 |
| Mr Paul Afoko |
If
the media sympathetic to the New Patriotic Party (NPP) is to be believed, then
Paul Afoko a businessman and a close associate of former President Kufuor is
heading for victory in the contest for the National Chairmanship of the Party.
Mr
Jake Obetsebi- Lamptey, the current National Chairman admits that Mr Afoko
started his campaign early and therefore has a head start.
He told TV3’s “Hot Issues” that “I have some
catching up to do”.
It
is widely believed that Mr Afoko is helped by the decision of both Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey
and his vice, Mr Fred Oware to contest for the same position.
Mr
Oware and Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey will end up splitting votes and create favourable
conditions for Afoko to slip through.
Mr Afoko Keenly supported Mr Alan Kyeremateng
against Nana Akufo-Addo in the last contest for the Presidential candidature of
the party.
However,
he has now positioned himself as an independent candidate arguing that a
National Chairman ought to be neutral in the contest for the presidential
candidature.
It is still not clear how the victory of Mr
Afoko will effect the chances of Nana Akufo- Addo.
Insiders
say that the race for the position of General Secretary is a straight fight
between incumbent Kwadwo Owusu Afriyie, alias Sir John and Kwabena Agyapong, a
former spokesperson of President Kufuor Kufuor.
Both
candidates say that they will win the race.
It
is also expected that Mr Freddie Blay, a defector from the Convention Peoples
Party (CPP) will very easily win as Vice Chairman of the Party.
As we went to bed, there were media
speculations that the election could be post poned as a direct result of the
poor financial state of the party.
Editorial
Collapse Of The Cedi
Over
the weekend, a pastor claimed that the continuing fall in the value of the cedi
is caused by spiritual forces and suggested that fasting and prayers would help
prop up the national currency.
The
problem is that another Christian priest, a Methodist Bishop in the gold mining
town of Obuasi claimed that fasting and prayers have failed to end the social
and economic problems confronting the people of Ghana.
Which
of these priests can we believe? Are all of them not worshiping the same God?
In
our view, the problems facing the people of Ghana including the fall in the
value of the cedi are human made and can be resolved through human effort.
The cedi is falling simply because we are not
producing the things we need for our survival and have become dependent on the
imports.
The
other reason is that under the marching orders of the World Bank and the
International Monetary Fund, the resources of Ghana are being exploited only to
maximise the profits of giant companies in the centre of the colonial
metropolis.
The
way out is to abandon the reckless path of neo-liberalism, take hold of the
resources of Ghana and exploit them for the benefit of the people.
There can be no super natural in this process.
Experimenting
With Life
 |
| Dr David Suzuki |
By
David Suzuki
I am a geneticist by training. At one time, I
had one of the largest research grants and genetics labs in Canada. The time I
spent in this lab was one of the happiest periods of my life and I am proud of
the contribution we made to science. My introductory book is still the most
widely used genetics text in the world.
When
I graduated as a geneticist in 1961, I was full of enthusiasm and determined to
make a mark. Back then we knew about DNA, genes, chromosomes, and genetic
regulation. But today when I tell students what our hot ideas were in '61, they
choke with laughter. Viewed in 2013, ideas from 1961 seem hilarious. But when
those students become professors years from now and tell their students what
was hot in 2013, their students will be just as amused.
At
the cutting edge of scientific research, most of our ideas are far from the
mark - wrong, in need of revision, or irrelevant. That's not a derogation of
science; it's the way science advances. We take a set of observations or data,
set up a hypothesis that makes sense of them, and then we test the hypothesis.
The new insights and techniques we gain from this process are interpreted
tentatively and liable to change, so any rush to apply them strikes me as
downright dangerous.
No
group of experts should be more aware of the hazards of unwarranted claims than
geneticists. After all, it was the exuberance of geneticists early in this
century that led to the creation of a discipline called eugenics, which aimed
to improve the quality of human genes.
These scientists were every bit as clever,
competent, and well-meaning as today's genetic engineers; they just got carried
away with their discoveries. Outlandish claims were made by eminent geneticists
about the hereditary nature of traits such as drunkenness, nomadism, and
criminality, as well as those judged "inferior" or
"superior." Those claims provided scientific respectability to
legislation in the US prohibiting interracial marriage and immigration from countries
judged inferior, and allowed sterilization of inmates of mental institutions on
genetic grounds. In Nazi Germany, geneticist Josef Mengele held peer-reviewed
research grants for his work at Auschwitz. The grand claims of geneticists led
to "race purification" laws and the Holocaust.
