|
FOCUS | Syria Becomes the 7th Predominantly Muslim Country Bombed by 2009 Nobel Peace Laureate |
|
|
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=29455"><span class="small">Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept</span></a>
|
|
Tuesday, 23 September 2014 11:10 |
|
Greenwald writes: "The utter lack of interest in what possible legal authority Obama has to bomb Syria is telling indeed: Empires bomb who they want, when they want, for whatever reason."
President Barack Obama accepts the Nobel Peace Prize. (photo: AP)

Syria Becomes the 7th Predominantly Muslim Country Bombed by 2009 Nobel Peace Laureate
By Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept
23 September 14
he U.S. today began bombing targets inside Syria, in concert with its lovely and inspiring group of five allied regimes: Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Jordan.
That means that Syria becomes the 7th predominantly Muslim country bombed by 2009 Nobel Peace Laureate Barack Obama—after Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya and Iraq.
The utter lack of interest in what possible legal authority Obama has to bomb Syria is telling indeed: Empires bomb who they want, when they want, for whatever reason (indeed, recall that Obama bombed Libya even after Congress explicitly voted against authorization to use force, and very few people seemed to mind that abject act of lawlessness; constitutional constraints are not for warriors and emperors).
It was just over a year ago that Obama officials were insisting that bombing and attacking Assad was a moral and strategic imperative. Instead, Obama is now bombing Assad’s enemies while politely informing his regime of its targets in advance. It seems irrelevant on whom the U.S. wages war; what matters it that it be at war, always and forever.
Six weeks of bombing hasn’t budged ISIS in Iraq, but it has caused ISIS recruitment to soar. That’s all predictable: the U.S. has known for years that what fuels and strengthens anti-American sentiment (and thus anti-American extremism) is exactly what they keep doing: aggression in that region. If you know that, then they know that. At this point, it’s more rational to say they do all of this not despite triggering those outcomes, but because of it. Continuously creating and strengthening enemies is a feature, not a bug. It is what justifies the ongoing greasing of the profitable and power-vesting machine of Endless War.
If there is anyone who actually believes that the point of all of this is a moral crusade to vanquish the evil-doers of ISIS (as the U.S. fights alongside its close Saudi friends), please read Professor As’ad AbuKhalil’s explanation today of how Syria is a multi-tiered proxy war. As the disastrous Libya “intervention” should conclusively and permanently demonstrate, the U.S. does not bomb countries for humanitarian objectives. Humanitarianism is the pretense, not the purpose.

|
|
FOCUS | Months After Plutonium Leak, U.S. Nuclear Waste Facility Still Shut |
|
|
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=20877"><span class="small">William Boardman, Reader Supported News</span></a>
|
|
Tuesday, 23 September 2014 09:38 |
|
Boardman writes: "More than seven months after the release of Plutonium and other radioactive materials into the environment from the failed Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP) on Valentine's Day 2014, the only U.S. nuclear weapons waste repository remains closed and unsafe, with little certainty as to when, or even if, it will be able to re-open."
A photograph looking over the top of nuclear waste emplaced at WIPP in drums, waste boxes and overpacks in Panel 7 where the release of radioactive material took place. (photo: WIPP)

