Chernobyl and WHO

During the 24th Chernobyl year (April 26th 2010) I was in Geneva, taking part at the vigil infront of the WHO (web). Why?

Vigil in Geneva April 26th 2010:

from independentwho.info:

The World Health Organisation (WHO) is failing in its duty to protect the victims of radioactive contamination.

CONSTITUTION OF THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION:

“Healthy development of the child is of basic importance …”
“Informed opinion and active co-operation on the part of the public are of the utmost importance in the improvement of the health of the people …”

In Chapter 1, Article 1 – Objectives of WHO, it states :

“The objective of the World Health Organization shall be the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health”.

But on 28th May 1959,
WHO signed Agreement WHA-12-40 ned  with the International Atomich Energy Agency
which prevents WHO taking any initiative or action to achieve its objectives:the preservation and the improvement of health.

An analysis of the action taken by WHO in response to radioactive contamination,
from the start of the nuclear age up to the present day shows this quite clearly
and is what motivates our action.

Compared with other agreements made between various UN agencies, there is nothing unusual in the way this document has been drafted, but we would point out that, in practice, it puts WHO under the yoke of the IAEA.
* WHO must notify the IAEA of any plans to undertake research and then either work with, or yield the research to the IAEA.
* The Agreement specifies that neither of the two agencies should be disadvantaged by the other: thus the business interests of the IAEA should not suffer …
* In 23 years, no social or medical programme, worthy of the name, has been set up in the contaminated areas of Chernobyl.
* In the nuclear nations, epidemiological studies are rare.
* In countries like France, there is a total blackout on all civil and military nuclear activity.
The vigil has also been maintained by distinguished members of the scientific, medical and political communities. Mr Yablokov, Mrs Goncharova and Mr Nesterenko – 27th April 2008:

Mr Vassili Nesterenko, Belarusian Physicist
I want to say to you here: as long as we have the support of friends, we continue to hope that the victims will survive. I am one of the 800, 000 liquidators injured by Chernobyl. These are truly the forgotten men in our country. Tens of thousands of them have already left this world, they are no longer able to speak. In the name of the others, to all of you on this Vigil, I wish you courage and a long life, that you may remain here until victory is achieved. I wish all of you good health, just as we had, all of us liquidators, before we arrived at the reactor. We were all young and full of strength. Thank you.

Based upon his research the book “Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment” has been made public on April 26th 2010:

Chernobyl Radiation Killed Nearly One Million People

and not 32 – 50, like WHO and IAEA say.

regards,

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

Obama’s way of making Atomic War more “human”

From German issue of Le Monde diplomatique from April 2010 (web)

In this issue of Le Monde, Obama’s strategy is described as not to make the planet atomic weapons free, but the strategy of his B-61′s is mentioned (web). The US military wants to abandon it’s longe range bombers such as the B-52 and B-2 and the atomic Tomahawk missles. At the same time the military sympathizes with the use of the B-61 earth penetrating weapons. The US military claims due to the earth penetrating nature of these bombs, there would be less fallout and less collataral damage (paper from Brookings think thank here). The IPPNW (web) says, the B-61′s only digs 7 metres into the ground, then it detonates and causes more fallout than a surface explosion. The ideology seems to be clear: Creating a clean image of the atomic version of the B-61 is a goal of the hardliners in the Pentagon. Obama has failed to replace them with people who support other strategies.

Even Obama’s Stratcom-commander General Chilton said on Dec. 15th 2009, that “We will need atomic weapons as long as the United States exist”.

More:
http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/resources/books/BAC/chapter1.pdf

The atomic B-61 is needed for destroying / damaging Iran’s underground atomic facilities. You cannot compare them with the atomic reactor in Iraq – destroyed by conventional weapons of Israel in 1981, or the Syrian reactor – also destroyed the conventional way in 2007. They were all build on the surface. Obama doesn’t risk another ground invason.

Efficiency is one thing, the other one is Dollars. From 2007 till 2008 the U.S. spent more than 140 million Dollars daily for it’s atomic arsenal.

But we must resist against the downplaying of even an “limited” atomic war. The results would be: In 48 hours -> 2,6 million deaths, fallout on India, Pakistan, Afghanistan,  10,5 million people injured – according ot the IPPNW. This is the worst case scenario. This must never happen.

More about the medical consequences:
http://www.ippnw-students.org/iran/iran_attack.pdf

Here is the Non-Governmental Organizations’ Statements to the States Party to the Seventh Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, May 11th, 2005

And here is my older blog entry about the possible scenarion of an evacutation of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan

Here is the NPT Treaty of the U.N.

regards,

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

Chernobyl 24

Belarus

During my stay with the group “Civil iniative for a world without an atomic threat” / and Federal Working Agency Chernobyl from Germany / Rottweil, I had the chance to visit “former” abandoned village (40 min. from Luninetz). State officals asphalted the sand-street to cover the radioactive sand below. Once there were more than 62 populated houses with families, now only 7 are standing – including one new house WITH a family and small children. Why is that? Did the belarusian governement find away to send the radioactive contamination away? No, they simply follow their plan to call contaminated areas clean, and struck them off the radiation map. This can be called the “Struck off Strategy”.

See here how it is done: CORE program link and Strucking villages off the radiation map. Other reasons are: Holding contaminated areas as contaminated (25 % of Belarus) is too expensive, so better resettle them and make business there, like agriculture – which is very important for Belarus. But it is a crime against the people (more than 2,000,000 are still living in contaminated areas), especially against the children. The 2nd gernation of Chernobyl children is already born and affected by radiation. But does anyone care? Not the WHO or the IAEA – because they have a gag contract since 1959, which does the WHO not allow to make their results about Chernobyl public – this is the gag contract link.

It is 24 years of Chernobyl, 24 years of secrets, of crime against the humanity, 24 hours a day. More in my video or the photos below. Since January 2007 Belarus builds is own atomic power plant – and everyone who says something against atomic power is an enemy of the state – according to belarusian president A. Lukashenko. He even took belarusian Chernoby children as hostages, letting them not allow to trave in other countries – read all about this international scandal here. This means at least 6 months in jail. More about the anti-atomic power movement in Belarus on BelarusAntiAtom.info

various Geman newspapers wrote reports about our trip. See the last photos above or the links here

regards,

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

US forces pull back is an evacuation

When US or coalition forces pull back from Afghanistan or Iraq – it’s not a pull back.

It’s an evacuation.

An evacuation due to the fallout – created by six U.S. B61-11 earth-penetrating atomic weapons with a yield of 340 kt each.

Fallout will be going down on Afghanistan, perhaps Iraq, Pakistan and / or India.

Source for attack scenario: HPAC – Hazard Prediction and Assessment Capability / PENTAGON

Although President Obama doesn’t want to nuke Iran HERE

it is a possible scenario. More HERE and in this IPPNW fact sheet

So, be alerted, when applauding to pull back of forces, when at the same Iran’s atomic power plants are running.

If the Iran is building an atomic bomb this is a case for:

• 1st, the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review
• 2nd, the National Security Strategies of 2002
• 3rd, the 2006 National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction
• NPT / Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty more HERE

The IAEA sells the ideology of peaceful atomic power, which, plus the know how, enables countries to build atomic reactors and atomic bombs – both siamese twins. Which means, every atomic reactor automatically contravenes the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Which opens automatically the HPAC scenario and the attack with atomic bombs.

The IAEA is subject to the five permanent U.N. members: China, USA, France, England, Russia. All atomic powers.

pure coincidence.

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »