When The S*** Hits the Fan

#EaglesOfDeathMetal Frontman says Guards Knew About #Paris Shooting in Advance

by

Claire Bernish
March 10, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Eagles of Death Metal lead singer, Jessie Hughes, made a stunning statement in an interview with Fox Business Network: He believes it’s possible security guards at the Bataclan Theater knew about the Paris terror attacks in advance.

As a veteran performer, Hughes realized something was odd the night leading up to the attack, when the security guard for the backstage area didn’t make eye contact with him.

“When I first got to the venue and walked in, I walked past the dude who was supposed to be the security guard for the backstage,” Hughes recalled, noting the guard’s odd demeanor.

“I immediately went to the promoter and said, ‘Who’s that guy? I want to put another dude on,’ and he goes, ‘Well, some of the other guards aren’t here yet,’ and eventually I found out that six or so wouldn’t show up at all.”

Though Hughes refused to speculate at length “out of respect for the police investigating,” he added, “It seems rather obvious that they had a reason not to show up.”

On November 13, 2015, 89 people were killed — including the band’s merchandise manager, Nick Alexander — and 200 were injured, when attackers stormed the Bataclan during the Eagles of Death Metal show.

After the attack and a brief break, the American band returned to complete their European tour last month, though they recently canceled due to an injury.

Fox Business Network aired the first portion of Kennedy’s interview with Hughes on Wednesday, and the second part is scheduled for tonight at 8 pm, EST.

This article (Eagles of Death Metal Frontman says Guards Knew About Paris Shooting in Advance) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Leaking Beachfront Nuclear Reactor Near Miami Threatening Florida Everglades

by

Claire Bernish
March 9, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Biscayne Bay, FL — According to a study released by Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Gimenez on Monday, the waters of Biscayne Bay measured 215 times the level of radioactive tritium as is found in normal ocean water.

Tritium is a radioactive isotope traceable to nuclear plant cooling tower operations. In this case, the leak appears to be emanating from the aging canals in the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station located nearby.

“This is one of several things we were very worried about,” said South Miami Mayor and biological sciences professor, Philip Stoddard, as the Miami New Times reported. “You would have to work hard to find a worse place to put a nuclear plant, right between two national parks and subject to hurricanes and storm surge.”

Biscayne Bay harbors one of the largest coral reefs on the planet and is situated near the Everglades. Hot, salty water from the canals appears to be flowing back into both national parks, which has caused concern among environmentalists and others from the time Turkey Point planned to expand its reactors in 2013.

“They argued the canals were a closed system, but that’s not how water works in South Florida,” Stoddard remarked.

“How much damage is that cooling canal system causing the bay is a question to be answered,” Everglades Law Center Attorney Julie Dick told the Miami Herald prior to reviewing the report. “There are a lot more unknowns than knowns and it just shows how much more attention we need to be paying to that cooling canal system.”

Tritium, a hydrogen isotope, is considered a precursor indication of leaks from nuclear plants, as it ‘travels’ or spreads faster than, and often precedes, other radioactive agents.

“While the tritium levels far fall below levels experts consider dangerous, the telltale tracer provided the critical link that high levels of ammonia and phosphorus in sections of bay bottom — pollution that is more damaging to marine life — likely came from the canals,” the Herald explained. Samples for the county monitoring study were gathered during December and January — and the tritium levels seem to show Florida Power & Light in violation of both local water laws and federal operating permits.

 FPL, which operates Turkey Point, will likely receive another violation due to the leak — the county issued a citation in October for tainted groundwater — to force FPL to bring the plant into compliance, the Herald reported Tuesday.

After news of the report made headlines, critics, including environmentalists, nearby rock miners, and Rep. Jose Javier Rodriguez, came forward in full force calling for the Environmental Protection Agency to intervene in the matter.

“For years our state regulators have failed to take seriously the threat to our public safety, to our drinking water, and to our environment posed by FP&L’s actions at Turkey Point,” Rodriguez asserted, according to the New Times.“Evidence revealed this week of radioactive material in Biscayne Bay is the last straw and I join those calling on the U.S. EPA to step in and do what our state regulators have so far refused to do — protect the public.”

