How to Pay Down the Federal Deficit: Sell America’s Icons, Assets and Gold?
April 7, 2011 by Andrew
Filed under Government
April 7th, 2011
Daily Finance
By: Douglas McIntyre
For most Americans, it is unimaginable that the U.S. could put its iconic properties on the market. But as the nation struggles to balance its balance sheet, should the federal government take a look at selling some of its most valuable assets?
It wouldn’t be the first time that a large nation has pondered taking such drastic steps in recent years. Just two years ago, the Greeks and the British probably never would have thought that some of their famed assets would hit the auction block.
But since then, Greece has been saddled with such onerous budget restrictions due to E.U. bailout guarantees that some have suggested that it sell some of its popular islands. A number of the country’s politicians are attempting to block the transactions. One of the jokes about Greece — which sadly now has some basis in reality — is that it will have to sell the Parthenon. The Greeks don’t find the joke very funny.
The British have also begun the sale of assets, which could eventually include the Royal Mail.
Asset sales by governments have a long history. A large percentage of the geographic area of the United States was acquired through the purchase of land from other governments. In the Louisiana Purchase, Napoleonic France, strapped for cash due to its wars in Europe, sold the United States land that is now part or all of 14 states for the 2010 equivalent of $219 million.
24/7 Wall St. has identified nine U.S. assets that could generate a total of $543 billion — or about a third of the annual budget deficit for the government’s current fiscal year. The list is by no means comprehensive, but shows that the U.S. has salable assets that, in some cases, are worth hundreds of billions of dollars.
Each of the nine assets on this list were compared to private companies or entities that already have established public valuations. For example, to put a value on the U.S. Postal Service, 24/7 Wall St. looked at FedEx (FDX) and United Parcel Service (UPS), and to estimate a sale price for the New York Federal Reserve building, they examined nearby Wall Street real estate. We looked at cash flow and revenue figures when comparable values were not available. We determined the size and dimensions of each asset using U.S. government data, which was taken from dozens of departments and agencies.
It’s worth noting, though: While these nine sales and licensing agreements might make a big dent in a single year’s budget deficit, they wouldn’t balance the budget, and the current federal debt — the overall amount we owe — is around $14 trillion. That $543 billion is just a drop in the bigger bucket — we’d need to find many, many more assets to put on the auction block to significantly reduce the debt. But this is a huge country, and this list is just the tip of the iceberg.
1. New York Federal Reserve Building
Guesstimated price tag: $750 million
Location: Manhattan, New York
U.S. ownership: 87 years
Who should buy it: Donald Trump, SL Green, Tishman Speyer
Why it’s valuable: Location
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is located in a massive building that takes up an entire block in Manhattan’s Financial District. Construction of the building was completed in 1924. It’s 14 stories tall and features an additional five floors underground. If the bank relocated to less valuable real estate, the government could make a significant amount of money. A recent notice issued by the New York City Department of Finance estimated the building’s value for the 2011 to 2012 tax year to be $88,594,000. While this may be the value for tax purposes, a review of comparable buildings in Manhattan revealed this wold likely be significantly less than its market price. On Madison Avenue, a similar building was sold for just under $1 billion. In all likelihood, considering its location and the historical significance of the building, the government could fetch closer to $750 million from a buyer like Donald Trump or SL Green.
2. Hoover Dam
Guesstimated price tag: $415 million
Location: Nevada/Arizona
U.S. ownership: 75 years
Who should buy it: Duke Power, Con Edison, Southern Company
Why it’s valuable: Hydroelectric power
The Hoover Dam includes one of the largest hydroelectric installations in the country. If a company were to purchase the structure, it would most likely do so to privatize the dam and reap the benefits from the sale of the power it generates. According to the Department of the Interior, the average annual net generation for the Hoover Dam from 1947 through 2008 was about 4.2 billion kilowatt-hours. The Energy Information Administration calculates the average retail price of a single kilowatt-hour, as of 2010, at 9.88 cents. That means the energy produced by the dam each year is worth roughly $415 million. Of course, the operators of the power plant must deal with additional, necessary costs, such as flood control. Without the benefit of a profit and loss statement for the dam, one year’s revenue is a reasonable — though quite conservative — valuation.
