The coming “Cuban” #missile crisis – 2018

Answering a question about Taiwan – Will there be a war with the USA? “We will see what will happen” said the Chinese Ambassador to the USA

werebuggered

Posted to nuclear-news.net by Shaun McGee 6th April 2018

Following up on the video posted by Chris Busby concerning the threat of nuclear war looming where he mentions the issue of xenophobic and threatening rhetoric from the UK and USA, he mentioned the Chinese Petro Yuan.

For your information there are some serious issues occurring, that might explain the ramping up of the rhetoric to both Russia and China concerning the blame game from NATO partners. The situation today is on a par with the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Print

Firstly, in the UK and USA there is the mid term elections coming up and the local elections in the UK. This rhetoric will help the Governments of both countries pander to their home audience and distracting citizens from various embarrassing matters.

Secondly, The Chinese have made some incredibly strong statements not widely reported and have made some very public tactical moves. The Russian angry statements in recent weeks are well reported and I will not cover them here.

China`s head of the military went to Moscow in a very public way a couple of days ago;

Chinese defence chief says his visit to Moscow is a signal to the US General Wei Fenghe said his talks with Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu reflected the growing military cooperation between the two former Communist rivals PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 04 April, 2018 http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2140182/chinas-defence-chief-calls-his-moscow-trip-signal-us

A recent statement (2 days ago) on Trumps latest threat against China has just been responded too by a Chinese official;

Answering a question about Tawain – Will there be a war with the USA? “We will see what will happen” said the Chinese Ambassador to the USA (@19 mins approx) 4th March 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giBRQ1q1yJg

In a stunning revelation China has made clear that the USA has not held any talks for some time now on trade. The recent Chinese officials statement (2 hours ago) from China is here;

MOFCOM: No bilateral talks held recently over trade friction between China, US https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9Wfe9hL410

Thirdly, behind the scenes and not very well reported have been recent moves within the EU to clamp down on Tax evasion and other more corrupt financial practices which much of the main stream media are not discussing in any great detail. It seems as though the USA Petro- Dollar model and UK financial industries are heavily under attack;

EU efforts to clamp down on tax evasion and financial corruption in the UK NOT being reported by the BBC etc , we see more reasons for a distraction from the real issues outlined on this article http://nuclear-news.net/2018/04/02/the-problem-with-the-bbc-and-brexit-response-to-scientists-for-the-eu/

And to support Chris Busby and other scientists from around the world that say radiation is far worse than the US Pentagon and the UK Ministry of Defence would ever admit thus rendering the outcome of a nuclear war far more disastrous (as much as 10,000 times more) than military planners have projected, this might be worth a read. How they cover up the real effects of radiation on the environment and human health;

“…So our new case is based on Uranium; it entirely by-passes all the argument about “dose” on which previous appeals were fought. It is the chemical composition and genetic effects of the internal Uranium which is now the issue. The Blake Determination is therefore irrelevant, except insofar as we can employ previous reports by both our experts and other experts to argue that there was Uranium contamination. And there is plenty of evidence for that U-235, the fissile isotope in the bombs was even measured in the south west coastal area by the New Zealand surveys in the 1980s, but was wrongly characterised as Radium dial material, a cover-up that continues. I trekked down to the Case management hearing in London on 31 st January, presided over by a new Judge, Fiona Monk. The MoD began by asking that Blake’s decision about what cancers could not be caused by radiation should be accepted by any new Tribunal. Amazingly, she refused: saying that each case must be re-heard on its merits. Then I said that we were bringing in a new argument—radiochemical genotoxicity….” https://nuclear-news.net/2018/04/05/british-nuclear-test-veterans-update-fissionline-54/

 

Advertisements

British Nuclear Test Veterans Update – Fissionline 54

Update to the British nuclear test veterans appeal here

nuclear-news

main

Posted to nuclear-news.net by Shaun McGee 5th April 2018

This is an extract of an article published by Prof. Chris Busby in this months Fissionline magazine sent to me by a concerned member of the public. In it Prof. Busby discusses a change of strategy that has been submitted to the courts concerning health damage to the British Nuclear test Veterans. However, not only is the statutory response time for this submission been exceed (by some weeks) by the UK “Misery” of Defence (MoD) but also his emails were hacked which delayed the submission of the final draft of the papers that supports the argument (Fusion Doctrine at work?). Here is a link to the Fissionline Magazine which has many interesting nuclear related articles and please support the Fissionline Magazine as it is being filtered (re-indexed etc) by Googles search engine etc (Which we have discussed and proven on this

View original post 1,499 more words

He wished for “Japan to move further towards renewables”. Toyoshi Fuketa Japans #nuclear #NRA chief

 

Screenshot from 2018-04-03 16:15:30.png

Posted by Shaun McGee

Posted to nuclear-news.net on the 4 April 2018

Q and A from Toyoshi Fuketa, the Chairman of Japans Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRA) in the Foreign Correspondence Club of Japan on the 29th March 2018

T

The moderator began by stating that there would be no speech from Toyoshi Fuketa and they would move straight into the Q and A session.