The leak also serves as possible confirmation for environmentalists who have suspected radioactive leaks from Turkey Point as the cause of algae blooms appearing in the bay for years.

“Biscayne Bay has not traditionally had algae blooms,” explained executive director for Miami Waterkeeper Rachel Silverstein, reported the Herald. “That’s from pollution. From sewers, septic tanks and now we know, cooling canals.”

Indeed, though FPL claims it continues to protect the health of the bay, as the Herald noted, Turkey Point has created issues for the waterways since the facility began producing more energy three years ago. “When you look at the big picture,” FPL environmental director, Matt Raffenberg, insisted, the canals “are not impacting Biscayne Bay.”

At a meeting on Tuesday, county commissioners discussed the imperative need to bring FPL and Turkey point into compliance with the law.

“We’ve had stop gap measures we’ve approved,” Gimenez said. “So far they’ve not proved to be the solution.”

Referencing the last time FPL was forced to implement changes following a lawsuit in the 1970s, he added, “It’s time we enter the 21st century.”

FPL’s continued problems with Turkey Point might have finally crossed the legal line by violating the federal Clean Water Act.

“There’s a certain validation to critics in seeing this result in the study,” Stoddard said. “But more important, it’s now crossed the threshold of federal law here.”

This article (Leaking Beachfront Nuclear Reactor Near Miami Threatening Florida Everglades) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Mr. Usaji. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Science Proves Birth Defects Linked To Zika, But There’s More To The Story

by

Claire Bernish
March 8, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Despite reports to the contrary over the past few weeks, recent studies suggest the link between the Zika virus and microcephaly is stronger than previously believed. In another new development, the World Health Organization announced the sexual transmission of Zika virus happens with more frequency than was first imagined.

Both developments led WHO on Tuesday to strongly caution pregnant women against traveling to countries experiencing Zika virus outbreaks. The virus appears to be spreading rapidly, with the CDC reporting at least 153 cases in the United States as of March 2, ostensibly by those who had traveled to countries with outbreaks.

On Friday, researchers announced they had discovered the possible mechanism by which Zika virus can cause microcephaly — a rare birth defect that causes babies to be born with abnormally small heads and underdeveloped brains.

“Working with lab-grown human stem cells, scientists found that the virus selectively infected cells forming the brain’s cortex, the thin outer layer of folded gray matter,” the Washington Post reported. “Its assault made those cells more likely to die and less likely to divide normally and make new brain cells.”

Hengli Tang, a researcher with the University of Florida and one of the study’s authors, told reporters during a conference call, “What we show is the first piece of evidence” marking the hypothetical link between Zika virus and microcephaly. “We’re literally the first people in the world to know this, to know that this virus can infect these very important cells and interfere with their function.” Though the study didn’t discern whether the virus is capable of reaching the brain, it did show that if that is possible, “this virus can do a lot of damage.”

The findings by researchers from Johns Hopkins University, Emory University, and Florida State University show the clearest evidence for how the Zika virus harms fetuses. As scientists and researchers rush to verify that link, others have reported theories contending microcephaly was caused by everything from vaccines to fungicides. But microcephaly’s connection to the virus is strengthening, as researchers have also documented the presence of the Zika virus in the brains of newborns who died, as well as in the placental fluid of infected mothers. Though the findings aren’t considered definitive proof of Zika virus’ role in causing microcephaly, scientists believe it certainly adds to the hypothesis.

WHO Director-General Dr. Margaret Chan said, “reports and investigations in several countries strongly suggest that sexual transmission of the virus is more common than previously assumed.” Her statement came after an emergency committee meeting on Tuesday, which also noted the Zika virus’ link to microcephaly and other birth defects.

In fact, WHO reported that nine countries have also announced increasing cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome — a condition causing paralysis or even death — in children, teenagers, and adults, which is also strongly believed to be linked to Zika virus. A study published in the Lancet on February 29 described a nearly certain link between Guillain-Barré and the Zika virus. According to the study authors:

“This is the first study providing evidence for Zika virus infection causing Guillain-Barré syndrome. Because Zika virus is spreading rapidly across the Americas, at risk countries need to prepare for adequate intensive care beds capacity to manage patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome.”

