Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘earthquake’

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

This articile is reblogged here with the permission of the Mari Takenouchi of http://savekidsjapan.blogspot.jp

Mari Takenouchi explainig the danger at Sendai Nuclear Power Plant and other nuclear plants in Japan
こちらは英語、日本語動画は下にあります。

驚愕!40年来反原発の地質学者、生越忠氏も、川内原発反対運動で、九電と受益者に大 きな不安を掛けたと、自民党系で右翼とつながりのある井上正三なる人物から1976年に刑事告訴、最高検察庁が告訴を受理していた!(ただし起訴は免れた と言います。昔からやられていた手法なのです!)

原発建設前から、原発各地を訪れ、40年以上にわたり反対運動を続けてきた地質学者、生越忠氏著『悪用される科学』(1981年)より

私は生越忠氏の本はすべて復刻版を創るべきだと思います。
『開発と公害』シリーズ(自費出版で100冊以上ある)なども秀逸です。
原発建設前から各地の地質調査をした反原発地質学者は彼だけです!
  • 現地調査に臨んだところ、川内原発の原子炉設置予定地の地盤は、断層や節理でずたずたに切られた、傷だらけのもの
  • 1965年にこの地域一帯の地質調査をした鹿児島県が、地盤を安定したものと見せかけるため、中生層を古期岩層に塗り替え
  • 川内川筋に存在すると推定されていた大断層を抹殺
  • 九電の下請け業者がボーリング・コアの差し替えという恐るべき行為を続けていたことが、内部告発によってわかった。「私や他の作業員、現場監督などが、何回もコアを差し換えた。差し替えは公然と行われていた」
  • ところがボーリングコア差し替え事件を、九州大学生産科学研究所の山崎達雄教授がごまかしてしまった!)
  • 当時、鹿児島大学理学部地学科の露木利貞教授に公開質問するも、露木教授は逃げ回った。

以下は『開発と公害』第87号より(1999年9月)

より簡単に理解したい方は、竹野内真理のこちらの動画を!
  • 鹿児島の中心街は川内原発からたった44km
  • 現地調査を建設前の1975年に行った生越氏は、 敷地の一部および周辺の平山溶岩に顕著な断層粘土を伴った大規模活断層ありと主張したが、九電は無視。
  • 川内原発の敷地の一部を含む南九州地方の新第三世紀末ないし第四紀古期の火山岩類に断層で切られている部分があることは、以前から公知の事実で文献も発行されている。ところが、これも九電も国も無視。
  • 1979年の着工前であった、1977年、村山喜一衆議院議員からの質問に、国は断層の存在は認めつつも、問題にならないと国会答弁。
  • 1997年、2回にわたり「鹿児島県北西部の地震」が発生。一回目は M=6.5(深さ12km)で震度5強、二回目はM=6.3(深さ9km)で震度は6弱。 →それでも川内原発は止まらなかった!(より地震規模が大き く、震央距離が川内原発に近く、震源深さがより浅ければ、重大事故が起きていた可能性。)
  • 1997年地震は、プレート間地震でもなく、海洋プレート内地震でもなく、大陸プレート内の潜在活断層の再活動によっておこった活断層地震であることは確か。
  • ところが、97年の地震では活断層もリニアメントも見られなかった。つまり同地域には潜在的に断層が存在。
  • ただし、上記活断層はボーリング調査(せいぜい深さ3km)で分かる範囲ではない。九電は「活断層の存在がわかっていない」というべきところを、「活断層は存在していないことが分かった」とすり替えた。
  • 1997年地震の後に、非常に余震が多かった。(断層や節理が多い地層なので、蓄積されていたひずみエネルギーが一挙に放出されなかった可能性)
  • 佛像構造線が川内原発の敷地の製法を通っているので、延岡ー紫尾山構造線の南 方延長部が、もし、川内川河口の左岸付近にまで及んでいるとすると、その位置は、佛像構造線の東方、つまり川内原発の敷地内または近傍になり、内陸直下型 の大陸プレート内地震が発生する可能性が多分にある。
  • すべての原発に言えることだが、原発の支持基盤が地震断層の出現によって変位・変形することがあり得るのに、これを原発の耐震設計では考慮していない。
  • 建築物の固有周期と支持基盤の固有周期が似通っていて共振現象を起こすと、より大きな被害をこうむる。剛性の強い原子炉施設は、震央距離が短い大陸プレート内地震が起こった場合に共振現象を引き起こす恐れがある。
  • 1978年9月29日、活断層の定義を50万年前以降に動いたものから5万年前以降にしてしまった。(現在は40万年前以降)
  • 施設の基礎岩盤に変位・変形が生じた場合は、たとえ施設をいかほど頑丈に作ったとしても、被害の発生が防止できなくなる恐れがある。原発は、基礎岩盤が破壊されることはないという誤った前提に立っている。
  • 九電は海洋プレート内地震を全く無視している。1909年の宮崎県西部の地震 はM=7.6、深さ約150kmのユーラシアプレートとその下に沈み込んでいるフィリピン海プレート内の地震。震央位置は、宮崎・熊本両県境にある市房山 付近で、川内原発に近い延岡ー紫尾山構造線が走っている。
  • 海洋プレート内地震には、プレート間地震とほぼ同一の巨大地震もある。例:1911年喜界島近海の地震(M=8.0、深さ=100キロメートル)、1993年釧路沖地震(M=7.8、深さ101km)、1994年北海道東方沖地震(M=8.1、深さ23km)
  • 特に上記の海洋プレート内地震である、喜界島近海の地震では、震央位置がより 北方で発生する可能性もあるのであり、その場合は川内原発の敷地の直下で、見かけ上は「内陸直下型地震」の形をとった海洋プレート内地震が発生することも 皆無ではない。(ただし、電力会社は海洋プレート内地震を検討していない)
  • 地震が今まで起こっていないとされていた空白域でM=7.5を超える大地震、もしくはM=8.0前後という巨大地震が起こった例はある。
  • 川内原発に関しては、大地震の空白域であること、97年の中地震で活断層が存在することが明らかになったこと、そして九州電力が国内で最低基準の地震動を川内原発に適用してしまったことで、地震による危険度は高いと言える。