Today,
the leading-edge of genetics is in the field of biotechnology. The basis of
this new area is the ability to take DNA (genetic material) from one organism
and insert it into a different species. This is truly revolutionary. Human
beings can't normally exchange genes with a carrot or a mouse, but with DNA
technology it can happen.
However,
history informs us that though we love technology, there are always costs, and
since our knowledge of how nature works is so limited, we can't anticipate how
those costs will manifest. We only have to reflect on DDT, nuclear power, and
CFCs, which were hailed as wonderful creations but whose long-term detrimental
effects were only found decades after their widespread use.
Now,
with a more wise and balanced perspective, we are cutting back on the use of
these technologies. But with genetically modified (GM) foods, this option may
not be available. The difference with GM food is that once the genie is out of
the bottle, it will be difficult or impossible to stuff it back. If we stop
using DDT and CFCs, nature may be able to undo most of the damage - even
nuclear waste decays over time. But GM plants are living organisms. Once these
new life forms have become established in our surroundings, they can replicate,
change, and spread; there may be no turning back. Many ecologists are concerned
about what this means to the balance of life on Earth that has evolved over
millions of years through the natural reproduction of species.
Genomes
are selected in the entirety of their expression. In ways we barely comprehend,
the genes within a species are interconnected and interact as an integrated
whole. When a gene from an unrelated species is introduced, the context within
which it finds itself is completely changed. If a taiko drum is plunked in the
middle of a symphony orchestra and plays along, it is highly probable the
resultant music will be pretty discordant. Yet based on studies of gene
behavior derived from studies within a species, biotechnologists assume that
those rules will also apply to genes transferred between species. This is
totally unwarranted.
As
we learned from experience with DDT, nuclear power and CFCs, we only discover
the costs of new technologies after they are extensively used. We should apply
the Precautionary Principle with any new technology, asking whether it is
needed and then demanding proof that it is not harmful. Nowhere is this more
important than in biotechnology because it enables us to tamper with the very
blueprint of life.
Since
GM foods are now in our diet, we have become experimental subjects without any
choice. (Europeans say if they want to know whether GMOs are hazardous, they
should just study North Americans.) I would have preferred far more
experimentation with GMOs under controlled lab conditions before their release
into the open, but it's too late.
We
have learned from painful experience that anyone entering an experiment should
give informed consent. That means at the very least food should be labeled if
it contains GMOs so we each can make that choice.
David
T Suzuki PhD is an award-winning scientist, environmentalist and broadcaster.
Web:www.davidsuzuki.org
Short people prone to paranoia
Scientists
have found that feeling shorter makes people more susceptible to feelings of
paranoia and inferiority as well as extreme mistrust.
A
team of researchers from Britain's Oxford University used virtual reality (VR)
technology to decrease the height of 60 adult women who were travelling on a
computer-simulated Tube train by 25 centimeters.
The
volunteers who were prone to having "mistrustful thoughts"
experienced the same journey for a second time at their normal height.
The
results of the study indicated that most participants reported negative
feelings, such as being incompetent, unlikeable or inferior when they were
height-reduced.
The
researchers added that when in the lower height phase of the experiment, the
participants also experienced increased levels of mistrust, fear and paranoia.
They
were more likely to think someone in the virtual train carriage was
deliberately staring at them, had bad intentions towards them or was trying to
harm them, the study discovered.
This
is while the other virtual passengers in the carriage were programmed to be
neutral and not do anything to spark feelings of fear or suspect.
“Being
tall is associated with greater career and relationship success. Height is
taken to convey authority and we feel taller when we feel more powerful,” said
Professor Daniel Freeman who led the research.
“In
this study we reduced people's height, which led to a striking consequence:
people felt inferior and this caused them to feel overly mistrustful. This all
happened in a virtual reality simulation, but we know that people behave in VR
as they do in real life,” he added.
Freeman
further said that the study provides a key insight into paranoia as it shows
that people's excessive mistrust of others directly stems from their own
negative feelings about themselves.
“The
important treatment implication... is that if we help people to feel more
self-confident then they will be less mistrustful,” he noted.
The
research was published in the journal Psychiatry Research on Wednesday.
STATEMENT FROM DUMOR FAMILY
 |
| Komla Dumor |
A
Komla Dumor Memorial Foundation has been set up by the Dumor Family to sustain
the legacy of Komla Dumor by pursuing
plans he had for promoting the ideals that he stood and worked for. These
ideals enabled him to have such a positive impact on the world and endeared him
to so many people worldwide, resulting in the amazing outpouring of love
following his passing.