3. Randolph Air Force Base
Guesstimated price tag: $1 billion
Location: San Antonio, Texas
U.S. ownership: 81 years
Who should buy it: City of San Antonio
Why it’s valuable: Could be converted to a commercial airport
There are many cases of former Air Force bases being converted into commercial airports, including the fields that are now Bangor International in Maine and Southern California Logistics in the Golden State. This usually happens only after a base has been closed, but there’s no reason to believe the government wouldn’t sell an operating base in an area where it could get a premium price for it. According to the Census Bureau, San Antonio is the fourth fastest-growing city in the U.S. The metropolis also happens to have a nation-high three Air Force bases within its city limits. Randolph AFB has two substantial runways capable of supporting all but the largest jetliners. Incorporating the costs the city of San Antonio would have to sustain to upgrade facilities and build a new terminal, Randolph could be sold for as much as $1 billion.
4. Naming Rights to the Grand Canyon
Guesstimated price tag: $1 billion
Location: Arizona
U.S. ownership: Became a national monument 103 years ago
Who should buy it: Large international brand
Why it’s valuable: Brand recognition
It’s very common for large venues, like stadiums and convention centers, to sell naming rights for tens of millions of dollars. The new Citi Field in New York (formerly the Met’s Shea Stadium) sold naming rights to Citigroup for $400 million. The U.S. government would likely get much more for a major national attraction like the Grand Canyon, which has more than twice as many visitors each year as Citi Field, and has the added branding value of being a major national landmark. This trend could spread to any of the hundreds of national monuments in the U.S., such as Mount Rushmore or the Washington Monument.
Click here for the full report from Daily Finance
Glenn Beck to End Daily Fox News Program
April 7, 2011 by Andrew
Filed under Government
April 7th, 2011
New York Times
By: Brian Stelter
Glenn Beck will end his daily Fox News Channel program later this year.
His departure was jointly announced in a statement on Wednesday by Fox and Mr. Beck’s company, Mercury Radio Arts.
Fox News and Mercury Radio Arts, which have clashed over the making of the program, will “work together to develop and produce a variety of television projects for air on the Fox News Channel as well as content for other platforms including Fox News’ digital properties,” the companies said in the statement.
As expected, a senior Fox News executive, Joel Cheatwood, will join Mr. Beck at Mercury Radio Arts starting later this month.
The joint statement did not specify an end date for Mr. Beck’s show, called “Glenn Beck,” which has been telecast at 5 p.m. on Fox News since early 2009. Asked if Fox News had a rough end date for the program, a spokeswoman referred back to the statement. Mr. Beck’s contract with Fox ends in December.
Mr. Beck is a hugely popular figure on Fox News, averaging 2.2 million viewers each weekday, though his ratings have fallen somewhat in the last year. He is beloved by his fans for speaking out against what he sees as threats from progressives, socialists and people he deems “radicals.” His opponents — and there are many — condemn him for his conspiratorial views and apocalyptic predictions.
Notably, his program is a rare daily broadcast platform for a strain of libertarian politics that is also evident in the Tea Party, a movement he embraced and encouraged.
Though the discord rarely spilled onto the television broadcasts, Mr. Beck and his managers repeatedly clashed with Fox, and they had been contemplating an exit from Fox for some time. Two of the post-Fox options Mr. Beck has considered, according to people who have spoken about it with him, are a partial or wholesale takeover of a cable channel, or an expansion of his subscription video service on the Web. His company has been staffing up — making Web shows, some of which have little or nothing to do with Mr. Beck, and charging a monthly subscription for access to the shows.
A spokesman for Mr. Beck declined to say whether the agreement announced Wednesday included a non-compete agreement that would preclude Mr. Beck from hosting a television show elsewhere for a period of time.
Mr. Beck also hosts a syndicated radio show on weekday mornings. He was estimated to earn about $32 million in total revenues in 2009, the first year that he worked at Fox.
In the statement on Wednesday, Mr. Beck said he would be starting a “new phase” of a partnership with Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News. “I truly believe that America owes a lot to Roger Ailes and Fox News,” he said.
Mr. Ailes said in the statement, “Glenn Beck is a powerful communicator, a creative entrepreneur and a true success by anybody’s standards. I look forward to continuing to work with him.”
Almost immediately after Mr. Beck’s announcement, the progressive group Media Matters for America, which combats Fox on a daily basis, said it was “no surprise” that he was leaving, given that many advertisers had shunned Mr. Beck’s show ever since he labeled President Obama a racist in the summer of 2009. (Fox has said in the past that the advertisers simply moved over to other programs on the channel.)
Color of Change, the group that spearheaded an advertiser boycott of Mr. Beck, asserted that the program lost “over 300 advertisers.” James Rucker, the executive director of the group, said in a statement, “Fox News Channel clearly understands that Beck’s increasingly erratic behavior is a liability to their ratings and their bottom line, and we are glad to see them take this action.”
