a lot of Europeans," said Mr. Kristensen.
He added: "The big question is: 'Why are they still there more than a decade after the cold war ended?' Neither the United States nor Nato has been able to articulate a credible mission for the weapons."

Yesterday's 100-page report is based on documents obtained under the US Freedom of Information Act, military publications, commercial satellite imagery and other material.

The NRDC also discloses how many nuclear bombs the US would provide non-nuclear Nato allies with in the event of war.
It found that as many as 180 would be dropped by Belgian, German, Italian, Dutch, and Turkish aircraft. 


THE MILITARY TIMES TRIED TO EXPLAIN (EXCUSE?) OUR PRESENCE IN TURKEY,
"Maj. Peter Gersten, then deputy commander of Combined Joint Task Force 'Operation Inherent Resolve', told Air Force Times: 
We can get out of Incirlik to the combat area (IN SYRIA) in roughly 20 minutes; where, typically, we are averaging somewhere around 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 hours to get to the combat area.If you can get from launch to target area in 20 minutes, you don’t require a tanker.”

The Air Force flies KC-135 tankers, MQ-1 Predators and A-10 Thunderbolt II fighters from Incirlik. The Marine Corps also has EA-6B Prowlers there.


NOT ENOUGH INFO!
WE NEED TO KNOW THREE THINGS FOR CERTAIN:

1~ DID ERDOGAN TAKE POSSESSION OF ANY OF THOSE DURING THAT LOCK-DOWN OF INCIRLIK WHEN HE FAKED THAT COUP ATTEMPT AND HELD OUR AIR BASE AND ALL IN IT HOSTAGE FOR DAYS? 

2~ WHERE THE HELL ARE THE TURKISH AIR BASE NUKES RIGHT NOW? 


3~ WHY WOULD THE U.S. TOLERATE SUCH THREATS AGAINST OVER 500 U.S.TROOPS?
THE MANIAC IN TURKEY NEEDS "RE-SCHOOLING" ON WHAT THE WORD "ALLY" MEANS.

"Some 1,500 US airmen and their families were locked in the southern Turkish air base of Incirlik together with a stock of tactical nuclear bombs beginning July 16.

[MY NOTE:Power was restored July 22, but tensions still ran high and it's little better there today. Who knows when Erdogan will repeat his July, 2016 siege?]  

The base was under virtual siege by large police contingents, cut off from electric power for several days except for local generators that were quickly running out of fuel. This sort of pressure appears to have been Erdogan’s method of turning hundreds of Americans on the base into hostages to force Washington into extraditing Fethullah Gulen, whom he accuses of orchestrating the failed coup... from his place of asylum in Pennsylvania.
It was a LUNATIC playing bully, rubbing a super-power's face in the dirt.


OBVIOUSLY, OUR CONGRESS IS TOO BUSY OFFING 'OBAMACARE' AND SCREWING-OVER AMERICA'S POOR, ELDERLY, KIDS AND DISABLED TO GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE LIVES OF U.S. SERVICEMEN IN SYRIA. THEY'RE ALL TOO BUSY KISSING THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY AND BIG PHARM BUTTS RIGHT NOW. HOW THEY LOVE THE TASTE OF WALL STREET BUTT, OUR CONGRESSIONAL WHORES.

"Are the bombs secure?"
The Congressional Research Service compiled a report for the benefit of congress, but they were not formally briefed.
The new report from the Congressional Research Service shows that a report was compiled on the matter for Congress.

The report finds the security situation of the bombs 'adequate', as they are stored in facilities last updated in 2015, are heavily guarded by US troops, and are stored securely underground.
To steal or access these bombs, the report suggests, one would need to overwhelm US and NATO forces on one of their own bases, and then come up with some way to haul a 12 foot long, very heavy warhead.

But is there still good reason to question their presence in Turkey?   
Shouldn't the US move the nukes?
    
In its conclusion, the report weighs the alternatives to stationing nuclear weapons at Incirlik. Moving the warheads could possibly encourage Russia to cooperate more and possibly reduce their nuclear stockpile, though nothing guarantees that.