Concerning the issue of the build up of the tritium laced decontaminated water, the NRA has held the view that only releasing it into the ocean was the only viable solution.

Should people be worried about returning to live in areas around the plant?

He replied that people should not consider any health risks in doing so…

(NOTE from Shaun McGee This issue is being debated still  in Japan –  https://europeannewsweekly.wordpress.com/2016/12/27/campaign-to-stop-bad-nuclear-health-practice-in-fukushima-concerning-thyroid-cancer-epidemic/ and https://europeannewsweekly.wordpress.com/2016/03/18/shocking-health-effects-in-fukushima-nuclear-workers-found-under-the-official-radiation-dose-limits/ )

…  limited numbers of people have returned but with few families with children doing so. The problem of infrastructure within these areas means that there are little in the way of schools, employment and that the ease of living there is difficult. He went onto state that was no health risk in the decontaminated areas.

Concerning the time that “complete” decommissioning would take, the moderator mentioned a few decades or even 100 years and the response was stated that this was an “ambiguous definition” that was “difficult to answer” for instance;

A totally cleared area returned fully to nature

An industrial area with certain areas sealed from the public.

The moderator said that now we know the earthquake was the actual cause of the disaster and not the Tsunami so what would happen if there was another damaging earthquake at the site and what would be the safety response? Toyoshi Fuketa responded that the earthquake did not trigger the meltdowns. The stored water on the site would be problematic but any contamination issues would not effect the surrounding areas and therefore there would be no reason for evacuation. The moderator mentioned after the answer that a Parliamentary committee had designated the Earthquake as the actual trigger but got no response to that. The next question quickly followed;

The issue of the Monshu nuclear reactor and the nuclear processing fuel cycle that has largely failed was mentioned and the questioned asked whether the continuation of this programme despite being a costly failure might be because of the needs of the military research and development?

Toyoshi Fuketa Said that the NRA concentrates on safety issues and with the help of the IAEA is involved in military research and development oversight.

Asked whether Japans nuclear plans for 20 to 22 percent of future energy being supplied by nuclear being realistic … said that the NRA has no opinion on this question but later in the Q and A … confessed a personal position that he would hope that Japan would develop alternative energies and an energy saving policies instead (his own specialisation being engineering and not nuclear specific engineering).

When the issue of the IAEA`s 2016 report mentioning 4 points there was a critique of the NRA

1/ Human resources and training

2/ The lack of a self questioning attitude

3/ failure in on-site safety inspections

4/ Japans large threat of natural disasters including volcanoes, earthquakes and Tsunamis being the a threat.

Toyoshi Fuketa said that there was a problem with funding, employment and training in that there was not enough funding available for best practise policies and implementation. Concerning the self questioning attitude the NRA relied on the input from utility companies whist using public forums and platforms, open to the public, for increased scrutiny and transparency. Also, the OECD had input and did reports (Full critiques of OECD report with sources can be found here https://europeannewsweekly.wordpress.com/2016/08/15/japans-dodgy-deep-geological-nuclear-waste-disposal-hopes-and-fears-2016/ ).

The reason given for the lack of on-site inspections mentioned in the IAEA 2016 report was to look at other countries with different policies using the USA and Switzerlands more safety conscious approach. The NRA wishes to use the USA policies and is in year 2 of a 3 year improvement plan which began in 2017 and that this was being developed with on-site agencies and other bodies.

The issue of Japans proclivity to natural disasters was deemed by Toyoshi Fuketa to be the “most contentious issue in the report. He went onto say “what is adequate protection”?

He said that Press challenges to the official reports were important in this regard and that made the NRA have to offer technical responses to questions raised in public debates but that the NRA would ultimately make its own technical decision on issues.

