Secret body scanners with 50 times more radiation than airport x-ray scanners to be rolled out
In the late 1990s, travel experts doubted the government would ever employ such machines in a security checkpoint role at airports or other locations. The terrorist attacks on 9/11 dramatically reversed that mentality to the point that now, no doubt afraid of being accused of doing “too little” to enhance security, lawmakers and select government agencies have done a complete reversal, permitting the use of high-powered x-ray machines to “scan” airline travelers (and perhaps, we near bus, train and other modes of travel in the future).
The all-knowing Transportation Security Administration insists the machines it is currently using – some 250 of them – are safe, but the agency relies primarily on its own in-house and government experts to support their claims.
The non-governmental experts speak
But other private-sector experts, including a bevy of health and radiation scientists cited by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, disagree. They include Dr. Russell Blaylock, M.D., a board certified neurosurgeon, who wrote:
The growing outrage over the Transportation Security Administration’s new policy of backscatter scanning of airline passengers and enhanced pat-downs brings to mind these wise words from President Ronald Reagan: The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help you. So, what is all the concern really about – will these radiation scanners increase your risk of cancer or other diseases? A group of scientists and professors from the University of California at San Francisco voiced their concern to Obama’s science and technology adviser John Holdren in a well-stated letter back in April (2010).
The letter he referred to was signed by doctors John Sedat Ph.D., David Agard, Ph.D., Marc Shuman, M.D., Robert Stroud, Ph.D., all of whom are faculty at the University of California, San Francisco. They wrote:
We are writing to call your attention to serious concerns about the potential health risks of the recently adopted whole body backscatter X-ray airport security scanners. This is an urgent situation as these X-ray scanners are rapidly being implemented as a primary screening step for all air travel passengers. Our overriding concern is the extent to which the safety of this scanning device has been adequately demonstrated. This can only be determined by a meeting of an impartial panel of experts that would include medical physicists and radiation biologists at which all of the available relevant data is reviewed.
These experts went on to say that even though the overall dose of radiation “would be safe if it were distributed throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high.”
Despite what the experts say, the government continues to employ more powerful x-ray machines
No matter. Again, the TSA knows better. And apparently, judging by the lack of concern shown by a majority of members of Congress, most of them agree with this rogue agency.
So, law enforcement agencies, including the TSA and others, are continuing to expand their use of x-ray scanners, “including machines that expose people to as much as 50 times more radiation than an airport scanner, and are sometimes using them on people without their knowledge or consent,” AllGov.com reported.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is currently installing some 35 drive-thru x-ray gates that will scan vehicles at the border with passengers still inside.
New York City, meanwhile, has utilized specially equipped vans to scan vehicles for drugs and weapons, again while people are inside them.
Also, prisons have begun to use x-rays that can see through the body in search of contraband that may be hidden inside the bodies of prisoners – and jail employees as well.
Where are the government regulatory agencies?
The Food and Drug Administration, which is responsible for the safety of medical machines like x-ray equipment, apparently has no jurisdiction over their non-medical use, according to reports. So, they’ve done nothing about the use of x-ray scanners by police.
Fukushima Fish have 258 Times ‘Safe’ Level of Radiation
The mainstream media is finished with Fukushima, but it seems Fukushima isn’t finished with us. A couple of irradiated fish captured near the inoperative nuclear plant showed 25,800 becquerels of caesium per kilo—258 times the level determined ‘safe’ by the government.
The plant ceased operations following a meltdown involving three reactors after the devastating earthquake and tsunami in March of 2011.
Radiation Spike in Fish
Since June, officials have allowed fishing outside a 31-mile radius from the plant while being purportedly stunned by the record radiation levels of the fish. Until the recently captured pair of greenlings, record radiation levels had been at 18,700 becquerels per kilo as found in cherry salmons. The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) is intent on capturing more of and researching the fish, their food sources, as well as their habitats to explain the 7,100 becquerels jump.
Of course there is no ‘safe’ level of radiation, and food contaminated with high amounts of radiation can be especially dangerous. Not too long ago, it was found that radioactive food (food contaminated with radiation from Fukushima or others sources), is actually comparable to receiving hundreds of X-rays.
Radiation’s Wide Effects
Radiation cast an even wider net, however, than for fish alone. Butterflies with disfigured eyes, legs, and antennae and stunted wings have caught the eye of scientists and put fear in the hearts of locals. The Sixth Report of Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey has declared that 36 percent of Fukushima children have malformed thyroid growths and may develop cancer. Infants and young people are most endangered by radiation’s effects, according to the World Health Organization, because cellular division occurs faster.
Here is an extensive page all about radiation.
Protecting Yourself from Radiation
Fukushima plant operators have already admitted that the Fukushima radiation levels emitted from the disaster exceeds almost two and a half times the initial ‘estimate’ produced by Japanese safety regulators. Researchers have also stated that the amount of radioactive isotope caesium-137 released at the height of the crisis was equivalent to 42% of that from Chernobyl. This is cause for concern, and prompts a serious need for protection.