A move could be seen as prudent in light of the evolving and uncertain relationship of the US to Turkey, and the weapon's current proximity to ISIS territory and the Syrian quagmire, but it would represent a loss of confidence in the Turkish system, and another host country would have to approve the presence of the nukes.'

WELL, AS WE'VE SEEN, AT LEAST FIVE OTHER NATIONS HAVE ALREADY APPROVED THE PRESENCE OF AMERICAN NUKES, HAVEN'T THEY?
SEND THEM THERE...ANYWHERE BUT TURKEY OR SYRIA!   

IN AUGUST, 2016,
"On Monday, a US-based think tank, The Stimson Center, responded to this proposal when it released a report titled "B-61 Life Extension Program: Costs and Policy Considerations" which slammed the planned upgrades to the U.S. tactical nuclear bomb program as an “egregious” waste of money and said deployment overseas is risky.

“The continued presence of these weapons [NUCLEAR WARHEADS] at five sites in Europe, particularly in Turkey, raises serious risks of their seizure by terrorists or other hostile forces,” the report said.

[NOTE: 5 SITES? NO, 6 ADMITTED SITES, AS WE'LL SEE SHORTLY**.]

The bombs are designated as tactical weapons, dropped from small, short-range aircraft.
The report calls them all but obsolete given the U.S. strategic nuclear deterrence.

[SO, IF THEY ARE NOT FOR "DETERRENCE", COULD WE ASSUME THEY ARE STRICTLY FOR A NUCLEAR ATTACK, A 'FIRST-STRIKE'?]

ROLLING THE DICE

“From a security point of view, it’s a roll of the dice to continue to have approximately 50 of America’s nuclear weapons stationed at Incirlik Air Base in Turkey, just 70 miles from the Syrian border,” said report co-author Laicie Heeley. “These weapons have zero utility on the European battlefield and today are more of a liability than asset to our NATO allies,” said Heeley, a fellow with the Budgeting for Foreign Affairs and Defense program at the Stimson Center.'

EXACTLY...BUT WE DON'T SEE THAT COMMENTED ON IN THE 'NEWS' THAT ISN'T NEWS, DO WE? 
** FROM THE FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS, NOVEMBER 9, 2006, WE HAD DEPLOYED NUKES TO SIX EUROPEAN NATIONS...NOT 5. 

BUT HOW MANY OF THE 10,000+ WARHEADS ARE IN EUROPE TODAY?
WE JUST DON'T KNOW.
 

THERE WERE OVER 7,000 THERE A FEW DECADES BACK.
HOW THOSE WERE HANDLED GAVE ME CHILLS...WE WERE NOT IN CONTROL OF THOSE WEAPONS!

FROM 'THE NEW YORKER':
"By the mid-nineteen-sixties, more than seven thousand American nuclear weapons were deployed in Western Europe, Greece, and Turkey.

The weapons were technically in the custody of U.S. officers, ready to be handed over for use in wartime by NATO personnel. 

But custody of the weapons was not the same as control of them.
A delegation of U.S. senators visiting Europe in 1960 was shocked to find hydrogen bombs loaded onto German planes that were on alert and crewed by German pilots; thermonuclear warheads atop missiles manned by Italian crews; nuclear weapons guarded and transported by “non-Americans with non-American vehicles.”
The theft or use of these weapons by NATO allies became a grave concern.

“The prime loyalty of the guards, of course, is to their own nation, and not to the U.S.,” the Senate delegation warned in a classified report.
With a few hours and the right tools and training, you could open one of NATO’s nuclear-weapons storage vaults, remove a weapon, and bypass the PAL (
Permissive Action Link) inside it. Within seconds, you could place an explosive device on top of a storage vault, destroy the weapon, and release a lethal radioactive cloud.