The
Komla Dumor Memorial Foundation will, among other things, seek to promote
excellence in journalism, with particular emphasis on broadcast journalism, and
initiate programmes for the development of African youth as well as the
education of children, including his own three wonderful children, Elinam,
Elorm and Araba.
Since
the passing of Komla Dumor on Saturday 18th January 2014, numerous
individuals, local and international organisations have offered to contribute
to such a framework for continuing the tremendous impact that Komla made in
addition to giving him a fitting burial.
The
Foundation has made arrangements for monetary contributions to be paid into a
bank account details of which are as follows:
Bank : Standard Chartered Bank
Account
Name : Komla Dumor Foundation
Account
Numbers : 0100118364400 (GHANA
CEDI)
8701518364400 (USD LOCAL)
8700218364400 (USD OFFSHORE)
2800218364400 (GBP OFFSHORE)
Swift
Code : SCBLGHAC
Branch : Opeibea House
Branch
Address : P. O. Box KIA 903, Airport, Accra
The
Komla Dumor Memorial Foundation will be managed by a Board of Trustees made up
of distinguished local and international personalities who believe in what
Komla stood for. The Foundation will
coordinate all other initiatives designed to honor the memory of Komla Dumor.
Donors
to the Komla Dumor Memorial Foundation may specify the use to which the donor
wishes to have the donation applied within the broad parameters of the
Foundation. The Foundation may be contacted on the following:
Tel:
+233 303 932 383
In
respect of In Kind Donations, arrangements can be made through the email or
phone contact provided above.
Prof.
Ernest Dumor, father of Komla Dumor, says, “Komla sought to give of himself to
society and set an example of excellence, especially for the youth. He was
always eager to ease the pain of those in need. It is our hope this Foundation
will enable us to continue pursuing and realising Komla’s dream. We are
grateful to all those who have expressed their commitment
to this cause.“
Media Contacts:
Amb.
Patrick R. D. Hayford
020
601 309
Esther
A. N. Cobbah
Stratcomm
Africa
28
Samora Machel Road, Accra
023
084 7021
Website:
www.komla-dumor.com
Email:
dumorfamliy@gmail.com
Hotline:
0303 932 383
Note to Editors
Komla
Afeke Dumor, who passed away suddenly on 18th January 2014 in
London, was the son of Professor Ernest Dumor, the first Chief Executive
Officer of the National Identification Authority (NIA) and a former member of
the Electoral Commission of Ghana and a Professor of the University of Cape
Coast in the Central Region of Ghana.
Komla,
who is a native of Aflao in the Volta Region of Ghana, was a well-respected
international broadcast journalist. He previously hosted the Super Morning Show
on Joy FM in Ghana for almost a decade before going to the BBC in 2007.
Komla
is survived by his wife, Kwansema, and three children. He was the brother of
Mrs. Mawuena Trebarh, Chief Executive Officer of Ghana Investment Promotion
Centre (GIPC), and Dr. Korshie Dumor, a Medical Doctor currently practicing in
the USA.
“shoot-to-kill”
order against Fulani herdsmen
By
Dr. Michael J.K. Bokor
Folks, when I read earlier today a news report that the NPP
MP for Asante Akyem, Kwadwo Baah Agyeman, had given an order to his
constituents to "shoot and kill" whenever cattle belonging to Fulani
herdsmen invade their farms, I cringed.
Not only because the order came from an MP who had no authority to issue such an order but because of the wider ramifications of the order and the likelihood of its being abused to worsen the very problem that it might have been aimed at solving.
I questioned the legality, morality, and propriety of this kind of order in a constitutional democratic era when governance calls for better approaches toward solving problems than what the MP has chosen.
This order is a recipe for disaster and won't solve the perceived problem. The MP has crossed the line and should be told so. Indeed, the Ashanti Regional Security Council (Regsec) has swiftly done so to ensure that nobody does anything to endanger life and well-being that part of the country.
The government must immediately make its voice heard on the matter and how it intends to solve the Fulani problem once-and-for-all.
When the Fulani menace arose sometime ago, I was one of those who vehemently condemned the government for not tackling it expeditiously to avert any confrontation between the Fulani herdsmen and their benefactors (the local people whose land and resources they and their cattle use) all over the country where they operated.
The government took some time to respond to the menace, setting up task forces and empowering them to deal with the Fulani herdsmen, some of whom were driven out of some areas only to return to carry out their activities with impunity; hence, the anger of the people in the affected areas.
