Sickened Navy crew members have lawsuit dismissed — TV: “Sailors say they have cancer”… of thyroid, gallbladder, testicles — Unremitting headaches, rectal bleeding, tumors, bodies deteriorating (VIDEO)

Published: December 18th, 2013 at 7:45 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
198 comments


San Diego Union Tribune, Dec. 18, 2013:  A San Diego federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit alleging that U.S. sailors were exposed to dangerous radiation [but] left the door open for a follow-on lawsuit [...] saying it was beyond her authority to determine whether the Japanese government had perpetrated a fraud [...] Sailors represented in the lawsuit were deckhands who washed down the flight deck, and performed other decontamination tasks. Paul Garner, the Encinitas lawyer leading the case, said the sailors’ ailments include rectal bleeding, other gastrointestinal trouble, unremitting headaches, hair loss and fatigue. Some have thyroid and gallbladder cancer. Many are in their 20s.  Garner said he will refile the case without alleging the conspiracy with the Japanese government. The number of plaintiffs is now at 51 people. Garner said he intends to add at least 20 more when he refiles.  [...]

Japan Daily Press, Dec. 18, 2013: The lawsuit claimed that the power company’s officials lied about the amount of radiation leaking from the molten-down reactors of the plant, with the Japanese central government complicit in the lie. The U.S. personnel said that it was that information that was used by the U.S. Navy to calculate their operational safety, and the health risk on the sailors in the relief effort. [...] Garner said that he will be refiling the case, but this time minus the charges against the Japanese government. [...]

Charles Bonner, one of the attorneys representing USS Ronald Reagan service personnel, Nuclear Hotseat, Dec. 10, 2013: The 51 sailors that we represent right now have come down with a host of medical problems, including cancers, and leukemia, all kinds of gynecological problems, people with thyroid cancers, people who are going blind [...] tumors on the brain. These service men and women are young people 21, 22, 23 years old and no one in their family had ever (inaudible) any of these kind of illnesses before.

Daniel Hair, Petty Officer 3rd Class aboard the USS Ronald Reagan: [Around 5 months after 3/11 his] body began to betray him [...] his immune system began to attack his body. The diagnosis, he said, was a genetic immune system disease, which on X-rays looked to have made his hip joint jagged and his spine arthritic.  [...] Other servicemembers have been diagnosed with leukemia, testicular cancer [...] “I live in pain every day. I went from this guy in top physical condition to a deteriorating body and a whacked-out mindset.” [...] no history of the genetic disease in his family and that doctors have told him radiation exposure could have triggered it.

Al Jazeera’s America Tonight, Dec. 17, 2013: Dozens of sailors who served on the nuclear powered super carrier USS Ronald Reagan are suing the owner of the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. The sailors say they have cancer and say it may have been caused by their rescue efforts following the plant’s meltdown.

Watch the broadcast here

Published: December 18th, 2013 at 7:45 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
198 comments

Related Posts

  1. Another 20 Navy Sailors: USS Ronald Reagan crew with thyroid cancers, leukemia, brain tumors, bleeding, blindness after Fukushima disaster — Young kids developing problems — Gov’t and Tepco involved in major conspiracy (AUDIO) December 12, 2013
  2. TV: US sailors having traits associated with radiation poisoning after Japan operation — Bleeding from rectum — Baby with birth defects — Cancer — Thyroid problems (VIDEO) December 29, 2012
  3. US sailors “have won the major battle” in Fukushima lawsuit — Now 200 young Navy and Marines with leukemia, organs removed, brain tumors/cancer, blindness, more — Gov’t: Fukushima a terrible tragedy… Navy ships under threat and didn’t know where to go, some ‘very interesting’ moments… That radiation will kill you like a nuclear weapon (VIDEO) October 30, 2014
  4. Radio: US Navy sailors had radioactive snow ball fights off Fukushima — Crew “pretty well toast” after weeks on Pacific… significant cancers, incessant bleeding from anus or vagina, blindness — Debris from USS Reagan sent to Hanford nuclear waste site (AUDIO) January 16, 2014
  5. “I’ve got people who are bleeding from their behinds, who have sores all over their bodies” -Attorney for U.S. Navy sailors exposed to Fukushima radiation (AUDIO) February 12, 2013

198 comments to Sickened Navy crew members have lawsuit dismissed — TV: “Sailors say they have cancer”… of thyroid, gallbladder, testicles — Unremitting headaches, rectal bleeding, tumors, bodies deteriorating (VIDEO)

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    Gotta play heroes at every turn..
    Fighter jets now accompany Santa.
    Militarize Christmas.

    NORAD's Santa tracker draws criticism with fighter jet escort

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/04/norad-santa-tracking-draws-criticism-with-fighter-jet-escort/


    Report comment

  • Alpha1

    Can you say wow what kind of power does that Judge have and why would he ever pass such a judgement with our troops being ailed here. San Diego Judge paid off maybe just to keep this from mainstream media???


    Report comment

    • davidh7426 davidh7426

      As I understand the American Injustice System, a federal judge only has power with in American territory, though I suspect there are plenty in the American government who believe otherwise.

      Which is why the judge had to dismiss the case.

      So if the plaintiffs really do want to go "balls to the wall" against Japan, they'll probably have to go through something like the International Court of Justice.

      By the way the judge is a she, not a he.


      Report comment

    • Bones Bones

      I think an important thing to remember is that when you join the military you have to sign your rights away. Ironic and sad, I know. It's probably why they didn't bother suing the Navy despite them almost knowing immediately the dangerous levels in the air and water and contaminating the ship. It's a freakin' nuclear sub and even without any outside communication, which DIDN'T HAPPEN, they would have known the rad levels and probably have labs on board for isotopic identification. So, they have no legal standing at least while they were in the military. I don't know how long those clauses last, but I would guess that since it happened during service they are almost completely boned. I think changing the rules so they don't sign their rights away and granting all military their damn rights as citizens of the U.S. This will continue as many, many, many soldiers and their whole families are in Japan. New borns are even there and forced to be there by .gov or more apropos .mil. Just something I thought I could add as the elites hide behind the law to "legally" due their criminality and that is where the fights must lie in a country ruled by laws and courts and process. They will abuse all laws as well. I just wanted to make people aware that soldiers sign away their rights on joining.


      Report comment

      • Bones Bones

        Remember, corporations and banks got their cartels and basically sovereign state status through…lobbying congress to make their criminal deeds legal and legalize their monopoly over our entire society at almost every level.


        Report comment

        • Angela_R

          "Remember, corporations and banks got their cartels and basically sovereign state status through…lobbying congress to make their criminal deeds legal and legalize their monopoly over our entire society at almost every level."

          Sounds as though they all forgot about "unconscionable conduct."

          "Lying" is never right; even colloquially termed 'white lies." No doubt a judge could determine the difference between 'venial' or 'mortal', though it is becoming very apparent that the lying constitutes 'mortal.'
          'I didn't know' or 'following orders' constitute no argument.


          Report comment

          • HoTaters

            Yes, the PAC system (PAC = Political Action Committee)


            Report comment

          • Bones Bones

            I think what the power brokers have done is disgusting. Hell, in my short couple decades of life I've even seen the HUGE decline in every aspect of society and all starting from the controlled economy which came about through laws. They also "cover-up" their crimes by lobbying to make what they did legal. The fight I believe is to fight them on their ground. The legal system. Kind of the idea behind explaining soldiers sign away their rights as citizens and have almost zero recourse without huge public awareness pushing them to capitulate. The "legal" system is what allows these dbags to ruin everything we hold dear just for more money. I hope you don't think I'm on the plutocrats side here and understand what I mean. I'm trying to understand their psychology.


            Report comment

        • rakingmuck

          Why can no one accept the lawyer was incompetent?


          Report comment

          • ManWithThePlan ManWithThePlan

            It's nothing really to do with his argument or ability. Most people like me (that have no knowledge of law) just give him the benefit of the doubt. We also want to believe that he can pull it off, because clearly, if he does, it will be quite awesome, as well as a turning point.


            Report comment

      • Crash2Parties Crash2Parties

        I'm sure there is a buried argument there, too. Something about, "if they could sue the government for being exposed to radiation, they could sue the government for getting shot," or some other such that ignores the need to not expose our soldiers to unnecessary risk…


        Report comment

      • Angela_R

        "I think an important point to remember is that when you join the military you have to sign your rights away."

        One cannot sign their conscience away. Remember the Nuremberg trials…


        Report comment

      • We Not They Finally

        They may have signed away their rights, however: I also read that the officers on that ships were given iodine pills, but the ordinary enlisted were not. If that is true, then they knew the danger but recklessly, willfully endangered of the troops. I'd go on a campaign to have them court-marshaled for such. Hang a bunch of red flags out there and appeal to some media outlet to pick it up.

        There are veteran's groups, like Wounded Warriors and others. There was a veterans' group against the Iraq War. If they are not aroused to THIS cause, then to what?

        The military won't listen. But should it go high profile in the MSM, then maybe at least the outrage will go viral.


        Report comment

      • ratpuppy ratpuppy

        It was that way when I was in the Navy in the 70's and early 80's… Can't sue the government for anything.

        If the Navy claims that there wasn't dangerous radiation in the operating area, that would be a powerful witness to debunk regardless of injuries/fatalities received. It makes no sense, but our pro-nuclear Navy and government would probably fight to the Supreme Court to conceal any of this, before they would allow the public embarrassment of a trail about nuclear power, or needlessly endangering sailors, even if they were not directly named as a defendant.

        One thing the U.S. Navy has in common with the Japanese government is in their irrational desire to "save face" regardless of the truth.

        I really do feel for the unfortunate souls who were in the wrong place at the wrong time, and I hope their case gets followed so we can all get an idea of what is coming, and how little our government seems to care.


        Report comment

      • kickstand970 kickstand970

        Reply to Bones
        December 18, 2013 at 10:32 pm

        USS Ronald R. Regan ia CVN-76…a carrier, not a sub. Check your facts, people will pay attention to yours… Also, it is a volunteer service. If you don't want to go in harm's way, step aside and let the Men and Women of America who will- through.