Months After Plutonium Leak, U.S. Nuclear Waste Facility Still Shut
By William Boardman, Reader Supported News
23 September 14
U.S. Energy Dept. denies fake claim, ignores serious reports
ore than seven months after the release of Plutonium and other radioactive materials into the environment from the failed Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP) on Valentine’s Day 2014, the only U.S. nuclear weapons waste repository remains closed and unsafe, with little certainty as to when, or even if, it will be able to re-open. Nuclear experts continue to argue about just what actually happened last winter, and why, and how much radioactivity was released from the contaminated underground storage area near Carlsbad, New Mexico. To date, WIPP investigators have identified just one radioactive waste drum that ruptured underground.
According to a recent Reuters report, a “second container of Plutonium-contaminated debris may have contributed” to the WIPP radiation release. On September 18 Reuters, apparently alone among news media, attributed knowledge of this possible second ruptured waste container to a government field office manager saying: "What has come out insinuates we have another potential drum.”
In response to this speculation, the U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE) issued a “WIPP Update” on September 19 that, while it did not name its employee who was the source of the story, still appeared to deny his story flatly:
Recent news reports have incorrectly suggested that there is a second breached drum in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) underground facility. There is no evidence to suggest a release from a second drum. The site conducted initial surveys that showed no evidence of a radiological release from Panel 6, and we have seen no evidence since then that suggests anything different.
This is something of a slippery non-denial denial. And the government evades the actual news reports.
Accurate news reports in New Mexico didn’t mention “a second breached drum,” as DOE states. The accurate news reported that the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) had identified a second drum containing the same ingredients (including a lead-lined glove) as the drum that burst in February, raising the possibility of a second breached drum. The first burst drum is in the section called Panel 7, in Room 7.
There are 678 other drums from LANL that are considered to be at “higher risk” of bursting due to the mixture of their contents, similar to what was in the burst drum. More than 600 of these “higher risk” drums are already stored underground at WIPP, 57 remain at LANL for further processing, and 113 are in temporary shallow burial at another nuclear waste facility, Waste Control Specialists in Andrews, Texas.
Report to legislators: “we still don’t have a clue how it happened”
New Mexico legislators heard from Terry Wallace Jr. (LANL’s WIPP Recovery Leader and Principal Associate Director for Global Security) on August 15, 2014. He said that some 300 LANL scientists had performed roughly 3,000 experiments with a variety of chemical mixtures in an effort to determine what caused the failed drum to burst. The scientists have tried to duplicate the chemical contents of the “higher risk” drums, but have not reached any conclusive result. The experiments have created reactions that generated hundreds of degrees of heat, but found no evidence of what might have set off the reaction that caused the underground drum to burst in February. No one yet knows how the 10,000-year-secure waste storage site failed, or whether it’s likely to fail again, or 600 more times, or whether the failure was a unique event with an unknowable cause.
At another meeting with legislators on September 16, 2014, LANL’s Wallace discussed the breach potential of the second drum, which contains a mixtures thought to be the same as what was in the burst drum. “I cannot guarantee that second drum won’t go (have a chemical reaction), nor can I guarantee that all conditions are likely to make it go,” Wallace told legislators, according to another accurate news report in the Carlsbad Current-Argus.
During the 1990s, WIPP was originally promoted as a safe storage site for the nation’s nuclear weapons waste, a salt mine half a mile underground that would be secure for 10,000 years without leaking. WIPP took in its first waste on March 26, 1999. The first known release of Plutonium and other radioactive elements happened less than 15 years later. Since then, the only certainty about WIPP has been uncertainty. Further, the DOE response to the imaginary “second breached drum” glosses over the reality of continuing spikes of radiation in the environment around WIPP.
Radiation danger and government deceit make an ugly reality
This kind of denial is consistent with more than six decades of U.S. government deceit about the effects of ionizing radiation. Another example is presently part of the DOE’s “WIPP Recovery” website on the “fact sheet” page that discusses 13 WIPP employees exposed to radiation during “The Radiological Release on Feb 14, 2014.” The number of exposed workers, first reported by DOE as zero, eventually rose to 21. DOE reassures the reader that these 13 employees “received internal contamination…. [But] the employees are unlikely to experience any health effects as a result.”
That may be true as far as statistical odds go, but it blurs the reality that the exposed workers inhaled Plutonium and other alpha-radiation emitters which, when lodged in the lungs or any other part of the body, remain there effectively forever. Only a very careful reading of the DOE “fact sheet” would lead a reader to infer that this is precisely the life-threatening situation these workers are now in. Nowhere does DOE mention the fact that alpha radiation is a carcinogen.
The DOE “fact sheet” also states that beta and gamma radiation “are not related to this event,” the WIPP radiation release in February. This appears to be a false statement. Plutonium and Americium, which DOE acknowledges were released, both emit beta as well as alpha radiation. The New Mexico Environment Dept. (NMED) has a DOE Oversight Bureau that has produced detailed calculations of the radiation releases from WIPP. These NMED calculations show both alpha and beta radiation releases, as well as three gamma ray emitters, Beryllium, Potassium, and Thorium.
Secrecy and deceit are more important to U.S. nuclear arms build-up
With President Obama’s recent announcement of significant expansion of the U.S. nuclear arsenal’s megadeath capabilities, LANL and WIPP are among the facilities that expect to see their activities significantly increased. This would be a global peace issue in any event, even with facilities operating at peak performance. But these two are among 17 U.S. nuclear weapons facilities that don’t work well or don’t work at all.
The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) reached that judgment in a September 2 report to the Secretary of Energy. The five-member board later released the 22-page report (scheduled for publication September 23 in the Federal Register), with little media attention (Santa Fe New Mexican, an exception). The result of a three-year review of emergency preparedness at U.S. nuclear weapons facilities, the report was clearly reactive to the WIPP failure in particular:
On March 21, 2014, and March 28, 2014, the Board communicated to the Secretary of Energy its concerns regarding shortcomings in the responses to a truck fire and radioactive material release event at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, New Mexico…. Many of the site-specific issues noted at WIPP are prevalent at other sites with defense nuclear facilities, as documented in the attached report….
Based on an evaluation of the problems observed with emergency preparedness and response at DOE sites with defense nuclear facilities, the most important underlying root causes of these problems are ineffective implementation of existing requirements, inadequate revision of requirements to address lessons learned and needed improvements to site programs, and weaknesses in DOE verification and validation of readiness of its sites with defense nuclear facilities….
Such deficiencies can ultimately result in the failure to recognize and respond appropriately to indications of an emergency, as was seen in the recent radioactive material release event at WIPP. Therefore, the Board believes that DOE has not comprehensively and consistently demonstrated its ability to adequately protect workers and the public in the event of an emergency.
Or, to put it in less bureaucratic language: the Energy Dept. and its contractors are not doing their jobs, which pretty much puts us all at risk. And for this we’re paying how many millions, or is it billions, of dollars?
Meanwhile, LANL, which is having such trouble managing its waste, is likely to be ordered to step up its production of Plutonium pit triggers for nuclear weapons, creating even more waste with to WIPP to go to. The Los Alamos lab has produced eleven or fewer Plutonium pits a year for more than two decades. This production is expected to increase by eightfold, to 80 pits a year.
That high-paced pit production will reportedly be housed in “Plutonium Facility 4 at Los Alamos, a 36-year-old building on a seismically active fault with structural vulnerabilities that prompted the lab to close it more than a year ago.” According to LANL, Plutonium Facility 4 “is the only fully operational, full capability plutonium facility in the nation.” Not to worry about the earthquake fault, though. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board long ago (October 2009) noted the “severity” and “urgency of the problem and recommended that LANL:
Implement near-term actions and compensatory measures to reduce significantly the consequences of seismically induced events,… [and]
Develop and implement an acceptable safety strategy for seismically induced events….”
A LANL spokesperson recently said of Plutonium Facility 4, “we continue to work on resuming the remaining activities as quickly and safely as possible.” What could possibly go wrong?
William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