But solving the problem cannot be done with this "shoot-to-kill" order from an MP.
Where is the District Security Committee (Disec) in this case? Or the District Assembly itself? And why should an MP go to that extreme of taking over a security matter to issue such a dangerous order on?
In fact, the MP's justification of his order is itself a confirmation of the high-handedness that he has turned to as the solution. He says that the eleven-member military and police task force set up last year at the instance of the National Security Council to investigate the Agogo Fulani herdsmen menace, had not achieved the desired results.
But why won't he raise the issue for it to be tackled in a more civilized manner than resorting to this killing (of the cattle or the Fulani herdsmen)?
Threatened, won't the Fulani herdsmen also arm themselves to defend their interests? In consequence, what will the local people and the Fulanis be setting themselves up for? A battle of sorts?
Obviously, this NPP MP doesn't know his limits or purview as a law-maker. One would have expected him to even raise the problem on the floor of Parliament or introduce a bill to help Parliament come out with a law to define how cattle herding by these Fulanis should be done in the country.
We know that the Fulani herdsmen are not restricted to the Agogo area alone; they are all over the country, doing things with impunity. So, to provide a long-term solution for their menace, shouldn't this MP even think outside the box to initiate a bill that will have a national character and help restrain these Fulanis in any civilized way possible?
Failing to do so portrays this MP as narrow-focused. His reason for issuing the order is even more ridiculous:
"We will not sit there for these Fulani herdsmen to use their cattle to destroy what we have used our hard earned money to establish. So, I am admonishing that if they come to your farm, shoot and kill them. As an evidence, let them be on the farm and the security [personnel] will come and see. It will be an evidence that the cattle are still there", the MP advised.
Indeed, whether we like it or not, these Fulanis also have their part to play and cannot just be destroyed anyhow. The problem needs a better solution than what this NPP MP has ordered his constituents to do.
Some MPs really need a lot of “schooling” to be able to function properly. Pandering to the gallery isn't part of that "schooling".
And the government itself will be blamed for not acting resolutely to solve this Fulani problem to ensure peaceful co-existence in areas accommodating these Fulani herdsmen and their cattle. Indeed, for as long as the government and its law-enforcement agencies fail to tackle problems to the satisfaction of the people, there is the likelihood that some on-the-spur-of-the-moment measures such as is coming from this NPP MP will be adopted by those who can no more tolerate the nuisance from undesirables in their communities whose activities endanger limb and property.
Why can't the government act more decisively on such problems
that have serious security implications? I am worried; so should all Ghanaians
be at this stage that a "shoot-to-kill" order is in full swing in
Agogo and its environs. Who knows where it will come from next? Shooting to
kill is dangerous to democracy!!
I
shall return…
E-mail:
mjbokor@yahoo.com
Join
me on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/mjkbokor to continue the conversation.
GMO Crops Have Led to a 25% Increase In Herbicide Use
One of the
Main Selling Points for GE Crops – Decreased Pesticide Use – Has Been Totally
Debunked
One
of the main selling points for genetically engineered crops is that they would
use substantially less pesticides than conventional crops.
Because
of that, and other, promises regarding GE crops, they have taken over much of
the food crops in America. For example:
Monsanto
reports that – between 2008 and 2009 – 95% of all sugarbeets planted
were genetically engineered to be able to tolerate high doses of the pesticide
Roundup
The
USDA reports that 93% of all soy and 85% of all corn grown
in the U.S. is an herbicide-resistant GE variety
Similarly,
around 93% of all cottonseed oil
and more than 90% of all canola oil produced in the U.S. is
herbicide-resistant GE
However,
it turns out that GE crops need a lot more
herbicides than conventional ones.
Washington
State University Charles Benbrook – former Executive Director of the Board on
Agriculture at the National Academy of Sciences and, before that, Executive
Director of the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Research, and Foreign
Agriculture, U.S. House of Representatives – published a study showing:
Contrary
to often-repeated claims that today’s genetically-engineered crops have, and
are reducing pesticide use, the spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds in
herbicide-resistant weed management systems has brought about substantial
increases in the number and volume of herbicides applied. If new
genetically engineered forms of corn and soybeans tolerant of 2,4-D are
approved, the volume of 2,4-D sprayed [background] could drive
herbicide usage upward by another approximate 50%.
***
Largely
because of the spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds, HR crop technology has led
to a 239 million kg (527 million pound) increase in herbicide use across the
three major GE-HR crops, compared to what herbicide use would likely have been
in the absence of HR crops.
