Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Renounce War Now.

by Jerry Alatalo

2015

(Thank you to PressTV News Videos at YouTube)

****

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are  cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its labor, the genius of its scientists, the houses of its children. This is not a way of life… Under the cloud of war, it is humanity hanging itself on a cross of iron.” April 16, 1953

– DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER (1890-1969) General, 34th President of the United States

“You can certainly destroy enough of humanity so that only the greatest act of faith can persuade you that what’s left will be human.” To Ed Murrow, CBS, January 4, 1955

– J. ROBERT OPPENHEIMER (1904-1967) American scientist

****

The Russell-Einstein Manifesto

Issued in London, July 9, 1955

In the tragic situation which confronts humanity, we feel that scientists should assemble in conference to appraise the perils that have arisen as a result of the development of weapons of mass destruction, and to discuss a resolution in the spirit of the appended draft.

We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of this or that nation, continent, or creed, but as human beings, members of the species Man, whose continued existence is in doubt. The world is full of conflicts; and, overshadowing all minor conflicts, the titanic struggle between Communism and anti- Communism.

Almost everybody who is politically conscious has strong feelings about one or more of these issues; but we want you, if you can, to set aside such feelings and consider yourselves only as members of a biological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of us can desire.

We shall try to say no single word which should appeal to one group rather than to another. All, equally, are in peril, and, if the peril is understood, there is hope that they may collectively avert it.

We have to learn to think in a new way. We have to learn to ask ourselves, not what steps can be taken to give military victory to whatever group we prefer, for there no longer are such steps; the question we have to ask ourselves is: what steps can be taken to prevent a military contest of which the issue must be disastrous to all parties?

The general public, and even many men in positions of authority, have not realized what would be involved in a war with nuclear bombs. The general public still thinks in terms of the obliteration of cities. It is understood that the new bombs are more powerful than the old, and that, while one A-bomb could obliterate Hiroshima, one H-bomb could obliterate the largest cities, such as London, New York, and Moscow.

No doubt in an H-bomb war great cities would be obliterated. But this is one of the minor disasters that would have to be faced. If everybody in London, New York, and Moscow were exterminated, the world might, in the course of a few centuries, recover from the blow. But we now know, especially since the Bikini test, that nuclear bombs can gradually spread destruction over a very much wider area than had been supposed.

It is stated on very good authority that a bomb can now be manufactured which will be 2,500 times as powerful as that which destroyed Hiroshima. Such a bomb, if exploded near the ground or under water, sends radio-active particles into the upper air. They sink gradually and reach the surface of the earth in the form of a deadly dust or rain. It was this dust which infected the Japanese fishermen and their catch of fish.

No one knows how widely such lethal radioactive particles might be diffused, but the best authorities are unanimous in saying that a war with H-bombs might possibly put an end to the human race. It is feared that if many H-bombs are used there will be universal death, sudden only for a minority, but for the majority a slow torture of disease and disintegration.

Many warnings have been uttered by eminent men of science and by authorities in military strategy. None of them will say that the worst results are certain. What they do say is that these results are possible, and no one can be sure that they will not be realized. We have not yet found that the views of experts on this question depend in any degree upon their politics or prejudices. They depend only, so far as our researches have revealed, upon the extent of the particular expert’s knowledge. We have found that the men who know most are the most gloomy.

Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war? People will not face this alternative because it is so difficult to abolish war.

The abolition of war will demand distasteful limitations of national sovereignty. But what perhaps impedes understanding of the situation more than anything else is that the term “mankind” feels vague and abstract. People scarcely realize in imagination that the danger is to themselves and their children and their grandchildren, and not only to a dimly apprehended humanity. They can scarcely bring themselves to grasp that they, individually, and those whom they love are in imminent danger of perishing agonizingly. And so they hope that perhaps war may be allowed to continue provided modern weapons are prohibited.

This hope is illusory. Whatever agreements not to use H-bombs had been reached in time of peace, they would no longer be considered binding in time of war, and both sides would set to work to manufacture H-bombs as soon as war broke out, for, if one side manufactured the bombs and the other did not, the side that manufactured them would inevitably be victorious.

Although an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons as part of a general reduction of armaments would not afford an ultimate solution, it would serve certain important purposes. First: any agreement between East and West is to the good in so far as it tends to diminish tension. Second: the abolition of thermonuclear weapons, if each side believed that the other had carried it out sincerely, would lessen the fear of a sudden attack in the style of Pearl Harbour, which at present keeps both sides in a state of nervous apprehension. We should, therefore, welcome such an agreement though only as a first step.

Most of us are not neutral in feeling, but, as human beings, we have to remember that, if the issues between East and West are to be decided in any manner that can give any possible satisfaction to anybody, whether Communist or anti-Communist, whether Asian or European or American, whether White or Black, then these issues must not be decided by war. We should wish this to be understood, both in the East and in the West. There lies before us, if we choose, continual progress in happiness, knowledge, and wisdom. Shall we, instead, choose death, because we cannot forget our quarrels? We appeal, as human beings, to human beings: Remember your humanity, and forget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to a new Paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the risk of universal death.