11月19日更新 Updated Nov 18, 2014

歴史的ともいえる、国家による無謀で人命にかかわる最悪の決断、川内原発再稼働が正式決定いたしました。

Sendai Nuclear Power Plant is to be restarted by the decision of Japanese government, which could be called as a historical decision that ignores the future lives of the people.

2015年から稼働する予定です。しかし川内原発は、以下の質問3以降に書きましたように、敷地の周囲に活断層があり、また地盤もボーリングコアの差し替えの内部告発もあった通り、劣悪な場所です。

Sendai is to be restarted in 2015, but as I wrote in Question 3, it has numerous faults and there was even a whistle blower who confesssed that many changed the sample of boring cores of the site.  (The ground of Sendai NPP is not solid enough so many people exchanged the samples to go ahead with the construction.)

建設前に現地入りした生越忠元和光大学教授は、この事実を拡散されたところ、ある自民党員から刑事告訴されたと言う経緯まであります。

Former professor of Wako University, Mr. Sunao Ogose, a geologist who pointed out this issue, was later criminally accused by a member of Liberal Democratic Party.

90歳を過ぎた生越氏から竹野内は11月17日、手紙を受け取りました。

I received a letter from Mr. Ogose who is over 90 years old now on November 17, 2014.

地盤問題や不当な刑事告訴事件がまるで知られないまま、川内原発が稼働されることを嘆いていらっしゃいました。また反原発団体の不勉強についても嘆いています。

Mr. Ogose is deploring the fact that Sendai NPP is to be restarted without these important facts known widely…He also deplores the insufficient effort by anti-nuclear groups!

どうかこのことを皆さん、広めて下さい。

Dear all, please disseminate the article below!

*******************

7月12日追記:川内原発問題については私の「おかしな人々」や「竹野内真理ファイル」ブログにも掲載しています。
http://fukushimaworkerslist.blogspot.jp/2014/06/blog-post.html

Sendai Nuclear Power Plant issue is covered in the following of my blog.

http://takenouchimari.blogspot.jp/2014/03/blog-post_15.html

*****************

ボーリングコア差し替えの内部告発あり川内原発建設前から反対していた地質学者の生越忠氏も刑事告訴を受けていた!

Former professor of Wako University, Mr. Sunao Ogose was also criminally accused for revealing the facts of Sendai Nuclear Power Plant scandal (intentious exchange of boring core samples) !
 Mr. Sunao Ogose, anti-nuke geologist
He predicted Great Hanshin Earthquake (1995) and supported a lawsuit against the construction of Rokko Liner in Kobe before the earthquake.  He also predicted Niigata-Oki Earthquake which brought more than 3000 damages to Kashiwazaki Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant.  In 1970s, he gave a warning to Sendai Nuclear Power Plant, which is now decided to be restarted by the government.
新潟沖地震で柏崎原発が事故を起こす以前から活断層の存在を指摘、住民と原発反対裁判。
1995年の阪神淡路大震災も予測し、住民と地元で六甲ライナー反対の裁判を行っていた生越忠元和光大学教授。最も再稼働の可能性の高い川内原発も建設前から警鐘を鳴らす。
生越忠元和光大学、地質学教授
「開発公害研究資料・第四集」(1982年)より要約、抜粋
Extract and Summary of Mr. Ogose’s work, “Document on Development and Pollution Studies, Vol IV” (1982)

***川内原発建設前にボーリングコアの差し替え!***
Exchange of Boring Core Samples of Sendai Nuclear Power Plant Before the Construction!

「おかしいですねえ。ふしぎですねえ。これ、こんなにボロボロでしょ。断層や節理(ひび割れ)が縦横に入っていて、まるで寄木細工みたい。この地層は、原子炉設置場所の基礎岩盤と一連のものなんですけどね。九電は、地質上の問題はまったくないようにいっている。。。」

1975年、12月13日川内原発の反対派地元住民に招かれて地盤調査に入った生越忠氏。

“Wierd…so strange…See?  This easily breaks off like this.  The ground here has countless faults and cracks vertically and horizontally like a wooden mosaic work.  The layer here is the same layer as the ground rock foundation of the Sendai nuclear power plant.  However, Kyushu Electric Company talks as if there is no problem…”

This was the word of  a geologist, Mr. Sunao Ogose who was invited to investigate the foundation of Sendai Nuclear Power Plant on December 13, 1975.