NATO’s hydrogen bombs are still guarded by the troops of their host countries.
In 2010, peace activists climbed over a fence at the Kleine Brogel Airbase, in Belgium, cut through a second fence, entered a hardened shelter containing nuclear-weapons vaults, placed anti-nuclear stickers on the walls, wandered the base for an hour, and posted a video of the intrusion on YouTube. The video showed that the Belgian soldier who finally confronted them was carrying an unloaded rifle.
"

IMAGINE TURKISH FORCES WITH AMERICAN BOMBS, OR ISIS, OR ANY NATION NEARBY WHO WANTS A NUCLEAR WEAPON.  


**WHERE THE NUKES WERE, ONCE UPON A TIME 
'A new review published in the November/December issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists shows that the United States stores its nearly 10,000 nuclear warheads at 18 locations in 12 states and six (6, NOT 5) European countries. 

The article’s authors – Hans M. Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists and Robert S. Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council – identified the likely locations by piecing together information from years of monitoring declassified documents, officials statements, news reports, leaks, conversations with current and former officials, and commercial high-resolution satellite photos.

About 400 warheads are at eight bases in six European countries – Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey and Great Britain (for more information on U.S. warheads in Europe, go to http://www.nukestrat.com/us/afn/nato.htm).


2,000 ALWAYS ON "HIGH ALERT".
More than 2,000 of those warheads are on high alert, ready to launch on short notice.
Only about 28 percent of U.S. warheads have been moved to separate storage facilities.

[NOTE: THERE IS A MAP DEPICTING WHERE THE WARHEADS WERE STATIONED IN AMERICA 2006 AT THE ABOVE LINK.]

There were no nuclear weapons in Alaska. The last nuclear weapons (about 24 B57 depth bombs) were removed from the state (Naval Air Station Adak) in the mid-1990s after the Pentagon decided to eliminate the nuclear anti-submarine warfare mission.
For more information go here.   

As for Asia, nuclear weapons were deployed in South Korea, the Philippines and Japan at various stages between 1954 and 1991. The last weapons were nuclear artillery shells and bombs withdrawn from South Korea in late 1991. Since then, nuclear weapons have also been withdrawn from Guam, Hawaii and Alaska.  

THERE WERE 90 WARHEADS IN TURKEY IN 2006.
As for the Middle East, only Israel is thought to possess nuclear weapons (Pakistan and India are not considered Middle East but South Asia). Yet nuclear weapons are also present in Turkey, where the United States stores roughly 90 nuclear bombs at Incirlik Air Base near the border with Syria. Go here for background.

WOULD AN ELECTRO-MAGNETIC PULSE WEAPON SET OFF OUR NUKES?


The EMP vulnerability of U.S. nuclear warheads is classified and not known, but all warheads and their delivery systems are thought to be hardened against EMP. 
HOWEVER... 
Because the military is becoming increasingly dependent on computer systems, and since the civilian infrastructure generally is not hardened, some argue that a “rogue” state or a well-organized terrorist organization could achieve a disproportional effect if they somehow managed to acquire a warhead and detonate it high in the atmosphere. Others dismiss this as a worst-case scenario that is very unlikely and argue that it would be too expensive to harden all military forces and the civilian infrastructure anyway.

The United States is the only nuclear weapon state that deploys nuclear weapons in foreign countries.'

[NOTE: THE REPLIES BY THE AUTHOR TO COMMENTS IS FASCINATNG, FULL OF INFORMATION I DIDN'T KNOW PRIOR TO READING THE ENTIRE THING. BE SURE TO READ ALL THE WAY TO THE END OF THE COMMENTS SECTION.]


"OFFICIALLY", THE U.S. ONLY CLAIMS 50 NUCLEAR WARHEADS AT INCIRLIK AIR BASE IN TURKEY, BUT ALSO "OFFICIALLY" WE KNOW THAT AMERICA SENT ABOUT 200 MORE NUCLEAR BOMBS TO EUROPE, ACCORDING TO THE INFAMOUS BROOKINGS INSTITUTE, JULY, 2015. 
IF, AS THE DECLASSIFIED PAPERS SHOWED IN 2005, AS THE GUARDIAN REPORTED, THERE WERE 480 U.S. NUKES IN EUROPE, THEN THE NEW SHIPMENT OF 200 BROUGHT THE TOTAL CLOSER TO 700?  
IT WAS VERY DISCONCERTING TO ME TO READ WHAT THE CHIEF MILITARY COMMANDER AT INCIRLIK WAS ACCUSED OF:
'The Turkish squadron and (INCIRLIK) base commander, Brigadier Gen. Bekir Ercan, is under arrest, suspected of a senior role in planning and executing the coup, by assigning the aircraft and helicopters to support it, responsibility for the disappearance of a large number of aircraft and aiding the defection of air crews to Greece.