ABC News reported there are now over a dozen cases being investigated in the U.S. in which Zika virus may have been sexually transmitted. Widespread outbreak of the virus throughout both American continents led WHO to declare it constitutes a global emergency.

Zika virus remains largely mysterious to scientists, who theorize its incubation period lasts approximately one week — meaning travelers account for the large number of cases reported in areas not experiencing outbreaks. Findings the virus may be transmitted through sex more often than previously realized fuels concern about its spread around the globe.

Another cause for concern surrounds the lack of symptoms in nearly 80 percent of those who contract Zika virus. Symptoms in those who have them mimic those of dengue fever — which is also transmitted by the same species of mosquito, Aedes aegypti — and can include fever, rashes, headaches, fatigue, and muscle and joint pain. Though Aedes mosquitoes normally populate Florida, the Gulf Coast, and Hawaii in the U.S., as the Observer noted, hot summer weather has been known to drive them as far north as Washington, D.C. With February reported to be the hottest in recorded history, it wouldn’t be unlikely to imagine such an expansion of the Aedes population this year.

WHO now recommends pregnant women refrain from travel to areas of ongoing outbreak, and said they should practice safe sex or abstinence for the duration of their pregnancies if they have partners who have traveled to such areas.

This article (Science Proves Birth Defects Linked To Zika, But There’s More To The Story) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Ron Paul: “Absolutely No Meaningful Difference Between Hillary and Trump”

by

Claire Bernish
March 3, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) On Tuesday, Ron Paul agreed with what countless activists and independent journalists have been saying for months: Bernie Sanders is pretty much the same as Donald Trump.

Asked by CNN in an interview whether he would consider supporting Sanders’ presidential bid, Paul somewhat incredulously replied, “No. No, because he’s an authoritarian … he’s just a variant of Trump. Trump wants to be the boss.”

Paul went on, explaining that on issues of foreign policy where he’d collaborated with Sanders, the Vermont senator is “part of the military-industrial complex.”

“He was a big voter for militarism. He’s an authoritarian of a different color; but Trump is a super-authoritarian,” Paul said.

Paul’s criticism of the presidential contenders didn’t stop with Sanders and Trump.

“From a libertarian viewpoint, there is absolutely no meaningful difference between Hillary and Trump,” he emphatically remarked. “I mean, they both support [the] military-industrial complex, the federal reserve, deficits, entitlements, invasion of our privacy.”

Indeed, Paul summarized the absurdity of the 2016 election platforms, saying, “It’s super-nationalistic populism versus socialism. That is so remote from what we need to be doing — we need to be moving ourselves away from tyranny toward liberty.”

Asked if he would be endorsing any candidates, Paul explained there isn’t a single person left in the race who fits libertarian ideals of limiting government and protecting individual liberties.

“Some of the top candidates want to carpet bomb the world,” he said, shaking his head in disbelief. “No, a libertarian can’t endorse this authoritarian approach.”

 

This article (Ron Paul: “Absolutely No Meaningful Difference Between Hillary and Trump”) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Gage Skidmore. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Hillary Hypocrisy: No Gun Rights for Americans, Billions in Arms for Dictators Overseas

by

Claire Bernish
March 3, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Perhaps Hillary Clinton needs a reminder that people have a difficult time placing trust in known hypocrites. Or perhaps unabashed hypocrisy simply doesn’t, for unknown reasons, strike her as an ethical deficiency.

“I have made it clear based on Senator Sanders’ own record that he has voted with the NRA, with the gun lobby numerous times,” Clinton said during one Democratic debate in January, proceeding to proffer ostensible examples from his congressional voting record. “Let’s not forget what this is about — 90 people a day die from gun violence in our country. That’s 33,000 people a year.”