|
|
|
I'm Calling Their Bluff |
|
|
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=7122"><span class="small">Elizabeth Warren, Reader Supported News</span></a>
|
|
Tuesday, 23 September 2014 07:36 |
|
Warren writes: "The excuses have started. Once again, the Republicans blocked a vote on our student loans bill - and now that they are about to head home to face voters, they are pouring out the excuses."
Senator Elizabeth Warren with college students. (photo: Elizabeth Warren.com)

I'm Calling Their Bluff
By Elizabeth Warren, Reader Supported News
23 September 14
he excuses have started. Once again, the Republicans blocked a vote on our student loans bill – and now that they are about to head home to face voters, they are pouring out the excuses.
Excuse #1: Some Republicans say that the benefit of letting people refinance their student loans is too small. Too small? Tell that to young people with 8%, 10%, even 12% interest rates (and higher on some of the private loans). They could save hundreds – or even thousands – of dollars on their excessive student loan payments each year.
But if the Republicans really think the benefit of the bill is too small, I'll call their bluff. I'm all for finding ways to give our students an even bigger break.
Excuse #2: Some Republicans say that the $1.2 trillion in outstanding student loan debt just isn't a big deal – that we should be focused on the rising costs of college instead. Yes, the rising cost of college is a terrible problem – and we need to stop it – but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything for the millions of people who already went to school and are being crushed by debt.
But if the Republicans really want to do more, I'll call their bluff. Let's work together to do even more to help our students. I'm ready.
Excuse #3: Some Republicans don't like that the bill is paid for by closing the tax loopholes for millionaires and billionaires and making them pay their fair share.
But if the Republicans' only problem with the bill is how it's paid for, I'll call their bluff. If they have ideas on other ways to pay for it, we're eager to listen.
Excuse #4: Some Republicans – including Mitch McConnell – went so far as to say that Democrats don't really want this bill to pass. Really? That's just plain ridiculous. Only in Washington can you vote against something, and then when it doesn't pass, blame the people who voted for it.
Excuses. Excuses. But they don't fool anyone. They don't fool each of you who signed our petitions, made phone calls, posted on Facebook and tweeted asking for a vote.
This isn't complicated. It's a choice – a choice that raises a fundamental question about who the United States Senate works for. Does it work for those who can hire armies of lawyers and lobbyists to protect tax loopholes for billionaires and profits for the big banks? Or does it work for those who work hard, play by the rules, and are trying to build a future for themselves and their families?
This fight isn't over. Millions of Americans are getting crushed in student loan debt, while the rich and powerful hang on tight to their tax loopholes. When the choice is between billionaires and students, I know which side I'm on, and I'm going to keep hitting back.

