Tech | March 18, 2011 | 350 comments

ANN COULTER: Don't Believe The Experts, Radiation Is Actually GOOD For You

source: http://www.businessinsider.com/ann-coulter-radiation-oreilly-video-2011-3#ixzz1Gxcg7ik2

Image
twinite
Last night, Ann Coulter came on to The O'Reilly Factor and said this:
"There is a growing body of evidence that radiation in excess of what the government says are the minimum amounts we should be exposed to are actually good for you and reduce cases of cancer."
Yes, you read that correctly. According to Ann Coulter, radiation is actually the cure for cancer, and, no, she was not talking about chemo levels of radiation. She meant living in the shadow of Chernobyl.
Coulter cited a number of articles from, of all places, The New York Times to prove her point, and then took the media to task for not reporting on this “because a, it's not sensationalistic to say, 'oh, humans are going to have two heads' and b, it's antinuclear power."
O'Reilly, in response to this nonsense, jokingly said "we should all be heading for the nuclear reactor leaking and kind of sunbathing," to which Coulter actually agreed!


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ann-coulter-radiation-oreilly-video-2011-3#ixzz1G...

http://www.businessinsider.com/ann-coulter-radiation-oreilly-video-2011-3
  1. groups:
    Community,   Politics,   Tech,   Collective Journalism,   5 more
  2. tags:
    Radiation,  Idiots,  Ann Coulter,  O'Reilly Factor
  3.     
    |

350 comments // ANN COULTER: Don't Believe The Experts, Radiation Is Actually GOOD For You

  • WisconsinNorm
    • +1
      WisconsinNorm  

    • One of my favorite military instructors as well as many other military personnel voluntarily allowed themselves to be exposed to varying levels of radiation around 1951. He thought the number of military volunteers was in the hundreds. The "deal" was to have a lifetime of free annual medical examinations/care even if they left the military at a veteran's hospital of choice.
      Somewhere these results are still probably being analyzed.
      My always smoking and drinking instructor lived to 84. He never heard how it went for the others.
      Scary world.

    • 2 years ago
  • monkeyeatmusic
  • arigg
  • tommic
  • tommic
    • +1
      tommic  

    • i wonder if Ann Coulter has ever been laid? She needs a good f--king. It's probably why she's such an angry bitch

    • 2 years ago
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
  • ArchDruid
  • arigg
  • dreamsenvoy
  • corderodedios
    • 0
      corderodedios  

    • Perhaps Coulter believes in "radiation hormesis" like some of the folks who have commented below. Check it out. Few studies have shown such an effect, and those that have are seriously flawed. Laboratory studies occasionally showing such an effect in "test tube" experiments cannot be generalized to humans. No scientific body of repute accepts "radiation hormesis" as a fact in humans.

      If you cherry-pick data from all sources in the absence of critical thinking, you can show anything - you can even find ways to reject "climate change" caused by burning fossil fuel, as do Coulter and most other folks who suck up to the Corporate gestapo. Corporations and their bigshots get rich burning fossil fuel as well as nuclear fuel, and Corporations have an active brainwashing program to scare folks into sticking their heads in the sand instead of thinking for themselves. Coulter and folks like her are on the take from the Right and are part of the Republican Lie Machine.

    • 2 years ago
  • 2damax
    • 0
      2damax  
    • corderodedios:

      radiation hormesis is likely more common in single-selled organisms...we are multicelular for a reason, one of which is likely to protect our gamates from radiaition exposure

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Image

    • A process known as radiation hormesis mediates its beneficial effect on health. Investigators have found that small doses of radiation have a stimulating and protective effect on cellular function. It stimulates immune system defenses, prevents oxidative DNA damage, and suppresses cancer.

      Accordingly, atom bomb survivors in Nagasaki who received 1,000 to 19,000 mrem of radiation have had a lower incidence of cancer, especially with regard to leukemia and colon cancer, than the non-irradiated control population. And it is turning out that Japan's atom bomb survivors are living longer. They have a death rate after the age of 55 that is lower than matched Japanese people not exposed to radiation. (Don't expect to hear this on the evening news.)Contrary to what is perceived to be true, the actual truth is that ionizing radiation in low doses does not cause cancer (or genetic defects). It, in fact, has a beneficial effect on one's health. There are epidemiological studies and scientific data on health effects from low to moderate doses of ionizing radiation that show it decreases the risk of cancer. Government authorities and regulators — including the news media — ignore this data.