The next question concerned the different policies utilities have on their policies on safety and working practices and should all nuclear utilities come under one unifying structure (A national merger of the many utilities was mentioned) to simplify the complicated inspection and advice procedures found in Japan. …. said that Japan should develop the US model (or similar) where nominated safety officers at each plant hold monthly meetings (2017 report on the US NRA safety culture can be found here www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/whos-responsible-nuclear-power-safety/nrc-safety-culture#.WsOVtZ_OBhE ) to decide best practice on safety and other issues but he didn’t mention any plans ongoing to deal with this issue.

The last question was from the moderator who asked if, in his personal opinion, would Japan stop using nuclear energy? Toyoshi Fuketa`s response, after a rather long pause, was to say that he wished for Japan to move further towards renewable energy solutions and to further reduce the consumption of energy. He mentioned that it would be difficult for Japan to completely stop nuclear energy production in the near future as the infrastructure and policies in Japan were not completely ready for zero nuclear energy yet. He finished of this statement by saying that “I am not originally a nuclear engineer but was a structural engineer”

Source video in English with Japanese translation here;

Novichok A234 – The facts – Exclusive to nuclear-news.net

Posted to nuclear-news.net  by Shaun McGee (aka arclight2011)

Posted on 29th March 2018

ffcb8059fe78589c83fd9e574ab4933b

Thanks to Prof. Chris Busby for proofreading the chemical composition from the chemist source materials ( linked here link)  and for his input into this article.

After some research on Novichok i discovered that;
1/ Militarised Organophosphates (MOP) can be processed into a sticky oil or a fine powder and there are at least 4 types
2/ New Nuclear, biological and chemical NBC suits were developed before Desert Shield as the Novichok series of chemical agents were designed to circumnavigate the old Noddy suits supplied to the military.
3/ Novichok series compounds are detectable easily with testing equipment developed prior to Desert Shield
4/ It is very likely that an antidote was developed prior to desert shield (especially as Skripals daughter and the policemen are recovering)
5/ By making all references to Novichok series a matter of national security the OPCW was not told that these compounds were so dangerous thus allowing the USA and UK to keep such weapons on their shelves.
6/ Most of the Russian peer reviewed studies on this were done under the guise of fertiliser/insecticide production
7/ Although some of the precursors like SO2 are very nasty making this product difficult to produce a synthetic chemist in a lab could produce it
8/ Concerning the Polonium 210 poisoning of Litvinyenko, this polonium could have been synthesised by reducing radium tubes and dials etc reasonably easily

I have some a posit that these chemicals were not recognised as a chemical weapon because of the need to protect Big Agri profits and their business models (ever wonder why Russia agriculture is mainly organic?)
I decided to see if any country could make this and decided to see if Ukraine (as an example) could have produced this. A 2017 OSCE report cited the need to improve chemical handling, transportation and safety in Ukrainian labs needed to be improved so a 3 year plan was initiated and funded by the EU and USA. Ukraine also sent battalion of chemical trained soldiers to Kuwait before the Iraq invasion. One week after the incident with the Skripals the Ukrainian Gov. sent this message to the UK ;
“…Ukraine is ready to provide Britain with assistance in investigating the case of poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavel Klimkin said….” 
Did the UK and USA also hide this product so they could have used it in Iraq or similar?
Ukraine had the basic Potash needed for manufacture of Novichok;
“…John J. McKetta Jr – 1989 – ‎Science
Of the foreign producers, the largest is the USSR, and its producing centers are the Upper Kama Basin of the western Urals, the Starobinsk Basin in Belorussia, and the Ciscarpathian area in the western Ukraine. USSR production has nearly tripled since 1969. Sulfates of potash are produced in the Ukraine, and Muriate Organphosphate is produced at the Upper Kama and Starobinsk basins …”


Some food for thought. Though Ukraine may not have produced this it could have been a criminal crowd in Russia or any secret services etc etc. I used Ukraine as an example and there is no direct proof that Ukraine was responsible though they were capable, thereby, busting the UK and USA government line that it HAD to be Russia! 

Sources for quotes;

“…We proudly represent products of leading Russian, Belarus, and Ukrainian fertilizer producers. Member of the International Fertilizer Association. products. MOP / KCl – Muriate of Potash Ammonium Sulphate – granular / crystalline. SOP – Potassium Sulfate Calcium Ammonium Nitrate NPK blends – 15-15-15, 16-16-16…..” http://lushburyfertilizer.com/

From 2017 .. OSCE report with recommendations to have plans in place by 2020 “..2. Objectives

The overall objective of this Decision is to support OSCE projects aiming at strengthening chemical safety and security in Ukraine in line with UNSCR 1540 (2004) and the Association Agreement by providing a significant contribution to the ICSSP in Ukraine. In particular, this Decision aims at reducing the threat posed by the illicit trade of controlled and toxic chemicals in the OSCE region, in particular in Ukraine, thus promoting peace and security in the Union’s neighbourhood…..” https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017D1252

2003 – Kuwait gets a NBC Ukranian battalion trained in NBC protection and cleanup to protect them from Iraq`s “chemical weapons”  https://www.kuna.net.kw/ArticlePrintPage.aspx?id=1327966&language=en

13th March 2018 – “…Ukraine is ready to provide Britain with assistance in investigating the case of poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavel Klimkin said.

“The UK is investigating, of course, it will bring it (until the end – IF.) It is already known that the poisoning was due to chemicals that were developed in Russia … We are in solidarity with Britain if we need our help – expert or other – we will provide it, “the minister said to journalists on Tuesday in Kiev….” http://interfax.com.ua/news/general/491334.html

John T McKeta Jnr – https://books.google.ie/books?id=bCgffmgHmYcC&pg=PA142&lpg=PA142&dq=ukraine%20mop%20chemical&source=bl&ots=zpPOcQmQkX&sig=nJ2078R-DmDt0_wVpsU_gVK7zck&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjX0bSaq5DaAhXFQ8AKHR21DAYQ6AEIVTAE#v=onepage&q=ukraine%20mop%20chemical&f=false

Image source; Crimea: Ukraine notifies NATO of possible chemical weapons supply – http://qha.com.ua/en/politics/crimea-ukraine-notifies-nato-of-possible-chemical-weapons-supply/139605/

The problem with the BBC and Brexit – Response to Scientists for the EU

maxresdefault
Published on 1 Apr 2018

BBC have failed public on quality education over Brexit. As they launch an investigation into themselves – here’s how they could fix the problem with a more evidence-based approach.

Follow “Scientists for EU” on Facebook, G+ and Twitter (@Scientists4EU), subscribe to our YouTube channel – and see our website (scientistsforeu.uk)

Posted to europeannewsweekly

Posted by Shaun McGee aka arclight2011

2 April 2018

Some food for thought here.. On the 1st January 2019 the EU will enact a new policy concerning tax policy and transparency issues concerning the same. Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/company-tax/anti-tax-avoidance-package/anti-tax-avoidance-directive_en

And the BBC has a pension fund;

“…BBC pension fund

One can also look at the top 20 equity holdings held by the BBC pension fund – of course, the BBC being behind the Panorama programme which aired on Sunday night on the Paradise Papers.The scheme has substantial investments in the following:

Google (Alphabet Inc)

Amazon

Facebook – like its other online friends, it has, of course, suffered criticism for lack of UK tax payments.

Apple Inc One can also see the funds that the pension scheme invests in by reviewing the annual report for the pension scheme…..” https://www.enterprisetax.co.uk/5444-2/

Of course tax avoidance is endemic in the UK and that was discussed last week during a Parliamentary committee meeting discussing Russian corruption. However, during the meeting the issues of tax avoidance came up as well as the fact that dodgy Russian money is coming into the UK at the rate of about 1 billion Pounds Sterling a week and that Liam Fox and many other politicians were getting some of this money (not well reported on the BBC ). If you want a laugh at the topics discussed and the xenophobic responses, here is the full meeting (worth a view as the BBC made it into a sound-bite of minuscule proportions) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkfYKjkYKnk

Then read what the BBC “Journalist” reported LOL .. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43574268

Lastly, if you watch the Parliamentary committee video, bear in mind that the facts that did come out were quite an eye opener and the corruption is MUCH wider than just Russian issues.. Basically, the anti tax avoidance directive and losing the 1 billion a week (plus other billions a week from various countries) would crash the city, pensions and complicity of politicians, security services etc etc

Keep up the good work but you dont stand a chance. Any right minded people would be calling for a 2nd referendum and thats why the BBC and main stream media prefer the choice of the royal flowers etc .. One last link to rap this up http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/news/bbc-employee-attempted-suicide-after-tax-avoidance-crackdown/a1102942

Be careful though, remember the Fusion Doctrine and RIPA now makes legal what the Home office has been illegally doing to Journalists/researchers who have a moral backbone! (see my channel especially the series in 2013 on the death of the Magna Carta and btw I was supposed to be a part of the #pitchford Inquiry but the terms were narrowed to make the Inquiry worthless) http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/met-anti-terrorism-database-holds-more-2000-records-relating-journalists/

If I was a betting man I would say that the UK Gov will use Pesco funding and EU citizens rights as a bulwark against the EU Tax avoidance law and concede to a Norway style EEA agreement.. but they surely are not doing that? It is what the Atlantic Alliance would go for (ie NATO) as the UK could then continue as the leading country defending Northern region Fascist Latvia etc as agreed last year giving EU PESCO command of the southern region. So actually all this is a distraction for the plebs and copy for the journalists .. Just saying

UPDATE; Another helpful EU agency is apparently ESMA (security and markets authority) they have currently scared the living daylights out of many companies selling high risk financial ‘trading’ services…

ESMA agrees to prohibit binary options and restrict CFDs to protect retail investors

27 March 2018

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has agreed on measures on the provision of contracts for differences (CFDs) and binary options to retail investors in the European Union (EU)…..

 

https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-agrees-prohibit-binary-options-and-restrict-cfds-protect-retail-investors

That doesnt work from Ireland so this Cached version does work for me..

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:nAFAercvO-YJ:https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-agrees-prohibit-binary-options-and-restrict-cfds-protect-retail-investors+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie&client=ubuntu

#JTRIG ?

Screenshot from 2018-04-02 12:21:19

And when I reported the error;

Screenshot from 2018-04-02 12:23:07

And I tried again and again LOL No progress!

Here is the text;

The agreed measures include:

1.    Binary Options – a prohibition on the marketing, distribution or sale of binary options to retail investors; and

2.    Contracts for Differences – a restriction on the marketing, distribution or sale of CFDs to retail investors. This restriction consists of: leverage limits on opening positions; a margin close out rule on a per account basis; a negative balance protection on a per account basis; preventing the use of incentives by a CFD provider; and a firm specific risk warning delivered in a standardised way.

In accordance with MiFIR, ESMA can only introduce temporary intervention measures on a three monthly basis. Before the end of the three months, ESMA will consider the need to extend the intervention measures for a further three months.

Significant Investor Protection Concern

ESMA, along with National Competent Authorities (NCAs), concluded that there exists a significant investor protection concern in relation to CFDs and binary options offered to retail investors. This is due to their complexity and lack of transparency; the particular features of CFDs – excessive leverage – and binary options – structural expected negative return and embedded conflict of interest between providers and their clients; the disparity between the expected return and the risk of loss; and issues related to their marketing and distribution.

NCAs’ analyses on CFD trading across different EU jurisdictions shows that 74-89% of retail accounts typically lose money on their investments, with average losses per client ranging from €1,600 to €29,000. NCAs’ analyses for binary options also found consistent losses on retail clients’ accounts.

These measures were agreed by ESMA’s Board of Supervisors on 23 March 2018.

Steven Maijoor, Chair, said:

“The agreed measures ESMA is announcing today will guarantee greater investor protection across the EU by ensuring a common minimum level of protection for retail investors. The new measures on CFDs will for the first time ensure that investors cannot lose more money than they put in, restrict the use of leverage and incentives, and provide a risk warning for investors. For binary options, the prohibition we are announcing is needed to protect investors due to the products’ characteristics.

“The combination of the promise of high returns, easy-to-trade digital platforms, in an environment of historical low interest rates has created an offer that appeals to retail investors. However, the inherent complexity of the products and their excessive leverage – in the case of CFDs – has resulted in significant losses for retail investors.

“A pan-EU approach is required given the cross-border nature of these products,  and ESMA’s intervention is the most appropriate and efficient tool to address this major investor protection issue.”

CFDs – agreed measures  

The product intervention measures ESMA has agreed under Article 40 of the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation include:

1.    Leverage limits on the opening of a position by a retail client from 30:1 to 2:1, which vary according to the volatility of the underlying:

·         30:1 for major currency pairs;

·         20:1 for non-major currency pairs, gold and major indices;

·         10:1 for commodities other than gold and non-major equity indices;

·         5:1 for individual equities and other reference values;

·         2:1 for cryptocurrencies;

2.    A margin close out rule on a per account basis. This will standardise the percentage of margin (at 50% of minimum required margin) at which providers are required to close out one or more retail client’s open CFDs;

3.    Negative balance protection on a per account basis. This will provide an overall guaranteed limit on retail client losses;

4.    A restriction on the incentives offered to trade CFDs; and

5.    A standardised risk warning, including the percentage of losses on a CFD provider’s retail investor accounts.

Next steps

ESMA intends to adopt these measures in the official languages of the EU in the coming weeks, following which ESMA will publish an official notice on its website.  The measures will then be published in the Official Journal of the EU (OJ) and will start to apply one month, for binary options, and two months, for CFDs, after their publication in the OJ.

Translated versions: BG CS DA DE EL ES ET FI FR HR HU IT LT LV MT NL PL PT RO SK SL SV

Nuclear Hotseat Shownotes for world segment 2 Jan 2017

GLOBAL Uranium companies to cut production to increase the value of uranium post FUKUSHIMA

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/05/global-uranium-companies-to-cut-production-to-increase-the-value-of-uranium-post-fukushima/

Google filters nuclear-news.net website, so much for net neutrality anyway!

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/16/google-filters-nuclear-news-net-website-so-much-for-net-neutrality-anyway/

Sellafield Ltd buries the cost of its expensive Evaporator D Nuclear waste processing project

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/29/sellafield-ltd-buries-the-cost-of-its-expensive-evaporator-d-nuclear-waste-processing-project/

The potential health effects to coastal populations of the dumping of 330,000 tons of radioactively contaminated mud on the coast of Wales, 2.8km from Cardiff.

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/04/the-potential-health-effects-to-coastal-populations-of-the-dumping-of-330000-tons-of-radioactively-contaminated-mud-on-the-coast-of-wales-2-8km-from-cardiff/

UK: Renewables a better option than nuclear power: but nuclear is needed for maintaining nuclear weapons

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/30/uk-renewables-a-better-option-than-nuclear-power-but-nuclear-is-needed-for-maintaining-nuclear-weapons/

France’s President Emmanuel Macron to save France’s nuclear export industry?

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/27/frances-president-emmanuel-macron-to-save-frances-nuclear-export-industry/

What caused radiation spike in Xian: North Korean blast, European accident, or one closer to home?

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/30/what-caused-radiation-spike-in-xian-north-korean-blast-european-accident-or-one-closer-to-home/

Ruthenium 106 investigation update 12 Dec 2017. Who is lying and why?

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/12/ruthenium-106-investigation-update-12-dec-2017-who-is-lying-and-why/

Russian nuclear plant says it finally emits nuclear isotope #Ruthenium106 (13 Dec 2017)

https://nuclear-news.net/2017/12/14/russian-nuclear-plant-says-it-finally-emits-nuclear-isotope-ruthenium106/

 

Tokyo 2020 Olympic fallacies and fallout

To finish this summary of his talk it would seem that the recent drive for tourism in the nuclear damaged Fukushima prefecture would actually be impacted during and after the Olympics. As the deadline for the games approaches clean up from the tsunami and nuclear disaster would be diverted into the Olympic infrastructure program as the tough IOC deadline approaches for July 2020.

 

Screenshot from 2017-07-26 18:32:43Published 26 July 2017

by Shaun McGee

In this article I wish to report on the issues with the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. This is based on a presentation by Andrew Zimbalist the sports economist at the Foreign Correspondence Club of Japan on the 26th July 2017

As Prof. Zimbalist began his presentation he commented that the promised profits to the country as “Public dialogue is propaganda”.  He added to this by saying that there would be “no positive impulse to the economy”.

He followed up with a breakdown estimate of costs. There are three cost projections. The first being the initial costing to some 5 billion dollars. The second is a more recent report stating 12.5 billion dollars (less the contingency fund that was removed of some 2.5 billion dollars that is supposed to cover the cost over runs). The third was a more recent costing of 27 billion dollars!

He stated that the infrastructure that are being built specifically for the Olympics are likely to be “white elephants” with only a single use. He also said that Tourism will actually suffer during and after the games and that it would be unlikely to benefit the local economy.

Concerning infrastructure, he said that some 8,000 acres of land were used in the Beijing games and that Japan would be sorely stressed to provide all the land the International Olympic Committee (IOC) requires for its planned infrastructure.

The economy would be sorely tested as tax benefits etc for private investment would be at the cost of the tax payer. There would be no Tariffs on building materials imported. Free land would be offered to private investment companies and low indirect loans.

He mentioned the cost of security at being in the region of 2 billion dollars but did not mention that civil society groups would be targeted as they were in London in 2012.

To finish this summary of his talk it would seem that the recent drive for tourism in the nuclear damaged Fukushima prefecture would actually be impacted during and after the Olympics. As the deadline for the games approaches clean up from the tsunami and nuclear disaster would be diverted into the Olympic infrastructure program as the tough IOC deadline approaches for July 2020.

The video from which this article was derived can be found here;