Several Congressional bills, now part of the United States Code, permit onlookers to view how regularly and consciously agents of the USG knowingly both plied unwitting 'guinea pigs' with different doses, and dispatched these uninformed 'research subjects' down pathways of uptake, of radiation. These have included the Veterans Dioxin and Radiation Compensation Standards Act of 1984), the Radiation-Exposure Compensation Act of 1990, the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, among several others. Such troves of insight as these could easily form a foundation for widespread, open, and community-led dialog about the origins and impacts of the Nuclear Fool Cycle.
At the very least, evidence discernible through legislative histories, in archives such as that at GWU, in the hundreds of thousands of pages that ACHRE data caches contain, and in multiple other locations proves beyond dispute that, in addition to annihilating civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, both before and after these grotesque, clear-cut experiments in extermination, USG plans incorporated production and use of hideous engines of destruction employing radioactive materials. To argue any other point of view violates the basic rule of argumentation: one is entitled to opinions, but one does not have liberty to deny obvious facts, nor to fabricate data.
Relying in part on the Groves document, champions of eliminating DU weapons, like Leuren Moret and Doug Rokke, have asserted that U.S. military and industrial and scientific leaders have long recognized DU as deadly. Their argument continues that, with a more or less complete consciousness of the likely consequences, for almost seventy years, military-industrialists have hatched schemes that made DU ordnance inevitable, and its arguably attendant morbidity and mortality equally impossible to avoid.
This humble correspondent agrees that a vast array of dispositive data supports such a conclusion. In any event, that soldiers, citizens, and technical experts, in direct contravention of established government policy and opinion, offer such contentions speaks to the absolute necessity for a broad and thoroughgoing debate on these topics.
A SNARLING, SNARKY SPITTING CONTEST
General Background
In fact, the Groves memo, declassified in 1974 just as extensive field-testing of DU weapons was about to begin in Puerto Rico (click here) and elsewhere, has, as a result of 1990's ACHRE publicity, induced, instead of any sort of honest intellectual engagement, a fractious round of accusations against those who have cited these materials in relation to Depleted Uranium toxicity. This noisome ad-hominem brouhaha began because Leuren Moret, after her whistle-blowing revelations at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (click here), turned her attention to DU.
For many decades, the Conant/Groves document (click here) that is probably critical to any accurate general understanding of the contemporary atomic pass remained 'under seal,' part of a vast secret archive that, even today, contains thousands, tens of thousands, or even more hidden informational tidbits about the workings of the world (click here), not to mention of the ruling elite's methods for arraying knowledge of this reality to the advantage of the plutocrats. Similarly as in the case of investigators plumbing the depths of Wikileaks, to the estimable service of Ms. Leuren Moret, all humanity owes a debt of gratitude for insisting that this ACHRE-dispensed 'missive of doom' contained critical items to contemplate.
On the basis of the powerful articulation therein--leaving aside altogether the choice to unleash megatons of explosive fission conflagrations--to support weapons that utilize radiation, Moret and others, when they uncovered the choppy, rambling document sent to Groves, deduced that here lay the roots of DU ordnance. Moret has repeatedly stated this hypothesis, both in her own writing and speaking (click here) and in multiple international appearances that have indicted U.S. policy in this regard (click here).
Moreover, multiple veteran advocates also called out, such as Dr. Doug Rokke, who for a time helped to lead the Army's clean-up (click here) of DU after Gulf War-I--until his insistence on publicity and integrity about DU's menace resulted in his discharge (click here). Journalists like Bob Nichols have joined the chorus (click here) too, reiterating this contention about the Conant-led S1 subcommittee report, and stating with fiery directness that U.S. use of DU is a criminal matter dating from the 1940's.
Institutionalized Derision: A Modus-Operandi for De-rigeur Debunking
Three names show up repeatedly in leveling such accusations, which especially condemn Moret and Rokke as intellectually dishonest (click here), and all who would listen to them as unwary, or worse, as morons. As so often in life, though, projection may be the most primitive coping strategy. These fiery accusers almost all, upon close examination, are at best gold-ribbon hair-splitters and at worst disingenuous dissimulators.
Dr. Robert Holloway is one of the chief proponents of DU's inherent mildness for any killing purposes other than blowing up tanks. His primary methodology is twofold. He first rebuts whole arguments based on a rejection of some part of the deduction that he knows is technically wrong, suggesting thereby a wholesale dismissal of the positions that he dislikes.
He then appeals to the weight of established authority. "The vast majority of experts on the subject of depleted uranium believe that the alarmists on this subject are mistaken." He uses 'mistakes' to bully and demean; he employs sources that agree to suggest ineptitude on the part of other viewpoints.
Dr. Bob Cherry is a second attack-dog against Rokke and Moret and others. Like Holloway a Health Physics Ph.d., and like Helbig, below, a retired Army Colonel, he has routinely pursued and sought to discredit Doug Rokke (click here).