      Americans are exposed to an average 200 mrem of natural and medical radiation per year. Natural background radiation comes from cosmic rays, isotopes of uranium and thorium in the bricks, plaster, and concrete of buildings, and radioactive potassium. Radioactive potassium in our bodies generates about 25 mrem of radiation per year — more than the EPA safety limit. It comes from potassium-40, a naturally occurring radioactive isotope of potassium. People that suffer from radiophobia and think that they would be better off without that source of radioactivity in their bodies can take comfort in knowing that organisms grown in the laboratory consuming only non-radioactive potassium-39, with no potassium-40 in their diet, develop severe growth defects. The radiation that potassium-40 in our cells provides is vital for our health.

      People who live in Ramsar, Iran, a resort on the Caspian Sea, are exposed to natural background radiation of 79,000 mrem per year, 5,266 times more than what the EPA's 15-mrem/year radiation safety standard allows. The local river and its streams have a high concentration of radium, which is 15 times more radioactive than plutonium. Its 2,000 residents do not have an increased incidence of cancer, as the linear hypothesis would predict, and their life span is the same as that of other Iranians. Fortunately, for that resort, EPA regulations don't apply there, or to people in Guarapari, Brazil, who get 17,500 mrem of radiation per year with no ill effects.

      One place with high background radiation where EPA regulations do apply is a park in Santa Fe, Fountainhead Rock Place. It has radioactive rock of volcanic origin that emits 760 mrem of gamma radiation, 14 times the allowed amount. Regulators, however, have chosen to make an exception here and have not closed the park off to the public.http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller12.html

    • 2 years ago
  • kvb1
    • 0
      kvb1  

    • Coulter, Limbaugh, et el are corporate whores that spew out whatever the corporations want then to, whether it makes sense or not. They are just the front line in the propaganda war.

    • 2 years ago
  • domingohern
  • GENERALNATTY
  • ecoalex
    • +2
      ecoalex  

    • Wowee when is she running for Presidint? What a cult the Conservatives have.Beyond dumb and dumber,words cannot express the idiocy conservative addicts exhibit.

    • 2 years ago
  • Prijedor
  • Prijedor
  • mii
    • +1
      mii  

    • Perhaps Ms.Coulter would expose herself to an extra crispy
      dose of radiation and list the advantages for us.

    • 2 years ago
  • Cruzankenny
  • bambuu
  • savvy7
  • Cruzankenny
    • +1
      Cruzankenny  
    • savvy7:

      I'll buy her a two way ticket, just so she doesn't get suspicious. She is already paranoid enough and I don't want anything to dissuade her.
      I'll even pay for Glenn Beck if he promises to interview her at the site.

    • 2 years ago
  • feefer2010
  • samthesixth
  • JLaughbon
  • JanforGore
  • Nephwrack
  • samthesixth
  • samthesixth
  • ZiggyStrange
    • +3
      ZiggyStrange  
    • samthesixth:

      What is it Sam do you like them dumb tall and skinny? What context are you talking about? She's using the dumbest possible argument. It's like saying a drowning victim should be ok, we all drink water.

    • 2 years ago
  • samthesixth
    • -2
      samthesixth  
    • ZiggyStrange:

      I like them all! The context of her comment has to do with citing a(n) NYT article and several other studies that demonstrate beneficial effects of radiation. I am not saying I agree with her. I am pointing out that the headline is off as she didn't say radiation is "good for you." She said the NYT and other academic studies say it may be beneficial in reducing incidents of cancer. Good story, bad headline.

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • samthesixth:

      Now you're changing the subject. We are talking about taking comments out of context which the rightwing haters do to him as well as LIE about him constantly. Your retiscence to admit it speaks volumes. I agree with you on some things, but regarding Mr. Gore, you are just like them. And in this case regarding her all you have to do is watch the video to see there has been no taking what she said out of context. If you actually are defending her comments, then that is really sad and I have nothing more to say on it in this thread to you.

