Being a flight attendant has its bonuses, like getting to travel the world for free, meet new people, and earn well above the average American salary. But it’s not all free snacks and flights to Paris. The job comes with some costs too—like erratic schedules, aggressive passengers, and significant delays.
But those, while frustrating, may be the tip of the iceberg. This week, new research is boosting concerns about an even more severe hazard: the increased risk of cancer. The study, published in the journal Environmental Science, is the second wave of a 2007 Harvard Flight Attendant Health Survey aimed at analyzing how “occupational exposures impact the health of flight attendants.”
The initial 2007 study analyzed the general health of flight attendants, finding elevated rates of things like sleep disorders, fatigue, and depression. For this new study, the researchers from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health focused on cancer, recruiting more than 5,000 current and former flight attendants— 80 percent of whom were female—to share their history.
Once cataloged, the stats were compared with the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), a nationwide study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The conclusion is stark. Flight attendants show a higher prevalence of every cancer studied, including breast, uterine, gastrointestinal, thyroid, cervical, melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer.
Although the authors were not able to nail down an exact reason, concerns have been building for years about the exposure to cancer-causing agents (called carcinogens) on airlines. In this case, the two significant identified risks—which may be driving these numbers—are disrupted circadian rhythms and what’s called “cosmic ionizing radiation.”
Cosmic ionizing radiation is radiation that comes from outer space and is caused by things like solar flares. While only a small amount of it reaches earth, it’s present in much higher doses at flight altitudes. According to the CDC, flight attendants and pilots are exposed to it on every single flight, exposing them to the largest annual ionizing radiation dose of all U.S. workers.
For years, the World Health Association (WHO) has declared a direct link between long-term exposure of this cosmic ionizing radiation and cancer. As a result, the European Union has placed limits on the amount of radiation exposure for flight crew members, specifically for pregnant women, to lessen the risk of cancer and other health effects. Although the CDC offers warnings about the dangers, it doesn’t suggest that the ionizing radiation levels are actively monitored for U.S. flight crews.
On top of that potential carcinogens, the Harvard researchers also point out pervasive disruption of sleep circadian rhythms among flight attendants, due to things like night shifts and changing time zones. While changing sleep cycles may seem benign, a chronically disrupted sleep cycle has been linked to multiple types of cancer including skin and breast.
In the wake of the study, former flight attendants have taken to Twitter to express their concern about how long the information has been concealed.
Echoing their thoughts is Harvard epidemiologist Irina Mordukhovich, one of the researchers involved. “Our study informs future research priorities regarding the health of this understudied group of workers, who have a wide range of job-related exposures to known and probable carcinogens,” she said in a statement. “Our findings raise the question of what can be done to minimize the adverse exposures and cancers common among cabin crew.”
With its spate of right-wing rulings this week, the Supreme Court has paved the way for Donald Trump and the Republican-dominated Congress to intensify their attacks on human rights, workers and the country’s democratic institutions, dragging the US deeper into the abyss.
US political culture has long been dominated by oligarchical corporate and financial interests, militarism and jingoism, but the current Trumpocracy represents a new level of neoliberal cruelty. Indeed, the United States is turning into a pariah nation, a unique position among Western states in the second decade of the 21st century.
What factors and the forces produced this radical and dangerous shift? How did Trump manage to bring the Republican Party under his total control? Is Trumpocracy a temporary phenomenon, or the future of American politics? Is the Bernie Sanders phenomenon over? In the exclusive Truthout interview below, world-renowned scholar and public intellectual Noam Chomsky, Emeritus Professor of Linguistics at MIT and currently Laureate Professor of Linguistics at the University of Arizona, tackles these questions and offers his unique insights.
Qn. “…… how do we explain the fact that he has essentially taken over the Republican Party without any serious opposition?”
Noam Chomsky: Part of the solution to the puzzle is Obama’s performance in office. Many were seduced by the rhetoric of “hope” and “change,” and deeply disillusioned by the very early discovery that the words had little substance………
Quite apart from Obama’s disappointing policies, he and the [Democratic] Party were victims of the intense racism that is deeply rooted in large parts of American society. The visceral hatred of Obama cannot be explained in other terms.