Clinton’s attempts to equate Sanders’ votes with moral turpitude are devoid of reason on a number of levels, most glaringly because her largest donors — and some of the largest contributors to the Clinton Foundation — are connected directly or indirectly with the defense industry and the gun lobby.

Indeed, Hillary Clinton tops the list of presidential hopefuls receiving defense lobbyist contributions — outpacing even the top Republican candidates. On March 21, according to The Intercept, a fundraising rally for Clinton’s campaign will be hosted in part by Jeff Forbes of the lobbying firm Forbes-Tate, who — until 2016, apparently — had lobbied for the National Rifle Association. Yes, the gun rights advocacy group. Guns. The very industry Hillary loves to vilify other candidates over their lack of staunch opposition toward.

No, this is not in any way intended to demonize gun rights — or, for that matter, characterize guns and gun ownership in any manner. This is about Clinton’s complete lack of consistency, penchant for outright hypocrisy, and — more to the point — blatant support for weapons manufacturers as long as their wares are employed by the military. Certainly not as constitutionally-legal protection for citizens of the country she seeks to rule.

This also pertains to Clinton’s willingness to say just about anything in order to further her apparent lust for wealth and power.

Consider an analysis by the International Business Times last May, of Clinton’s tenure at the State Department:

“Under Clinton’s leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation … That figure — derived from three full fiscal years of Clinton’s term as Secretary of State (from October 2010 to September 2012) — represented nearly double the value of American arms sales made to those countries and approved by the State Department during the period of George W. Bush’s second term.

“The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase … [which] compares to an 80 percent increase in such sales to all countries over the same time period.”

U.S. ally and unabashed human rights abuser, Saudi Arabia, also doled out $10 million to the nebulous Clinton Foundation prior to Hillary’s appointment as Secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton desperately wants you to believe her narrative — though, admittedly, keeping up with its chameleon propensity for molding to her funders’ industries or interests can be onerous.

Clinton’s lambasting of Sanders for a milquetoast gun control stance casts aside the entire industry of violence from which her direct funders amass obscene wealth. She hypocritically champions restrictive policies on private citizen ownership of weapons, but cozies up to recent associates of the NRA. And she claims the need to curtail violence and needless deaths, but acts as a de facto peddler of weapons of war.

This article (Hillary Hypocrisy: No Gun Rights for Americans, Billions in Arms for Dictators Overseas) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

So It Begins: American Police Start Pushing to Weaponize Domestic Drones

by

Claire Bernish
March 2, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Connecticut — Police are now voicing their concerns about domestic drone use — specifically, they want the option to be able to employ weaponized drones in the future, should the need arise.

As if police brutality and aggression weren’t already an epidemic in the United States, police departments in Connecticut oppose a bill to outlaw the weaponization of drones. The bill also address unmanned aerial vehicles fitted with cameras, and their potential to violate the privacy rights of individuals. But law enforcement departments in the state appear far more concerned with being deprived of the possibility of arming them with weapons, rather than cameras.

As FOX 61 reported, bills currently being considered would both restrict drone use and classify arming them with any weapons — such as firearms or flamethrowers — as a Class C felony. Employing drones to set off explosives, deadly weapons, tear gas, and the like would be punishable by ten years in prison — and at the moment, that would include law enforcement. As written, the bill would require law enforcement to procure a warrant prior to using a drone for any reason.

Connecticut legislators seem to be taking practically the opposite route of those in North Dakota.

In 2015, North Dakota passed a law granting police the right to arm drones with “less than lethal” weaponry. Quietly slipping under the radar of the public and the media, the bill as originally written by its sponsor, Representative Rick Becker, banned all weapons on police drones — until a powerful police lobby had its way with the original draft.

“Bruce Burkett of the North Dakota Peace Officer’s Association was allowed by the state house committee to amend HB 1328 and limit the prohibition only to lethal weapons. ‘Less than lethal’ weapons like rubber bullets, pepper spray, tear gas, sound cannons, and Tasers are therefore permitted on police drones,” Justin Glawe reported for The Daily Beast in August.