    • 2 years ago
  • samthesixth
    • 0
      samthesixth  
    • JanforGore:

      I am not defending her comments. They are not her comments. They are the comments of the NYT. She clearly says she is not a scientist and is only conveying what the NYT says. Why is the headline not directed at the NYT? Leftwing haters and rightwing haters distort things all the time. There is no difference between the two, except in rhetoric. To claim that anyone pointing out Gore's complicity in the ethanol boondoggle or his involvement in Occidental petroleum's shenanigans is not right wing attacking. It is simply truth. Do you support the ethanol subsidies that he now admits were lobbyist and politically based (i.e. he supported that stuff while dressing it in the guise of environmentalism)? Do you support the profits he made as a major shareholder in Occidental Petroleum? Do you support the removal of indigenous people to further Occidental's shareholder's profits? I've never heard you address those points. But I have heard you denigrate anyone who raises them.

    • 2 years ago
  • samthesixth
  • congoboy
    • 0
      congoboy [removed]  
    • JLaughbon:

      A process known as radiation hormesis mediates its beneficial effect on health. Investigators have found that small doses of radiation have a stimulating and protective effect on cellular function. It stimulates immune system defenses, prevents oxidative DNA damage, and suppresses cancer.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy [removed]  
    • JanforGore:

      A process known as radiation hormesis mediates its beneficial effect on health. Investigators have found that small doses of radiation have a stimulating and protective effect on cellular function. It stimulates immune system defenses, prevents oxidative DNA damage, and suppresses cancer.

    • 2 years ago
  • theknopfknows
    • +1
      theknopfknows  

    • ANN HAS A DUMB BLONDE COMPLEX SHE HAS TO PROVE HER DUMBNESS DUMB AND DUMBER AND DUMBEST: We all are al little dumber listening to this dumb blonde.

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • +5
      JanforGore  

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqG35TpgkIM

      You know, I posted another video in here to mock Ann Coulter, and actually, I don't apologize for it. However, in all seriousness, what she claimed is not only ludicrous it is blatantly irresponsible, uninformed, hateful and simply another way to show allegiance to the corporate backers who sell her ill informed hatefilled screeds. I really want her and all of those who support her ignorance only out of political partisanship to perhaps remember a little bit of history. And while this was not from a nuclear 'plant' the premise regarding radiation sickness and its effects are the same. And actually to see this happening in Japan after what was done to them in 1945 by our hand is heartbreaking- and yes, Crystalman, I am one who does care. I, unlike you who never misses a chance to come here and show your obsessive hatred and intolerance for Muslims and anyone who isn't like you while you hypocritically rail at others cares for those who now do not have access to water, food, medical attention and will now have to deal with the potential fallout of this nuclear disaster. Don't dare to come here pontificating to people as a whole that you don't know while defending this sorry excuse of a human being. It only shows your own true agenda here and it isn't to spread tolerance, love for others and caring. That kind of hypocrisy makes me retch.

    • 2 years ago
  • LivingPong
  • freecrack
  • Budoshi
    • +2
      Budoshi  

    • Let's send Ann Coulter to live in the Chernobyl Reactor... Lots of Good radiation there still...

      I'm putting it in the words of the famous innkeeper of "Allo Allo", René... "YOU STUPID WOMAN!!!"

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Budoshi:

      Accordingly, atom bomb survivors in Nagasaki who received 1,000 to 19,000 mrem of radiation have had a lower incidence of cancer, especially with regard to leukemia and colon cancer, than the non-irradiated control population. And it is turning out that Japan's atom bomb survivors are living longer.

    • 2 years ago
  • Budoshi
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Budoshi:

      naw, no real proof. just what comes up when googled. ann can be an extremist in her conservative viewpoints but that doesnt necessarily always make her wrong. i dont claim to be an expert in radiation, its effects and what may be considered a healthy or an unhealthy level. i was just trying to submit conflicting evidence to whats considered accepted theory. i dont always agree with what i post but feel its important to express more than what everyone else is saying. many people spread what they perceive to be true when in reality it may be false.

    • 2 years ago
  • leftleftgivemeyourleft
  • bike10
  • JLaughbon
  • crystalman
    • -11
      crystalman  

    • I get the distinct impression that most of the goons on here pretending to be upset about the catastrophe in Japan are actually relishing the whole disaster because it confirms and feeds their loathing of progress and development and vindicates (falsely I might add) their demonisation of nuclear energy. It's a deep rooted misanthropic nastiness that poses as righteous and channels its spite towards whoever it can lay its hands on just to feed its own ego trip. There is no compassion here for the people in Japan...or humans in general. Just pretense and hypocrisy. Excuse me while I retch.

    • 2 years ago
  • bundlebear
  • dudefromtherock
  • JLaughbon
    • +6
      JLaughbon  
    • crystalman:

      Wow, someone spent a long time with a dictionary in their lap.

