Canada's Vested Interest in the Protection of the Nuclear Industry Via Continued Lies About Fukushima

Dana Durnford, the man who spent months documenting missing, sick, and dying marine life along the British Columbia coast, was recently arrested and charged with criminal harassment for calling out two soft-on-nuclear individuals in a YouTube video. (You can see Dana's work at his site, The Nuclear Proctologist, or on his YouTube channel, BeautifulGirlByDana.)

In an ongoing illustration of the backwards-ass world in which we live, a man who is telling the truth about Fukushima is being made a criminal by those who are downplaying the very real dangers of Fukushima fallout, thereby exposing the public to more health risk through ignorance.

The federal government-funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) reported in April 2015 that radioactive fallout from Fukushima had just been detected "on North American shores for the first time."

As is the standard line from establishment media and government regarding Fukushima, the public was told that the findings were no big deal, nothing to worry about.

(The truth is, there is no level of man-made radioactive isotopes that is safe to ingest. It all carries a risk. Even low-level radiation exposure can cause catastrophic health damage.) 

From the article:

"Trace amounts of radiation from the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan have been detected on North American shores for the first time, but researchers say the amount of radiation is not a concern."

Two of the "researchers" interviewed in the article, Jay Cullen and Ken Buesseler, are the standard nuclear industry gatekeepers being held up in mainstream media as experts in order to placate the public.

These men, being held up as "experts" on the Fukushima fallout situation in Canada and the U.S., are testing sea water samples, rather than sea life (algae, kelp, fish, seals, whales, etc.) where the radioactivity actually accumulates, to determine the level of contamination. Testing sea water samples is like searching for a needle in a haystack. Their methodology is flawed, making any results they find close to meaningless. But that doesn't stop mainstream media from holding up these Fukushima-downplayers as supposed experts every chance it gets... 

Now, in order to understand the level of lying, manipulation, and complicity among the establishment scientists and media outlets, we have to look to the roots of the situation. We have to look to the allegiances. We have to follow the money trail.

 
Jay Cullen, for example, is employed by the University of Victoria on the British Columbia, Canada coast.

The University of Victoria is funded by the Canadian federal government. 

Canada is the number two exporter of uranium worldwide and a major exporter of nuclear reactors, just like the ones that have been melting down non-stop, 24/7, for four-and-a-half years now at Fukushima, Japan. In fact, it is almost certainly Canadian uranium spewing out of those reactors and contaminating all of North America (and the rest of the planet more slowly).

The Canadian federal government makes big money from the sale of uranium and nuclear reactors. Maybe more importantly, its uranium makes Canada a big shot on the world stage. It makes Canada a strategically powerful entity for the overall global war machine, of which it is an active member.

So we have a government-funded "scientist" telling the gullible public that everything is A-OK with the supposedly tiny and inconsequential amounts of radioactive fallout that have been detected in ocean water on the B.C. coast. And we have a government-funded journalist and media outlet reporting this news to the public, asking the questions, directing the discourse, and looking the other way when presented with evidence of the variety that Dana Durnford has uncovered. And the government that funds the scientist, the university, the journalist, and the media outlet earns a big chunk of its income (and its global political clout) from the activities of the uranium/nuclear industries.

Not only that, but Cullen's research is partially funded directly by a pro-nuclear Canadian government agency.

From the article, "Fukushima’s Political Fallout Puts Anti-nuke Researcher On Trial," by Yoichi Shimatsu, published on Rense.com:

"What Jay Cullen failed to mention to the Toronto-based Global and Mail is that the 630,000 dollar grant to his inFORM project came from the MEOPAR foundation, whose Board chairman is Robert Walker, former CEO and President of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL). The federal Crown corporation is Canada’s largest nuclear laboratory, which developed the CANDU reactors and was the wartime uranium-supplier for the Manhattan Project, which built and detonated the world’s first atomic bombs."

Can we really expect even a shred of truth about the Fukushima situation from such channels?

I suppose the CBC journalist, paid by the nuclear industry-protecting Canadian federal government, was unaware that there had been no real, ongoing testing for radioactive fallout from Fukushima before these findings were reported. (Even the results in question are based only on tests of ocean water, not on the sea animals and plants that absorb and bio-accumulate the radioactivity like sponges.)

I suppose that CBC journalist was unaware that the federal government refused to test air, water, soil, or food for radioactive fallout in any systematic, ongoing, or thorough manner since the nuclear disaster at Fukushima, Japan began in March 2011.

And I suppose that CBC journalist was unaware that radioactive fallout from Fukushima, Japan had already been detected (even with incredibly spotty testing) all along the West Coast since soon after the disaster began.

Fallout from Fukushima has been documented in fish and seaweed off the Alaska coast. It has been found in almonds, prunes, soil, tuna, and milk in California. It has been found in Canadian milk and water reservoirs. And this only scratches the surface. 

An article in Scientific American, for example, reported in March 2012 that radioactive iodine from Fukushima had been found in kelp along the California coast. Radioactive fallout was found in all the kelp that was tested. However, only Iodine 131, which has an eight-day half-life, was tested for by these scientists, despite the fact that many other more dangerous radioactive isotopes were released from the nuclear reactors as well, along with the short-lived iodine.

From the article:

"The scientists only measured iodine 131, although other isotopes were in the plume from Japan that also accumulate in kelp. One of them, Cesium 137, has a 30-year half-life."

Yes, and Strontium, which was also released from Fukushima, has a half-life of 28 years. Plutonium, which was released from Fukushima, has a half-life in the thousands of years. 

You see, you have to test for something (diligently, in an ongoing manner, and using the proper methods) in order to find it.

If you don't test for it, you don't find it.

If you don't test for it in the right ways, you don't find it.

And you can then tell the public it has nothing to worry about, just like Jay Cullen and Ken Buesseler are doing.

Just like Health Canada is doing.

I wrote in May 2011 about how Health Canada initially refused to test milk samples for radioactive fallout from Fukushima, despite requests from British Columbia dairy farmers to do so. After reluctantly testing only 24 samples of milk over three months, Health Canada declared the milk perfectly fine and uncontaminated.

It took independent tests ordered and paid for by private citizens (at $400 a pop) to uncover Strontium contamination in B.C. milk. Source: Canada's Land of Milk and Strontium Later, it was uncovered by these same private citizens that Strontium 90, one of the radioactive isotopes released by the nuclear reactors at Fukushima, had been found in the milk samples by the Health Canada tests. The radioactive contamination was not considered worth mentioning by Health Canada because the levels that were found fell below the "allowable limits," which are determined, yes, by the Canadian federal government.

I've written on the subject of Fukushima gatekeepers before, on New Year's Eve 2013: New Moon in Capricorn: Fukushima, Gatekeepers, and the Big Responsibility of Thinking For Yourself.

The subject remains just as relevant today. 

What follows are some updated excerpts from an article first posted on this blog on May 8, 2011 called, "Canada Day Cardinal Grand Cross Eclipse: Well, Golly Gee Whiz. Look Who's Fueling the Global Nuclear Industry." The article was written ahead of a Cardinal Grand Cross on Canada Day 2011 involving the personal planets in Cancer, Uranus in Aries, Saturn in Libra, and Pluto in Capricorn. The article outlines the vested interest the Canadian federal government - and all paid agencies of that government - have in protecting the nuclear industry.

(The article was also censored on AstroDispatch at the time, which made me feel all warm and fuzzy.)

"Canada's benign, peacekeeper image, so strategically useful on the world stage, is in the process of being stripped bit-by-bit by a Pluto in Capricorn opposition to its Cancer Sun. Squared by transiting Uranus in Aries, the shocking extent of Canada's role within the global war machine emerges as the facade is stripped. The fundamental understanding of Canada's identity on the world stage - past, present, and future - is changing rapidly. 

Canada is the second largest producer of uranium in the world. It was the largest producer of uranium in the world up until 2009 when it was overtaken by Kazakhstan.

To be more specific, northern Saskatchewan - my home province - is the second largest producer of uranium in the world. This is where the uranium is mined - mainly from McArthur River, the largest uranium mine in the world.

We're doing what we can to get back to number one, too. Uranium production in Saskatchewan is on the upswing after the opening of a new mine at Cigar Lake in March 2014.

The world's largest publicly-traded uranium corporation, Cameco, is headquartered in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. "Is your nuclear reactor running low on fuel? Cameco may be able to help." It was once a Canadian Crown Corporation, held by the Canadian people, but is now majority owned by parties from the United States. These parties from the U.S. more than likely lead back to Big Oil, which owns a fair percentage of the world's uranium production.

So guess where the uranium is coming from for the globe's nuclear reactors? And for depleted uranium munitions and bombs? That's right. From those benign peacekeepers to the North, eh?

And from the most below-the-radar province in the country (maybe tied with Prince Edward Island). Saskatchewan: flat as piss on a plate. It's the only province in the country where you can watch your dog running away for three days straight. Hayseed farm boys, wheat fields, pump jacks, sunsets, good fishing.

And the heart of the global nuclear industry.

The mining of uranium in Canada began in 1942 under direction from the military. (Straight to the Manhattan Project with ya!) By 1959, 23 mines and 19 treatment plants were in operation. Canada now has 18 nuclear reactors with plans (still?) to build nine more over the next ten years. Sixteen of the reactors are in Ontario with one in Quebec and one in New Brunswick. In 2008, 53% of Ontario's power came from nuclear energy.

Canada is a major exporter of nuclear reactor systems worldwide, called Candu (Canada deuterium uranium), and has sold systems to India, South Korea, Romania, Pakistan, Argentina and China. There's that good, old Saskatchewan "Can do!" spirit again.