すると同日、川内市寄田町の農業・中野近夫さんが、なんと、九電の下請けの会社でボーリングコアを差し替えたと内部告発をした!

Then on the very same day, Mr. Kimio Nakano (farmer in Sendai City, Yoseda Town) exposed that HE HAD EXCHANGED THE BORING CORE SAMPLE OF SENDAI NPP for the subcontractor of Kyushu Electric Company! 

翌14日、住民側は記者会見を開き、地元各紙はこの件を大きく報道。九電は否定しようとしたが、中野さんは「自分もやったし、他人もやった。やった証拠に、余ったコアを磨いて私の家の茶の間に飾ってあります」と明言。

On the following day, the residents held a press conference and this became a major news in local papers.  Kyushu Electric Company tried to deny the fact, but Mr. Nakano refuted as, “I did it and others did it.  As a proof, I polished a left-over borig core and put it as a decorative ornament in my living room.”

この問題は1977年11月21日の参議院科学技術振興対策特別委 員会にもちこまれたが、九電や山崎達夫九州大学教授らが「たとえボーリングコアの差し替えがあったとしても結論に影響を与えるようなものではない」と誤魔 化した。(影響を与えないものなら初めから差し替えするはずがないのだが)

This issue was discussed in the Committee of Scientific Promotion Measures in the Upper House on November 21, 1977, but Kyushu Electric Company and Tatsuo Yamazaki, a professor of Kyushu University, deluded this serious fact saying, “Even though there was some exchange, there would have been no impact on the decision of NPP construction.”

(IF THERE WAS NO IMPACT, NOBODY WOULD HAVE EXCHANGED THE BORING CORES FROM THE BEGINNING!) 

***地元の右翼から告発される*****
Mr. Ogose Criminally Accused by a Local Right Winger

さて私は右のような差し替えの事実は地質学的にも証明できる旨を内外に説明したことを理由に川内市在住の井上正三なる右翼の人物(福田派の自民党員と言われる)から、九電に対する信用棄損・営業妨害の容疑で最高検察庁に告発された。

1976年1月29日付(偶然私がエートスから刑事告訴を受けたのも今年の1月29日!)の告発状は、その後、東京地方検察庁に回されたため、私は3回にわたって同検察庁の検事から取り調べを受けた。

Regarding the above fact of the whistle blower, I explained I could geologically give proof of the boring core exchange.

Then a local right winger called Mr. Shozo Inoue (so called Fukuda Faction of LDP member) criminally accused me for infringement of trust and obstruction of business against Kyushu Electric Company through the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office.

Letter of accusation dated on January 29th, 1976 was filed in Supreme Prosecutors’ Office and was forwarded to Tokyo Local Prosecutors’ Office, and I was investigated by the prosecutors for 3 times.
(Note: Takenouchi was also criminally accused by ETHOS on the same day of 2014!)

しかし私は、ありもしないことをいいふらして故意に九電の信用を棄損したわけでも、九電の営業を妨害したわけでもないばかりか、コアの差し替えは正真正銘の事実であることが参議院で明らかにされたと言う事もあって、私に対する井上正三の告発は不発に終わった。

However, I was not disseminating something untrue or infringed the trust of Kyushu Electric intentionally or obstructed its business.

Moreover, the exchange of boring core is an irrefutable fact which was also revealed in the Upper House, so the accusation by Mr. Shozo Inoue was not successful.

ところが井上は、生越氏が検事に「コアの差し替えの事実はなかったと釈明し、私の言動が行き過ぎであったことを私自身がみとめると共に、この件については、これ以上、井上と争う事はしないと言明した」とまるで正反対のことを宣伝していた。

さらに井上は、みずからが発行している『法律と鹿児島』紙で、生越氏のことを「私立も私立、それも名もない次第のインチキ学者」と誹謗中傷していた。

However, Mr. Inoue was disseminating the following as contrary to the fact,
“Mr. Ogose explained to the prosecutor that the core exchange was not a fact and admitted that his action was excessive and he had no intention to fight legally with Mr. Inoue.”

Furthermore, Mr. Inoue was slandering Mr. Ogose saying, “He is a demagogue scholar who is working for a nameless private university.”