        Report comment

      • ManWithThePlan ManWithThePlan

        Do you think that, as a long-term effect, we will perhaps see a future where youth are less inclined to join the military?
        I mean, they try to get them while they're young – as with any self-respecting, competitve business that's pretty obvious and even somewhat understandable from a 'brand loyalty' standpoint; the soldiers are also most likely caught completely off-guard by the fine print, and only realise that they've been dealt an unfair hand once the human rights violation has occured – this is pretty understandable from the 'protect you business interests at all costs' standpoint.

        Having said that, do you think it's possible that future potential recruits will think twice about their decision to join the military, once word gets around how the military, governments and corporations are all in bed together?


        Report comment

    • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

      Government is not really devised to govern.. its purpose is to control.


      Report comment

  • Gradius

    Like I said… mass death is happly coming to everybody. You should thanks those low-life Yakuzas @ Fukushima.


    Report comment

  • Shaker1

    I think I understand the ruling here. And, honestly, does one think that the US Navy was relying, or had to rely upon Tepco or the Japanese government for the information? It seems to me that beyond being in the wrong place at the time of the accident which might have been unavoidable in the course of events and its timeline (the quake and tsunami itself and the hours required to move them from harm) the sailors were harmed by the policies and assumptions of our government and its advisors. She's only saying that she doesn't believe that she can have the authority to coerce evidence from the Japanese government or Tepco, and therefore couldn't evidentially be confident in her decision. Actually, I would have thought the lawyers would have been smart enough to expect this. Maybe they're employing the wrong people.


    Report comment

    • the whole legal system is corrupt, if they can get fees, they care less about their "clients"


      Report comment

      • rakingmuck

        THE LAWYER WAS INSANE I HAD MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS WITH HIM AND PREDICTED THIS OUTCOME HERE. WHY DO U DISMISS SOMEONE WHO CAN BACK UP WHAT THEY ARE SAYING AND IS ONE SAME SIDE.


        Report comment

        • VanneV anne

          Maybe the lawyer was assigned on purpose or bought off. Lawyers are good at acting. Maybe he is pretending to be insane to throw the case on purpose. The US is using Japan as a base as a strategic defense against China. We are all being sacrificed for this elitist chess game. The US government used to at least pretend to care about people and to put a value on human life. It is hard not to be cynical and impossible to go back to naivete.


          Report comment

          • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

            .. :) Yes, we have quite the chess game going on…


            Report comment

            • IamtheWalrus IamtheWalrus

              Afraid it's not a game at all. We think it is and we play it everyday. But by definition a game is one where the results of the activity are based on a "wining" outcome for any of the parties involved. And sadly, the outcome has already been decided.


              Report comment

          • Sally Sally

            OK, now that his stupidity is revealed by the court's dismissal, he is "insane." At the time you thought he was quite the hero. Funny how times change.


            Report comment

            • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

              Perhaps his original complaint was not elegant. But If he was stupid or deliberately throwing the case he wouldn't be amending before re-filing.

              Likely, he's refiling to eliminate the stronger of two reasons for the dismissal, leaving the "political question" issue for the circuit courts when his new case is dismissed.

              Thanks to Flatsville:

              https://www.google.com/url?q=http://media.utsandiego.com/news/documents/2013/12/17/TEPCO.pdf&sa=U&ei=IeKyUs6OHYvg2wXhioFY&ved=0CA4QFjAB&usg=AFQjCNFK-TA9KgpZ16n5AFUu_ADk4lodHA

              In this context the "political question" boils down to whether the federal courts should be able to question military officers about their decision making, and in some sense "second guess" those decisions. I don't think it goes that deep here. It's not an operational or a battlefield decision. Basically like asking a commander: "if the weatherman hadn't lied to you, would you have briefed the correct weather forecast to your troops at the order?" That's not much of a "political question."

              Rakingmuck protests too much; this IS the government at work. A hardball attorney would be curious whether any federal agencies had input. Given ethics rules on ex parte communications, likely they would have chosen an in person meeting with a trusted fellow colleague or mentor of the judge rather than a documented email or letter or recorded phone call.


              Report comment

              • flatsville

                I don't know this atty at all…but, I suspect this is merely his opening shot.

                And of course I find it odd that people are surprised that it was dismissed at this stage.

                What concerns me is that people assume these cases are winnable out of the box. This guy and these sailors will be at this for years.

                Getting the nuclear registry opened to them will be a victory in and of itself.


                Report comment

              • Sally Sally

                Sammartino took the lazy way, dismissing on jurisdictional grounds, ignoring TEPCO's substantive grounds for dismissal, and allowing Garner to amend his complaint, thus guaranteeing more wasted time. How many times did Orly Taitz go round and round?

                For instance the Complaint, which had already been tossed once for being improperly filed, alleged that TEPCO lied to the injured sailors. Like, WTF? TEPCO lied to these swabbies? It was a verified Complaint at that. This guy is as much a sanctions-whore as Taitz.