Click here for the full report from the New York Times
The Kevin Trudeau Show: 4-6-11
Today, Kevin explains how there is one very unique ability that ALL successful people have. Find out what it is and if YOU have what it takes to become a part of this exclusive club!
Self Help:
Your Wish Is YOUR Command
Lose Weight The Safe Way
Improve Your Health & Vitality
Give Kevin YOUR Vote
Deer Antler Velvet
Nature’s Best Antibiotic
Everything Kevin:
Become An Insider!
Support Kevin!
Kevin is on YouTube!
Sign Up For Kevin’s FREE Podcast
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Become A Fan of Kevin on Facebook
Kevin’s Film Club
Kevin’s Book Club
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Click below to watch the Kevin Trudeau Show!
Studies Show Coffee Drinkers Get Health Perks
April 6th, 2011
AOL News
By: Jane Healey
Coffee lovers have a reason to celebrate.
Recent studies have shown that rather than being harmful, coffee actually provides a variety of health benefits.
In a study published last week in Stroke: the Journal of the American Heart Association, Swedish researchers followed the health habits of nearly 35,000 women ages 49 to 83 for 10 years. They discovered that the women who drank at least one cup of coffee per day had a 22 to 25 percent lower risk of stroke than those who drank less or none at all.
“The risk [of stroke] appeared to be increased among women with low or no coffee consumption,” the Swedish study team noted.
The Swedish study is the latest in a series of studies over the past few years that have revealed that not only is drinking coffee not harmful but that it may be good for your health.
In another well-known study, Dr. Frank Hu, a professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, and his team of investigators on the Harvard Nurses’ Health Study discovered a link between coffee consumption and lower diabetes risk.
“I think it’s actually more healthful than tea,” Dr. Hu recently told the Boston Globe.
Additional recent studies have found that drinking coffee can reduce your risk of gallstones, liver disease, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and certain cancers. If you’re a long-distance runner, you might consider having a cup of joe before a big race, as coffee has also been shown to increase a runner’s endurance.
Exactly how coffee provides these benefits is still a mystery that researchers are trying to solve. Swedish researchers in last week’s published stroke study theorize that coffee reduces inflammation and improves insulin resistance — both risk factors of stroke. The high content of powerful disease-fighting antioxidants in coffee may also be what provides such a wide array of health benefits.
“Coffee drinkers should rejoice,” Sharonne Hayes, a cardiologist at the Mayo Clinic, told The Associated Press.
“There really hasn’t been any study that convincingly said coffee is bad. If you are drinking coffee now, you may be doing some good, and you are likely not doing harm.”
Click here for the full report from AOL News
Eskimo Study Highlights Obesity and Disease Prevention Benefits of Omega-3s
April 6th, 2011
Natural News
By: Jonathan Benson
High consumption of foods naturally rich in omega-3 fatty acids helps to reduce the risk of developing obesity-related illnesses like heart disease and diabetes, says a new study published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Even among obese populations, omega-3s demonstrably keep at bay inflammation and blood triglyceride levels, two markers of obesity-related illness.
Researchers from the Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center in collaboration with the Center for Alaska Native Health Research at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, gathered data from a small Eskimo community living in the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta region of southwest Alaska. Seventy percent of the 330-person group was overweight or obese, which is comparable to statistics in the lower 48 states. Yet the Eskimo group as a whole consumes roughly 20 times more omega-3s on a regular basis than the average American does.
“Because Yup’ik Eskimos have a traditional diet that includes large amounts of fatty fish and have a prevalence of overweight or obesity that is similar to that of the general US population, this offered a unique opportunity to study whether omega-3 fats change the association between obesity and chronic disease risk,” said Zeina Makhoul, PhD, lead study author.
Upon analysis, researchers noted significantly higher blood levels of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), two types of omega-3 fats, in the Eskimo group overall, as well as rates of type-2 diabetes that were less than half of what they are in the continental US. And even among obese individuals in the Eskimo group, blood triglyceride levels and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were comparable to those found in normal-weight people, indicating that omega-3s offer health protective benefits for both thin and overweight individuals.
“Interestingly, we found that obese persons with high blood levels of omega-3 fats had triglyceride and CRP concentrations that did not differ from those of normal-weight persons,” said Makhoul. “It appeared that high intakes of omega-3-rich seafood protected Yup’ik Eskios from some of the harmful effects of obesity.”