ところでこの井上氏は自民党の候補者の選挙運動にも積極的に取り組 んでいたが、選挙違反で逮捕・起訴されたこともある経歴の持ち主。自民党にとって邪魔な人間を、いろんな難癖をつけてやたら刑事告発したので「告発魔」と 言われており、反原発の大阪大学講師だった久米三四郎さんも刑事告発されたと言う。

Mr. Inoue was also actively involved in election campaign supporting for LDP candidate, but he has the records of arrest and accusation for violating the Election Law. 

He is also dubbed as “The Accuser” since he was known for accusing inconvenient people for LDP with various reasons.  A famous anti-nuclear lecturer, Mr. Sanshiro Kume was also criminally accused by Mr. Inoue.

***御用学者の罪と無実の人間を殺人罪にまでしようとした東大名誉教授***
Crime of Government Sided Scholar: A Professor Emeritus of Tokyo Univeristy Who Tried to Put Crime of Homicide on an Innocent Citizen

「真理の探究」という美名に隠れて、ある専門分野の学問の研究に、 その道一筋にうちこんできたようなふりをしながら、大学教授などの地位を得た「学者」のなかには、実は学問を食い物にした権力のひもとしか言いようのない ような人間が極めて多いこと、しかもこれらの「学者」が、反開発、反公害、反薬害などの闘争に関わる住民・市民を権力に売り渡すと言う卑劣な行為を進んで 行っていたという例が少なからずあることが明らかにされた以上、反原発・反公害・反薬害などの闘争は、御用学者糾弾闘争へと必然的に発展していかざるを得 なかったのである。

Behind the cause of “Seeking for the truth,”pretending that they had been studying for their expertise, there are many scholars who can be just regarded as puppet of the state power sacrificing the truth of the very expertise. 

It has been revealed that there are MANY examples where these scholars sacrifice honest residents and citizens who are struggling for anti-development/pullution/harmful drugs.

In this regard, there is no other way than pursuing the untruth of government-puppet scholars in the struggle of anti-nuclear/pullution/harmful drugs.

さらにここで指摘しておかなくてはならないことは、警察や司法権力に手を貸し、無実の人間を罪に陥れた極悪非道の御用学者が、とくに国家権力との癒着の強い一流有名国立大学の中に少なからずいると言う事である。

I need to emphasize here that especially in 1st grade state-owned universities, there are many government-puppet evil scholars who would even give helping hands to the police and judicial power, driving innocent citizens into false crimes.

この種の御用学者のうち、もっとも悪質と言われている人は東大名誉 教授で科学警察研究所長をも歴任したことのある古畑種基(故人)であるが、かれは弘前事件、島田事件、財田川事件などの冤罪事件で警察側あるいは検察側の 鑑定に関わり、白を黒と言いくるめ、無実の人間が殺人罪の汚名を着せられると言う結果を招いた。

The late Mr. Tanemoto Furuhata, a Tokyo Univeristy Professor Emeritus who used to be the dicrector of Science Police Institute is known to be the most evil one until today. 

Having involved in the investigation and scientific judgement on the side of police and the prosecutor in the case of Hirosaki, Shimada, Zaidagawa (they were revealed as false accusation after all), Mr. Furuhata lied that there were evidence of crimes so that innocent citizens were accused as murderers.

********************************
なお、この問題を含め、竹野内は法務省に3つの質問をしましたが、8月1日、法務省から回答できないという回答が来ました。

Including the Sendai NPP issue, I gave 3 questions to Ministry of Justice.  On August1, there was an answer from Ministry of Justice saying that they cannot answer the questions.

メール拝見させていただきました。
個別の事件に係る弁護士や捜査機関に対するご意見をお寄せいただきましたが,
法務省は捜査機関ではなく,また,警察や弁護士の監督官庁でもありませんことから,
直接捜査することはできませんし,警察や弁護士に指導等を行うこともできませんことを
ご理解願います。
この度お寄せいただいたご意見については,全国の警察を所管する警察庁や
日本弁護士連合会にお寄せいただきますようお願いします。

法務省

(竹野内注:エートスともんじゅ西村事件の問題は日本弁護士連合会にも送りましたが、回答を拒否され、またもんじゅ西村事件については警察庁にも電話しましたが回答を拒否されました。)

国への質問を出した際に、法務省にもメールを送ったのですが、URLのリンクを含めない1000文字以内の質問にしてくださいと回答があり、以下に書き直して7月5日に送りました。

非常に大事な内容だと思いますので、ご覧ください。

Please take a look at the 3 very important questions.

1. 福 島原発事故を起こした東電幹部や国の責任者などへは、住民が刑事告訴を起こしたにもかかわらず、警察も検察も捜査さえされませんでした。ところが事故前か ら地震と原発の問題を憂慮してIAEAに単独直訴まで行い、事故後は「福島の子供たちに多数の甲状腺がんや白血病など健康被害が出ているので疎開させよ、 エートスは人体実験である」とツイッターで訴えたシングルマザーの私の所には、沖縄まで福島から警察と検察が沖縄まで来て捜査を行い、起訴猶予となりまし た。海外のメディアもこれを驚くべきニュースとして取り上げています。不公平な司法措置ではないですか?