Of course, ‘less than lethal’ is quite a misnomer. Besides maiming and seriously injuring people, many of those options can also be fatal — particularly Tasers.

“This is not one I’m in full agreement with. I wish it was any weapon,” Becker rued at a hearing in March. “In my opinion, there should be a nice, red line: Drones should not be weaponized. Period.”

He noted the potential for police to mimic U.S. use of drones abroad, as in fighting ISIL — particularly because, he added, “When you’re on the ground, and you’re making decisions, you’re sort of separate. Depersonalized.”

North Dakota may have succumbed to Big Drone’s wishes — as the Daily Beast described the booming industry and its lobbyists — but it’s almost inevitable privacy rights groups, legislators, concerned citizens, and law enforcement will point to its and Connecticut’s laws as reference precedents. Depending on which turn the bills before the Connecticut legislature take, that state could be added to what will likely be a growing list of laws for how to deal with weaponized drones.

Joining the battle to prevent police spying by drone, the ACLU was slated to testify about the Connecticut bill on Tuesday.

For now, the prospect of law enforcement arming drones remains a legal gray area — at least, in most areas of the U.S.

This article (So It Begins: American Police Start Pushing to Weaponize Domestic Drones) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

As Fukushima Continues Leaking, 3 Former TEPCO Execs Charged with Negligence

by

Claire Bernish
February 29, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Japan — Three former executives from the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) have been formally charged with negligence over the 2011 disaster at the company’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.

In accordance with a ruling from a citizen’s panel last year — and despite two previous refusals by Tokyo prosecutors to press charges — the three will be the first to go to court over the catastrophic meltdown, which followed a massive tsunami.

Those charged include former TEPCO chairman, Tsunehisa Katsumata, and former executive vice presidents, Sakae Muto and Ichiro Takekuro, according to Reuters. As their indictments did not stipulate arrest, none of the trio have been taken into custody.

Despite previous claims there was insufficient evidence necessary to prosecute, a unique component of the country’s legal system allowed citizens to make the final call. As Reuters explained:

“Japanese citizens’ panels, made up of residents selected by lottery, are a rarely-used but high-profile feature of Japan’s legal system introduced after World War Two to curb bureaucratic overreach. They were given the power to force prosecutions if they called for them a second time.”

That panel found the three executives did not exercise sufficient preventive means, despite being warned of the potential effects a tsunami could have on the Fukushima plant.

Japan’s national media outlet, NHK, said the three former executives planned to enter not-guilty pleas, as they could not have anticipated the size of the March 2011 tsunami, said the BBC.

None of the three charged were available for comment, reported Reuters.

Nearly five years ago, one of the strongest earthquakes ever recorded struck off the coast of Japan, spurring an enormous tsunami, which forced roughly 160,000 residents to flee. Three reactors at the Fukushima plant suffered meltdowns as the wall of water knocked power offline, triggering chain reactions.

Close to 16,000 people died and around 2,500 are still listed as missing from events of that day — though none have been directly attributed to the nuclear catastrophe. As radioactive contamination has created an uninhabitable zone surrounding the plant, and with leaks and general mismanagement of the Fukushima cleanup still continuously making headlines, the meltdown is considered nearly on par with Chernobyl in 1986.

This article (As Fukushima Continues Leaking, 3 Former TEPCO Execs Charged with Negligence) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Chomsky: Trump Rising in Polls for Same Reasons Germany Embraced Hitler

by

Claire Bernish
February 24, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United States — Adolf Hitler rose to power during a period of similar social tumult as that which has currently garnered Donald Trump such fervent support, according to Noam Chomsky. In a recent interview with Aaron Williams for Alternet, Chomsky explained how fear, alone, does not sufficiently explain Trump’s surprising popularity:

“Fear, along with the breakdown of society during the neoliberal period. People feel isolated, helpless, victim of powerful forces they do not understand and cannot influence.”

Governmental control over the lives of the U.S.’ populace has increased tremendously in recent time.