Click here for the full report from Natural News
Ron Paul: The Fed Undermines Foreign Policy
April 6, 2011 by Andrew
Filed under Government
April 6th, 2011
InformationLiberation.com
By: Ron Paul
Last week I was both surprised and pleased when the Supreme Court upheld lower court decisions requiring the Federal Reserve Bank to comply with requests for information made by Bloomberg under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). Bloomberg simply wanted to know who received loans from the Fed’s discount window in the aftermath of the 2008 financial market crisis, and how much each entity received. Surely this is basic information that should be available to every American taxpayer. But the Fed fought tooth and nail all the way to the Supreme Court to preserve their privileged secrecy. However, transparency and openness won the day. There are some 29,000 pages to decipher, but a few points stand out initially.
The Fed lent huge sums of our money to foreign banks. This in itself was not surprising, but the actual amount is staggering! In one week at the height of the crisis, about 70% of the money doled out went to foreign banks. We were told that bailing out banks was going to stave off a massive depression. Depression for whom? We now know that the Fed’s bailout had nothing to do with helping the American people, who have gotten their depression anyway with continued job losses and foreclosures. But now we learn that a good deal of the money did not even help American banks!
In light of recent world events, perhaps the most staggering revelation is that quite a bit of money went to the Arab Banking Corp., in which the Libyan Central Bank owned about a third of its stock. This occurred while Libya, a declared state sponsor of terrorism, was under strict economic sanctions! How erratic the US must appear when we shower a dictator alternately with dollars and bombs! Also, we must consider the possibility that those loans are inadvertently financing weapons Gaddaffi is using against his own people and western militaries. This would not be the first time the covert activities of the Fed have undermined not only our economy and the value of the dollar, but our foreign policy as well.
Of course I can’t say I’m surprised by the poor quality of the data provided by the Fed. The category of each loan made, whether from the “Primary Discount Window”, the “Secondary Discount Window,” or “Other Extensions of Credit,” is redacted. Thus, we don’t know with certainty how much discount window lending was provided to foreign banks and how much was merely “other extensions of credit”. Also, some of the numbers simply do not seem to add up. We are of course still wading through the massive document dump, but it does seem as though several billions of dollars are unaccounted for.
As the world economy continues to falter in spite of – or rather because of – cheap money doled out by the Federal Reserve, its ability to deceive financial markets and American taxpayers is coming to an end. People are beginning to realize that when the fed in effect doubles the worldwide supply of US dollars in a relatively short time, it has the effect of stealing half your money through reduced purchasing power. Rapid inflation will continue as trillions in new money and credit recently created by the Fed flood into the commodity markets. It is becoming more and more obvious that the Fed operates for the benefit of a few privileged banks, banks that never suffer for bad decisions they make. Quite the opposite – as we have seen since October 2008, under our current monetary system politically-connected banks are paid to make bad decisions.
Click here for the full report from InformationLiberation.com
High Fructose Corn Syrup Increases Abdominal Fat and Insulin Resistance
April 6th, 2011
Natural News
By: T.M. Hartle
A new study from Princeton University found that significant weight gain occurred by merely adding high fructose corn syrup to the diet. Subjects in the test group gained 48% more weight than those who were not given any high fructose corn syrup. Companies with financial ties to the industry have fought back against current scientific research with a very effective, yet deceptive, advertising campaign. Despite industry ad campaigns, research continues to show high fructose corn syrup to be a health damaging substance.
The latest ad campaigns have tried to paint a picture that high fructose corn syrup is no different than white sugar. It is interesting that the industry is trying to make their product look harmless by comparing it to another unhealthy substance. Regardless of the lunacy of the comparison, the claim is false. During the study conducted at Princeton, subjects consuming foods laced with high fructose corn syrup experienced weight gain, high increases in triglyceride levels, and fat deposits in the abdominal area. This study, however, does not stand alone in its implication of high fructose corn syrup and its health damaging effects.
An earlier study looked at the direct differences between white sugar and high fructose corn syrup. This study separated two groups: one was given white sugar, the other high fructose corn syrup. The group receiving white sugar received a similar amount to what would be found in a regular can of soda. The other group received high fructose corn syrup in half the volume in comparison to the amount of white sugar given to the first group. Researchers found that high fructose corn syrup consumption led to increased triglycerides, abdominal fat, and weight gain. The group on white sugar did not experience any of these effects. Researchers also hypothesized that this could lead to leptin and insulin resistance leading to a predisposition toward obesity. Leptin is a hormone that signals to the brain that you are full. Research has shown that high fructose corn syrup does inhibit this hormone leading to excess calorie intake.