      And for the record, only a moron would assume that nuclear power is 'safe'. Nuclear power is merely a 'contained catastrophe' and we knew that already.

      It's pinheads like you that will take advantage of this disaster in an attempt to demonize those ALREADY against nuclear power. The stance I have against this type of power production was well in place long before this ever happened.

      There...now I will refrain from being distracted by you from the real issue, the survival and safety of the Japanse people.

      "If electricity comes from electrons, then morality comes from morons"

    • 2 years ago
  • JLaughbon
  • Nephwrack
  • bambuu
  • madammarsh
    • +2
      madammarsh  
    • crystalman:

      Seems to me that you're the one plastering handbills on a sacred site. I've cried many times over the past week, watching these people and the horrifying situation they are in. Have you?

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • madammarsh
    • 0
      madammarsh  
    • crystalman:

      I've been thinking about this some more since my last post. Your remarks suggest that you may not even see the others on this site as human beings but merely as propaganda dispensers. That is a dangerous way of looking at those who hold opposing opinions. It reminds me of the way murderers or torturers dehumanize their victims. Remember in Silence of the Lambs?--"It puts the lotion on its skin." Please understand-- I am NOT calling you either of those things, nor accusing you of anything other than the insensitivity you claim to find in those on the left. We are all trying to get our voices heard and our opinions noticed in the midst of a chaos of events and uncertainty. It is too easy sometimes to fling snot at ideological opponents or those we deem wrongheaded.
      There's a lot of snot being flung on this thread at Ann Coulter and her detractors and her supporters. I hope that no one on here has felt that i've been guilty of that, but maybe I have. If so, I apologize. It's hard to keep to the spirit of debate when you find something ridiculous or dangerous.
      It does none of us, nor our causes, any good to fall into the trap of seeing each other as things rather than humans. History is full of such errors. Let's not do that. My sweetie, with whom I've lived for nearly ten years, is a rightie, of the William F Buckley strain, and we disagree constantly on matters of politics. Buckley had many friends on both the right and the left. He found the interplay of many viewpoints useful and stimulating. He also possessed a dazzling intellect to which I can only aspire. I can at least try to follow his example in listening to others' views and responding with some civility and not so much snot and snark.

      This is not what some might facilly call 'Kumbayah.' This is a plea for all of us expressing views to remember and think of one another as real people with real lives and real feelings
      and not just amateur pundits with a political or ideological ax to grind. If we become so hard-wired to the left or right that we lose the ability to do this simple yet complicated thing, we are lost for sure. crystalman, will you reconsider your words?

    • 2 years ago
  • crystalman
  • bundlebear
    • +7
      bundlebear  

    • and in other news
      land mines have been shown to help people to lose weight
      forest fires are a great source of heat for homeless people
      global warming does wonders for tanning

    • 2 years ago
  • freecrack
    • +5
      freecrack  
    • bundlebear:

      dont forget smoking while pregnant makes for smaller babies wich is good as it makes the birthing process easier for mothers.

      wich is of course way more important than the hole in the babies heart

    • 2 years ago
  • EdJoyProductions
  • freecrack
  • nanac
    • +3
      nanac  

    • Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh are two of the most despicable, obnoxious, people in America..They have discovered a simple way to make money..It don't take any brains/beauty, or knowledge, just a willingness to say outrageous, absurd, things....

    • 2 years ago
  • dudefromtherock
  • Littlewolf
  • nanac
    • +2
      nanac  
    • Littlewolf:

      Indeed..I often wonder how soulless people like Ann Coulter look in the mirror....What's really interesting, if you look up the word "soulless"..Ann Coulter's name comes up..

    • 2 years ago
  • nanac
    • +1
      nanac  
    • dudefromtherock:

      Brains are becoming extinct among Republicans...Stupidity is an asset, and intelligence is a liability....It seems like the more retarded they appear to be, the more popular they are among Right-Wingers...It is a perfect example of "the blind leading the blind".....

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • nanac
    • +1
      nanac  
    • congoboy:

      Whatever people might think about John Kerry, idiot wouldn't be an adjective to describe him..Ann Coulter is easily described as such, and a few other choice words......

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • Argon18
    • +2
      Argon18  

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEJz9UMn30w

      Wasn't it good for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles to swin in that radioactive waste? They never would've been able to fight the way they did without it.