[WHAT TYPE OF AIRCRAFT WAS "DISAPPEARED? WHERE TO, GREECE? AND REMEMBER, ERDOGAN BLAMED THE U.S. FOR THAT "COUP ATTEMPT".]


Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim insinuated that the Americans may be viewed as partners, at least passive ones, in the conspiracy, in view of the use the plotters made of Incirlik for sending aircraft based there and arming them for the missions of intercepting the President’s airplane (which was never realized) and bombing the Parliament building in Ankara (which was).

The Turkish Labor Minister, S├╝leyman Soylu, was more explicit: “This coup has America behind,” he twitted in his Twitter account.

THE RECENT THREATS ERDOGAN MADE TO OUR U.S. FORCES THERE.
The Washington Times reports that a senior aide to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan suggested American troops could be targeted alongside their Kurdish allies in the country’s ongoing air war against the militias.

Erdogan's senior presidential aide Ilnur Cevik said U.S. forces who are teamed up with members of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units, or YPG, were in danger of being hit by Turkish fighters patrolling the volatile border region with Syria.If YPG units and their American military advisers “go too far, our forces would not care if American armor is there, whether armored carriers are there,” Mr. Cevik said. “All of a sudden, by accident, a few rockets can hit them.”

AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, BY NO ACCIDENT, FIRE COULD RAIN FROM THE SKY ALL OVER TURKEY, BUT THEN AGAIN, MAYBE SOME (MOST?) OF OUR 200 OR SO NUCLEAR WARHEADS ARE STILL IN TURKEY AT THE INCIRLIK AIR BASE?

Last month, the Boston Herald reported that about 200 MORE Marines rolled into northern Syria backed with howitzers, significantly widening America's footprint in a highly toxic battlefield.

THIS REPORT SHOULD SHOW THE WORLD WHY TURKEY IS REALLY IN THE MIX IN SYRIA...TO KILL KURDS.

Footage posted by Syrian activists online showed a convoy of U.S. armored vehicles driving on a rural road in the village of Darbasiyah, a few hundred meters from the Turkish border. Clashes in the area were reported between Turkish and Kurdish forces Wednesday a day after the Turkish airstrike which also destroyed a Kurdish command headquarters.

The Turkish airstrikes, which also wounded 18 members of the U.S.-backed People's Protection Units, or YPG, in Syria were criticized by both the U.S. and Russia.
The YPG is a close U.S. ally in the fight against the Islamic State group but is seen by Ankara as a terrorist group because of its ties to Turkey's Kurdish rebels.


FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES, APRIL 28, 2017, FURTHER CONFIRMATION OF ARMORED U.S. TROOP MOVEMENT IN SYRIA, "BOOTS ON THE GROUND" STYLE:
'The Marines' deployment came days after another intervention, when dozens of Army troops drove outside the town of Manbij, riding Stryker armored vehicles, following an earlier conflagration of fighting between Syrian Kurdish troops and Turkish troops.

The U.S. deployment in Manbij intentionally put Americans in the middle of that rivalry, hoping to cool it down.
The SDF retook Manbij from IS control, and Turkey said it won't allow the town to be under Kurdish control, threatening to move on it. The American presence appears intended to reassure Ankara the Kurds don't hold the town.

Kurdish activist in the area, Mustafa Bali, said the deployment is ongoing, adding that it stretches from the Iraqi border to areas past Darbasiyah in the largely Kurdish part of eastern Syria.