                Anyway, here was an excellent take-down of the suit from a year ago when it was filed, with a link to the complaint.

                http://logophere.com/Topics/2012-12-Climate.htm


                Report comment

          • rakingmuck

            I had many conversations with this attorney. He raised his pitch and became irrational every time. He was, however, devoted to his cause and (personal opinion) do not think he could have or wanted to be bought off. If anything he was overly attached and therefore could not take any rational input having convinced himself he was going to win. Having dealt with too many lawyers in my life to count, this was when I stopped trying. Even then he continued to seek my advise if only to reject it. What is the definition of insanity? We all know this one.


            Report comment

    • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

      @Shaker1:

      ". . . the sailors were harmed by the policies and assumptions of our government and its advisors."

      Well, turns out one of those assumptions was a lie by TEPCO, specifically that there was no meltdown and the release was grossly understated. Whether in the absence of that assumption the US Navy chain of command would have made different decisions about placement of the carrier is entirely within US federal court powers to compel testimony. . .

      "She's only saying that she doesn't believe that she can have the authority to coerce evidence from the Japanese government or Tepco, and therefore couldn't evidentially be confident in her decision."

      No good Plaintiff's attorney goes into court expecting to be able to compel anything useful, subpoena power or no subpoena power. If there isn't enough evidence to get to trial from day one, don't file. That leaves the Defendant in the position of bringing it's own witnesses and documents to discovery and deposition, or have them excluded from trial. At any rate it's a tactical decision by the Plaintiff's attorney whether to file with that handicap. Let TEPCO bring whoever they want or hide whatever they want, but if the Plaintiff's have enough evidence to at least show negligence, say with "res ipsa" then it should get to a jury, if there's jurisdiction.

      It's not the job of a judge to pine over any party they anticipate might be dishonest with the tribunal.

      Does anyone have a link to…


      Report comment

      • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

        Does anyone have a link to the actual decision?


        Report comment

        • Shaker1

          I respectfully disagree about Japan's 'lies'. While we all know that Tepco with the consent and complicity of the Japanese government have lied, I believe that if one reviews the FOIA documents concerning the discussions of the NRC that they (the NRC) had enough information to assume the worst-case, knew that the winds were blowing seaward the day of 3/11. They also knew that venting was happening, knew of the compromise of offsite and emergency power and the rise of containment pressures. They have a staff familiar with the models, actually who have taken part in assembling the models of such situations, knew of personel evacuations and the limited staff on the site. They also knew of the communication problems that may not have allowed particular communication, but had enough communication to assume the worst. On that day they also prepared briefings for other areas of government. Again, this is from just the first day, 3/11. While we're bashing Japan about its failings, and I'm one of them and surely don't make excuses if you've read my comments, they (the NRC) were intimate in an advisory role here and in Japan. Nobody said to the Reagan, 'Hey, get the hell out of there?' Was Japan responsible for that? I will submit that even thinking of lying about the situation hadn't entered too many minds at that point, but they obviously leaned to a best-case hopes and the NRC should have known better to accept anything of the sort.


          Report comment

          • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

            @Shaker1: "While we all know that Tepco with the consent and complicity of the Japanese government have lied, I believe that if one reviews the FOIA documents concerning the discussions of the NRC that they (the NRC) had enough information to assume the worst-case, knew that the winds were blowing seaward the day of 3/11"

            Having not read the case file, I don't know whether this discussion is on point with the decision, but for what it's worth:

            Tepco still hasen't come clean about what exactly blew up and out of the building on 3/11. As Arnie Gunderson points out, a release of hot particles is very much different from a release of steam containing radioactive iodine, cesium and tritium. And, he suggests that inhalation and ingestion of those hot particles might account for the increased incidence of health problems in the sailors, over and above what one could expect from the exposure measured on the radiation detection equipment.

            You suggest the NRC had enough intelligence to make the correct conclusions in spite of TEPCO's deception and that they must have acted accordingly. But, was the TEPCO deception (or your suggested conclusion) the one that was briefed down to the sailors? Whether the chain of command would have positioned the carrier differently had they known there was, let's say, a partial fission reaction explosion followed by a complete meltdown is a question for the witness stand. . .


            Report comment

        • flatsville

          I'll bang around to see if I can get a copy. This was a "Hail Mary" effort at best. The real goal may have been PR and getting the military to open the nuclear registry for these sailors.

          I don't know the atty in question even by reputation. Being "crazy" may be bonus.

          Perhaps obewan should call Int'l Atty Frances Boyle and have him take the case…


          Report comment

            • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

              Seems this is likely just another an appeals case at this point.

              If he does what he says and refiles without alleging Japanese government conspiracy with TEPCO, then all he's doing is isolating the "political question" issue for appeal. (In this context that boils down to whether the federal courts should be able to question military officers about their decision making, and in some sense "second guess" those decision.)

              His case will still likely get dismissed again based the Judge's "political question" interpretation of Lane (a Fifth Circuit case), and he'll end up appealing it to the 9th Circuit to see what they say. . .