[Read more…]

From theantimedia.org Team

Study: FDA Allows Glyphosate in Your Food Based on Monsanto’s Faulty Research

by

Claire Bernish
February 23, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Despite the World Health Organization’s classification of glyphosate — the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup — as a probable carcinogen for humans last year, the product remains the top-selling herbicide worldwide. Though the agrichemical behemoth vociferously disputes the findings, researchers recently found Monsanto’s claims are based on outdated and inadequate science.

Enough glyphosate, Truthout noted, “is now used to cover nearly every acre of cultivated cropland in the U.S.,” leading to widespread glyphosate tolerance, including reports of “superweeds” that are virtually immune to repeated drenchings. Use of the dangerous weedkiller has increased by more than 100 times since it first came to market in 1974.

[Read more…]

From theantimedia.org Team

Former Finance Minister Compares Current Financial Crisis to Great Depression

by

Claire Bernish
February 23, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Greece’s financial crisis, unprecedented in scope, reached a pivotal moment last summer when the Greek people voted overwhelmingly against further austerity programs — ostensibly imposed to help the country pay back enormous debt. Overseeing the matter was Syriza Party Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis — a staunch opponent of the crippling austerity measures that had effected a stranglehold on the country’s economy.

Greece’s debt to the so-called Troika — the International Monetary Fund, European Commission, and European Central Bank — turned out not to be the true reason for the proposed austerity. As Varoufakis discovered, the Troika actually, if somewhat covertly, intended to decimate Greek organized labor and the country’s modest social safety net. After the Greek populace stunned the world with its ‘no’ vote, Varoufakis sensed the coming accession by Syriza to implement the plans — and he hastily and quietly resigned his post.

The Real News Network partnered with acTVism Munich for an exclusive interview with Varoufakis about those events. Discussing the lead-up to his resignation, Varoufakis said:

“The Greek people didn’t vote for yes. They voted as we were directing them to. Overwhelmingly they said no. And extremely courageously, for reasons I’m sure you know. That night [after the vote], when I spoke to my prime minister, it became abundantly clear to me that the pressure had gotten to him; and he was going to turn that magnificent no of the Greek populace into a yes. And I was not going to be a part of that. So I took my leave. I stole into the night. And since then I’ve been campaigning for that no.”

Varoufakis compares the Greek and global economic situation to that of Wall Street in the 1930s, and the impending stock market crash — with all the same social and political consequences. The first installment of the interview, How the Greek People’s Magnificent “No” Became “Yes,” can be viewed below:

[embedded content]

In the second installment of the interview, Varoufakis discusses the Origins of the European and Global Economic Crisis. As he explains:

“Capitalism requires surplus and recycling — just like the planet requires environmental recycling — so does capitalism require a mechanism that takes the surpluses, the profits if you want, from where they are being produced and invests them in areas that are in deficit, that have losses, where demand is low and unemployment is high. Unless you have this recycle mechanism, capitalism fails. These recycle mechanisms are part and parcel of every major state, or have been, for 200 years now.”

The former finance minister discusses the implications of the Bretton Woods System on past and current state of global economics, among a number of other related issues. You can view the second part of the interview below:

[embedded content]

This article (Former Finance Minister Compares Current Financial Crisis to Great Depression) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: marclozano.If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

One (Extremely) Important Policy that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump Both Agree on

by

Claire Bernish
February 23, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) An increasing number of politicians have joined the call for an audit of the Federal Reserve, including several presidential contenders — most surprisingly, Donald Trump.

Senator Rand Paul drove the recent push for the audit, following in the footsteps of his father, Representative Ron Paul, with a proposed bill that drew condemnation from corporations and the Obama administration, as well as anti-Wall Street Senator Elizabeth Warren. Though the bill was ultimately defeated in January in a close 53-44 vote, the proposition to audit the Fed increasingly garners widespread attention and support.

Though Senator Bernie Sanders, with his apparent populist, socialist platform, might not be such a surprising supporter of the proposal, billionaire mogul Donald Trump is. In a tweet on Monday, Trump asserted:

“It is so important to audit the Federal Reserve, and yet Ted Cruz missed the vote on the bill that would allow this to be done.”