Resolution 

We invite this Congress, and through it the scientists of the world and the general public, to subscribe to the following resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the Governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.”

Max Born,   Perry W. Bridgman,   Albert Einstein,   Leopold Infeld,   Frederic Joliot-Curie,   Herman J. Muller,   Linus Pauling,   Cecil F. Powell,   Joseph Rotblat,   Bertrand Russell,   Hideki Yukawa

****

“The power to destroy the world by the use of nuclear weapons is a power that cannot be used – we cannot accept the idea of such monstrous immorality… The time has now come for the nations of the world to submit to the just requisition of their conduct by international law.” No More War! (1958)

– LINUS PAULING (1901-1994) American scientist, Nobel Prize for Chemistry 1954, Nobel Peace Prize 1962

“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience… In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Farewell address, January 17, 1961

– DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER

“Global war has become a Frankenstein’s monster, threatening to destroy both sides… It contains now only the germs of a double suicide.” Address, July 5, 1961

– DOUGLAS MacARTHUR (1880-1964) American general

“If we are not able to prevent a third world war, we shall go down in history – if history should survive – as the guilty generation, the generation which did nothing to prevent the annihilation of mankind itself.” Quoted in N.Y. Times, November 12, 1963

– U THANT (1909-1974) Burmese Secretary General, United Nations

“The choice today is not between violence and non-violence. It is either non-violence or non-existence.” Nobel Prize acceptance speech, December 11, 1964

– MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. (1929-assassinated 1968) American human rights leader, Nobel Prize 1964

****

2015

(Thank you to GlobalResearch TV at YouTube)

Gosling: ‘ISIL Could Be Closed Down In Blink Of An Eye.’

by Jerry Alatalo

“That action is best which procures the greatest happiness for the greatest numbers.”

– FRANCIS HUTCHESON (1649-1746) Scottish professor of moral philosophy

keyboard777-1Alphabet Sometimes you wonder if the day will ever arrive when all world leaders speak nothing but truth and investigative journalism becomes unnecessary. Think of all the time that would be freed up for both professional journalists and men and women around the world who try to track truth down.

Take the case of ISIL, or ISIS, or Daiesh, or Islamic State as an example. One would think that its so-called “leader” or Caliph al-Baghdadi would’ve sent out more communications to the world than the single speech he delivered over a year ago. This is supposedly the man who wants to convert the entire human race to his form of radical Islam, yet he can’t manage to produce video messages using the available inexpensive, professional-grade DSLR cameras made by Canon, Nikon and other companies.

There’s one question about ISIL/ISIS: where is al-Baghdadi, and why has he remained completely silent? There are a number of legitimate questions about ISIS that aren’t being asked by Western media organizations, including the question about ISIS’ sales of black market oil that Tony Gosling mentions in his short Press TV interview. Has any Western media group done even one report on ISIS’ illegal sales of oil?

For that matter, has any Western news group done any extensive, deep investigative reporting on ISIS whatsoever? Unless someone can point such reports out, the answer is no, and that leads to the question “why not?” While elected high power American politicians speak out about the extreme dangers of ISIS, the terrorist organization bringing death, suffering and destruction in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East – North Africa region seems completely missing from corporate media lists of news stories on which to focus.

Has any corporate news group, or the United States government, reported on successful efforts to cut off financing for the ISIS terrorist organization?  How about reports of only the efforts being undertaken to shut down ISIS finances, putting successful efforts and the details to the side? Has anyone seen reports including the names of specific bankers, specific banks, specific oil trading businesses, specific transactions methods used, amounts entered on bank accounting forms, and so on?

How about lead stories on the 6 o’clock news broadcasts of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox, etc. showing the photographs of ISIS or other terrorist groups’ soldiers killed, and commentary about the soldier’s country of origin, interviews of family and friends in that country of origin, etc.? Apparently the editors and program chiefs at these major media corporations believe stories about obesity, newly discovered “wonder” drugs, Donald Trump’s hairdresser, tips for eating healthier, and any number of irrelevant topics are more important than finding the truth about ISIS, with focus on journalism devoted to efforts to stop its rampage of killing and destruction.

Has any Western corporate media organization interviewed one, much less every, national leader from the Middle East or Africa and asked them to describe their thoughts about ISIS and other terrorist groups – how the terrorists manage payrolls, get their money, weapons, food, supplies, sell oil on the black market, who is buying the oil, etc. –  and what they think is necessary to stop them?

Why haven’t the leaders or representatives of every nation in the Middle East and Africa, or any region where terrorists are operating, addressed appropriate committees in the United States Congress during focused discussions on dealing effectively with terrorism?

Is the “war on terror”, in particular the war on ISIS, as Tony Gosling says “a farce… a lie”?