|
|
Why Ordinary People Bear Economic Risks and Donald Trump Doesn't |
|
|
Monday, 22 September 2014 13:11 |
|
Reich writes: "Last week, the Trump Plaza folded and the Trump Taj Mahal filed for bankruptcy, leaving some 1,000 employees without jobs. Trump, meanwhile, was on twitter claiming he had 'nothing to do with Atlantic City,' and praising himself for his 'great timing' in getting out of the investment."
Economist, professor, author and political commentator Robert Reich. (photo: Richard Morgenstein)

ALSO SEE: The American Middle Class Hasn't Gotten a Raise in 15 Years
Why Ordinary People Bear Economic Risks and Donald Trump Doesn't
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
22 September 14
hirty years ago, on its opening day in 1984, Donald Trump stood in a dark topcoat on the casino floor at Atlantic City’s Trump Plaza, celebrating his new investment as the finest building in Atlantic City and possibly the nation.
Last week, the Trump Plaza folded and the Trump Taj Mahal filed for bankruptcy, leaving some 1,000 employees without jobs.
Trump, meanwhile, was on twitter claiming he had “nothing to do with Atlantic City,” and praising himself for his “great timing” in getting out of the investment.
In America, people with lots of money can easily avoid the consequences of bad bets and big losses by cashing out at the first sign of trouble.
The laws protect them through limited liability and bankruptcy.
But workers who move to a place like Atlantic City for a job, invest in a home there, and build their skills, have no such protection. Jobs vanish, skills are suddenly irrelevant, and home values plummet.
They’re stuck with the mess.
Bankruptcy was designed so people could start over. But these days, the only ones starting over are big corporations, wealthy moguls, and Wall Street.
Corporations are even using bankruptcy to break contracts with their employees. When American Airlines went into bankruptcy three years ago, it voided its labor agreements and froze its employee pension plan.
After it emerged from bankruptcy last year and merged with U.S. Airways, America’s creditors were fully repaid, its shareholders came out richer than they went in, and its CEO got a severance package valued at $19.9 million.
But American’s former employees got shafted.
Wall Street doesn’t worry about failure, either. As you recall, the Street almost went belly up six years ago after risking hundreds of billions of dollars on bad bets.
A generous bailout from the federal government kept the bankers afloat. And since then, most of the denizens of the Street have come out just fine.
Yet more than 4 million American families have so far have lost their homes. They were caught in the downdraft of the Street’s gambling excesses.
They had no idea the housing bubble would burst, and didn’t read the fine print in the mortgages the bankers sold them.
But they weren’t allowed to declare bankruptcy and try to keep their homes.
When some members of Congress tried to amend the law to allow homeowners to use bankruptcy, the financial industry blocked the bill.
There’s no starting over for millions of people laden with student debt, either.
Student loan debt has more than doubled since 2006, from $509 billion to $1.3 trillion. It now accounts for 40 percent of all personal debt – more than credit card debts and auto loans.
But the bankruptcy law doesn’t cover student debts. The student loan industry made sure of that.
If former students can’t meet their payments, lenders can garnish their paychecks. (Some borrowers, still behind by the time they retire, have even found chunks taken out of their Social Security checks.)
The only way borrowers can reduce their student debt burdens is to prove in a separate lawsuit that repayment would impose an “undue hardship” on them and their dependents.
This is a stricter standard than bankruptcy courts apply to gamblers trying to reduce their gambling debts.
You might say those who can’t repay their student debts shouldn’t have borrowed in the first place. But they had no way of knowing just how bad the jobs market would become. Some didn’t know the diplomas they received from for-profit colleges weren’t worth the paper they were written on.
A better alternative would be to allow former students to use bankruptcy where the terms of the loans are clearly unreasonable (including double-digit interest rates, for example), or the loans were made to attend schools whose graduates have very low rates of employment after graduation.
Economies are risky. Some industries rise and others implode, like housing. Some places get richer, and others drop, like Atlantic City. Some people get new jobs that pay better, many lose their jobs or their wages.
The basic question is who should bear these risks. As long as the laws shield large investors while putting the risks on ordinary people, investors will continue to make big bets that deliver jackpots when they win but create losses for everyone else.
Average working people need more fresh starts. Big corporations, banks, and Donald Trump need fewer.

|
|