The claim that high fructose corn syrup is the same as white sugar simply does not pan out according to many scientific studies. Americans have heard that high fructose corn syrup isn’t healthy but many cannot articulate why. The reality is fructose is processed entirely differently in the body than sucrose and other sugars. This leads to fatty liver, increased abdominal fat, leptin resistance, increased triglycerides, and other negative health effects not seen with other types of sugar. High fructose corn syrup is not a benign ingredient in foods and consumers should consciously evaluate ingredients labels on food and avoid it entirely.
Click here for the full report from Natural News
Maple Syrup Compounds Help Fight Diabetes, Cancer
April 6th, 2011
Natural News
By: Jonathan Benson
Put down the corn syrup-laden Aunt Jemima and reach for some 100 percent pure maple syrup. New research recently presented at the 241st annual meeting of the American Chemical Society in Anaheim, Calif., highlights the amazing health benefits of maple syrup, including its ability to help treat diabetes and prevent the onset of cancer.
Navindra Seeram and her colleagues from the University of Rhode Island last year discovered that maple syrup contains 20 unique health-promoting compounds, 13 of which have never before been identified in maple syrup. And according to a release from United Press International, five of the compounds identified have never been previously identified in nature at all.
“I continue to say that nature is the best chemist, and that maple syrup is becoming a champion food when it comes to the number and variety of beneficial compounds found it in,” said Seeram in a statement. “It’s important to note that in our laboratory research we found that several of these compounds possess antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, which have been shown to fight cancer, diabetes and bacterial illnesses.”
Maple syrup is already known for being rich in vitamins and minerals, but now it has become clear that the natural sweetener is loaded with a host of powerful, disease-fighting antioxidants. And among maple syrup’s various health-promoting compounds is a newly-identified one the team named Quebecol, which is a compound uniquely created when Maple tree sap is boiled and turned into syrup.
Advertisement
“Quebecol has a unique chemical structure or skeleton never before identified in nature,” Seeram said. “There is beneficial and interesting chemistry going on when the boiling process occurs. I believe the heat forms this unique compound.”
In its current work, the team also found that certain antioxidant phenolic compounds in maple syrup inhibit carbohydrate hydrolyzing enzymes associated with the onset of type-2 diabetes. So while maple syrup may typically be considered a sugary threat to diabetes, the new research seems to indicate otherwise.
Seeram’s work, which was funded by the Federation of Quebec Maple Syrup Producers, is set to be published in the Journal of Functional Foods.
Click here for the full report from Natural News
Prozac and Other Drugs Cause Thick Arteries, Raise Heart Risk
April 6th, 2011
Natural News
By: Sherry Baker
Millions of Americans take antidepressant drugs — most are Prozac and related antidepressant medications in the class known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). A gigantic money maker for the drug giants, the SSRIs bring in billions to Big Pharma a year. They are promoted and prescribed as safe treatments for depression, anxiety and even premenstrual tension — despite a long list of possible side effects ranging from sexual dysfunction and headaches to dizziness and suicide.
Now you can add another reason to think twice before agreeing to take antidepressants. At the American College of Cardiology meeting in New Orleans, Emory University School of Medicine scientists have just announced they`ve discovered that the drugs are linked to thicker arteries. The significance? The findings strongly suggest Prozac and similar meds could raise the risk of heart disease and stroke.
Depression is sometimes listed as a risk for heart disease. But that was not the explanation for the Emory findings, according to Amit Shah, MD, a cardiology fellow at Emory University School of Medicine. Instead, Dr. Shah said in a press statement, the data indicates the effect of antidepressant use on arteries that was revealed by the study is separate and independent from depression.
Dr. Shah worked with Viola Vaccarino, MD, PhD, chair of the Department of Epidemiology at Emory`s Rollins School of Public Health, on the groundbreaking study which involved 513 middle-aged male twins who both served in the U.S. military during the Vietnam War. Twins are genetically the same but may be different when it comes to other risk factors such as diet, smoking and exercise, so studying them is a good way to factor out the effects of genetics.
The Emory research team measured the thickness of the lining of the main arteries in the neck (carotid intima-media thickness, or IMT) by ultrasound. The results showed that among the 59 pairs of twins where only one brother took antidepressants, the one taking the medication had a significantly higher carotid IMT — even when heart disease risk factors such as smoking were taken into account. In fact, the thicker arteries were found in antidepressant users whether or not they had ever had a stroke or heart attack in the past.