But the new deployment puts U.S. troops directly along the border with Turkey, another flashpoint, and immerses Washington into that increasingly hot fight. Should Erdogan happen to launch a strike against a zone containing US troops, he can simply say he was aiming elsewhere, although the retaliation by his NATO ally would be prompt.

It remains unclear if the US is now actively seeking to engage Turkey on the combat field, and is looking for a politically correct, and media friendly pretext to do so. It is also unclear what a conflict between the US and Turkey would mean for the rest of NATO: it certainly would set a precedent, as never before has fighting broken out between two alliance members.'


OUR TROOPS ARE DEFINITELY IN HARM'S WAY ON ALL SIDES, FROM VOLATILE, SIDE-SWITCHING 'REBEL' FORCES FIGHTING BOTH FOR AND AGAINST ASSAD, FROM ISIS, AND NOW FROM TURKEY. 
Just three days after Turkish warplanes killed at least 20 US-backed Kurdish fighters along the Turkey-Syria border as well as several Kurdish peshmerga troops on Mount Sinjar in northwestern Iraq, footage posted by Syrian activists showed the US has deployed troops and APCs in the contested region, in a move that could potentially drag the US in a conflict where it already finds itself mediating between two so-called US ally forces in the proxy war against Syria.
The US appears to have deployed troops along the border: to serve as a deterrent to further Turkish attacks.

A senior Kurdish official, Ilham Ahmad told The Associated Press that American forces began carrying out patrols along the border Thursday along with reconnaissance flights in the area. She said the deployment was in principle temporary, but may become more permanent. Another Kurdish activist said the deployment is ongoing, adding that it stretches from the Iraqi border to areas past Darbasiyah in the largely Kurdish part of eastern Syria.

"The U.S. role has now become more like a buffer force between us and the Turks on all front lines," he said. He said U.S. forces will also deploy as a separation force in areas where the Turkish-backed Syrian fighting forces and the Kurdish forces meet.

As noted above, the US intervention is meant to send a "a message of reassurance for the Kurds and almost a warning message" to the Turks, he said.      

NO DENYING U.S. PRESENCE NEAR TURKISH AIRSTRIKES
Navy Capt. Jeff Davis, a Pentagon spokesman,
did not dispute that U.S. troops are operating with elements of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) along the Turkish border, but he would not get into specifics. The SDF is a Kurdish-dominated alliance fighting IS that includes Arab fighters.

"We have U.S. forces that are there throughout the entirety of northern Syria that operate with our Syrian Democratic Force partners," Davis said. "The border is among the areas where they operate." He said the U.S. wants the SDF to focus on liberating the IS-held town of Tabqa and the extremist group's de facto capital, Raqqa, "and not be drawn into conflicts elsewhere."

REMEMBER WHEN SOME NEWS AGENCIES IN THAT AREA REPORTED THAT THERE MIGHT BE U.S. NUKES INSIDE SYRIA, EVEN AT TABQA?

IF SO, DID ERDOGAN OR THE U.S. PUT THEM THERE?

REUTERS NEWS, MARCH 6, 2016:
"U.S. builds two air bases in Kurdish-controlled north Syria"

In August 2016 EurActiv.com, a Belgian news site which receives funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, claimed from two unnamed sources that the US had started to transfer the nuclear weapons stationed in Turkey....

THE 'VOICE OF AMERICA' ASKED, AUG. 5, 2016,
"How Safe Are US Nuclear Weapons in Turkey?"

"This particular airbase, Incirlik, is in southern Turkey.
The Turkish commander of the base recently was frog-marched off in handcuffs after being accused of involvement in last month's failed coup against the government.  

And that is the problem, says nonproliferation expert Jeffrey Lewis of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterrey, California.  

"I think in the near term they are very safe," Lewis said of the bombs in an interview with VOA. "But there are no security measures that would be sufficient against a host state that is trying to seize them, so generally speaking, it is not a good idea to have nuclear weapons in a politically unstable country."

World leaders have reacted with unease.
And so have experts in nuclear weapons policy.