At the very least, evidence discernible through legislative histories, in archives such as that at GWU, in the hundreds of thousands of pages that ACHRE data caches contain, and in multiple other locations proves beyond dispute that, in addition to annihilating civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, both before and after these grotesque, clear-cut experiments in extermination, USG plans incorporated production and use of hideous engines of destruction employing radioactive materials. To argue any other point of view violates the basic rule of argumentation: one is entitled to opinions, but one does not have liberty to deny obvious facts, nor to fabricate data.
Relying in part on the Groves document, champions of eliminating DU weapons, like Leuren Moret and Doug Rokke, have asserted that U.S. military and industrial and scientific leaders have long recognized DU as deadly. Their argument continues that, with a more or less complete consciousness of the likely consequences, for almost seventy years, military-industrialists have hatched schemes that made DU ordnance inevitable, and its arguably attendant morbidity and mortality equally impossible to avoid.
This humble correspondent agrees that a vast array of dispositive data supports such a conclusion. In any event, that soldiers, citizens, and technical experts, in direct contravention of established government policy and opinion, offer such contentions speaks to the absolute necessity for a broad and thoroughgoing debate on these topics.
General Background
In fact, the Groves memo, declassified in 1974 just as extensive field-testing of DU weapons was about to begin in Puerto Rico (click here) and elsewhere, has, as a result of 1990's ACHRE publicity, induced, instead of any sort of honest intellectual engagement, a fractious round of accusations against those who have cited these materials in relation to Depleted Uranium toxicity. This noisome ad-hominem brouhaha began because Leuren Moret, after her whistle-blowing revelations at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (click here), turned her attention to DU.
For many decades, the Conant/Groves document (click here) that is probably critical to any accurate general understanding of the contemporary atomic pass remained 'under seal,' part of a vast secret archive that, even today, contains thousands, tens of thousands, or even more hidden informational tidbits about the workings of the world (click here), not to mention of the ruling elite's methods for arraying knowledge of this reality to the advantage of the plutocrats. Similarly as in the case of investigators plumbing the depths of Wikileaks, to the estimable service of Ms. Leuren Moret, all humanity owes a debt of gratitude for insisting that this ACHRE-dispensed 'missive of doom' contained critical items to contemplate.
On the basis of the powerful articulation therein--leaving aside altogether the choice to unleash megatons of explosive fission conflagrations--to support weapons that utilize radiation, Moret and others, when they uncovered the choppy, rambling document sent to Groves, deduced that here lay the roots of DU ordnance. Moret has repeatedly stated this hypothesis, both in her own writing and speaking (click here) and in multiple international appearances that have indicted U.S. policy in this regard (click here).
Moreover, multiple veteran advocates also called out, such as Dr. Doug Rokke, who for a time helped to lead the Army's clean-up (click here) of DU after Gulf War-I--until his insistence on publicity and integrity about DU's menace resulted in his discharge (click here). Journalists like Bob Nichols have joined the chorus (click here) too, reiterating this contention about the Conant-led S1 subcommittee report, and stating with fiery directness that U.S. use of DU is a criminal matter dating from the 1940's.
"This did not happen by mistake and it is not an accident. American political leaders are doing this on purpose, and it is premeditated. The US government has known all this, and more, since 1943. That's when it was first documented that uranium oxide gas did all these thing as it destroys the bodies of gullible young American men and women; not to mention the helpless, innocent civilians in Iraq."All of this type of reasoning has caused an apparent firestorm of controversy, however. This humble correspondent uses the adjective, 'apparent,' advisedly here. While database delving churns up close to the top of most citations-lists seemingly crushing critiques of Moret, et al--"Leuren Moret (and so on) Mislead the Public on 1943 Memo"--a bit of reflection, and a bit more digging, suggests that these self-righteous aspersions represent, as Lincoln warned us to avoid, 'much more good-sounding sense than good, sound sense.'
Institutionalized Derision: A Modus-Operandi for De-rigeur Debunking
Three names show up repeatedly in leveling such accusations, which especially condemn Moret and Rokke as intellectually dishonest (click here), and all who would listen to them as unwary, or worse, as morons. As so often in life, though, projection may be the most primitive coping strategy. These fiery accusers almost all, upon close examination, are at best gold-ribbon hair-splitters and at worst disingenuous dissimulators.
Dr. Robert Holloway is one of the chief proponents of DU's inherent mildness for any killing purposes other than blowing up tanks. His primary methodology is twofold. He first rebuts whole arguments based on a rejection of some part of the deduction that he knows is technically wrong, suggesting thereby a wholesale dismissal of the positions that he dislikes.
He then appeals to the weight of established authority. "The vast majority of experts on the subject of depleted uranium believe that the alarmists on this subject are mistaken." He uses 'mistakes' to bully and demean; he employs sources that agree to suggest ineptitude on the part of other viewpoints.
Dr. Bob Cherry is a second attack-dog against Rokke and Moret and others. Like Holloway a Health Physics Ph.d., and like Helbig, below, a retired Army Colonel, he has routinely pursued and sought to discredit Doug Rokke (click here).
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