1. There was no investigation by police/prosecutor on TEPCO executives in spite of criminal accusation by residents.  However, as for me, a single mother who had visited IAEA regarding nuclear and earthquake issue before the Fukushima accident, and called for evacuation of kids saying through twitter, “health hazards such as many thyroid cancer or even leukemia are observed.  ETHOS is a human experiment” was actually investigated by Fukushima police and prosecutor who came all the way to Okinawa.  I eventually got deferred indictment and foreign media took up this case as a shoking news.  Isn’t this an unfair judicial treatment?

2. 1996 年に起きたもんじゅ西村事件(動燃のナトリウム漏れ事故調査社内担当の西村成生氏が自殺、それを境にマスコミが事故の報道から離れた事件)では、X線写真 や医療カルテ、深部体温の記録などより、飛び降り自殺ではなく、他殺であると検死をしたした医師その他の法医学者がご遺族に見解を話しています。ところが 担当弁護士の海渡雄一氏は最も大事な自殺・他殺の争点を無視し、刑事事件としてではなく民事事件として扱い、また警察に問い合わせても「弁護士がそのよう な対応であれば、警察は絶対に動かない」と言います。このような扱いはあり得ないのではないですか?再捜査すべきではないですか

2. In 1996, Monju Nishimura Case took place, in which Mr. Shigeo Nishimura, in-house investigator of Monju Fast Breeder Reactor accident comitted a suicide.  However, X-ray photoes and medical records showed that he did not jump off from the building and instead was killed, which was testified by the doctor in charge along with other forensic doctors.  Surprizingly, the lawyer who was in charge of this incident took the case as civil case in stead of a criminal case, ignoring the high possibility of homicide.  The police says that they would not make any move if the lawyer acted that way.  I am quite shocked at the treatment of this case.  Isn’t it necessary to reinvestigate this case?

3. 40 年来の反原発の反骨の地質学者であり、1975年12月川内原発建設前に調査に入った元和光大学教授、生越忠氏は、予定地と連なる地層の中に多くの断層や 節理を見つけ、原発建設の地盤として不適切であることを指摘したところ、地元の農家の人がボーリングコアをより強度な地層の土とすり替えていたことを内部 告発。この件を発表した後、1976年右翼の人物から九州電力への名誉棄損と営業妨害の容疑で刑事告訴され、最高検察庁が受理、その後東京地検に回され、 結局は不起訴となったが、生越氏は3度にわたり取り調べを受けたと言います。本来であれば、九州電力が告発されるべき事件であり、反原発の憂慮する住民や 学者に対する嫌がらせとしてか思えず、非常に不当な司法措置と考えますが、どうですか?また川内原発が最も再稼働に近いと言われている現在、この事件を再 検証する必要があるのではないですか?

3. In December 1975, former Wako University professor Sunao Ogose made a research on the soil of Sendai Nuclear Power Plant premise, and found out countless number of faults and cracks in the same layer of soil, which showed inappropriateness of building a nuclear power plant in that site.  Then a local farmer who worked at the boring core site confessed that he switched the core with firmer soil. After Mr. Ogose announced this whistle blower’s statement, he was criminally accused by a LDP related right winger and the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office took up the case.  Then the case was taken by Tokyo prosecutors’ office and Mr. Ogose was investigated for 3 times and eventully non-indicted.  To begin with, Kyushu Electric Company who ordered switching the cores should be the one to be criminlly accused and what had happened seems to be harassement against anti-nuclear residents and scholars.  Sendai Nuclear power plant is said to be the one which is closest to the restart.  Isn’t it necessary to reinvestigate this case?

Read Full Post »

1986 it was said, 1996 quoted:

Hesselstein-NRC-1986

2007 it happened to TECPO already:

2007-2011

Read Full Post »

Japanese people hear it from Fukshima day One: “Panic and fear of radiation is much worse than radiation itself


This statement is used by the IAEA for Chernobyl victims.

The IAEA ignores cancer, leukemia, diabetes, trisomy 21, all kinds of illness, all kinds of cancer in connection with radiation, especially low radiation.

The IAEA calls it “Radiophobia”.

The present and future victims are perceived as a disturbance to the atomic industry, to the japanese government, to the companies running atomic plants. They are going to end it.

Since the foundation of the IAEA their purpose is: To serve and protect the atomic industry in these five countries: USA, Russia, China, France, Britain.

They also monopolized public health during and after atomic accidents, by the gag contract WHA 12-40 between them and the WHO (1959). SOURCE

Learn more about the International Atomic Energy Association:

The IAEA, WHO and TEPCO should be a case for the International Criminal Courts

Fukushima and Three Mile Island USA: strategic misinterpretation by the IAEA

Japanese officals and WHO ignore irradiated Japanese Children

IAEA and ICRP – Licence to Kill – ALARA principle

Fukushima: The IAEA strategy

Japan: Additional 252,500 Cancer Cases and Risk for pregnant women

25 Years with FUKUSHIMA

Atomic Industry – Licence to Kill

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

So far had a radioactivity of cesium-134 and cesium-137 have been allowed by a maximum of 600 becquerels per kilogram. Since last weekend the EU limit for food from affected areas in Japan, however, was significantly increased.

