Ban DU Weapons - OpEd News

Tag(s): Afghanistan; Death; Disaster Nuclear; Iraq; Military; Mutation; Veterans; Veterans; Weapons
Add to My Group

October 17, 2007 at 10:10:47 A Genetic Disaster by Kate Mucci Page 1 of 1 page(s) http://www.opednews.com

A Genetic Disaster

On a recent episode of Out There TV, we interviewed Dr. Gary Null, who just released a documentary called “Gulf War Syndrome". Even as the pundits cried out indignantly about the conditions at Walter Reed, nobody addressed the larger problem … that tens of thousands of veterans have been injured, not just by bullets and bombs, but by the very air they breathe in the war zones.

s is poignantly and graphically shown in Null’s documentary, the U.S. administration is using nuclear weapons in its war of terror. Yes, it’s true. We, who invaded a sovereign nation allegedly because of its vast stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, are blithely using exactly such weapons.

Of course this is illegal according to every convention to which we are a party, but talking about legality misses the point. The crisis about to be precipitated by the indiscriminate use of nuclear armaments against the basically defenseless inhabitants of at least two countries will affect all of humanity. Its scope can barely be imagined.

Depleted Uranium, which is in no way, shape or form depleted of its ability to kill and maim, was in the so-called “smart” bombs used during the invasion and is still used daily in the artillery and shells used during the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. The half-life of Uranium-238 is 4.5 billion years, the age of the earth. And, as Uranium-238 decays into daughter radioactive products, in four steps before turning into lead, it continues to release more radiation at each step. There is no way to turn it off, and there is no way to clean it up. It meets the US Government’s own definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Depleted Uranium is the by-product of nuclear weapon and energy creation, and there is so much of it, it is actually cheaper than ice cream, according to an expert on Dr. Null’s DVD. Because there is such a glut of this material, the weapons manufacturers get it practically free. Wow – what a deal. Dispose of toxic waste by aiming it at civilians in what someone has classified as a terrorist state and you’ve killed two birds with one stone. No, actually, it’s much more than two birds. It’s more like all the birds. It’s the weapon that keeps on killing. Forever.

Do not for one minute think that this radioactive angel of death will stay within the boundaries of Iraq or Afghanistan, and that it is only the children of those terrible “Muslim fanatics” that will bear the burden of our nuclear holocaust. Cancer rates among children have increased by 400 per cent in Iraq, but they are not the only ones with terrible tumors and wasted limbs.

Cancers of every kind are increasingly common in soldiers returning from the Iraq war, but the effects of DU are far more insidious than cancer. The genetic structure of those exposed to it can actually be altered, and when these men father children, those children are at risk of being born with terrible mutations. Many have been born without arms or legs, with one eye, or none.

Where the wind blows, so too blows the DU dust, and it knows no borders. The air, the water and the soil in Iraq are so irradiated that the whole country should be vacated, but the problem extends far beyond the Middle East. In Australia and England, readings have shown increased levels of background radiation. We can only imagine what’s going on in neighboring nations downwind.

By deploying this weapon, we have forever altered the genetic structure of not only the human race, but of all life on earth. This travesty has been completely ignored by mainstream media in favor of nonsense about spoiled pop stars and self-aggrandizing politicians. The military has refused to acknowledge its part in what could well be the genetic destruction of the human race and has largely left its own American military victims to suffer and die without compassion or treatment. And of course the current presidential candidates have completely denied any knowledge of this issue.

But we cannot let this rest. We have to do something. We must join with Dr. Null, Dr. Doug Rokke, Leuren Moret and many others who are doing everything they can to put an end to this. I am imploring everyone reading this column –educate yourself. Watch Dr. Null’s documentary, “Gulf War Syndrome”. (You can find the link on the Out There TV web site). Read Dr. Rokke’s and Leuren Moret’s papers on the subject, then, get involved. Call, write, e-mail, camp on the doorstep of Congress if you have to, but make our representatives put a stop to the war and the use of these illegal weapons. Force them to look after the American, Iraqi, Afghani and all other victims of Depleted Uranium poisoning.

We cannot turn away from this truth. We cannot sit comfortably in our living rooms, blissfully ignorant of the fact that we, each and every one of us, are responsible for the potential demise of the human race. E.T. is not going to beam us up out of this, and we cannot entrust the continued existence of the species to men who are so crazed by power and greed that they cannot see they are forever destroying the very planet they covet.

Kate Mucci is co-host and producer of Out There Television; a weekly one-hour program broadcast throughout the U.S. on the America One and ITVI networks, and in 32 other countries around the world on BEN TV on the Sky Digital satellite system. Out There TV can be viewed on the web by going to www.OutThereTV.com where you can also find more information on Depleted Uranium and many other topics. Contact Kate at outtheretv@aol.com

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Ban DU Weapons

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

www.outtheretv.com

Kate Mucci is co-host and producer of Out There Television, a weekly one-hour broadcast program airing throughout North America, Europe and The U.K. and worldwide on the web. See the website at www.outtheretv.com.