"There are a lot of tough barriers, but incidents and accidents have a nasty way of happening," said Hans Kristensen, director of the Federation of American Scientists' nuclear information project.
"You only get so many warnings before something goes terribly wrong, and there are plenty of warnings in the region now," Kristensen said.

According to Amy Woolf, a specialist in nuclear weapons policy at the Congressional Research Service, Turkey neither maintains nuclear capable aircraft nor allows the U.S. to permanently deploy its own at the base.

"PERMANENTLY"?
BUT THEY DO FLY IN AND OUT OF THAT TURKISH-CONTROLLED AIR BASE!

Currently, some of the planes that rotate through Incirlik in the war against terrorism are nuclear capable, but they are not designated for any nuclear mission. "

ALL THAT "NONE ARE NUCLEAR CAPABLE" ROT IS B.S. ANYWAY.
THERE ARE PLANES THAT CAN DELIVER A NUCLEAR WEAPON OVER THERE!
IN THE FIRST PLACE, THE U.S. SOLD TURKEY 49 FIGHTER-BOMBERS, THE F-4 PHANTOM II, WHICH IS AND HAS BEEN CAPABLE OF DELIVERING THE LIGHTER WEIGHT B-61 BOMBS.
TURKEY ALSO HAS 196 F-16C AND 44 F-16D FIGHTING FALCONS.
.
FOR PROOF OF THAT, SEE Aircraft in the Inventory". hvkk.tsk.tr. Turkish Air Force.

HERE'S A 'SHORT LIST' OF ALL THE AIRCRAFT CAPABLE OF DELIVERING A B-61 BOMB. I'VE UNDERLINED AND TYPED IN RED THOSE THAT TURKEY HAS NOW:
"The B61 has been deployed by a variety of U.S. military aircraft. Aircraft cleared for its use have included the FB-111A, B-1 Lancer, B-2 Spirit, B-52 Stratofortress; F-101 Voodoo, F-100 D & F Super Sabre, F-104 Starfighter, F/A-18 Hornet, F-111 Aardvark and F-4 Phantom II fighter bombers; A-4 Skyhawk, A-6 Intruder and A-7 Corsair II attack aircraft; the F-15 Eagle, F-15E Strike Eagle and F-16 Falcon; British, German and Italian Panavia Tornado IDS aircraft. USAFE and all NATO dual role aircraft can carry B61s. The Lockheed S-3 Viking was also able to deploy the B61 as a nuclear depth bomb. 

The B61 can fit inside the F-22 Raptor's weapons bays and will also be carried by the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II. [SOURCE: "Nukes for NATO." Airforce Magazine, July 2010 ]

NATO has agreed to vastly improve the capabilities of this force with the increased accuracy of the B61 Mod 12 upgrade and the delivery of the stealthy F-35. [ 21 April 2013. "Obama accused of nuclear U-turn as guided weapons plan emerges". The Guardian. https://fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/05/nonstrategicnukes.php ]

VARIOUS air-dropping techniques for the B-61 exist, including toss bombing, parachute-retarded delivery, and lay-down modes, intended to give the dropping aircraft time to escape the ensuing blast.
By the mid-1950s smaller weapons had been developed that could be carried and deployed by fighter-bombers.
Hypersonic Glide Vehicles are a new potential method of nuclear delivery.
They can be potentially combined with ICBM MIRVs such as RS-28 Sarmat
."

AND, BTW, THE BIGGEST BOMB EVER DROPPED, RUSSIA'S "TZAR BOMBA", WAS DROPPED BY A VERY SLOW-MOVING, LUMBERING TANK OF A PLANE, SO SPEED AND MANEUVERABILITY ISN'T ALL IT TAKES.

BESIDES, WHEN WE SEE MUSLIMS BLOWING THEMSELVES TO POWDER TO BECOME "MARTYRS", WHY WOULDN'T SOME VOLUNTEER FOR A SUICIDE MISSION TO DELIVER A NUKE TO THE 'ENEMY'?  
REMEMBER 9/11?   