      Wasn't it good for Peter Parker to be bitten by that radioactive spider? He never would've been able to save NYC if he hadn't

      Just think of the next genration of Godzilla movies to come out of Hollywood and how much good they can do for the film industry because of this. They practically write themselves

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Argon18:

      Accordingly, atom bomb survivors in Nagasaki who received 1,000 to 19,000 mrem of radiation have had a lower incidence of cancer, especially with regard to leukemia and colon cancer, than the non-irradiated control population. And it is turning out that Japan's atom bomb survivors are living longer.

    • 2 years ago
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
    • +1
      Ian_Judge_Lord  
    • congoboy:

      sources?
      evidence?
      proof?
      rescouseces?
      links?
      articles?

      or is that just something that you read on a blog somewhere?
      or is it something you just heard about on the Faux "News" Channel Network?

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • killingjoke
    • +1
      killingjoke  
    • Image

    • mAnn Coulter: Who better to premiere a ground-breaking new depature in American journalism than our #1 FOX NEWS FOX...... Ann Coulter! Our favorite Konservative Kitten is more than just a pretty face! Winner of the prestigious Fox-Pulitzer Prize for Best Sadistic Libel in a Syndicated Column and Professor Emeritus of the Adolph Coors School for the Study of Swarthy Peoples at Pepperdine, she is a best selling author, incisive intellectual debater and can open beer bottles with her teeth. But here's what really makes our Fox News Fox tick: SHE LOVES BEING A GIRL!

    • 2 years ago
  • Littlewolf
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
  • congoboy
  • 2damax
    • +5
      2damax  

    • I think she attempted to read an article and stopped short of arriving at that good ol' liberal bias that reality has. as soon as she read the words: "we hypothesis that some levels of radiation might actually possibly be good for you" she yelled "HAH THOSE STUPID LIBERALS! I always knew that everything that i can attach that label to was wrong!" and then proceded to congratulate herself on knowing and adulterising a half-truth...as self-described "conservatives" always seem do.

    • 2 years ago
  • EdJoyProductions
  • CarlosIsDown
  • EdJoyProductions
    • +1
      EdJoyProductions  
    • CarlosIsDown:

      I respect people that have sex change operations too. Coulter is a mean homophobe. I just like saying that she had a dick and she is cheap. It is stupid, yes, but it would bother her if she ever read it and that warms my heart.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • Persecuted
    • +6
      Persecuted  

    • people like ann coulter are the reason why i believe in god... i cant be an athiest... because an athiest believes there is no reckoning for people like ann coulter or the koch brothers or all the greedy liars that make money from inciting the stupid and hurting millions of people with this type of idiotic rhetoric

    • 2 years ago
  • Persecuted
  • jesus_is_a_liberal
  • Persecuted
  • riverdeer
  • Yogotricks
    • +6
      Yogotricks  

    • experts?? who needs them... only those stupid liberals want experts and facts and all those physical materialization of intelligence.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Yogotricks:

      Accordingly, atom bomb survivors in Nagasaki who received 1,000 to 19,000 mrem of radiation have had a lower incidence of cancer, especially with regard to leukemia and colon cancer, than the non-irradiated control population. And it is turning out that Japan's atom bomb survivors are living longer.

    • 2 years ago
  • Persecuted
    • +1
      Persecuted  
    • congoboy:

      what a terrible and irresponsible thing for you to say congoboy. your right sided-ness has caused you to ignore medical facts... well why not? you ignore scientific fact all the time, dont you?
      i used to think you were an intelligent man who just viewed things conservatively. now i understand that you are a biased asshole who sides with republicans no matter what they are spewing from their disgusting evil mouthes... even if it goes against all scientific evidence... even if it goes against the actual numbers of people who died after the atomic bombs were dropped on japan... shame on you for this one congo

    • 2 years ago
  • Persecuted
    • 0
      Persecuted  
    • congoboy:

      1 mrem = 0.00001 Sv = 0.01 mSv = 10 μSv

      The threshold for an early death is around 2 sieverts, and death is highly likely at 6 sieverts

      each year we receive an average of 2.4 millisieverts from natural sources such as radon.

      so yes, we can with stand some radiation, as we do naturally... but i think that you dont quite understand what a mrem is and you just copied and pasted it off of the drudge reports website not having a clue what it means.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
    • -1
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Persecuted:

      just posting conflicting information, take it or leave it. so now one needs to decipher which scientific info is correct. to run blindly ahead without all the info whether true or not is reckless. there are plenty of folks on the liberal end of the spectrum who can also be accused of being one sided and presenting biased unsubstantiated garbage. facts as presented by anyone may be taken with a grain of salt. sure many people tragically died as a result of that justified but horrifying event as many innocent men and women died in the bombing of pearl harbor. war is hell

    • 2 years ago
  • Persecuted
    • 0
      Persecuted  
    • congoboy:

      the point is not who did the worse thing in the war... the point is that it is IRRESPONSIBLE AND STUPID to tell people that radiation is GOOD for them... you know that...