Herbicide-tolerant
crops worked extremely well in the first few years of use, but over-reliance
led to shifts in weed communities and the emergence of resistant weeds that
have, together, forced farmers to incrementally –
Increase
herbicide application rates (especially glyphosate),
Spray
more often, and
Add
new herbicides that work through an alternate mode-of-action into their spray
programs.
Each
of these responses has, and will continue to contribute to the steady rise in
the volume of herbicides applied per acre of HT corn, cotton, and soybeans.
HT
crops have increased herbicide use by 527 million pounds over the 16-year
period (1996-2011). The incremental increase per year has grown steadily from
1.5 million pounds in 1999, to 18 million five years later in 2003, and 79
million pounds in 2009. In 2011, about 90 million more pounds of herbicides
were applied than likely in the absence of HT, or about 24% of total herbicide
use on the three crops in 2011.
Today’s
major GE crops have increased overall pesticide use by 404 million pounds from
1996 through 2011 (527 million pound increase in herbicides, minus the 123
million pound decrease in insecticides). Overall pesticide use in 2011 was
about 20% higher on each acre planted to a GE crop, compared to pesticide use
on acres not planted to GE crops.
There
are now two-dozen weeds resistant to glyphosate, the major herbicide used on HT
crops, and many of these are spreading rapidly. Millions of acres are infested
with more than one glyphosate-resistant weed. The presence of resistant weeds
drives up herbicide use by 25% to 50%, and increases farmer-weed control costs
by at least as much.
The
biotechnology-seed-pesticide industry’s primary response to the spread of
glyphosate-resistant weeds is development of new HT varieties resistant to
multiple herbicides, including 2,4-D and dicamba. These older phenoxy
herbicides pose markedly greater human health and environmental risks per acre
treated than glyphosate. Approval of corn tolerant of 2,4-D is pending, and
could lead to an additional 50% increase in herbicide use per acre on 2,4-D HT
corn.
“Resistant
weeds have become a major problem for many farmers reliant on GE crops, and
they are now driving up the volume of herbicide needed each year by about 25
percent,” Benbrook said.
A
new study released by Food & Water Watch yesterday finds the goal
of reduced chemical use has not panned out as planned. In fact, according
to the USDA and EPA data used in the report, the quick adoption of genetically
engineered crops by farmers has increased herbicide use over the past 9
years in the U.S. The report follows on the heels of another such study by Washington State University research professor
Charles Benbrook just last year.
Both
reports focus on “superweeds.” It turns out that spraying a pesticide
repeatedly selects for weeds which also resist the chemical. Ever more
resistant weeds are then bred, able to withstand increasing amounts – and
often different forms – of herbicide.
Other Potential Downsides
Genetically
engineered foods have been linked to obesity, cancer, liver failure, infertility and all sorts of other
diseases (brief, must-watch videos here and here).
But
government agencies like the FDA go to great lengths to cover up the potential health damage from genetically
modified foods,
and to keep the consumer in the dark about what they’re really eating.
The
EPA recently raised the allowable amount of a glyphosate – the
main ingredient in Monstanto’s toxic Roundup – by 3,000% … pretending that it
won’t have adverse health effects.
And
– as noted above – the EPA is leaning towards approving corn specially engineered to tolerate the highly-toxic
herbicide 2,4-D. Ironically, Monsanto has proposed this new “Agent Orange corn” to combat the superweeds caused by the use of
Monsanto’s Roundup-ready GE crops. What could go possibly go wrong?
American Farmers Abandoning Genetically Modified Seeds
By
Daniel Jennings
A
growing number of farmers are abandoning genetically modified seeds, but it’s
not because they are ideologically opposed to the industry.
Simply
put, they say non-GMO crops are more productive and profitable.
Modern
Farmer magazine discovered that there is a movement among farmers abandoning genetically modified organisms (GMO) because of simple
economics.
“We
get the same or better yields, and we save money up front,” crop consultant and
farmer Aaron Bloom said of non-GMO seeds. Bloom has been experimenting
with non-GMO seeds for five years and he has discovered that non-GMO is more
profitable.
The
re-converts to non-GMO seeds are not hippies but
conservative Midwestern farmers who are making a business decision, Modern
Farmer discovered. They are switching back to natural seed because it is
more profitable — not because of any ideology.