GERMAN AIRCRAFT, CAPABLE OF DELIVERING NUCLEAR PAYLOADS, WERE ALSO STATIONED AT INCIRLIK UNTIL AFTER THE BIG 'COUP ATTEMPT' IN 2016, AFTER WHICH, AS I REPORTED BEFORE, GERMANY WAS EYING BOTH CRETE AND JORDAN AS POSSIBLE DESTINATIONS FOR THEIR AIRCRAFT AND WEAPONRY.

"Currently the German Luftwaffe has Panavia Tornados to deliver American nuclear bombs in case of war."  

NATO HAS PROMISED TO PROVIDE OR RE-EQUIP AIRCRAFT CAPABLE OF DELIVERING NUCLEAR PAYLOADS TO ITS "MEMBER STATES" IN CASE OF 'NUCLEAR THREAT' FROM RUSSIA, ETC.

IT'S CALLED "NUCLEAR SHARING". 

IF WE ALLOW GERMANY AND ITALY AND JAPAN, ALL WHOM WE FOUGHT AGAINST IN WORLD WAR II, TO FLY SUCH AIRCRAFT, WOULD NATO DISALLOW TURKEY, WHOM WE HAVEN'T YET INVADED OR BLOWN UP? 
NOPE.  

SO WHY DON'T WE GET THE NUKES THE HELL OUT OF ERDOGAN'S GRASP?
POLITICS!

OUR POLITICIANS/FOREIGN AFFAIRS "EXPERTS" FEEL THAT ERDOGAN MIGHT RUN TO RUSSIA'S OR IRAN'S WAITING ARMS... WHICH HE HAS DONE ALREADY WHEN HE WAS PISSED-OFF AT THE U.S.
"U.S. defense policy expert Kori Schake at the Hoover Institution told VOA that removing the weapons from Turkish soil would send the wrong signal to the American ally.

Turkey – which feels highly exposed by the upheaval in Syria and the Middle East overall – would develop alliances with Russia or even Iran.
"Even if Turkey does not have a lot in common with Iran, it might not have a lot of good choices if the U.S. were not seen as [its] guarantor," Schake said."

With American nukes strewn all around Europe, especially those in volatile Turkey, the question becomes, "If we REALLY don't plan to use them, why are they being left in locations where they can be compromised by lunatics like Erdogan or dedicated detroyers like the Islamic State?


AND WHAT IF ERDOGAN DID STRIKE A DEAL WITH, SAY, IRAN, TO HAND OVER THAT ENTIRE AIR BASE IN RETURN FOR 'FAVORS'?
IRAN ALSO HAS NUCLEAR CAPABLE AIRCRAFT.

TOO MANY DAMNABLE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS, TOO MUCH AT STAKE...PRECIOUS AMERICAN LIVES, AND THE CIVILIANS WHO CONTINUE TO BE UNDER ASSAULT FROM ALL SIDES.
IT'S AS BAD AS YEMEN, WHERE THE U.S. HAS "AIDED' THE SAUDIS IN KILLING THOUSANDS OF CIVILIANS, WOMEN AND CHILDREN INCLUDED.

TRUMP SHOULD SIMPLY PULL THE U.S. OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND LET THOSE NATIONS DECIDE WHOM THEY WANT TO LEAD THEM.

AMERICA WOULD SAVE TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS, STOP ALIENATING THE WHOLE WORLD WITH ITS "POLICING" AND INVASIONS AND WE JUST MIGHT SEE EVERYTHING QUICKLY CALM DOWN OVER THERE ONCE NOBODY WAS BEING AIDED BY THE U.S.


IF WE STOPPED PROVIDING EVERY 'REBEL' GROUP OVER THERE WITH 'WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION', THAT MIGHT HELP.
ANYTHING THAT CAN KILL HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE AT ONCE IS, AFTER ALL, A 'WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION', ISN'T IT?

IF WE STOPPED BLASTING AWAY AT ALL OF SAUDI ARABIA'S ENEMIES, THAT WOULD ALSO HELP.   AFTER ALL, ALMOST ALL THOSE 9/11 HIJACKERS WERE WHAT? SAUDI CITIZENS, YES?