I remember as a kid going on a school trip to this crappy converted motorhome-type thing that had been turned into a promotional "scientific" display for the Candu nuclear reactors. It was in a neighbouring town about 20 minutes away. Yes, when you grow up in Saskatchewan, this is the type of field trip you go on. One of the main displays was a group of everyday items, and the person leading the tours asked us which of the items gave off radiation. Kids would guess, and the leader would say, yes, that gives off radiation. And what else does? After a couple kids' guesses, I realized the pattern and cut the guessing game short: "They all do."

Ding ding ding! Yes, nine-year-old girl, it's true. All these common, everyday items give off radiation. Therefore, the uranium industry in your province is completely safe and should be supported by you and your peers throughout adulthood.

(Instead, it fueled a suspicion of nuclear power that led to complete opposition of nuclear energy.)

The same schtick we got from the "Radioactivity Wagon" as schoolkids in the 1980s is now being applied to the nuclear crisis in Japan. So-called experts are telling people that the low levels of radiation being found in food and rainwater are perfectly safe. You get more radiation from an airplane ride! An X-Ray! From eating a banana! Never mind that our bodies know how to process the radiation that is naturally-occurring in foods. They do not know how to process the man-made radioactive isotopes being produced at Fukushima...

This is the same ideology behind the supposed innocuousness of depleted uranium being used in munitions and bombs. We're told it's safe because it's depleted uranium, see? The levels of radiation are not enough to harm a human being, they say.

What the supposed experts and depleted uranium proponents (some of whom e-mail me every time I mention d.u. in a post - must be on someone's payroll) are not telling us is that it's not exposure to the environmental radiation that causes the biggest problem. It's the ingestion of the radioactive dust (breathing it in, eating contaminated food, or drinking contaminated water) that causes the greatest harm to human health.

During the production of enriched uranium, depleted uranium is produced as a waste product, which is then used in bombs and munitions.

According to Jim Harding, University of Regina professor and author of Canada's Deadly Secret: Saskatchewan Uranium and the Global Nuclear System, despite assurances from officials that Canada's uranium is used only for "peaceful" purposes (IE. in nuclear reactors, which I would argue are not peaceful at all), depleted uranium all ends up in the same stockpiles. There's no separation of Saskatchewan depleted uranium from the rest of it, so Saskatchewan's uranium is being used in depleted uranium munitions and bombs, just as it was almost certainly used in Fat Man and Little Boy and in the nuclear testing before and after the dropping of those bombs.

Harding says the technology for depleted uranium came out of the Manhattan Project. There was so much public horror and uproar related to the dropping of the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima that nuclear warfare had to go stealth - which it did with depleted uranium. This is slow radioactive poisoning rather than instantaneous annihilation, and it sneaks along beneath the public's radar. How many people realize that we've actually had a covert nuclear war going on on this planet for decades now?

Depleted uranium is used to coat munitions so they are hard enough to penetrate tanks. When the munitions penetrate the tanks, they get very hot and basically turn to dust. (Same story with the bombs.) The dust is radioactive and is left behind for people to ingest - and for the wind to blow around the world. Once the dust is in the system, the body cannot get rid of it. This is what is causing the horrifying epidemic of birth defects and deformities in babies in Iraq as well as the spike in cancers, predominantly leukemia. Depleted uranium has also been used in Kosovo and Afghanistan and there is suspicion it is being used in Libya.

It's the same scenario with the radioactivity coming from the Japanese nuclear reactors. The levels of radioactivity being reported might be considered relatively low (ha), but the breathing in and ingestion of radioactive particles through food and water creates an accumulation in the body, with the possibility of long-term damage."

The health risk posed by constant exposure to low-level radiation (like the radiation from Fukushima) has been criminally downplayed by the powers-that-be in the past.

Even the Global Government's own establishment World Health Organization has come out recently (October 2015) with a report saying: "Low doses of ionizing radiation increase risk of death from solid cancer."

In "duh!" news from this report:

"New results from a study coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer agency of the World Health Organization, show that protracted exposure to low doses of ionizing radiation increases the risk of death from solid cancers. The results, published today in The BMJ, are based on the most powerful study to date and provide direct evidence about cancer risks after protracted exposures to low-dose ionizing radiation."

Low-dose ionizing radiation like the variety spewing into the Pacific and into the atmosphere non-stop for almost five years now...

This new statement coming from the WHO is contrary to the official lines that have been spouted constantly in mainstream media from establishment government, science, and medical channels. We are being told constantly that "there is nothing to worry about" regarding low doses of radioactivity in our environment, and this, of course, as all intelligent beings already know, is hogwash.

There is health risk from constant exposure to low-dose radiation. There is health risk from the accumulation over time of man-made radioactive isotopes in our bodies that are breathed in or ingested from food, water, or milk. There is health risk from ingesting radioactively-contaminated seafood.

And anyone lying about this, anyone downplaying this in "official tones," is increasing that health risk.

These people are the true criminals, not Dana Durnford.