“Five
years ago the [GMO seeds] worked,” said farmer Christ Huegerich, who along with
his father planted GMO seeds. “I didn’t have corn rootworm because of the
Bt gene, and I used less pesticide. Now, the worms are adjusting, and the
weeds are resistant. Mother Nature adapts.”
Farmers
can get paid more for conventional corn than GMO corn. Plus, Huegerich
discovered, convention corn can produce more per acre. Modern Farme
reported that two years ago, Huegerich planted 320 acres of conventional corn
and 1,700 with GMO corn. The conventional fields “yielded 15 to 30 more
bushels per acre than the GMO fields, with a profit margin of up to $100 more
per acre.” Last year, he planted conventional corn in 750 acres.
“I
get a fifty-cent-per-bushel premium,” Huegerich said of the non-GMO corn he grows in Breda,
Iowa.
Herbicide
use increased by 26 percent between 2001 and 2010 because of the spread of
herbicide-resistant weeds. Huegerich said he used herbicides on GMO corn
and conventional corn, even though theoretically he shouldn’t have to use it on
his genetically modified crop.
The
group Farm & Water Watch reported that 61.2 million acres of cropland in
the US are plagued by weeds that are resistant to the popular glyphosate
herbicides.
Why
Non-GMO Seeds Are More Profitable
The
Modern Farmer article, called The Post GMO-Economy, makes an excellent case for
farmers dumping GMO. Some of the interesting facts the magazine uncovered
include:
The
cost of growing one acre of non-GMO corn was $680.95, the cost
of growing an acre of GMO corn was $761.80 according to Aaron Bloom. That means
it costs $80.85 more an acre to raise GMO corn.
GMO
seeds can cost up to $150 a bag more than regular seeds.
The
market for non-GMO foods has grown from $1.3 billion in 2011 to $3.1 billion in
2013, partially because some Asian and European countries don’t want GMO seeds.
Grain
dealer Clarkson Grain pays farmers an extra $2 a bushel for non-GMO soybeans
and an additional $1 a bushel for non-GMO corn.
The
market for non-GMO seed is growing. Sales at Spectrum Seed Solutions,
which sells non-GMO seed, have doubled every year for the last four years.
Sales at another company that markets non-GMO seeds, eMerge Genetics of
West Des Moines, Iowa, have increased by 30 percent a year for five years.
Spectrum
Seed Solutions president Scott Odle thinks that non-GMO corn could be 20
percent of the market in five years.
Bloom,
the farm consultant, said planting convention corn can save farmers an average
of $81 per acre per season. That’s a difference of $81,000 for a farm of
1,000 acres.
It
looks like the past might be the future for farmers as more and more growers
abandon GMO. The free market could very well spell the end of GMO seeds.
The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide
Nuclear Radiation
By
Michel Chossudovsky
INTRODUCTION
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, if inhaled can cause
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)
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”.
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 industry 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).
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.
Privatization in the Name of the Ruling Elites
By
Dr. Gary G. Kohls
Among
the many facets of classical European fascism (many of which are becoming
increasingly true in the “Friendly American Fascist” version that is cunningly
[and rapidly] being instituted by ruling elites here in the good old USA) are
these twenty or so traits, gleaned from “End of America”, by author Naomi Wolfe
and “The 14 Characteristics of Fascism”, by author Lawrence Britt, PhD. Here is
the list that I compiled from those two sources, in no particular order of
importance:
1)
the suppression of workers’ rights and trade unions,
2)
the suppression of socialism and democracy,
3)
the support of corporatism and corrupt crony capitalism,
4)
the normalization of human and civil rights violations,
5)
the normalization of fraudulent elections,
6)
the merger of church and state,
7)
an obsession with law and order,
8)
press censorship,
9)
control of the media by ruling elites,
10)
uber-patriotism (the promotion of powerful nationalist feelings),
11)
attempts to unify majority factions of the nation by the scapegoating of
minorities,
12)
powerful militarism,
13)
sexism,
14)
xenophobia (fear of foreigners),
15)
a strong national security/surveillance state, the suppression of dissent,
16)
the targeting of whistleblowers and truth-tellers,
17)
anti-intellectualism/anti-science,
18)
the development of a “thug class”,
19)
the harassment of citizen’s groups by “law enforcement”,
20)
the development of a gulag of prisons and 21) the arbitrary detention and
release of citizens to instill fear.
My
purchasing decisions, my eating decisions, my politics and what candidates or
political party I support or vote for are shaped by how many fascist traits I
find in the particular industry with which I do business or what candidate or
party is running for office. Just looking at that list and you will know that I
(and a lot of other peace and justice folks that I know) am a member of the
most anti-fascist party that I know of: the Green Party. (Candidates embracing
the increasingly irrelevant democratic wing of the Democratic Party [the
Wellstone-wing] occasionally also get my support.)