____________________________________________________________

.
FURTHER READING 

~
Cause of death a mystery as remains of Tampa airman are returned from Turkey, 04/17/17.

Air Force Staff Sgt. Curtis John “CJ” Gardner, age 29, was found unconscious and unresponsive in his room at Incirlik Air Base on the morning of April 10.
He had been stationed at Incirlik for the past 15 months, but was due to be transferred to Ramstein Air Base the following week.
Gardner arrived at Incirlik shortly before opposition forces mounted a failed coup against Turkish President Recep Erdogan. Tension in Turkey made his tour of duty even more stressful than his previous deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq, his sister said.
"We know they have been under an extreme amount of stress that few outside the military are aware of," Erin Gardner said.
Family could not stay with troops at Incirlik, then, after the aborted coup, the base was surrounded by angry Turks. Power was cut. There was no water, or air conditioning for 10 days. The base remained tense even afterward, more so with the U.S. missile strike April 7 on an air base in Syria and with the ongoing campaign against Islamic State.

AS OF 5 DAYS AGO, "The official cause of death is (STILL) under investigation."


~ WHERE WERE AMERICAN NUKES IN EUROPE?
DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS THAT MOST AMERICANS ARE NOT AWARE EXIST.
TRULY A MUST-READ.

~ MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION IS NO LONGER A VALID DETERRENT.
AN ARTICLE WELL WORTH THE READ
 

"At a time of growing tensions between nuclear powers — Russia and NATO in Europe, and the United States, North Korea and China in Asia — Washington has quietly upgraded its nuclear weapons arsenal to create, according to three leading American scientists, “exactly what one would expect to see, if a nuclear-armed state were planning to have the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming enemies with a surprise first strike.”

Writing in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project of the Federation of American Scientists, Matthew McKinzie of the National Resources Defense Council, and physicist and ballistic missile expert Theodore Postol conclude that “Under the veil of an otherwise-legitimate warhead life-extension program,” the US military has vastly expanded the “killing power” of its warheads such that it can “now destroy all of Russia’s ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile] silos.”

~ FOR A MOST INTERESTING DISCUSSION BY EX-MILITARY PILOTS WHICH SHOWS HOW EASILY A NUCLEAR BOMB COULD BE DEPLOYED BY VARIOUS AIRCRAFT, GO <HERE>.


~ TURKEY GOT KICKED OUT OF IRAQ, BY 'FELLOW MUSLIMS'
EVEN THEY KNOW HE HAS DELUSIONS OF WORLD DOMINATION, REESTABLISHMENT OF THE OLD TURKISH EMPIRE.

Turkey tosses a monkey wrench into the Mosul offensive. Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdogan says Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is “insulting” him for demanding that his unwelcome 2,000 or so troops depart their northern Iraqi training base at Bashiqa.

Erdogan told a crowd in Istanbul this morning, “Iraq had certain requests from us regarding Bashiqa, and now they are telling us to leave, but the Turkish army has not lost so much standing as to take orders from you…The Iraqi prime minister is insulting me, first know your limits.”

Why this is a big deal:
“The Turkish presence is massively destabilizing. Reports Turkey has stepped up its training of [former parliament speaker Osama] Nujayfi’s militia has set off alarm bells,” writes Middle East analyst Kirk Sowell of Utica Risk Services. “This matters for two reasons.

One, these aren’t just random local Ninawa residents. They are the private army of Osama al-Nujayfi. Nujayfi has long ties to Turkey; in 2010, he flipped from Arab nationalist to working with [Masoud] Barzani’s [Kurdistan Democratic Party] because of the policy change in Ankara.

Two, this could increase the chance of direct conflict between Baghdad forces and Turkey-backed Sunni forces, or even Turkish forces directly. If Turkey were simply concerned about fighting ISIS, this would be less of a problem. But this is an effort to set of a zone of influence…This also hugely undermines U.S. policy in Iraq, which depends on strengthening Iraqi govt institutions versus Shia militias.” More on his take, here.





//WW