For now, it’s best to avoid certain varieties of fish from particular areas. Keep in mind that some contaminated tuna have been found off the California coast.
Remember that no dose of radiation is safe and there are variables to consider when protecting yourself from it.
Can you believe this? What are these lunatics raving about? Nuclear expert, Arnold Gundersen, recently visited Japan to discuss the dangers of the Unit 4 spent fuel pool at the Fukushima no. 1 nuclear power station. He talked with Japan’s politicians, with Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco), and with concerned citizens (1).
Gundersen: ‘I told Tepco that while I realized they hoped and believed that there will always be water in the nuclear fuel pool, I had to ask whether or not they had (already prepared and stationed) any chemicals to put out a nuclear fuel pool fire in the event they were wrong. Tepco’s response was that there was nothing in the fuel pool that could burn, a statement I find appalling.’ (emphasis added)
Their statement is not appalling: it is 100 percent totally absurd.
I hesitate to make the following charge, and I may be wrong (I hope I am), because one does not want to generalize or falsely accuse. But having lived in Japan for many years I believe that Tepco was making a racist slur against Gundersen personally. Such a ridiculous answer on their part cannot be taken seriously, thus, they were telling Arnie, “why don’t you row your boat back to Amerika, whitey.” Middle-age Japanese men, in particular, can have exclusionary attitudes toward outsiders.
Of course, Japan itself is under the racist, imperialist occupation of the United States military, so I don’t mean to be a hypocrite. But anyone who has studied Arnie Gundersen’s character knows that he is a kind-hearted and intelligent man who has only the best intentions for the Japanese people. But do the criminal thugs at Tepco have Japan’s welfare in mind?
The same convoluted logic applies to Tepco’s previous failure:
Why should we spend money to build a seawall tall enough to stop a tsunami in a tsunami-prone region?
We can’t think of any reason at the moment” (March 10, 2011).
Gundersen was also stumped at Tepco’s attitude to ignore international calls for improving the Fukushima nuclear situation, and the generous offers of help from international experts. He noted that
Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency and Tepco claim they are getting outside expertise from the International Atomic Energy Agency, but Article II of the IAEA’s charter states its mission is to promote nuclear power. There is a real need for experts who think outside the box.
I suggest readers have a look at this German documentary made some time ago which helped to galvanize concern about the Unit 4 situation (2). Inspect the faces of these sad gentlemen when questioned by the interviewer about the safety of Unit 4 (click the captions icon for English, at the 5:40 minute mark). Note the frowns, clasped hands and worry, as well as the unbearable tension in the room.
Perhaps the reason that Japan is not allowing independent advisors or inspectors to help save the Pacific Ocean (now Japan’s private dumping ground) could be that Japan, like many nations, retains the right to build nuclear weapons, whether secretly or according to law.
As my colleague Tony Boys pointed out, based on his own research and the research of Yoichi Shimatsu, former editor of the Japan Times Weekly, Reactor 4 may have been a secret nuclear weapons production site (3).
Although Japan has no stated production program, it is publicly admitted by those who support the idea that having plenty of nuclear bomb material on hand is prudent.
Having nuclear plants shows to other nations that Japan can make nuclear weapons (4; 5).
Strictly speaking, if other countries are going to develop nuclear weapons, it is logical for states to want to develop them for defensive purposes (i.e. the arms race). But shouldn’t Japan be more honest about this, and if the country is going to be destroyed by its own nuclear accidents how do nuclear weapons offer “security” and protection for the country?
Of course, whatever the Japanese people themselves think about these issues is irrelevant. A recent government poll, funded by the taxpayers, found that 90 percent of the 90,000 people that participated in the poll want to abolish nuclear power. However, the poll was just a public relations ruse, a cynical joke to profit government think tanks and university professors, and never was meant to be taken seriously. Apparently the people who voted are “biased” and therefore their votes were disqualified! In the end the rulers will decide Japan’s future and stick with nuclear power whether the people like it or not (6; 7; 8).
1. Global help urged to avert reactor 4 pool fire
2. The Fukushima Lie
3. Tony Boys: Reactor 4 May Have Been A Secret Nuke Weapons Production Site – Audio
4. Nuclear Arms Talk Accompanies Japan Atomic Power Phaseout Debate
5. Japan defense chief Morimoto sees nuclear plants as deterrent, favors 25% option for energy mix
6. Japan’s Future Reliance on Nuclear Power: Noda Administration Chooses “15%” Anyway, Despite 90% of 90K Public Comments Wanted “0%”
7. NISA’s New Safety Standard May Allow Nuclear Reactors on Top of Active Faults to Continue Operation
8. Japanese Government’s Energy Policy (Reliance on Nuclear Power in 2030) May Go the “Fourth Way”, Not Even Presented to the Citizens in Opinion Surveys
About the Author: