Global
The COVID Pandemic has thrown America’s atomic reactor industry into lethal chaos, making a major disaster even more likely. Reports from “terrified” workers at a Pennsylvania reactor indicate vital precautions needed to protect them may not even be possible.
Nationwide, with falling demand and soaring prices for nuke-generated electricity, the Pandemic casts a dark shadow over reactor operations and whether frightened neighbors will allow them to be refueled and repaired.
America’s 96 remaining atomic reactors are run by a coveted pool of skilled technicians who manage the control rooms, conduct repairs, load/unload nuclear fuel.
Because few young students have been entering the field, the corps of about 100,000 licensed technicians has been—-like the reactors themselves—-rapidly aging while declining in numbers. Work has stopped at the last two US reactors under construction (at Vogtle, Georgia) due to the Pandemic’s impact, which includes a shrinking supply of healthy workers.
The devastating impact of the coronavirus on Italy has sparked considerable speculation as to why the country appears to have suffered so disproportionately from the disease. Some initial theories suggested that the deaths might be due to lower standards and ill-advised practices in the Italian national health system, but the reality is that northern Italy, where the virus has struck hardest, has by most metrics better and more accessible health care than does the United States overall.
By one reckoning, the claimed number of dead is too high because anyone who tested positive and died had his or her death attributed to the virus even if it was actually due to other unrelated causes. And that argument has also been flipped on its head to demonstrate that the numbers are too low, using the fact that many Italians have not been tested for the virus to assert that many dead were actually caused by coronavirus. Since those dead were not medically confirmed positive for COVID-19, the deaths were erroneously attributed to other causes.
The film “Prosecutor,” tells the story of the International Criminal Court, with a focus on its first chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, with lots of footage of him in the year 2009. He held that office from 2003 to 2012.
The film opens with the Prosecutor helicoptering into an African village to inform the people that the ICC is bringing its form of justice to locations all over the world, not just their village. But, of course, we all know it isn’t true, and we know now that even in the decade since the film was made, the ICC has not indicted anyone from the United States or any NATO nation or Israel or Russia or China or anywhere outside of Africa.
Moreno-Ocampo had successfully prosecuted top officials in Argentina in the 1980s. But when he began at the ICC the focus was on Africa. This was in part because African nations asked for these prosecutions. And some who argued against a bias toward Africa were, of course, criminal defendants whose motivations were far from selfless.
After I circulated yesterday’s excerpts of statements from a TED Talk interview of Bill Gates (Mr. “Vaccinate Everybody on the Planet for Every Known [or suspected] Virus”), an internet contact of mine asked me a couple of questions:
“Gary, are you an advocate of the herd immunity? Do I understand correctly that this means letting the virus run its course and kill as many people as necessary including many doctors and nurses who are treating the sick?”
Here is what I wrote back, thinking that some other readers of my columns might benefit from the answers..
No, but most bacterial or viral infections – even the most contagious ones (whether mild, moderate or severe) will, if they don’t kill the victim, result in life-time immunity because they are acquired naturally. Vaccinations, a very abnormal way of causing an infection or infectious response, will only result in partial, incomplete or NO immunity.
Pressure on Bernie Sanders to quit the presidential race is intensifying. Over the weekend, the Washington Post splashed a major story under the headline “Some Top Sanders Advisers Urge Him to Consider Withdrawing.” While sheltering at home, comedian Larry David couldn’t curb his enthusiasm for an end to the campaign, telling a New York Times columnist: “I feel he should drop out. Because he’s too far behind. He can’t get the nomination.”
UPDATE: Now included in this video is the Q&A portion.
Here’s a video I encourage you to watch above or at this LINK. The part that I’m in, which addresses climate and war, starts around minute 40, but I encourage you to watch the whole thing.
This was an event in Charlottesville, Va., on February 28, 2020, featuring activists whose portraits have been painted by Robert Shetterly. Meeting other such activists has been a major source of inspiration to me. In this case, those activists include Sherri Mitchell, Kelsey Juliana, Diane Wilson, and John Hunter. They’re terrific.
Q: How did you take the news of the pandemic?
A: I think I took it the way most people did. Initially, there was hope that it could be controlled, localized. But things took a very different turn and the epidemic spread far and wide. Unprecedented measures and decisions became necessary. Leaders, citizens and international organizations found themselves in an extremely difficult situation. All of this will have to be thoroughly analyzed, but the priority now is to take things in hand and defeat this new, vicious enemy.
Q: How do you assess the measures now being taken?
A: The main concern must be people’s security and saving people’s lives. I assume that the steps now being taken are based on science and the advice of the most competent experts. Right now they are practically unanimous that lockdown is necessary. This is something both the authorities and the people must accept. A lot depends on people’s behavior. Utmost responsibility and discipline is of the essence. Then we may hope that the worst could be avoided.
Voting by mail should replace voting at the polls in it's entirety. The two
institutions that can definitely be trusted is the County Board of Elections
and the United States Postal Service. The money saved by eliminating the
need for poll workers could be used to offer free postage on the envelopes
used to vote by mail. The person voting would also have more time to
consider what they are voting for and would not be confined to the hours
of the polling place. It would also prevent unwanted entry to schools and
churches from anyone trying to harm someone. In addition the voter would
not be harassed by someone trying to place unsolicited campaign literature
into their hand. The additional revenue would boost the Postal Service
and perhaps keep it afloat until we as a country are able to vote online.
Voting by mail would solve the registered voter problem and guarantee safe
passage of the ballots to the County Board of Elections.
When a few thousand people were murdered on September 11, 2001, I was actually stupid enough – I kid you not – to imagine that the general public would conclude that because massive military forces, nuclear arsenals, and foreign bases had done nothing to prevent and much to provoke those crimes, the U.S. government would need to start scaling back its single biggest expense. By September 12th it was clear that the opposite course would be followed.
Since 2001, we have seen the U.S. government dump over a trillion dollars a year into militarism, and push the rest of the world to expend another trillion dollars a year, much of it on U.S.-made weapons. We’ve seen the creation of permawars, and the normalization of long-distance, push-button murder with drone wars. All of this has generated more terrorism in the name of fighting it. And it has come at the expense of actual defense.
A government agency aimed at actually defending people from actual dangers would cease activities that are counter-productive, that cause major environmental and climate destruction, and that consume resources that could be put to good use. Militarism meets all of those criteria.