The
destruction of labor unions, workers’ rights and the “privatization of
practically everything” (including public education and teachers’ rights) seems
to be one of the agenda items around which both major political parties are
uniting. So when I ran across the powerful article below (from the Labor
Fightback Network at www.----escape_autolink_uri:95ba6cd4ade749c819218ba642ba8459----),
I knew it deserved a wider audience. Therefore I include it below in its
entirety.
DEFEND
PUBLIC EDUCATION!
Public
education, one of the storied pillars of our society, is under attack by people
and institutions who like to think of themselves as “reformers.” What is the
message of these self-styled reformers? They contend that the public schools
have “failed.” They want to close “underachieving” public schools. They want to
fire teachers and kick out teachers’ unions. They want to privatize public
schools. Finally, they want to embrace high-stakes testing.
Who
are these “reformers?” They include politicians from both political parties
such as George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Jeb Bush, Rahm Emanuel and Corey Booker.
They include foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the
Walton Foundation (Walmart), and billionaires like former New York City mayor
Michael Bloomberg. They also include market-based education ideologues such as
Michelle Rhee of the misnamed foundation, Students First; as well as Wendy Kopp
of Teach for America. Here are a few of the issues.
POVERTY. Most of these
ideologues, foundations, and politicians dismiss poverty, dysfunctional
families, and deteriorating neighborhoods as “excuses.” All students should be
able to excel in school, and if they don’t the fault lies with the teacher and
their unions.
2. TESTING. Both “No child
Left Behind” under George W. Bush and “Race to the Top”
under Barack Obama
feature a reliance on high-stakes testing. Standardized tests in reading and
mathematics will determine whether or not a school or teachers within a school
are doing their jobs properly.
3. PRIVATIZATION. Most of the “reformers”
listed above embrace some form of privatization of part or all of public
education. Some embrace charter schools, which exist alongside the public
schools and draw students, and others champion vouchers, which are payments
directly to the student or the student’s family so that the parents can use the
money to choose a school for their son or daughter. In many cases, this means
non-union, private, for-profit schools or private for-profit on-line delivery
systems run by corporate education companies.
4. PRIVATE INVESTMENT. One of the major players in
the school “reform” movement are Wall Street investment firms and hedge fund
managers whose goal is to supplant the current geographically based public
school system that we have known and replace it with a competitive,
market-based system of school choice. Many Wall Street investors see public
education as the next great frontier for private investment.
5. SEGREGATION. Now, almost 60 years after Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka,
segregation is alive and well in what passes for public education. In urban
centers, financially strapped public schools are almost all African-American or
Latino. In corporate-run charter schools, the pitch is often to particular
target audience . . . often white students from affluent families. Charter
schools can select their student body and they often “counsel out” students
with disabilities or students who have low achievement records. The result is
that privatization helps re-segregate American schools.
The
Vilification of Teachers and Their Unions
If
there is one target in the sights of these advocates of the corporatization of
public schools, it would be American teachers and their unions. Almost all
reformers vilify teachers and their unions. Such apostles of destruction as
Wendy Kopp (Teach for America) and Michelle Rhee (Students First and former
school chief in Washington, DC) have denounced unions and called for the repeal
of teacher tenure laws. Their utopia would be a world in which every teacher
worked in a privatized, non-union system of schools with no job security and no
due process rights. If a teacher’s students do well on a battery of
standardized tests, then the teacher has employment for another year. If the
teacher’s students do not do well (often for a variety of reasons beyond the
teacher’s control) the teacher is fired. Often whole schools would be closed if
they were judged to be “under-performing.”
In
large cities such as Chicago and Cleveland, the public schools are no longer
run by elected boards. Instead, they are run out of the mayor’s office by
unelected bureaucrats. In most cases, these mayors are Democrats. They often
have unfettered power to close schools and impose testing. In Chicago,
Democratic Mayor Rahm Emanuel, an ally of President Obama, has promised the
closing of more and more neighborhood schools. He also provoked a long and
bitter strike with the Chicago Teachers Union. School closings were one of the
key issues in that strike.
The
assault on public education is a bi-partisan effort
The
assault on public education is a bi-partisan effort with both Democratic and
Republican politicians and education “experts” from both parties taking aim at
teachers and especially at teacher unions and collective bargaining for
teachers and other school workers. From Republican administrations to
Democratic administrations, federal policy, through the Department of
Education, to the states has been one of market-driven continuity. President
George W. Bush gave us “No Child Left Behind.” Then, President Barack Obama
initiated “The Race to the Top.” Both Federal programs contain an emphasis on
high-stakes testing in reading and mathematics, as well as closing schools and
firing teachers. What effect do these programs have on schools? Let’s take a
look:
CURRICULUM. Faced with federal
mandates to use testing, public schools often short-change other subject areas
(literature, history, music, and art) in order to concentrate on the subject
areas for which there are standardized tests. Administrators often tell
teachers to “teach to the test” in order to help the school get high scores on
the standardized tests.
CHARTER
SCHOOLS. Most charter schools
are private schools that have been started in order to compete with public
schools. Many charter schools are like chain stores with a number of them being
owned by the same newly formed education company. Governors like those in Ohio
(Republican) and Illinois (Democratic) have cut the budget for public education
and instead have funneled money to charter schools. For their part, many
charter schools exhibit a Jekyll and Hyde demeanor. In order to position
themselves to get taxpayer money, these private, corporate schools claim that
they are public schools. However, once the funds have been delivered and
outside citizens begin to inquire about just how these “new” public schools
operate, charter school officials frequently announce that they are private
entities and thus are not required to be transparent with parents or the public
in general.
FREE
MARKET IDEOLOGY.
Liberalism since its inception in 19th Century Britain has always held “free
markets” as a core belief as the best way to achieve a just society. Today,
this continuing faith in unfettered markets is called “neo-liberalism” and is
embraced in varying degrees by both Democrats and Republicans in the United
States. One of the pillars of this emerging neo-liberal consensus (among power
brokers, that is) is the idea of “school choice.” These proponents seek to
privatize prisons, schools, public services, the management of roads and
highways, just to name a few. It is an article of faith with them (unsupported
by any studies) that privately run schools are by definition better than public
schools. In addition, this programmatic push seeks to open up public education
as a new frontier for corporate investment. Public schools are derided as “cost
centers,” while privately run charter schools and online “schools” are lauded
as “opportunity centers.” One might ask: opportunity for whom? Investors for
sure. Kids? Not likely.
What
can those of us who believe in public education do?
First,
we must recognize that attacks on the public schools and on teachers and their
unions are part of a broader neo-liberal attack (supported by both political
parties) on the following: the labor movement, public services like schools,
and the safety net (features of the welfare state that benefit workers such as
Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps and other programs). The goal is either
to eliminate these services, institutions, and programs; or, if doing so would
provoke too much of an outcry, then privatize them, thereby opening them up to
private investment and control by the same forces that provide most of the
funding to the major political parties.
Second,
we must recognize that resistance to this assault must begin at the local
grassroots level in cities and towns across the country. What does this mean?
1.
Local teachers unions and other unions must reach out to neighborhood
organizations, faith groups, and parent groups to build local coalitions with a
common program that opposes cuts and privatization. Surveys have found that
parents are often very positive about their local neighborhood schools and
would resist efforts to close or privatize them.
2.
These same coalitions must put pressure on school boards (where they exist) and
on members of the local city or town council. Eventually the coalitions should
sponsor independent candidates for city or town council and for local school
boards. Even when unsuccessful, these campaigns can help provide to local
voters an alternative message to the message of the mayor and local Chamber of
Commerce and local foundations, which emphasize blaming teachers, closing
schools, and privatizing education.
3.
The coalitions should spend time becoming better informed on the issues
presented here. This is hard to do because many will be working parents with
many other responsibilities.
However,
we should not allow the duly appointed “experts” who favor privatization to
define the issues. Coalition members should attend school board meetings and
city council meetings (even en masse when necessary). Reading is critical and
here are three of the many books that touch upon the issues described above:
(1)
Reign of Error: The Hoax of
the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools,
by Diane Ravitch,
(2)
Class Warfare: Inside the
Fight to Fix America’s Schools, by Steven Brill, and
(3)
Schooling in Capitalist
America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life,
by Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis.
The
forces arrayed against us are well-funded and aggressive. They have support
from the highest citadels of political and economic power in America. However,
this is a struggle for the soul of what remains of democratic life in the
United States. We must work at the local level to build not just grassroots
resistance to these “reform” efforts, but we must also fashion alternatives to
preserve public institutions and to save local democracy. If we fail, then, in
the future, we will have the rhetoric of democracy . . . but gone will be its
substance.