              Report comment

              • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

                The silver lining here on the political issue goes beyond the equities: Normally, courts issue these rather harsh opinions because "second guessing" of military decision making would likely ruffle feathers between the branches. In this case, that might not be true. With a little luck, the Captain, the XO, the OpsO, and the nuclear warfare officer might be happy to testify that their SOP would have called for a different response had they known the extent of problem. Who knows.


                Report comment

                • Socrates

                  Why don't you call plaintiffs' counsel and offer advice for how to handle this lawsuit?

                  You cam also put your comments in an email and send it to him (them).

                  I both spoke to plaintiffs' counsel and emailed him.

                  I litigated a case that occurred aboard the USA Permit, a nuclear – class sub. The skipper was quite helpful to the injured service man's case.

                  Paul Garner could use help. Your comments should be addressed to him.


                  Report comment

    • rakingmuck

      As I have said after multiple conversations with lawyer he was clueless. AGAIN I tried multiple times to help – all in vein. He was over his head, not a top lawyer, an ambulance chaser and I feel truly sorry for these sailors.


      Report comment

  • razzz razzz

    Unfortunately, this was always going to be an uphill battle. Suing the government esp. the military usually doesn't fly let alone suing a foreign government in a domestic court. Takes an act of Congress to allow it and that needs high pressure public opinion or outrage. There is always the World Court-United Nations. I'm sure Japan and TEPCO violated some international treaties but if they allow US soldiers to sue then anyone could probably sue for nuclear fallout damages. Think the UN would like that.


    Report comment

  • weeman

    Fire your lawyers and find a new avenue of appeal, you have to prove negligance on behave of both parties, if they knowingly put your in jeprody, it was a bloodily nuclear aircraft carrier?
    Helicopters were used and came back hot, how do you think that they monitored realease?


    Report comment

  • Sixela Sixela

    They should be suing the NRC, the Navy or someone implicated in the FOIA documents. It was clear that they knew what was happening.


    Report comment

  • captndano captndano

    Obviously, these poor sailors got a Huge dose of radiation poisoning. And, from what I understand, it will never leave their bodies, so that should make each one highly contagious and basically walking dirty bombs? If that is indeed the case, they should just threaten that they will shopping in crowded malls, or pay visits to their government officials and shake a lot of hands until someone in power wakes up to this ugly fact and gives them some kind of relief.


    Report comment

  • Kassandra

    I listened to two former sailors involved in the case speak to the press at Caldicott's 2012 March Fukushima Research Symposium.

    One sailor said that all the officers received the potassium iodide but none of the enlisted folks.

    This sailor had visible tumors on his face from the exposure. He had the worst exposure of all personnel because he handled the colors (flag) and it captured radionuclides blowing in the wind.

    On another note: The TBS and Tepco cam data were rather wild today. I took many screen shots but I cannot post on the webcam discussion forum, nor can I see comments there.

    Here is a pdf with screen shots of today's pulsing radiation and 'spider web' phenomena

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/t5c5wafn5h4fpvf/December%2019%202013.pdf


    Report comment

    • Fall out man!

      Interesting about the enlisted men being neglected even as far as potassium iodide goes. Given its a nuclear war ship, one would expect it to have state of the art radiation monitoring equipment (and I'm sure it does). Also, those FOIA docs summarised very well on the Hatrick Penry site (briefly summarised in another post of mine a month or two back) made it very clear that both the navy and the NRC knew the plant was in melt down early on. On reading those documents one realises that at the admiralty level and NRC level, they knew exactly what the sailors were being exposed too.

      Here is Hatrick Penry's page about it…
      http://hatrickpenryunbound.com

      Interesting just how much steam (smoke?) can be seen pouring out of the place still in the photos you posted. Yes, like you say, it likely was smoke or steam making the lights appear to dim and brighten. Somewhere deep under the plant are hundreds of tonnes worth of three molten corium masses constantly boiling water and spewing radioactive gases.


      Report comment

      • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

        My reading of Hatrick Penry's website is that there was quite a bit of NRC speculation in the transcripts in the first few days, speculation that could have been avoided if Tepco had been forthcoming.

        As far as the iodine tablets, I would be very surprised if officers received medication that enlisted did not. For one thing, it's the corpsman (enlisted) who hand out the meds. For another, Officers are trained to avoid (and culled) for that type of behavior. (It's hard to convince people to fight for you when you're doing things that make them want to fight with you.)

        If there was a kernel of truth to the story, my guess is there might be some confusion about meds given to flight crews, pilots (all pilots are officers), and maybe even those who work on the flight deck. . .


        Report comment

    • Angela_R

      "One sailor said that all of the officers received the potassium iodide but none of the enlisted folks."

      The final line of 'The Sailor's Creed,' known to all members of the US Navy, states:
      I AM COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE AND THE FAIR TREATMENT OF ALL.


      Report comment

      • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

        The whole "War on Terror" "homeland" security apparatus is about anticipating future domestic instability and leaning forward. I mean, when did we get a "homeland." The USA was always the land of the free and the home of the brave. "Homeland" is Nazi shit. Even the terrorism is a joke. A son of an African banker trying to light his underwear on fire? Come on. Statistically, I'm more afraid of drunk drivers.