Cruz had backed the bill, but failed to show up for the vote. Sanders, Rubio, and a bipartisan assortment of senators all voted in favor of it.

Questionable Fed policy decisions and the handling of the financial crisis of 2008, namely the multi-trillion dollar big bank bailout, are cited as major concerns by those who support both the audit and oversight of the notoriously secretive central bank. Fed officials ambiguously argue against legislative oversight, and Fed chair Janet Yellen claimed prior to the vote that Paul’s bill would “damage the economy.”

In a statement before Congress in 2015, Sanders questioned the lack of transparency from the Fed in its refusal to disclose which financial institutions had received trillions in “zero-interest, or near zero-interest loans” after the crisis, courtesy of the American taxpayers.

“This $2 trillion [recent estimates have placed the figure above $3 trillion] in zero- and near zero-interest loans does not belong to the Fed,” Sanders declared. “It belongs to the American people, and the American people have a right to know where trillions of … their taxpayer dollars are going.”

He added that tracking where the money wound up seems a reasonable request, and “is why millions of Americans — whether you’re conservative, whether you’re progressive, or whether you are in-between — have come together to say that we need transparency at the Fed.”

Though the Vermont senator favors an audit, Ron Paul previously criticized what he called Sanders’s efforts to “water down” previous legislation to initiate one in 2010.

Nevertheless, however strange it may seem to find Sanders and Trump — and even Rubio — siding with a movement begun in earnest by Ron Paul, the importance of an audit has become the one point where an unlikely amalgamation of individuals of widely varied political camps can agree.

Despite the bill’s failure last month, the push for an audit of the Federal Reserve continues undeterred. Borrowing a choice mantra of government, the Fed should have nothing to fear in transparency — if it has nothing to hide.

This article (One (Extremely) Important Policy that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump Both Agree on) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team

Unstoppable Gas Leaks in Texas Even Worse than California’s, Media Silent

by

Claire Bernish
February 22, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Texas — After the mammoth methane gas leak that spewed uncontrollably from a damaged well in California’s Aliso Canyon was finally capped last week, residents of nearby Porter Ranch began trepidatiously returning to their homes. Lingering doubts over whether Southern California Gas Company will continue using the underground storage field have left many wondering if concerns for their safety are being considered at all — particularly considering the company has, so far, only been charged with misdemeanor violations.

All told, the Aliso Canyon leak thrust an estimated 96,000 metric tons of potent methane — not to mention benzene, nitrogen oxides, and other noxious substances — into the atmosphere over a period of months. So vast was the impact of the leak, it has been likened in impactful scope to BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

California, however, isn’t the only state dealing with mammoth methane leakage.

Texas is dealing with a comparable disaster that has been overlooked by officials and the media, in part, because the state’s methane emanates from a powerful industry’s infrastructure. According to the Texas Observer’s Naveena Sadasivam:

“Every hour, natural gas facilities in North Texas’ Barnett Shale region emit thousands of tons of methane — a greenhouse gas at least 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide — and a slate of noxious pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and benzene.

“The Aliso Canyon leak was big. The Barnett leaks, combined, are even bigger.”

At its peak, the SoCal Gas leak emitted 58,000 kilograms of methane per hour. By comparison, researchers with universities in Colorado and Michigan, partnering with the Environmental Defense Fund, estimate around 60,000 kilograms are spewed every hour by over 25,000 natural gas wells in operation on the Barnett Shale — with the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex at the center. This amounts to around 544,000 tons of methane every year. But contrary to the magnitude of the Aliso Canyon event, emissions caused by oil and gas extraction from the Barnett Shale — and a second large formation, Eagle Ford Shale — won’t cease as long as hydraulic fracturing remains the boon it has been to the fossil fuel industry.

An eight-month long study of Eagle Ford by the Center for Public Integrity, the Weather Channel, and InsideClimate News found “a system that does more to protect the industry than the public.”