In the new study, the scientists documented higher carotid IMT in research subjects who used SSRIs (60 percent of those who took antidepressants) as well as those who used other kinds of antidepressants. Curiously, higher levels of depressive symptoms were associated with thicker arteries only in those taking antidepressants — so the Big Pharma meds themselves seem to be the key to this disturbing change in the cardiovascular system.
Advertisement
“One of the strongest and best-studied factors that thickens someone`s arteries is age, and that happens at around 10 microns per year,” Dr. Shah stated. “In our study, users of antidepressants see an average 40 micron increase in IMT, so their carotid arteries are in effect four years older.”
How could antidepressants have an effect on blood vessels? The Emory scientists think it may result from changes in serotonin. The SSRIs are the most commonly prescribed antidepressants and they are known to increase the level of serotonin in the brain. Other kinds of antidepressant drugs also impact serotonin levels. And, although serotonin is a chemical that helps some brain cells communicate, what is often ignored in the hyping of SSRIs is that serotonin functions outside the brain, too.
Actually, most of the body`s serotonin is found outside the brain, especially in the intestines, Dr. Shah stated in a media release. What`s more, serotonin is stored by platelets, the cells that promote blood clotting; the chemical is released when platelets bind to a clot. The chemical can, in fact, act in a variety of ways and either constrict or relax blood vessels, depending on whether the vessels are damaged or not.
“I think we have to keep an open mind about the effects of antidepressants on neurochemicals like serotonin in places outside the brain, such as the vasculature. The body often compensates over time for drugs` immediate effects,” Dr. Shah said.
Click here for the full report from Natural News
Media Is Wrong On The Dangers Of Radiation
Apri 6th, 2011
Natural News
By: Mark Sircus
Radiation is now being detected in Russia, imagine what it must be like for the poor Japanese who live within 500 miles. Japan is not that big of a place, though it is a land of big people who have made some huge mistakes. Almost all supporters of the nuclear industry have run for cover but today we see one being sneaked out or savagely used.
“I think there is a role for safe nuclear power,” says Dr. David J. Brenner directs the Center for Radiological Research. He is the expert brought out by the New York Times to confuse everyone. Is there really such a thing as safe nuclear power? How anyone can say that after this latest nuclear accident is beyond comprehension.
Brenner knows that radiation kills people and has even calculated how many people a year the United States Government is killing with their airport radiation scanners. He calculates 100 people die and has testified before Congress about this danger and harm.
The Times tells us that he has published research showing that CT scans increase the cancer risk in children. Dr. Brenner believes, as all true blue scientists do, that even low doses increase the risk of cancer, and that there is no “safe” level or threshold below which the risk does not rise. “But for all his concern about potential harm from radiation, he does not foresee a public health disaster resulting from the crisis at Fukushima Daiich,” The Times had the audacity to print.
So on the day after plutonium is being reported leaking from the nuclear plant The Times pushes this doctor out on stage to tell everyone to relax, there is no problem, it’s safe and we can sound the all clear sirens. I really hope that Brenner has a hard time sleeping tonight or forces The Times to do a retraction. Perhaps someone paid him off yesterday knowing that some big guns need to be brought out to calm the crowds after the plutonium report.
Plutonium – used in the fuel mix for one of the six reactors – has been found in soil at the plant, but not at levels that threaten human health, officials say over and over. I did not know there was such thing as safe levels of plutonium, did you? A by-product of atomic reactions and also used in nuclear bombs, plutonium is highly carcinogenic and one of the most dangerous substances on the planet at the lowest levels we can imagine.
Advertisement
“Plutonium is a substance that’s emitted when the temperature is high, and it’s also heavy and so does not leak out easily,” said agency deputy director Hidehiko Nishiyamaat a news conference. “So if plutonium has emerged from the reactor that tells us something about the damage to the fuel. And if it has breached the original containment system, it underlines the gravity and seriousness of this accident.” The discovery probably means there is a breach in the reactor’s containment mechanism.
It is two weeks and all we hear is its safe – safe – safe! Never in the history of the news have so many lies been spit out so fast. It is a betrayal against humanity and it’s in full progress. The fact is that there never has been and never will be a safe level of nuclear radiation. Crimes against humanity are being conducted in print because the danger is spreading with no legitimate suggestions given to people in terms of how to best protect themselves.
Click here for the full report from Natural News