        There are lots of good meaning guys and gals filling recently created do-nothing military and civilian jobs in intelligence and law enforcement who think it's all a joke or a bluff. It's just a meal ticket to them. They rationalize that they'd never use it for totalitarian ends because they're good Americans. But the foundation has been laid for the next ones.

        The flip side is all the bad press isn't what it appears. Traditionally, the government types brush back the wealthy with investigations, and the wealthy brush back government types with the press. The billionaires are unhappy with NSA investigations right now and are brushing them back with the press. Otherwise, you wouldn't see it in the MSM. . .


        Report comment

      • rakingmuck

        WHY CAN U NOT ACCEPT THIS WAS A GOOD CASE AND A HORRIFIC ATTORNEY. HE WAS THE BOOGEYMAN!


        Report comment

        • NoNukes NoNukes

          rakingmuck,

          I can accept that the attorney was horrific. Nuclear has captured the media, science, medical, etc., it would be surprising if somehow these people got a good attorney. They deserve a brilliant one.

          I haven't read it, can you please say more about why it is a good case?


          Report comment

  • behappy1

    First let me say my heart goes out to these people
    Someone should be held accountable,
    but not Japan

    This is to shift the blame,
    who's at fault,
    the U.S. us, we put them there, we still have bases in Japan
    nothings changed.

    Why do we have bases not only in Japan
    but in most countries around the world?

    I spent 20 years in the USAF
    The military has a catch all rule
    shit happens,
    this suit will go nowhere.

    Like super chicken would say to his sidekick fred
    you knew the job was dangerous when you took it

    Congress just voted to reduce vet benefits, not by much
    just a test, to see if the people would tolerate it.
    And they do.

    so much for concern and support for the troops


    Report comment

    • Fall out man!

      Talking of a track record of 'concern' for the troops. After seeing Hatrick Penry's analysis of the FOIA docs, one wonders if its just one more experiment. An "opportunity" to test what happens to the troops and the equipment after a close up exposure to a meltdown. I've no doubt they did good work to help Japan, but they could have done that without repeatedly criss crossing down wind of three nuke plants in full melt through, complete with at least two hydrogen explosions and one nuclear one throwing shattered fuel rods over a 2 mile radius.


      Report comment

    • We Not They Finally

      And is there also no legal basis as to whether or not the Navy even CARES? They've written their own off. Not even keeping track of them medically. It's the blackest mark against the military and an indelible stain on the nation's character.


      Report comment

    • rakingmuck

      Another comment not based on fact but on assumptions. My comments are based on facts not on pretend facts actual facts. Why? I tried to help attorney. I will keep saying it until I am blue in the face because I TRIED TO HELP.


      Report comment

  • bozzy54

    Those poor young service men and women sicken by radiation let's hope The affordable health car act will provide care at a low cost. LOL, that ship ventilation system draws in air into the belly as well as draws sea water into her systems. That ship and the internal system has been contaminated. People shower, drink and eat on that ship. So in my way of thinking everybody has been radiated. I believe there are over 5000 service personal asigned to her as well as every ship accompanying. So 75 service men and women may be just the beginning. It's terrible that us little people always gets the shaft!!!!


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    There'll be sickness and death as long as citizens of the world are forced to co-exist with nuclear plants.

    Being forced, for now.


    Report comment

  • newsblackoutUSA newsblackoutUSA

    I strongly urge everyone to download this newly released overview of the "decontamination" done by US military personnel.

    Snippet:
    "nsights and Lessons Learned:

    •• The use of a cross-functional CM team, which brings together experts in various disciplines, enabled everyone to better understand conditions and coordinate response/management actions.
    •• The DOD response to the Fukushima Daiichi power plant can be used as a case study in future leader development courses where CBRN CM (foreign and potentially domestic) is addressed.
    •• Establish standards early for units of measurement for decontamination.
    •• Use of unmanned aerial vehicles and UGVs with sensors and communication equipment can allow near real-time updates from the source and will help characterize the affected area.
    •• Units being deployed to CM/FCM missions should review DSCA operations to get a better understanding of how the DOD supports the civil authorities prior to the deployment."

    http://info.publicintelligence.net/CALL-Tomodachi.pdf

    Here's a link to may FOIA docs re; Fuku
    http://publicintelligence.net/search-results/?cx=partner-pub-3783081636211424%3A6347981827&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=fukushima&sa=Search&siteurl=publicintelligence.net%2Fcategory%2Fdocuments%2Fjapan-documents%2F&ref=publicintelligence.net%2F&ss=2080j598016j9


    Report comment

  • We Not They Finally

    This needs MAJOR PUBLICITY. I think that most people would be appalled if it just got publicity. The kind of thing that USED to show up on "60 Minutes." Now all "60 Minutes" seems to want to do, is let the NRC on to tell America that the radiation is just fine.

    Not the country I grew up in. Not a country I ever wanted to see. It's like someone took a pickaxe to the nation's heart. It's pretty unbearable. I can't even imagine what those poor sailors have been going through.


    Report comment

    • rakingmuck

      You people have jumped the shark. Keep at and there will be no chance of appeal. I am sickened by this. Read the case files. Don't open you mouth until you do because you have no idea how weak this case was. Feel sorry for the sailors but worse for ENE who shows now complete disdain for facts and and has fallen off cliff into utter nonsense. You are hurting not helping anyone. And I am sickened by this. By YOU


      Report comment

  • name999 name999

    …look into the actions of the US Navy in the 1940-50s. But the article says the judge says the ruling makes the case open for a higher court. Which is what is needed now. I am honored to be in the company of this intelligent and forward thinking crowd..again, thank you…this is headed for the supreme court. If our supreme court won't hear it, then that will be the biggest atrocity. But they may hear it eventually, it will be many years. Take a look at The Sleep Room by Anne Collins, from
    Canada…


    Report comment

  • rakingmuck

    Repeat of original post. After many conversations with this attorney I fear they will loose as he acts delusional, goes on rants and acts completely unprofessional. I wish these men and women had better representation as they deserve it. Unless the more senior legal team at this firm is involved there is no win here as lawyer loose canon. Clearly there is a bias here against people who speak on a factual basis rather than blowing smoke.


    Report comment

  • Shaker1

    I agree name999. The case may have been dismissed at that level with that argument, but it didn't preclude other arguments or other levels. There are arguments more obvious and easily obtainable under US law than fraud of the Japanese. To fly over damaged buildings with exposed, steaming, obviously damaged spent fuel pools seems pretty easy to me. Again, look at the FOIA documents concerning the NRC, their briefings with others in our government, then tie that to decisions of those in our government, party to that advice or not, that I'm sure were handed down from on high and you'll find the culprit. I'd love to hear the conversations between the commader of that ship and his superiors, especially after the rad alarms.


    Report comment

  • rakingmuck

    Wrong. The lawyer up to trial date had a weak case and has border line personality disorder. How do I know? Because unlike ANYONE here I spoke to him extensively trying to help. Can ANYONE here claim the same?


    Report comment

  • rakingmuck

    This thread has me ready to puke. Who I more clueless the attorney or everyone who has commented here WITHOUT EVEN BOTHERING TO READ THE CASE FILE.


    Report comment

  • rakingmuck

    Before you insult these sailors further than you have already get you facts straight and paranoid emotions in order. What you have done in not unlike blaming the rape victim because she wore a short skirt You have disgraced yourselves by commenting without knowing any facts or bothering to read case files. YOU ALL owe these sailors an apology.


    Report comment

  • rakingmuck

    My only hope is that you do some self reflection and realize the degree your ignorance of all relevant facts – INCOMPETENT ATTORNEY – has further insulted the plaintiffs in this case. They KNOW what went wrong. YOU are a bunch of fools.


    Report comment

    • SpeakEZ SpeakEZ

      rakingmuck, I've been a long-time lurker and have benefited from the information and comments from the dedicated folks on this site–including you. Thanks. Your frustration promted me to make a comment. As someone who has been involved in a federal group lawsuit (now in its 7th yr), I know first hand how incredibly challenging our legal system can make the pursuit of "justice." Your comments are spot on from what I have observed and heard about the sailors' lead counsel. Hopefully, a truly qualified attorney will step in and provide the legal advice and strategies for successfully pursuing this litigation.


      Report comment

    • Shaker1

      I, too, rakingmuck, think that you need to tone down your frustration. It's obvious some of us understand the problem here. General characterizations such as "YOU are a bunch of fools." are not appreciated. I do, though, understand your passion and feel the reason for it is honorable. No apology may be necessary on your part, but a little forgiveness might be in order.

      Ever serve on a jury? In the instance in which I participated I was quite amazed how many in the juror pool really don't have a sense of how the court system worked or what their place in it was.

      I hope they get better representation. Those in charge of that now seem to be like doctors attempting to do heart surgery through the anus. Would that doctor seem competent to even the most uneducated?

      But the ruling here is not the end, just a statement of how these lawyers at the moment are attempting to enter the body through the wrong hole. Maybe it will give pause to some of sailors and force them to consider their representation. Myself, I would at least look into some outside legal advice of the legal advice.


      Report comment

      • lickerface lickerface

        "Those in charge of that now seem to be like doctors attempting to do heart surgery through the anus."

        ^^^This made me burst out laughing. I really needed that, man. Sometimes I just need to laugh, especially during a time when it's very hard to.

        Hmm.. if I smile while I laugh, maybe I'll be immunized against the radiation?!? ;)

        Thnx for the funny visual shaker1.


        Report comment

  • Vorith

    The passing out of iodine pills may be a handle. As per Bones, surely they had their own monitors. Tho I missed it, it was in fact common to "frag" incompetent officers in Vietnam. Incompetent has it's flavors. I know a Top who took one out an Lt. to save his company.