Men, women and children by the thousands are fleeing from Syria, Libya, Iraq and other nations to escape wars and violence brought by paid mercenary terrorists. The unanimous consensus is that the situation in Syria is the world’s greatest humanitarian disaster. Only by speaking the truth can the suffering begin to diminish, step-by-step leading to a return to normalcy for ordinary citizens simply wishing to live their lives in peace – then finally end.

****

(Thank you to PressTV News Videos at YouTube)

Thank You Kevin Blanch.

by Jerry Alatalo

aaa-32The Fukushima nuclear catastrophe is the most important event in history. In the over 1,600 days since March 11, 2011 when the nuclear crisis began, radioactive material has flowed into the Pacific Ocean around the clock. In those early crisis days of March and April 2011 there was a chance to resolve the dangerous situation before it spiraled out of control.

The world did not come together, did not combine the greatest scientific minds and whatever resources deemed needed, and take all necessary action to stop the progression which has led to the dangerous nuclear contamination scenario now a reality in 2015.  The nuclear catastrophe in Chernobyl could have developed to the worst case nuclear scenario – “China Syndrome” – had it not been for thousands of men and women who willingly risked their lives and/or died from radiation to place the structures, materials, and means to stop the melted core from descending deeper into the Earth.

The worst case – China Syndrome – has occurred and is ongoing below three of the destroyed nuclear reactors at Fukushima. In Chernobyl, the thousands of courageous men and women were able to “flip the off switch”, at which point the area became entombed in a concrete sarcophagus or giant stone coffin. What is happening at Fukushima is nothing less than the absolute worst situation imaginable – not one but three complete core meltdowns which have become three China Syndromes, with  no possible way to contain and “turn them off”.

Most people remember the British Petroleum Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster, up until that time the greatest environmental disaster in history, and day after day of news reports showing underwater attempts to stop the continuous emission of oil into the waters of the Gulf. Some will remember thinking that humans had actually killed the Gulf of Mexico, and that indeed it was an accurate assessment.

Nobody would have imagined it possible to surpass the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster as measured by cumulative damage to the Earth’s environment. Unfortunately the environmental nightmare believed impossible has come to pass.

Robots used in attempts to carry out technical tasks in dealing with melted-down nuclear-fissioning cores descending deeper into the Earth at Fukushima have been ineffective because the tremendous heat has literally fried them. There has been nothing stopping emission of highly radioactive fission particles for 1,600 days. The discharge – like the oil discharged from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico – of that radioactive poison in its various elements into the great Pacific Ocean goes on.  This is what many people believe has occurred: human beings have actually killed the Pacific Ocean.

Looking soberly at Fukushima from March 11, 2011 to today over four years later leads one to a philosophical/spiritual quandary of the highest order. A number of “why” questions enter upon consideration of the Fukushima event in its entirety over the years from March 2011 and are perhaps impossible to answer. On the level of humanity as a collective, why didn’t the world act immediately with all of its power of scientific knowledge and resources to try to stop the damage?

Looking at the present situation it might have become a meaningless exercise to attempt answering why remedial action wasn’t taken from the start. If one can imagine the Earth as a human being and oneself as the Earth’s doctor, Fukushima represents an inoperable, incurable malignant cancer, and the “patient’s condition” leaves no other option for the healer but advising “getting one’s affairs in order”.

On the personal level, hearing news of loved ones or friends becoming stricken with terminal cancer is enough to break hearts and compel inevitable travels to interior regions of philosophical, spiritual places in search of answers for why. While everyone must face those times of loss when loved ones and friends get sick, deteriorate and pass away, facing the “extinction level event” that is Fukushima and answering the question “why?” is perhaps impossible. There is no chance of “wrapping one’s head around it”; such a question travels far beyond comprehension by even the greatest minds that ever walked the Earth.

One can diminish the sadness generated from awareness of how severe the environmental damage from Fukushima has been, and will continue to inflict, by acknowledging everyone dies inevitably, yet the thought of what’s coming in the years and generations ahead cannot be avoided or unlearned.  The human race is thus positioned for experiencing its greatest planet-wide lesson of loss acceptance in history.

May all people find the inner spiritual, philosophical or wisdom-based strength, courage and resources available to deal with the truth of Fukushima as positively as possible despite the enormity and depressing nature of the facts.

****

Among the many men and women who’ve tried to alert the world of Fukushima from the outset in March 2011 and to take the most powerful remedial actions necessary, Kevin Blanch from the state of Utah in America has devoted a great deal of time and effort. Mr. Blanch produced the following three videos in 2011, 2013 and 2015 respectively. They have been cross-posted here as a way to honor his efforts over the past years and express deep gratitude to him for caring enough to try.

Persons interested in further exploring and supporting Kevin Blanch’s work can visit his YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/user/kevindblanch

Mr. Blanch has no reluctance when it comes to using righteous indignation and strong language as effective tools/tactics for reinforcing his messages. With profound thanks to Kevin Blanch and all the men and women around the world who tried.

From April 4, 2011 – three weeks after the tsunami and nuclear disaster at Fukushima, Japan:

From December 23,  2013:

From August 30, 2015 – shockingly, more hard news: