The government-tasked commission tackles regulators and officials, buts it also makes some unusual assumptions about the March 2011 disaster.

The Japanese government's Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission concluded, in a 641-page report released Thursday, that the March 11, 2011 nuclear incident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant was a "profoundly man-made disaster." The "enormous amount of radioactive material" that was emitted into the environment, the study found, was the result of human negligence, rather than a natural disaster or -- in the parlance of theologians and insurance adjustors -- an act of god. The Commission held 900 hours of hearings and interviewed 1,167 people, finding that the nuclear meltdown was avoidable. The Commission's conclusions leave the jarring implication that regulators believe there is a category of nuclear disaster that might be unavoidable. Americans might be especially concerned, because the chairman of our own Nuclear Regulatory Commission suggested Friday that Fukushima did not violate any American safety standards.

The event that immediate precipitated the meltdown was, of course, the earthquake. At a magnitude of 9.0, it was the most powerful earthquake ever recorded in Japan, and one of the most powerful earthquakes ever measured. It sent a tsunami, a 133-foot-tall wall of water, crashing onto the coast. Together, the trembling earth and thundering water killed over 15,000 people and destroyed hundreds of thousands of buildings. They also overwhelmed the Fukushima plant, triggering a still-disputed chain of events leading to the nuclear disaster.

The plant operator, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) claimed that its safety infrastructure survived the initial earthquake, succumbing only the subsequent tsunami. The Commission disagreed, finding that many crucial safety systems failed before the flood. Moreover, the Commission characterized TEPCO's explanation as "an attempt to avoid responsibility by putting all the blame on the unexpected (the tsunami) ... and not on the more foreseeable earthquake."

Al Qaeda's bizarre plan to attack America by using an "ember bomb" to ignite wildfires is so impractical that the terror group would be better off armed with a cigarette lighter, according to California fire officials who recently tested an al Qaeda-prescribed incendiary device.

In early May, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the state's threat assessment center conducted a "practical evaluation" of a home-made "ember bomb," a complex device described in detail in a recent edition of the al Qaeda-produced Inspire magazine under the title "It Is of Your Freedom to Ignite a Firebomb."

"In America, there are more houses built in the [countryside] than in the cities," the Inspire article's author says under the pseudonym The AQ Chef. "It is difficult to choose a better place [than] in the valleys of Montana."

In response, California officials went about building and testing a sophisticated version of the device, complete with time-delay ignition, according to a "For Official Use Only" document published online today by the anti-secrecy website Public Intelligence.

The New Delhi government ordered Indian state-run insurers to provide cover to the country's ships transporting Iranian oil, allowing refiners to avoid any interruption in supplies due to the western sanctions.

United India Insurance Co. has agreed to provide protection and indemnity cover to Indian tankers carrying oil from Iran with General Insurance Corp. offering reinsurance.

The offer brings some relief to Indian shipping companies that aren't getting covers from European insurers since July 1 for carrying shipments from Iran, which is facing sanctions from the US and European Union for its decision to continue using its international nuclear rights.

An oil embargo by the European Union took effect on July 1 and bans firms from insuring Iranian shipments, forcing China and India to ask Iran's oil shipper, NITC, to deliver crude in its vessels.

Almost the entire Iranian fleet, the largest in the world, is employed for exporting oil cargos to various destinations now.

If passed, an amendment in the Agricultural Appropriations Bill will not just allow, but require the secretary of agriculture to grant permits for planting or cultivating GM crops - even if a federal court has given an injunction against it.

Basically, all Monsanto and other biotech companies have to do is ask and the industry gets its way. Issues like crop contamination, damage to farmers or consumers, courts orders or USDA studies all go out the window and the biotech industry cashes in.

Organizations like Food Democracy Now are in a panic, calling all to petition against the bill, which they say "fundamentally undermines the concept of judicial review and would strip judges of their constitutional mandate to protect consumer rights and the environment, while opening up the floodgates for the planting of new untested genetically engineered crops, endangering farmers, consumers and the environment."

Representative Peter DeFazio has been trying to push through an amendment that would kill the havoc-wreaking rider. He has the support of organizations like Organic Consumers Associations, Center for Food Safety and others. Their warnings have been circulating the web, gathering attention and support - but will they be enough to sway the House?

It's enough to make a member of Congress take notice: the prospect that hundreds of thousands of U.S. defense workers will receive you-may-be-fired warnings in the mail shortly before the Nov. 6 election.

