Nuke

Governments Worldwide Raise Acceptable Radiation Levels Based Upon Politics ... Not Science

radiation hazard sign
© n/a
Instead of Protecting People, Governments Cover Up by Raising "Safe" Radiation Levels

American and Canadian authorities have virtually stopped monitoring airborne radiation.

Neither American nor Canadian authorities are testing fish for radioactivity.

Does that mean that we don't have to worry about radiation from Fukushima?

It is a little hard to know, given that what is deemed a "safe level" of radiation is determined by politics ... rather than science. For example, current safety standards are based on the ridiculous assumption that everyone exposed is a healthy man in his 20s - and that radioactive particles ingested into the body cause no more damage than radiation hitting the outside of the body.
Bizarro Earth

Biofuels pollute more than oil, leaked data show

Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels such as palm oil, soybean and rapeseed are higher than those for fossil fuels when the effects of Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) are counted, according to leaked EU data seen by EurActiv.

The default values assigned to the biofuels compare to those from Canada's oil sands - also known as tar sands - according to the figures, which should be released along with long-awaited legislative proposals on biofuels in the spring.

A spokesperson for the European Commission said she could "not comment on leaked documents, such as impact assessments which have not been published."

But industry and civil society sources described the data as credible and in line with other studies. One said it would sound a death knell for the biodiesel industry, if published.

"I think the science has proved clearly that because of the link to deforestation in places such as South East Asia, a lot of the biodiesels have significantly negative impacts on the climate," Robbie Blake, a spokesman for Friends of the Earth, told EurActiv.

Comment: So the net effect is that the 'green measures' put into place to 'save the planet' will cost us more and speed up destruction of the planet.

Family

US: New Hampshire Republicans Propose Bills That Prevent Police From Protecting Domestic Abuse Victims

© ThinkProgress
Since the 1970s, New Hampshire police have operated under a progressive policy for handling domestic violence cases that has saved countless lives. Under current law the presumption is that an arrest will be made when police observe evidence of abuse. They have a large degree of discretion and don't need to witness the assault firsthand or obtain a legal warrant before they can separate the alleged attacker from his victim.

All that will change if Republicans get their way. The state's GOP legislators are pushing two bills that will reverse a half century of progress, the Concord Monitor reports:
Attention

Monsanto: 'There is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans'

© rawsangha.com
There is a growing body of scientific evidence which proves that genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) are inherently different from natural organisms, including the way the body processes them, as well as how the immune system responds to them. But Monsanto, the largest purveyor of GMOs in the world, believes that GMOs are no different than natural organisms, and that GMO testing is both needless and valueless.

In the Why aren't you running human clinical trials on GM crops? section of Monsanto's Food Safety page, the biotechnology giant explains its opinion that GMOs are "substantially equivalent" to natural organisms. According to Monsanto, since concentrations of proteins, carbohydrates, and other nutrient factors vary among natural crops, as well as among natural and GM crops, then these differences are automatically unimportant in light of GMO safety.


Comment: And what exactly is the definition of "substantially equivalent"?:

Substantial equivalence - anything but equivalent or substantial
Substantial equivalence. When looking at these two words many come away with the impression that they signify fairness, safety and adequate disclosure to consumers regarding the products those words are attached to. However, regarding the marketing of transgenic foods specifically genetically modified organisms in our food that is anything but the case. I think it is crucial that consumers are aware of what is in their food and how it may affect them and their children in order for them to be able to make informed decisions about what goes into their bodies.

This is the standard definition of "substantial equivalence":
"Substantial equivalence is a concept developed by OECD in 1991 that maintains that a novel food should be considered the same as a conventional food if it demonstrates the same characteristics and composition as the conventional food."
This concept was pushed in regards to GMOs by the FAO and the WHO in the early 1990s. Its intent was the stripping away of years of testing of so called "novel" foods which can be prohibitively expensive and time consuming and therefore would have affected the profits of companies like Monsanto that have a virtual stranglehold on the FDA, USDA, and other regulatory agencies and governments that have afforded them special treatment in allowing them to use this planet and its species as one huge science experiment. The residual effects of applying these two words to GMOs and in allowing them to be foisted upon the world with little to no adequate testing already negates the validity of applying the substantial equivalence label to them.
Bad Guys

Obama's "State of Delusion Address": Rebuilding America With War Crimes

king Obama
© n/a
From beginning to end, Barack Obama's State of the Union speech was replete with delusion and falsifications. His promise of building an "America that lasts" was predicated on a sentimental, but utterly disingenuous notion of selfless teamwork. The invocation of American military "heroes" and their "achievements" during nine years of waging war on Iraq as an exemplar of how to salvage his nation from economic and social catastrophe was both sickening and laughable.

"These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness and teamwork of America's Armed Forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations," said Obama in praise of US troops fresh from their destruction in Iraq.

If that's what Obama and the American people believe will resolve the deep-seated problems of American society then good luck to them in harbouring such crass delusions.

But what is sickening is how a truly gargantuan criminal war and blot on humanity is deified as a paragon of virtue to provide inspiration.
2 + 2 = 4

US: State of the Union Registers at 8th Grade Reading Level

Obama speech
© Getty Images
President Obama's 2012 State of the Union address again rated at an 8th grade comprehension level on the Flesch-Kincaid readability test - the third lowest score of any State of the Union address since 1934.

The University of Minnesota's Smart Politics conducted an analysis on the last 70 State of the Union addresses and found that President Obama's three addresses have the lowest grade average of any modern president. "Obama's average grade-level score of 8.4 is more than two grades lower than the 10.7 grade average for the other 67 addresses written by his 12 predecessors," they conclude.

"The Flesch-Kincaid test is designed to assess the readability level of written text, with a formula that translates the score to a U.S. grade level. Longer sentences and sentences utilizing words with more syllables produce higher scores. Shorter sentences and sentences incorporating more monosyllabic words yield lower scores," the University of Minnesota's Eric Ostermeier explains.

Obama's use of simple language is in part a reflection of his audience: the American voter in an election year. And it's part of a larger trend in simpler State of the Union language as the speech as transitioned from a simple address to Congress into a prime-time televised event.
Sheeple

Google's New Privacy Policy: The Good, Bad, Scary

googprivacy
© zdnet

"I'm all for breaking down data silos, but when Google knows more about me than my wife I get a bit worried".

Google has updated its privacy policy in a way that breaks down product silos, but allows the search giant to mine data across all of its services.

In a blog post, Google outlined the changes. These changes are the enterprise Holy Grail in many respects. Companies everywhere want to break down product walls to get a 360 degree view of customers. The difference with Google is reach and it is actually succeeding. In a nutshell, Google is:
  • Making its privacy policies easier to read.
  • Aggregating data across products for Google and user experience.
  • And arguing that it's easier to take your data and go somewhere else.
Here's how this boils down for this Google user between work and personal uses.
Top Secret

US: Last of Secret Kennedy Tapes Released


© Reuters/JFK Presidential Library and Museum
The final 45 hours of White House recordings secretly taped during John F. Kennedy's time in office were released on Tuesday, offering researchers unique perspective into the last three months of his administration.

The recordings are part of a collection of more than 248 hours of taped meetings and 12 hours of phone conversations that have been reviewed and released by the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum since 1993.

"The president's intelligence really comes across," said Maura Porter, declassification archivist with the presidential library who worked on the tapes for a decade.

Kennedy can be heard stumping experts with his questions in areas that were not necessarily his forte, she said.

The recorded conversations were made deliberately by the president, often captured in the Oval Office or Cabinet Room, but were kept secret from even Kennedy's top aides, the library said in a statement.
USA

The Ron Paul FIX is in

How did Newt Gingrich win the South Carolina primary? Answer: there are no free elections in the USA. There is no 'democracy' in the USA. There hasn't been for a long time.

Bad Guys

Newspaper Editor: Israel Should Consider Assassinating Obama

Obama, Netanyahu
© Getty

Andrew Adler, the owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, a weekly newspaper serving Atlanta's Jewish community, devoted his January 13, 2012 column to the thorny problem of the U.S. and Israel's diverging views on the threat posed by Iran. Basically Israel has three options, he wrote: Strike Hezbollah and Hamas, strike Iran, or "order a hit" on Barack Obama. Either way, problem solved!

Here's how Adler laid out "option three" in his list of scenarios facing Israeli president Benjamin Netanyahu (the column, which was forwarded to us by a tipster, isn't online, but you can read a copy here):
Three, give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States' policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.

Yes, you read "three" correctly. Order a hit on a president in order to preserve Israel's existence. Think about it. If I have thought of this Tom Clancy-type scenario, don't you think that this almost unfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel's most inner circles?

Another way of putting "three" in perspective goes something like this: How far would you go to save a nation comprised of seven million lives...Jews, Christians and Arabs alike?

You have got to believe, like I do, that all options are on the table.
Top