Consumer organization FoodWatch (web)and the Environment Institute Munich announced in a joint statement, that:

For example, should fish oil or spices to their previous value to twenty times higher than what corresponds to 12 500 becquerels per kilogram.

The appropriate Emergency Ordinance 297/2011 was on entered into force on March 27th 2011.

Safety standards for Japanese food has been decreased

German Federal Minister of Consumer Aigner contains important information to the public.

This is an act against the health of the people. This is not democratic.

THE E.U. TOOK IT partly BACK: http://www.foodwatch.de/kampagnen__themen/radioaktivitaet/nachrichten/kommissionsentscheidung/index_ger.html
reason: Massive protest of consumer organisations! JAPAN, you can do it also!

http://www.bmelv.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/2011/072-EU-Schutzmassnahmen-Japan.html

history says: Atomic accidents lead to higher radiation limits – which stay flexible. Flexible for incrasing the limit:

The ICRP – another profiteer of the atomic industry – made the recommendations for radiation protection norms, which were accepted by all countries, and which justified the set of regulations of the IAEA. Interesting isn’t it? Here is one:
ICRP said, the tritium emission (from atomic power plants) in water should be 40.000 Bq.

In 1990 they said: Lets make 7000 Bq/ litre.

This was proved by ACES (Comitee for environmental standards, Canada). They said: change the 7000 Bq (Because of cancer danger).

They also said: Lower it to 100 Bq in five years until you get 20 Bq / Litre.

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

News from April 13th 2011: Fukushima is now INES 7 – like Chernobyl. The IAEA doesn’t want that. Read here why.

The IAEA organizes propaganda conferences each year. Only those who are recommended by their country’s atomic authority are permitted to participate. Nuclear issues which are subject to criticism are excluded.
The World Health Organization (WHO) also organizes annual conferences. However, WHO is gagged by the IAEA (per Agreement WHA 12-40 of 1959) and is prohibited from independently issuing statements regarding the health effects of atomic accidents.
This means the IAEA’s engineers and physicists are given the legal right to make statements about the health impacts of atomic accidents at the same time medical doctors from the World Health Organization are legally prohibited from doing so. The IAEA’s physicists issue official statements about the biological effects of exposure to radiation or radioactive contamination; they are permitted to assess the impact of accidental exposure or releases of radioactive contamination on human health.

The IAEA has a history of denying that the following health impacts occurred as a result of exposure to radiation and radioactive contaminants: damage to the immune system, stillbirths, thyroid cancer in children, brain damage, mental retardation, trisomy 21, diabetes, fetal abnormalities, disabled children, and all kinds of cancer, illness.
Many of these illnesses occur months, years or decades after initial or continued exposure and therefore, the IAEA and WHO artificially reduce the casualty count by including only those injuries received in the first minutes, hours, days following a nuclear accident.

The proposal to bring TEPCO before the International Criminal Court (ICC) was made by German politician, Stefan Wenzel on April 9th, 2011, during the IPPNW congress in Berlin. Watch his impressive speech here (beginning at 4:08 Min.):


He also brought the following proposal to dissolve the secret relationship between the IAEA and WHO before the “Bundestag”, a federal legislative body in Germany.

https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/german-greens-cancel-secret-gag-agreement-between-iaea-and-w-h-o/