Companies led by Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) (LMT), the world's largest defense contractor, say federal and state laws may require them to send out blanket notifications of potential job cuts before the election unless President Barack Obama and Congress act by October to avert automatic defense reductions of $500 billion over a decade that would start on Jan. 2.

To employment-law attorney Margaret Keane, giving mass dismissal warnings in such uncertain conditions looks more like a lobbying tactic by corporations trying to ward off the cuts than an effort to follow the letter of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act.

"I just don't think you need to do that," said Keane, a partner with Littler Mendelson PC who advises employers on meeting the notification law's requirements. "Are we really talking about complying with the WARN Act, or are we talking about political pressure being applied?"

The feds demanded subscriber information from cell phone companies more than 1.3 million times last year, the New York Times reported Monday. According to the Times, the number of people whose data was turned over to the government could be far larger than 1.3 million, because "a single request often involves multiple callers." The information was released in response to an inquiry from Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass), but it's incomplete - T-Mobile, which claims 33 million customers, didn't provide Markey with specific data about the government's requests.

This isn't just about wiretaps. Rather, the authorities can obtain an incredible amount of information about you even without listening to your phone conversations. Instead, telecom companies are handing over things like text messages, voicemails, geolocation data (where you were when your phone connected with a cell tower) and which phone numbers you're calling when. Much of this kind of information is available without a warrant because, from a legal perspective, they government isn't searching you, it's asking for information from a private third party to whom you've willingly given this information by signing on as subscriber. In a few cases, the telecom companies refused to comply with the requests.

The latest scanners acquired by the U.S. government will be able detect the most minute traces of molecular discrepancies in both individuals' bloodstream and carry on luggage from 50 meters away.

Using advanced laser technology, Picosecond Programmable Laser scanners will show traces of drugs, chemicals, weapons, and even food you recently digested at the push of a button.

A non-governmental company originally developed the technology but has since partnered with the Department of Homeland Security, implying that the scanners will likely be deployed throughout airports and other high-risk areas.

An unidentified undersecretary at Homeland Security projected that the technology will be used within the next one to two years.

Though the essential process of detecting chemicals on individuals is not new, the significant speed and unmatched accuracy of these scanners makes them stand out against the rest of the market.

Two white-collar criminals received justice last week - Allen Stanford of Stanford International Bank and Rajat Gupta of McKinsey & Co and Goldman Sachs. One's actions are easy to understand, the other's extremely hard.

Stanford, a Ponzi schemer who stole $2 billion of his eager depositors' money, is easy: if he is not a psychopath, he certainly behaved like one for two decades. Gupta, convicted of fraud and conspiracy for leaking price-sensitive titbits about Goldman to Raj Rajaratnam, the criminally corrupt hedge fund manager who was his confidant and friend, is the puzzle.

Gary Naftalis, Gupta's lawyer, told the jury shortly before his conviction: "Rajat Gupta was in the seventh decade of an accomplished and praiseworthy life. It strains common sense that [he] would ...throw away everything he had done for 40 years, and wilfully and knowingly commit crimes. That just doesn't make sense."

Harold Ford Jr., sleazy corporatist and nepotist, offers up a particularly grotesque defense of U.S. aggression.

Harold Ford, Jr. is the walking, breathing embodiment of virtually everything rotted and corrupt about the American political class. He entered Congress at the age of 26 only by virtue of nepotistic benefits: while in law school, he ran for the seat long held by his father of the same name (he then promptly failed the test for admission to the Tennessee bar). In Congress, he voted for de-regulation of Wall Street (which helped precipitate the 2008 financial crisis); to authorize the Iraq War (and then harshly criticized Democrats who opposed it and refused to admit its error even as late as 2007); in favor of a Constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages (The Advocate branded him "anti-gay"); and was one of the few Democrats to support the credit-card-industry-demanded bankruptcy "reform" bill that made it harder for impoverished consumers to discharge consumer debt.

Ehud Olmert was found guilty yesterday of a corruption charge in the first criminal trial of a former Israeli prime minister, but acquitted on two other counts in what was widely seen as a significant victory for him.

Although Olmert was convicted of fraud and breach of trust, he was found not guilty on more serious charges that included allegations he received cash bribes from a U.S. businessman and double-billed Israeli charities for overseas fund-raising trips. It was not immediately clear when Olmert, 66, would be sentenced. If that crime, breach of trust, does carry a prison term, he would become the first Israeli prime minister to serve time. He could face up to five years in jail.