    • 2 years ago
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
    • 0
      Ian_Judge_Lord  
    • Image
    • congoboy:

      As early as January of 1945, The parliament of the government of Japan sent envoys to Moscow with orders to give Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin whatever he wanted, in order to facilitate the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics being a moderator in Peace Negotiations with the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain.

      Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact April 13, 1941
      PACT OF NEUTRALITY BETWEEN UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS AND JAPAN
      http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/s1.asp

      Soviet Denunciation of the Pact with Japan
      Source:
      The Department of State Bulletin
      Vol. XII, No. 305, April 29, 1945
      http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/s3.asp

      Soviet Declaration of War on Japan
      http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/s4.asp

      http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs.asp?doc_no=0000709436

      The Soviet Union had gotten the go-ahead at the Yalta Conference with President of United States Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to invade Japanese-conquered Manchuria in what is now modern-day China, so Stalin strung the Japanese Ambassadors and Representatives along throughout the Spring and Summer of 1945, claiming to the Japanese Parliament that the Soviet Union would be more than glad to speak with the Government of the United States on the behalf of the Japanese Empire, and telling the envoys that a resolution for Soviet-moderated peace talks were only merely days away.

      Leavenworth Papers
      No. 8
      August Storm: Soviet Tactical and Operational Combat in Manchuria, 1945
      by LTC David M. Glantz
      Combat Studies Institute
      U S. Army Command and General Staff College
      Fort Leavenworth, Kansas 66027
      June 1983
      http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/resources/csi/glantz3/glantz3.asp
      http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/resources/csi/glantz4/glantz4.asp

    • 2 years ago
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
    • 0
      Ian_Judge_Lord  
    • Image
    • congoboy:

      American troops conquered the Pacific Islands daily, but at a great cost in casualties. Americans feared that a full-scale invasion of the Island of Japan itself would cost a tremendous number of live on both sides.

      The Truman Administration decided to save United States SOLDIERS lives, (in an invasion that more likely than not would never have occurred) by slaughtering and massacring hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

      Truman’s decision would never have saved any lives at all, however, since the plan that was being put forward for the invasion of the island of Japan involved the United States military dropping DOZENS of Atomic bombs on the Japanese mainland in order to soften up the Empire’s defenses, prior to any Normandy-style amphibious landing of troops (the position and location of which was changed several different times, as a concrete strategy for the invasion could never be agreed upon by the Department of War and the military) any and all soldiers taking part in the invasion would have been instantaneously exposed to a lethal dose of atomic thermonuclear radiation within seconds immediately as soon as they stepped off of their landing craft.

      Since every soldier that took part in the invasion of the mainland of the island of Japan would soon die an early death from Radiation Poisoning and/or cancer very soon after whatever end to the War they had been capable to achieve when and if they managed to actually reach Tokyo and the Imperial Palace, the slaughtering of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians would have ended up saving exactly precisely ZERO human lives.

      President Truman began the so-called Manhattans Project. By July of that year construction, and subsequent testing had begun on the world’s first atomic bombs.

      Joseph Stalin never did take the American’s claims to have mastered Atomic Fission, and so took the United States Government’s claims to have a working functional Thermonuclear warhead with a very large grain of salt.

      When President Roosevelt died, only shortly prior to the Surrender of Hitler’s Nazi Germany, the new Truman Administration hardened to the point of anything even slightly short of unconditional surrender, of the kind that the Allies had just experienced in Germany.

      http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/31.pdf
      http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/40.pdf
      http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/47.pdf

      With the success of the Manhattan Project at the Los Alamosa National Laboratories and Roswell in New Mexico, and at the 99th United States Air Force Base Flight Wing Test and Training Center at Groom Lake in the Yucca Mountain Salt Flats 90 miles Northwest of downtown Las Vegas, Nevada; the United States Department of War also felt the need to demonstrate to the skeptical Soviet Union that the United States of America did indeed have Atomic weapons, and more than that, was indeed ready, willing, and able to use them against another nation overseas.