The UN General Assembly adopted the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on July 17, 1998. On July 1, 2002 the statute came into force. “The International Criminal Court is a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.” (Wikipedia, 03/25/2011) Thus far, the ICC has not accepted criminal or civil cases involving the destruction of natural resources and environmental terrorism. The establishment of its authority to do so is long overdue.
In relation to the ongoing accident at Fukushima, responsible officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Health Organization (WHO), the operating company (TEPCO) and Japanese nuclear power regulators should be brought before the International Criminal Court and held accountable for their actions.
Failure to aid in tens of thousands of cases and threats to natural resources hundreds of thousands if not millions of people is a Felony.
The behavior of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World Health Organization (WHO) following the reactor accident of Fukushima is a scandal. WHO has made public statements trivializing the emergency and ceding all of its responsibilities to the IAEA, citing the treaty of 1957. “What is WHO’s role in nuclear emergencies? Answer by WHO: “Within the United Nations system, the IAEA is the lead agency for coordination of international response to radiation events.” (World Health Organization, Japan Nuclear Concerns, FAQ, 14 March 2011, Geneva)
The IAEA – an organization whose Board of Governors is dominated by and comprised almost entirely of nuclear industry members, holds fast to its opinion that Fukushima should be assessed at Level 5 on the International Rating scale for significant events in nuclear facilities (INES).
The quantity of radioactive Iodine-131 released is a central indicator for the evaluation of nuclear accidents on the INES scale. The release of more than “a few 10 ^ 16 Bq of iodine 131” is classified as a level 7 catastrophic accident this (INES) scale.
Apparently, the IAEA, TEPCO and the Japanese government officials in charge have not clearly stated how much radioactive material has been released throughout the unfolding of the Fukushima disaster. According to estimates by the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO), comprised of 60 monitoring stations world-wide under the auspices of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the first three days of the Fukushima accident alone released about 3.8 x 10 ^ 17 Bq of radioactive Iodine-131. That is about 100 times the official inventory. The Fukushima disaster has also released significant amounts of several other radionuclides which have not even been measured.
Due to these figures, the Fukushima accident would have been legitimately classified as INES level 7 a long time ago. Greenpeace is now in the process of conducting its own analysis.
The behavior of WHO and the IAEA is therefore an unprecedented scandal. An inappropriately small evacuation zone is estimated to have resulted in the needless exposure of pregnant women, children, and other adults to excessive levels of radiation and radioactive contamination beyond 250mSv, the limit set for the recognition of work related cancer among Japanese nuclear power plant employees. Radiation biology assumes that if 10,000 people were exposed to a dose of 1 Sv, then 500 deaths are expected to occur as a result of their exposure (ICRP60) 500-1200 (BEIRV) 580-1740 (RERF), 2400 (Köhler). The ICRP – another profiteer of the atomic industry – made the recommendations for radiation protection standards, which were accepted by all countries and which were used o justify IAEA regulations. Interesting isn’t it?


Here is one:
ICRP set the original safety standard for tritium emission (from atomic power plants) in water at 40,000 Bq/litre.
In 1990 the ICRP said: Let’s lower the safety standard for tritium to 7000 Bq/ litre.
The new 7000 Bq/litre limit was approved by ACES (Committee for Environmental Standards, Canada). They agreed to change the safety limit to 7000 Bq/litre because of the cancer risk.
The ICRP later said: Let’s lower the safety standard to 100 Bq/litre every five years until we get down to 20 Bq /litre.
I think there is a big difference between ‘safety’ limits of 40,000 Bq/litre and 20 Bq/litre!
Said another way, if 40,000Bq/litre was safe, why would they ever lower the limit to 20 Bq/litre?

(thanks to Tadema for help)

 

Fukushima and Three Mile Island USA: strategic misinterpretation by the IAEA

Japanese officals and WHO ignore irradiated Japanese Children

IAEA and ICRP – Licence to Kill – ALARA principle

Fukushima: The IAEA strategy

Japan: Additional 252,500 Cancer Cases and Risk for pregnant women

25 Years with FUKUSHIMA

Atomic Industry – Licence to Kill

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

At the time of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, scientists were busy trying to figure out how many people die from atomic bombs and are incapable of fighting.

It was not about still-born children, sick adults or children suffering. Recognized losses had to stay as small as possible. (quote Rosalie Bertell, Toronto, Kanda)

Atomic power plants are an invention of the military to produce plutonium. Electricity was a waste product.

The definition of an accident is similar to what is known in Harvard as “strategic misinterpretation“. Quote of IAEA and OCDE: ““In consequence, the Chernobyl accident will be not considered as a significant accident.SOURCE

The ICRP talked in 1990 in connection with Chernobyl about “temporary effects from radiation“. Therefor ICRP admits radiation damage. The IAEA denies this.
The  ICRP leaves the field of consequences for health caused by radiation to engineers and physicists . The WHO does the same (independentwho.info)

In the case of Three Mile Island, the definition of accident refers only to the first 7 days. Everything about it falls within the definition of decontamination. But the Latency for Cesium is 20 – 25 years for mature people / 4 years children

Of these, the following doses are deducted:

The dose people at work in atomic power plants would be exposed to in normal operation.

The background radiation.

Moreover, the fallout from Chinese nuclear tests.

Excluding these values​​, and only 7 days. This is fraud.

The IAEA is undermining the right of expression and legal justice:

The IAEA recognized the judicial process to Three Mile Iceland / Harrisburg only to experts, the methodology and results consistent with those of the other “colleagues”on the same subject. The IAEA describes itself as the “colleagues”. Consequently, 11 were excluded from 12 experts from the court hearing.

Japanese officals and WHO ignore irradiated Japanese Children

IAEA and ICRP – Licence to Kill – ALARA principle

Fukushima: The IAEA strategy

Japan: Additional 252,500 Cancer Cases and Risk for pregnant women

25 Years with FUKUSHIMA

Atomic Industry – Licence to Kill

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ


Conference papers of the IAEA meeting in 1996:

On page 575:

Doubling of the background radiation reduces cancer risk by 25%.

So does the increase in background radiation mean that 30 million lives are saved, rather than arising cancer deaths by 120,000? (quote Dr. Vladimir Iakimets – Institute for System Analysis, Russian Academy of Sciences)

On February 9th 1996 the meeting of Russian Academy of Radiation Protection RCRP took place.