But there is far more than that. For some time, candidates for Republican primaries who emerged from the base have been far off the traditional spectrum. The establishment was able to suppress them and gain their own candidate, but that didn’t change the basis for their support. For years, both parties have drifted to the right — the Republicans off the spectrum of normal parliamentary politics. Their dedication to wealth and corporate power is so extreme that they cannot get votes on their actual policies
……. For the actual Republican constituency of wealth and corporate power, these are glory days, so why object, even if his antics sometimes cause some grimaces? The core constituency of Evangelicals is solidly in Trump’s pocket, thanks to the crumbs thrown their way. Many working people maintain the illusion that Trump cares about them and will bring back lost days of steady jobs in mining and manufacturing.
……… Trump himself seems to be having the time of his life. He’s constantly in the limelight, his loyal base worships his every move, he’s free to defy convention, to insult anyone he chooses, to disrupt the international economic and political order at will — whatever comes to mind next, knowing that he’s the biggest thug on the block and can probably get away with it — again, for a while, at least.
“….Qn: How do we explain the fact that Trump continues to cause chaos on all fronts, both domestically and internationally, and yet his popularity remains at quite high levels?
As I mentioned, Trump’s popularity among Republicans is unusually fervent and high, though not uniquely so. The affluent are doing fine. The economy is continuing the slow growth under Obama, though wages are barely rising and job security is low.
North Korea understands U.S. on ‘complete denuclearization’: Pompeo, Patricia Zengerle, WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Wednesday he was confident that North Korea understood the scope of the U.S. desire for complete denuclearization as the two countries negotiate after President Donald Trump’s summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
“We’ve been pretty unambiguous in our conversations about what we mean when we say complete denuclearization,” Pompeo told a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing on funding for the State Department.
By Aaron StreckVideographer Global News, 28 June 18 “……A group of protesters rallied outside the Pickering Recreation Complex on Tuesday afternoon.
It’s the site of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission licensing renewal hearing this week.
The group wants the Pickering Power Plant to be decommissioned over the impact it has on both the environment and people living in the area.
“I’m more concerned about lowering the electricity rates for the entire province and providing safety and security for the residents of the area, of the GTA. So when you balance it all out, I think we need to consider all Ontarians, consider the safety and security of the local residents and we can create jobs by immediately decommissioning the station. So that’s what we’re calling for, an immediate decommissioning,” said Angela Bischoff, Ontario Clean Air Alliance outreach director…..https://globalnews.ca/news/4298298/protesters-rally-pickering-decommission-nuclear-power-plant/
A new report draws a close connection between cancer and Coldwater Creek in north St. Louis County.
A two-year health assessment by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry concluded that radioactive waste in the creek could have increased the risk of developing bone, lung, skin or breast cancer as well as leukemia for those who lived nearby or who played in the creek as children.
“Our street was right next to the creek. My parents moved there when I was two and I moved away as an adult,” said Kathryn Fults Ward.
Ward was diagnosed with leukemia in August.
“I had been healthy all my life but then boom, all of a sudden leukemia,” she said.
Ward was one of many who attended Wednesday’s public meeting at St. James United Methodist Church held by the federal agency, known as ATSDR, to explain the results of the study and answer questions.
Radioactive waste from the Manhattan Project was stored north of Lambert-St. Louis International Airport starting in 1946. Some of it was in piles that were uncovered. It’s widely believed that wind and rain carried some of the radioactive waste into nearby Coldwater Creek. Some of that waste was later moved to another location near the creek on Latty Avenue.
Those contaminated sites have been cleaned up and currently, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers is testing for contamination along the creek and removing soil with elevated levels of radioactivity. The contamination removed during the current efforts has been below the surface and not posing a risk to the public.
“I lost my son, he was born with a brain tumor. It’s a brain tumor that occurs in 60-year-old men,” said Kim Visintine.
Visintine was one of the original members of a group of former north St. Louis County residents concerned about the frequency and types of cancers diagnosed in loved ones and former classmates they grew up with. They worried cancer could have a connection to contamination in the creek.
“So what this health assessment is for us is a validation of everything we’ve been working for since 2011,” said Visintine.
The ATSDR health assessment recommended further testing for dangerous levels of radioactive contamination in homes that flooded, along tributaries of Coldwater Creek and areas where likely contaminated soil was taken from near the creek was used at construction sites.
The agency is also recommending those who lived or played near the creek to talk to their doctor about their potential exposure.
Another public meeting will be held Thursday from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. at St. James United Methodist Church at 315 Graham Road in Florissant.
France’s EDF, GE to co-build reactors for huge Indian nuclear plant, Reuters Staff, NEW DELHI (Reuters) 28 June 18- GE and French utility EDF have agreed to team to build six reactors for a nuclear power project in western India, which is due to be the world’s biggest when finished……… The six European Pressurised Water reactors will be for a 9,900 mw nuclear power project at Jaitapur, south of Mumbai in the state of Maharashtra, GE and EDF said in a joint statement released on Tuesday…….
EDF will be responsible for engineering integration of the entire project, while GE Power will design the critical part of the plant and supply its main components, the companies said.
GE will also provide operational support services and a training programme to meet the needs of the state-run Nuclear Power Corp. of India Ltd, the plant’s owner and operator.
Electric rates may be cut after failed nuclear plants, TD, By JEFFREY COLLINS Associated Press, 28 June 18
COLUMBIA — Customers of South Carolina Electric & Gas could see their rates temporarily cut by nearly 15 percent, under a compromise plan passed Wednesday by lawmakers after the company spent billions on two failed nuclear plants that never produced power.
The bill passed with enough margin to overcome a promised veto from Gov. Henry McMaster. It could end up doing a lot more than lowering rates for the average South Carolina Electric & Gas customer by about $22 a month for several months.
Speaking ahead of the week-long World Gas Conference, Perry cited his experience with natural gas, saying he had “sung its praises for a long time,” the Washington Examiner reported.
According to a draft memo from the Department of Energy (DOE) that surfaced at the start of June, the Trump administration plans to direct the federal government to purchase electricity or generation capacity from coal and nuclear plants for two years. The DOE’s bailout package for at-risk generators remains unclear.
Dive Insight:
“We are looking at all the contingencies and different impacts,” Perry told reporters on Monday.
Perry’s comments echoed previous statements to the press made by Energy Undersecretary Mark Menezes earlier this month at an Energy Information Administration conference. Menezes said the DOE draft memo was being considered as one of several options.
Perry highlighted the importance of a bailout plan to keep coal and nuclear power plants open in competitive power markets. The DOE draft memo proposed using Perry’s executive authority under the Federal Power Act’s and the Defense Production Act’s emergency provisions to subsidize select plants.
Responding to criticisms that federal intervention would disrupt the electricity market and raise prices, Perry said, “The economics is secondary from my perspective. There is the potential to see some really chaotic attacks in this country. That is DOE’s responsibility to make sure that does not happen.”
Natural gas companies have opposed any market interference for coal and nuclear, joining renewable energy companies. Perry said those concerns won’t stop him from acting, to ensure people have access to electricity.
Regarding natural gas, the Trump administration has said pipeline infrastructure is vulnerable to physical and cyberattacks, thus increasing the need to ensure baseload generation options.
https://apnews.com/dc5e3c60042741c696dd062462a03cca– 28 June 18, ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — Advocates for New Mexicans who many believe were sickened by U.S. uranium mining and nuclear weapons testing have urged Congress to acknowledge their sacrifice and authorize compensation for them.
Navajo Nation Vice President Jonathan Nez and the co-founder of the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium testified during a hearing Wednesday in Washington on a compensation measure.
Sponsored by U.S. Sen. Tom Udall, it proposes expanding eligibility for payouts under the Radiation Exposure and Compensation Act of 1990, which currently covers claims from areas in Nevada, Arizona and Utah that are downwind from a different test site.
Tina Cordova, co-founder of the Tularosa consortium, said many who lived in the area weren’t told about the dangers of the Trinity Test on generations of residents.
They could benefit from the proposal, along with post-1971 uranium mine workers in Northwestern New Mexico.
Why the United States Needs North Korea to Stay Nuclear, A nuclear North Korea is not a threat, but an ideal stabilizer. National Interest Hongyu Zhang, Kevin Wang,
Many are hopeful that the June 12 summit in Singapore between President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un will lead to denuclearization and peace on the Korean Peninsula. Others believe the historical record makes clear that such a hope is overly optimistic. But what if allowing North Korea to retain its nuclear arsenal could both lead to peace and benefit America’s long-term security interests in the region?
There are two reasons for this. First, possessing nuclear weapons is the best way to pacify North Korea and constrain its aggression. Second, a secure and independent North Korea (without the presence of Chinese or U.S. forces) would also provide a buffer against great power tensions. The long-term primary objective of U.S. strategy in East Asia should be to contain a rising China. To achieve this, the United States must minimize Chinese influence on its neighboring states—whether they are U.S. allies or not. A limited North Korean nuclear arsenal is the most effective way to make this happen.
The United States should, therefore, continue reaching out diplomatically to North Korea and even end some sanctions to seek long-term stability. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, a nuclear North Korea and a balanced peninsula are the best possible outcome for the region and the world.
The View From Pyongyang: A Need for Balance
During the Cold War, the Soviet Union’s backing of North Korea and U.S. backing of South Korea were roughly equal, resulting in a stable power balance on the Korean Peninsula. However, since the Soviet collapse, the balance of power has rapidly shifted against North Korea. The United States continues to lead the Republic of Korea (ROK)-U.S. Combined Forces Command and regularly renews its security commitments in the region. In contrast, Russia abolished its alliance treaty with North Korea in 1994. China also refused to replace the Soviet Union as North Korea’s patron when the matter was discussed between Deng Xiaoping and Kim Il-sung in 1991.
Without this balance, the peninsula has been in prolonged instability and frequently came close to military confrontation. As a sovereign state ruled by a totalitarian regime, North Korea has shown its willingness to guarantee its security at any cost. Intensifying military and economic pressure against the North has only made it more defiant and unpredictable. Therefore, any solution to the present crisis must take into account the security of this sovereign nation. Clearly, massive militarization and isolation are not a long-term solution for North Korea.
……… not only do nuclear weapons offer a level of security that Chinese assurances do not, but they also are the most cost-effective way for a resource-poor North Korea to achieve sustainable security. A nuclear North Korea is not a threat, but an ideal stabilizer. The balance of power on the Korean peninsula and that between the United States and China are interrelated. China’s rise has the potential to shift the regional balance, making confrontation more likely in the future. If a limited nuclear capability guarantees North Korea’s existence and independence, it can provide a buffer space to keep Chinese forces in China and U.S. troops stationed in South Korea separate. ……….
North Korea’s fear of Chinese control is one area where North Korean and American interests of containing China actually align. Moreover, North Korea would prefer to have the ability to hedge between two superpowers to get the best deal, which is only possible by reducing China’s monopoly on economic leverage over North Korea. In the same way that a nuclear China was useful in containing the USSR in the 1970s, North Korea may be helpful in containing China today.
A tacit agreement to allow the DPRK to retain a minimal but credible nuclear deterrent is advantageous to U.S. interests in that it maintains a source of friction in Sino-North Korean relations. By possessing nukes, North Korea will be more independent from Chinese influence and can turn away from China. Thus, a nuclear North Korea would be a viable solution to the imbalance of power on the Korean peninsula after the end of the Cold War. Finally, North Korea would also benefit the long-term U.S. strategy of containing Chinese expansionism. This China containment policy can only be successful if the United States is willing to politically and economically engage with North Korea.
In a 1967 article in Foreign Affairs, Richard Nixon stated that “Taking the long view, we simply cannot afford to leave China forever outside the family of nations, there to nurture its fantasies, cherish its hates and threaten its neighbors.” If Nixon, along with Henry Kissinger’s support, could understand the strategic value of engaging a former adversary with newly acquired nuclear weapons, perhaps policymakers can see the strategic value of doing so with North Korea today.
Hongyu Zhang is a Visiting Assistant Professor of Government at the College of William & Mary, and can be reached at hzhang17@wm.edu. His research focuses on nuclear proliferation, East Asian security, and Chinese foreign policy.
Washington: US secretary of state Mike Pompeo on Saturday warned Iran not to pursue nuclear weapons, saying it would face the “wrath of the entire world” if it did so, but added that he hoped it would never be necessary for the United States to take military action against the country.
In an interview with political columnist Hugh Hewitt conducted on Friday and broadcast the following day on MSNBC, Pompeo said that whatever the fate of the international nuclear deal with Iran, it would not be in Tehran’s interest to seek nuclear arms.
“I hope they understand that if they begin to ramp up their nuclear program, the wrath of the entire world will fall upon them,” he said.
“Wholly separate from if they spin a couple of extra centrifuges, if they began to move to a weapons program, this is something the entire world would find unacceptable and we’d end up down a path that I don’t think is in the best interests of Iran,” Pompeo said
“When I say wrath, don’t confuse that with military action. When I say wrath, I mean the moral opprobrium and economic power that fell upon them. That’s what I’m speaking to. I’m not talking to military action. I truly hope that that’s never the case. It’s not in anyone’s best interests for that.”
Pressed on whether the United States would do whatever it had to do to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, Pompeo said: “President Trump has been unambiguous in his statements that say Iran will not be able to obtain a nuclear weapon.”
The group had been examining “the ways in which (the Meeting) is complicit in the nuclear weapons industry, including the funding of those activities through our investments, purchases, or other business transactions, and to plan for ways to eliminate or reduce that complicity in order to be compliant with the treaty.”
Timmon Wallis and Vicki Elson were the subjects of a May cover story, “Lay down your arms,” in Hampshire Life Magazine. Written by Emma Kemp, the piece focused on Wallis’ involvement with the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). Headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, ICAN won the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize for developing a treaty banning nuclear weapons.
Today, both Wallis and Elson work with ICAN, which initiated the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, also known as the Nuclear Ban Treaty, which was adopted by 122 countries on July 7, 2017. It prohibits the development, production, use and threat of nuclear weapons. As Kemp reported, “Once 50 countries have ratified the treaty, it will come into effect and be implemented into law in the respective countries. The United States is not one of the participating countries.”
But Wallis, 61, and Elson, 59, are hoping to change that. The two activists, who plan to marry this summer, launched the Northampton-based organization NuclearBan.US, to help people nationwide comply with the treaty. Continue reading →
Trump’s Nuclear Bailout Won’t Happen: Get Out Of Nuclear Investments, Seeking Alpha, Ezra Weener,
Summary
The nuclear and coal industries are dying.
Natural gas and the growing renewable industries are making nuclear energy economically inefficient and a money-losing proposition.
Trump has ordered energy secretary Rick Perry to find a way to revive these industries citing “national security” and “resilience”.
Despite many positives for these industries, some potential bailout plans negatively impact the free market; regulators have pushed back intensely, and it is unlikely anything significant will be done.
Investing in uranium miners or nuclear power plants based off the possibility of a bailout would be a huge mistake.
Over the last 7 years, the nuclear and coal industries have been getting killed. The spot price of uranium has dropped around 65% and made it basically impossible to economically mine, refine, and sell uranium. This comes from the U.S. and other countries moving away from nuclear power for fears of radiation, possible disasters, and a focus on renewables.
All this has made nuclear power harder to produce and increased the cost of production, while a boom in natural gas electricity production has lowered wholesale electricity selling prices to the point that it is no longer a properly viable source of power. As stated in DOE Staff Reports on Electricity Markets and Reliability,
“Flat demand growth, flattened supply curves, Federal and state policy interventions, and the massive economic shift in the relative economics of natural gas compared to other fuels are placing pressures on centrally-organized wholesale electricity markets, resulting in low average wholesale energy prices.”
The U.S. Senate approved a Hanford spending bill for the next fiscal year that would provide $315 million more for the nuclear reservation than proposed by the Trump administration.
The vote was 86-5 for a package of funding bills.Earlier this month, the U.S. House passed a spending bill for fiscal 2019 that would provide $247 million more for the Hanford Site than the administration’s funding request.
The two bills next must be reconciled. A final version then could be sent to President Donald Trump for his signature.
The Senate bill would restore all but $25 million of the cuts to current spending that were proposed by the administration.
The total Hanford budget under the Senate plan would be $2.4 billion, plus some additional money for security at the site.
“Once again, I’m proud that Democrats and Republicans have come together to reject President Trump’s senseless budget cuts and instead craft a budget that honors the sacrifices of central Washington families,” said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.
Murray, a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, worked to secure money for Hanford as the appropriations bill was being written.
Trump’s Military Drops a Bomb Every 12 Minutes, and No One Is Talking About It, TruthDig, Lee Camp, 24 June 18 We live in a state of perpetual war, and we never feel it. While you get your gelato at the hip place where they put those cute little mint leaves on the side, someone is being bombed in your name. While you argue with the 17-year-old at the movie theater who gave you a small popcorn when you paid for a large, someone is being obliterated in your name. While we sleep and eat and make love and shield our eyes on a sunny day, someone’s home, family, life and body are being blown into a thousand pieces in our names.
Once every 12 minutes.
The United States military drops an explosive with a strength you can hardly comprehend once every 12 minutes. And that’s odd, because we’re technically at war with—let me think—zero countries. So that should mean zero bombs are being dropped, right?