Due to a scarcity of air quality monitoring stations, with only five permanent monitors to cover Eagle Ford’s nearly 20,000 square miles, state officials simply don’t know the extent of pollutants in the air. Many facilities are permitted to police themselves, and aren’t required to submit those findings. Not that regulators would have an easy time enforcing a reporting mandate, as the “Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), which regulates most air emissions, doesn’t even know some of these facilities exist.”

David Sterling, chair of the University of North Texas Health Science Center, told InsideClimate News, “As much as I would like to believe that industry can police itself, history has shown that that has not worked without sufficient oversight.” With TCEQ’s budget having fallen 34 percent between 2010 and 2014, it’s virtually impossible to imagine such oversight increasing in the future.

There is a dearth of accountability for lawbreakers in Texas’ oil and gas industry. As the study discovered, in a period of nearly two years beginning in January 2010, 284 complaints against the industry — and “164 documented violations” — led to just two non-punitive fines, the larger of which was a mere $14,250.

Though alarming, that gap in accountability isn’t a surprise.

“Texas officials tasked with overseeing the industry are often its strongest defenders,” stated the study. “The Texas Railroad Commission, which issues drilling permits and regulates all other aspects of oil and gas production, is controlled by three elected commissioners who accepted more than $2 million in campaign contributions from the industry during the 2012 election cycle, according to data from the National Institute on Money in State Politics.”

Texas lawmakers are often personally tied to the industry, as “nearly one in four state legislators, or his or her spouse, has a financial interest in at least one energy company active in the Eagle Ford,” according to an analysis of personal financial forms by CPI cited by the study.

Residents located in the two Texas shale production regions experience many similar symptoms to those in Porter Ranch near Aliso Canyon, such as nosebleeds, dizziness, nausea, and various respiratory ailments. Those symptoms could be due to any number of pollutants and toxins. As the study described:

“Chemicals released during oil and gas extraction include hydrogen sulfide, a deadly gas found in abundance in Eagle Ford wells; volatile organic compounds (VOCs) like benzene, a known carcinogen; sulfur dioxide and particulate matter, which irritate the lungs; and other harmful substances such as carbon monoxide and carbon disulfide. VOCs also mix with nitrogen oxides emitted from field equipment to create ozone, a major respiratory hazard.

“Studies show that, depending on the concentration and length of exposure, these chemicals can cause a range of ailments, from minor headaches to neurological damage and cancer. People in the Eagle Ford face an added risk: hydrogen sulfide, also known as H2S or sour gas, a naturally occurring component of crude oil and natural gas that lurks underground.”

Texas’ shale facilities are responsible for 8 percent of the nation’s methane emissions, already; but the combination of faulty equipment and lack of monitoring sites mean occasional large methane releases from wells — called “super-emitters” — won’t necessarily be noticed immediately.

“If one well was a super-emitter the day we measured them, it could change the next day,” explained Daniel Zavala-Araiza, lead researcher of a 2015 Barnett Shale methane study by the Environmental Defense Fund, in the Observer. “It’s not just about finding a handful of sites. You need to be looking continuously to keep finding the ones that are malfunctioning … If you don’t have frequent monitoring, there’s no way you’re going to know when one of these super-emitters begins spewing.”

In fact, a recent study by Harvard University points the finger at the United States as the cause of an enormous spike in global methane emissions over the past decade, accounting for 30 – 60 percent of all “human-caused atmospheric emissions.”

“I believe the U.S. probably is responsible for this much of an increase in global methane emissions,” said Roger Howarth, a methane researcher at Cornell University, who is unaffiliated with the Harvard study, the Guardian reported. “And, the increase almost certainly must be coming from the fracking and from the increase in use of natural gas.”

Texas residents unfortunate enough to find their homes positioned near oil or gas facilities aren’t left with much recourse to combat the state’s infamous industry. Shale gas production more than doubled between 2009 and 2014, though it has slowed slightly with the recent glut. As InsideClimate News reported, state Representative Harvey Hilderbran tellingly asserted to a media panel in 2014:

“I believe if you’re anti-oil and gas, you’re anti-Texas.”

This article (Unstoppable Gas Leaks in Texas Even Worse than California’s, Media Silent) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team