      This was the beginning of M.A.D [Mutually Assured Destruction] and was the basis fro the thermonuclear arms race that kicked off the Cold War of the next half of the century.

      Likewise, the USSR, Under Stalin’s leadership, recognized that the United States had emerged from the Second World War as the World’s leading military and economic superpower, and therefore thereby presented a very obvious challenge to the imperialist expansionist and colonial aspirations of the Soviet Union.

      They hence decided to prematurely and preemptively cut off all communications between the USSR and the United States.

      The Japanese appeals for the Soviet Union to mediate Peace Talks with the allies therefore fell on deft ears at the Kremlin, and news of Japan’s desire to surrender for peace never reached anyone at the American Capitol in Washington, the District of Columbia.

      THE NATIONS: So Sorry, Mr. Sato
      Monday, Apr. 16, 1945
      Read more:http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,775556,00.html#ixzz1G4NwDVN9

      http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,775556,00.html

      On August 6th and American B-52 Flying Super-Fortress, christened the Enola Gay, flew into Japanese airspace. It them hung several miles above the Southeast city of Hiroshima. It dropped its deadly cargo, and world watched the results in shock and stunned disbelief. All that could be seen of the city of thousands was a mushroom cloud five miles high. Later inspection showed that everything within miles of the focal point of the blast had been vaporized upon detonation. The City of Hiroshima simply ceased to exist. Eighty thousand people were killed instantly.

      Later that month, the scene was duplicated when a second Atomic Bomb was unleashed on the City of Nagasaki, killing another 65,000 innocent civilians, and at least 10 American Prisoners of war.

      World special: 60 years after the atom bomb
      ‘I saw both of the bombs and lived’
      The Observer, Sunday 24 July 2005 01.18 BST
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jul/24/secondworldwar.japan2

      Two Dutch POW join Nagasaki bomb victim list
      The Japan Times: Friday, Aug. 5, 2005
      http://search.japantimes.co.jp/print/news/nn08-2005/nn20050805a7.htm

      It Gave Him Life – It Took It, Too
      by George Duffy
      http://www.usmm.org/duffygavehimlife.html

      Speaking of Prisoners of War, Not very many people know this, (it’s not very often frequently publicized) but amongst the victims of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were anywhere from several dozen to several hundred (estimates vary widely) American, British, and Allied Western Prisoners of War.

      Over 200,000 innocent Japanese civilians in the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were instantaneously vaporized in a flash, leaving behind nothing but their charred blackened burnt shadows on the sidewalks where they stood.

      Aside from its descendant, the H-bomb, the Atomic Bomb remains the most destructive weapon yet devised.

      On August 9 and 12, 1945, The United States of America, at the direct order of then-President Harry Truman, became not only just the FIRST, but also the ONLY nation in the recorded history of human civilization on Earth, to use thermonuclear weapons of mass destruction against another sovereign nation in peacetime, no less.

      White House Press Release Announcing the Bombing of Hiroshima, August 6, 1945
      THE WHITE HOUSE
      Washington, D.C.
      STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/truman/psources/ps_pressrelease.html

    • 2 years ago
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
    • 0
      Ian_Judge_Lord  
    • congoboy:

      No one in their right sane mind would ever go so far as to even suggest for one moment that the Empire Japan was an ALLY of the United States of America in August of 1945.

      But, had the Japanese appeals, throughout January and February of 1945, to Joseph Stalin at the Kremlin for a Soviet-Union Moderated Peace Talk negotiation with the Allies (The United States and the United Kingdom) reached the ears of the US or UK Governments as they should have, had the USSR not already preemptively stopped speaking with the West, then Japan would NOT have been at war with the United States by August of 1945.

      Therefore, since the War against Japan had already ended with the Japanese ATTEMPTS to surrender via the Soviet Union, the massacre of over two hundred thousand innocent Japanese civilians was a peacetime assault, and was thereby, by the definition given in International Law, was a Crime Against Humanity; placing President of the United States Harry S. Truman, alongside Premier Joseph Stalin himself and German Chancellor Adolf Hitler, amongst greatest genocidal criminal in the known recorded history of modern Western Human Civilization.

    • 2 years ago
1234
1 - 100 of 350
more from Tech:
from the community

top videos