Concerns Mount over Nuclear Energy After Series of SCARES!!

Here is our FIRST POST on a brand new blog, one which we wish did not have to be blogged ever, not at all, no way .. but we DO.

This is meant to be an ACTIVISTS blog, and attempt will be made to make SURE you can do something about what you read. In the beginning it may be necessary to post items that should help get you MOVING out of that comfy seat in front of the telly or your computer screen.

Concerns Mount Over Nuclear Energy After Series of Scares

Sceptics say recent errors highlight the drawbacks of nuclear energy

Irregularities at nuclear reactors in Germany and Japan in recent weeks have rekindled safety fears and raised tough questions about nuclear energy amid increasing environmental concerns.

The nuclear plant at Brunsbüttel in the northern German state of Schleswig-Holstein is now the world's safest. It's not surprising considering the reactor was shut down following a technical irregularity earlier this month.

The problem at Brunsbüttel, one of 17 nuclear reactors in Germany, is by no means the only mishap in recent months that has increasingly called the safety of atomic power into question.

Earlier this month, an earthquake caused leaks at a reactor in northwestern Japan and led to low-level radiation, reviving fears about nuclear safety, and the closure of the Brunsbüttel plant in Germany followed a fire at another reactor close to Hamburg.

Around the world, there are 438 nuclear plants currently in operation. The majority are in industrialized nations -- 104 in the US, 59 in France and 31 in Russia.

How dangerous were the incidents?

Despite the recent slew of incidents at nuclear power stations, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the errors in Germany, Sweden and Japan were exceptions and certainly did not pose a danger.

That's a view echoed by Klaus Kotthoff of the GRS group, an independent nuclear assessment and research organization.

While there is no technology that's free of errors, Kotthoff pointed out that nuclear power plants are subject to a range of registration procedures and measures aimed at managing irregularities -- as was the case at two nuclear plants in Germany earlier this month.

A fire broke out last month at the Krümmel nuclear plant near Hamburg in Germany

"I believe these incidents were not noteworthy from a technical security point of view," Kotthoff said.
Critics of nuclear energy, however, don't buy the argument. Henrik Paulitz of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) said the recent German incidents were dangerous.

"The reactor protection system was activated. That only happens in serious cases," Paulitz said, adding that they weren't isolated cases.
There are several nuclear incidents in Germany about which the public is not sufficiently informed, he said. The information that is released is mostly "incomprehensible" and the controversial backgrounds are often concealed.

"Serious security deficits are usually glossed over," Paulitz said.

Experts split over nuclear safety

Experts remain divided about the safety of nuclear reactors.

While Kotthoff said German plants are generally considered the safest, a 1997 study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ranked the German nuclear power station Biblis B second to last in an international nuclear power plant comparison. Only the Maine Yankee plant in the US fared worse, and it's since been shut down.

But Paulitz said other nuclear power stations too aren't much better.

Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Germany is again debating whether to stick to a nuclear energy phase out"An unfortunate mixture of technical problems and human error can at any time cause a major nuclear meltdown anywhere," he said.

The recent string of incidents comes at a time when nuclear energy seems to be undergoing somewhat of a revival. Considered one of the most cost-effective forms of generating electricity as prices of oil and gas rise, nuclear energy is largely favored by rapidly expanding economies in eastern Europe and Asia to meet their spiraling energy needs.

"The debates about climate change and reducing emissions also play a role here," said Alan McDonald of the IAEA. "And naturally, it's about securing production."

Nuclear energy plagued by problems

Nuclear energy production, however, remains problematic as most countries using nuclear energy need to import uranium. According to the IAEA, there are only 4.7 tons of economically viable uranium reserves worldwide. Given current levels of usage, experts believe stocks will only last for another 60 years. That would mean that uranium would be depleted faster than oil and gas reserves.

Experts also pointed to the unsolved problem of disposing nuclear waste, which remains radioactive for decades.

Experts estimate that uranium stocks will only last another 60 years

Paulitz said the environmental advantages of using nuclear energy are also limited since it only provides an estimated 1.2 percent of the world's energy needs. For nuclear energy to make a real difference in cutting greenhouse gas emissions, thousands of new reactors would have to be built, he said. That is hardly possible given the nuclear industry's low production capacity.

"It's only about sustaining energy production on this low level and maintaining the technology -- also because of interest in nuclear weapons," Paulitz said, adding that the world could easily do without this marginal energy source.

Security poses biggest hurdle

IAEA's Mcdonald said that security issues increasingly pose the biggest hurdle when it comes to using nuclear energy. The Vienna-based nuclear watchdog has set up an entire department to explore ways of preventing the misuse of nuclear materials and terrorist attacks on reactors.

"Terrorists who plant to blow up a nuclear reactor can do so with relatively easy means," Paulitz said. "Protecting against such attacks is just not possible."

So we ask: WHY BUILD THEM THEN?? Seems very short sighted to US.

Originally posted at Nuclear Free SA