Hell no! You’ve made the common mistake of confusing our world with some sort of rational, cogent world in which our military-industrial complex is under control, the music industry is based on merit and talent, Legos have gently rounded edges (so when you step on them barefoot, it doesn’t feel like an armor-piercing bullet just shot straight up your sphincter), and humans are dealing with climate change like adults rather than burying our heads in the sand while trying to convince ourselves that the sand around our heads isn’t getting really, really hot.
You’re thinking of a rational world. We do not live there.
Instead, we live in a world where the Pentagon is completely and utterly out of control. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the $21 trillion (that’s not a typo) that has gone unaccounted for at the Pentagon. But I didn’t get into the number of bombs that ridiculous amount of money buys us. President George W. Bush’s military dropped 70,000 bombs on five countries. But of that outrageous number, only 57 of those bombs really upset the international community.
Because there were 57 strikes in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen—countries the U.S. was neither at war with nor had ongoing conflicts with. And the world was kind of horrified. There was a lot of talk that went something like, “Wait a second. We’re bombing in countries outside of war zones? Is it possible that’s a slippery slope ending in us just bombing all the goddamn time? (Awkward pause.) … Nah. Whichever president follows Bush will be a normal adult person (with a functional brain stem of some sort) and will therefore stop this madness.”
We were so cute and naive back then, like a kitten when it’s first waking up in the morning.
It’s not just the fact that bombing outside of a war zone is a horrific violation of international law and global norms. It’s also the morally reprehensible targeting of people for pre-crime, which is what we’re doing and what the Tom Cruise movie “Minority Report” warned us about. (Humans are very bad at taking the advice of sci-fi dystopias. If we’d listened to “1984,” we wouldn’t have allowed the existence of the National Security Agency. If we listened to “The Terminator,” we wouldn’t have allowed the existence of drone warfare. And if we’d listened to “The Matrix,” we wouldn’t have allowed the vast majority of humans to get lost in a virtual reality of spectacle and vapid nonsense while the oceans die in a swamp of plastic waste. … But you know, who’s counting?)
There was basically a media blackout while Obama was president.
……. we now know that Donald Trump’s administration puts all previous presidents to shame. The Pentagon’s numbers show that during George W. Bush’s eight years he averaged 24 bombs dropped per day, which is 8,750 per year. Over the course of Obama’s time in office, his military dropped 34 bombs per day, 12,500 per year. And in Trump’s first year in office, he averaged 121 bombs dropped per day, for an annual total of 44,096.
Trump’s military dropped 44,000 bombs in his first year in office.
He has basically taken the gloves off the Pentagon, taken the leash off an already rabid dog………
Under Trump, five bombs are dropped per hour—every hour of every day. That averages out to a bomb every 12 minutes.
And which is more outrageous—the crazy amount of death and destruction we are creating around the world, or the fact that your mainstream corporate media basically NEVER investigates it? They talk about Trump’s flaws. They say he’s a racist, bulbous-headed, self-centered idiot (which is totally accurate)—but they don’t criticize the perpetual Amityville massacre our military perpetrates by dropping a bomb every 12 minutes, most of them killing 98 percent non-targets.
When you have a Department of War with a completely unaccountable budget—as we saw with the $21 trillion—and you have a president with no interest in overseeing how much death the Department of War is responsible for, then you end up dropping so many bombs that the Pentagon has reportedwe are running out of bombs.
……….This is about a runaway military-industrial complex that our ruling elite are more than happy to let loose. Almost no one in Congress or the presidency tries to restrain our 121 bombs a day. Almost no one in a mainstream outlet tries to get people to care about this.
Recently, the hashtag #21Trillion for the unaccounted Pentagon money has gained some traction. Let’s get another one started: #121BombsADay.
One every 12 minutes…….. We are a rogue nation with a rogue military and a completely unaccountable ruling elite. The government and military you and I support by being a part of this society are murdering people every 12 minutes, and in response, there’s nothing but a ghostly silence. It is beneath us as a people and a species to give this topic nothing but silence. It is a crime against humanity. https://www.truthdig.com/articles/trumps-military-drops-a-bomb-every-12-minutes-and-no-one-is-talking-about-it/
Tell Congress: Prevent Nuclear Catastrophe in Iran
Read the Public Inquiry Report, the Commissioners’ report, Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception is available to download for free at aukuspublicinquiry.com. Or just watch the replay of the National Press Club Luncheon.
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