Excerpts:

“Contaminated areas are only inhabited villages and cities, not lakes, forests and agricultural land. ”
“Introduction average acceptable dose by accident: Greater than 0.1 Sv per year.”
“Dual-zone strategy: a radiation control zone. An exclusion zone control – about 1 Sv / year.”
Means: a transition between yesterday and tomorrow is possible. And: Due to lack of comparable data a high level of uncertainty among the population real data for recorded doses are non-existent.
RCRP has abolished Privileges and allowances.
Federal law for radiation protection is subsequently amended. The 57,000 km ² were reduced to a very small area where the dose to the public is at least 0,1 Sv per year.

The following is from Dr. Katsumi Furitsu (this is a report about Fukushima, by her), Research Committee of the atomic bomb victims at Hannan Chuo Hospital, Osaka, Japan:

Report of the International Komietees the IAEA in 1991: The international Chernobyl project, assess the effects on health and the environment and evaluation of radiation protection measures. Presentation 1991, in Vienna. Chairman of the Committee, Dr Itsuzo Shigematsu – also chairman of the Researching the effects of radiation -> RERF (web) in Hiroshima Institute.
He set up the limit of the dose for the resettlement and maximum values ​​for contaminated food.

http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub884e_web.pdf

Source: ICRP: Protection of the Public in the Event of Major Radiation Accidents: Principles and Planing – ICRP Publication 40th Annuals of the ICRP, 14, no. 2. 1984
ICRP: Principles for intervention of Protection of the Public in a Radiological Emergency. ICRP Publication 63rd 1993

The IAEA has criticized the RCRP, they should apply the ICRP guidelines. This means that people relocating is unnecessary if the level of individual radiation mSv in the first year after an accident does not exceed 500. (ICRP 1984)
If this dose is short, there are acute Radiations symptoms.
500 mSv are also equivalent of 1.7 km distance to Ground Zero in Hiroshima.
Nov. 1992: The ICRP INCREASED the dose for the evacuation in 1Sv – the equivalent to 1.3 km to the Hiroshima Ground Zero.

This means the continuation of nuclear power, even if people die.

1992: increased occupational radiation ICRP recommends to 0.05 Sv / year.
IAEA and WHO deny leukemia in hand together with radiation.

WHY: IAEA and ICRP – the ALARP Principle


The OECD published the following report:

Chernobyl to the déjà dix. Impact radiologique et sanitaire. OCDE Paris, November 1995. The report is edited by Dr. Peter Waight (Canada), headed by an editorial committee chaired by Dr. Henri Métiver (France) and written by: Dr. H. Métiver (IPSN, France), Dr. P. Jacob (GSF, Germany), Dr. G. Suskewitsch (WHO, Geneva), Heinz Brunner (NAC, Switzerland), MCViktorsson (SKI, Sweden), Dr. B. Bennet (UNSCEAR, Vienna), Dr. R. Hance (FAO / IAEA , Vienna), p. Kumasawa (JAERI, Japan), Dr. S. Kusumi (Japan), Dr. A. Bouville (NCI, USA), Dr. J. Sinaeve (Eu. Brussels), Dr. OPIliari (OECD / ARN, Paris) and Dr. E. Lazo (OCDE / AEN, Paris)

This report was cited especially by Professor Lee (an expert of UNESCO) at St. Andrews University in Scotland during the IAEA conference 1996. The report should prove that the radiation does not cause adverse health effects. This report was prepared by a French team of experts led by Dr. Henri Métiver by the French Institute for Radiation Protection and Safety (IPSN) today IRSN (web) is written.

Excerpt page 61

Very extensive medical studies have shown that to the influence of radiation no anomaly in the field of health can be attributed.”
and: “In consequence, the Chernobyl accident will be not considered as a significant accident.

Or take this one:

CHERNOBYL
TEN YEARS ON
RADIOLOGICAL AND HEALTH IMPACT
An Assessment by the NEA Committee on Radiation Protection and Public Health
November 1995
OECD NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY

http://www.oecd-nea.org/rp/chernobyl/chernobyl-1995.pdf

On page 43 it reads “There are no clear trends in data for birth anomalies in Belarus or Ukraine (Li93, Bo94). Two
epidemiological studies in Norway concluded that no serious gross changes as to pregnancy outcome were
observed (Ir91), and that no birth defects known to be associated with radiation exposure were detected (Li92).
In Austria, no significant changes in the incidence of birth defects or spontaneous abortion rates which could be
attributed to the Chernobyl accident were detected (Ha92a).”

A simple lie. Have a look at this:

http://www.dissident-media.org/infonucleaire/trait_25_26.html#ancre270368

And this in contrast:

1000.000 people can die because of Chernobyl – according to Prof. V. Nesterenko (Liquidator and atomic physicist):

Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment

is now partially online (p. 1 – 145 of 327):

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 111 other followers