Fukushima

Why do you suppose that our media ignores the ongoing catastrophe at the Fukushima Nuclear Power complex in Japan?

Do you think it's a non-issue?

#1 [2]

Penteller [3] wrote on June 02, 2012 at 8:06 am

Goodness haveltors, just how

Goodness haveltors, just how much of the Coolaid have you drank? And where did you get the understanding that all is ok at Fucushima?

Let’s see. To begin with you can always tell when something is really bad, it’s when they stop reporting on it. When have you recently seen an in-depth, up-close and investigative report on the evolving catastrophe?

So massive radioactive contamination of costal areas of Japan, where rainfall runs to the Pacific is nothing to worry about? That one of the reactor pools is completely “liquid” and could breach at anytime is of no concern? To say nothing of another quake or tsunami that would wash it into the sea. That hundreds of thousands of gallons of water, used to flood and cool some of the containment pools has disappeared into the ground and sea, will not matter? That massive amounts of radiation that escaped in the explosions and fires on an island in the Pacific, whose waters flow towards the US, will not eventually impact us? All of this from more than just one destroyed nuclear power plant setting on the side of the ocean, damage so severe that they don’t even know how to prop it up, much less repair it as it continues to deteriorate.

To say nothing of the radiation detectors that have been turned off along both the Canadian and US coastlines, Canadian ocean scientist who have been laid off, as both countries refuse to release any kind of fallout information to the public.

You don’t have to be a scientist to know we’re screwed, just open your eyes and see through the smoke and mirrors of today’s media manipulation helps a bunch.

Goodbye West Coast Agriculture.

#2 [4]

buzorro [1] wrote on June 02, 2012 at 10:06 am

The folks at Accuweather.com

The folks at Accuweather.com ask, '

Does Radioactive Tuna Mean Fukushima Was Worse than Expected? [5]' (http://www.accuweather.com/en/outdoor-articles/beach-and-marine/does-rad... [6])

In fact, it means that reports have been downplayed. Note the date of the above article. Radioactive tuna was caught off the coast of California a year ago. Also note the statement that, '... Although the contamination in these particular tuna fell well below levels considered dangerous for consumption,...' Riiiight. What were the levels of cesium in those fifteen tuna? '...10 times the background levels of radioactive cesium...'

What most people don't know is that there were six nuclear reactors at the Fulushima Power complex. Three of these have already passed the meltdown stage and their nuclear rods are in the process of burning through the ground in a 'China Syndrome' scenario.

It might pay to take a geiger counter with you the next time you visit a Toyota, Nissan, or Honda car dealer.

#3 [7]

Mark Taylor [8] wrote on June 02, 2012 at 2:06 pm

If your research here is as

If your research here is as thorough and solid as your research proving Obama is a Kenyan and ineligible to be president [9], then I'm with you, Buz.

#4 [10]

rbecak [11] wrote on May 28, 2012 at 4:05 pm

All I know is that I hope it

All I know is that I hope it turns out alright. I am not smart enough for this stuff (took this IQ Exam [12], got far below average!!). :D

#5 [13]

haveltors [14] wrote on May 28, 2012 at 3:05 pm

There is little risk of a

There is little risk of a catastrophe now. The nuclear material is well under control.

#6 [15]

buzorro [1] wrote on May 26, 2012 at 11:05 pm

U.S. Army General: The Whole

U.S. Army General: The Whole Northern Hemisphere is at Risk of Becoming Largely Uninhabitable

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/u-s-army-general-the-whole-norther... [16]

#7 [17]

buzorro [1] wrote on May 26, 2012 at 11:05 pm

Fukushima nuclear cesium

Fukushima nuclear cesium fallout equals 4,023 Hiroshima bombs

http://www.examiner.com/article/fukushima-cesium-equals-4-023-hiroshima-... [18]