    Sounds like a bad call by the officers. It's either this or for some reason they got word from a "higher" source to play games. But ain't this a drop in the bucket in light of Gulf War Agent Orange and Blue Syndrome and the whole gamut of "kill our own" game?

    I'm waiting to hear about karmic payback for all that DU.

    It still appears no one is considering sabotage. Ok, say it wasn't, at first. What is going on now clearly is a form of sabotage (of the usual demographic's well being as well as rights).

    I realize I'm taking to the wind here. Not so divine….


    Report comment

  • Cisco Cisco

    Cheaper and less risk to pay off the sailors now and get them to sign a non-disclosure for a private settlement. The US government will torpedo this suit if it goes forward, because the risks of discovery of US complicity in the under reporting and coverup of critical data are too great. This would expose their reprehensible malfeasance and responsibility.

    The US and the nuclear cabal have benefited significantly in the suppression of critical testing, data, and accurate reporting. The US and its conspiring corporate partners never want to pay for its mistakes. History will show you this, i.e. agent orange victims from Vietnam, Gulf War Syndrome victims from oil fires and DU shells; and, in 10-20 years it will be DU from the Iraq War.

    And all the while, some large group of people who always professes they support the troops, will fight tooth and nail to never admit the true cause and effect of these mystery diseases, never flinching in denying and cutting appropriate medical care and social responsibility.

    And, I if by some strange reason this case goes forward, by the time it gets to court, many of the key witnesses and lots of others will be dead. By that time, those people who are left will spending all their time looking for food, water, and shelter.


    Report comment

    • obewanspeaks obewanspeaks

      .. :) Yes, history must be controlled..


      Report comment

    • lickerface lickerface

      Right, and I'm thinking this… instead of victims settling for Monopoly money, why not one of them (or all) be a martyr and make this more public. I would rather die trying to represent mankind than accept a dollar figure for my own suffering. Money wouldn't make me happy at this point. Yes, money can make things more comfortable, but we're ALL victims in the end. This could put a whole new meaning of "dying for one's country" if some of the Navy victims get smart and put up a good fight. It seems nothing good comes from allowing a corporate beast to simply pay fiat instead of going through "justice". Think of all the cases in our history where we could've hung real criminals, but instead, money shuts people up.

      I wish that many martyrs are made from this, and that people can feel hope from an energy other than the seductive ways of fiat. The desire to overcome an evil so large, that most give up, would be a reason to have lived. If I could see justice for us humans before I leave the earth, I would be a very satisfied soul.


      Report comment

  • douseeyet douseeyet

    Forget about suing Japan………the plaintiffs need to go after the US for leaving them there after the explosion.


    Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    He filed in the wrong jurisdiction..
    Thia has to go the International Crimes Court.


    Report comment

    • Cisco Cisco

      Oops…can't go there! On May 6, 2002, the United States formally withdrew its intent of ratification for its membership in the International Criminal Court. Bush & cabal's intent was to prevent the Court a venue for prosecuting war criminals and other US terrorist activities.

      Hey, no data. no proof. Any data that might help to prove the sailor's case is now a secret for Japan, and in turn the US. No proof and no independent court in which to get a fair hearing and judgement…good luck.


      Report comment

      • Cisco Cisco

        Oh, and the sailors won't get any help from the congress, administration, and/or the directly responsible agencies or departments, because it would expose/reveal the US's complicity and criminal acts. But, you will continue to hear from the politicians, ad nauseam, about their family values, and that they support the troops.

        Sad, pathetic and criminal


        Report comment

    • rakingmuck

      Thank you Rose. That was my recommendation as it is the only International governing body with years of precedent and other legally important aspects.


      Report comment

  • Sickputer

    Occasionally radiation cases result in judgements so it's not impossible:

    http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2015609123_apwahanforddownwinders.html

    The U.S. Department of Energy has agreed to settle claims brought by 139 people with thyroid disease who believe radiation releases from the Hanford nuclear reservation caused their illnesses.


    Report comment

  • Sickputer

    Other radiation victims waited decades to get even small awards for government misdeeds. Many died during the process.

    "The U.S. Attorney General established the Radiation Exposure Compensation Program within Constitutional and Specialized Tort Litigation Section in April 1992. The DOJ promulgated regulations for carrying out the program that permit use of existing records so claims could be resolved reliably, objectively, and non-adversarially, with little administrative cost to either the individual filing the RECA claim or the United States Government. The initial 1992 regulations were updated in 1997 and revised on March 23, 2004.

    RECA establishes lump sum compensation awards for individuals who contracted specified diseases in three defined populations:

    Uranium miners, millers, and ore transporters – $100,000;
    “Onsite participants” at atmospheric nuclear weapons tests – $75,000; and
    Individuals who lived downwind of the Nevada Test Site (“downwinders") – $50,000."

    http://www.justice.gov/civil/common/reca.html

    Awards to date total nearly 2 billion dollars:

    http://www.justice.gov/civil/omp/omi/Tre_SysClaimsToDateSum.pdf


    Report comment

    • lickerface lickerface

      Wow.. I'm at a loss for what human life is valued. $50k-100k?!?

      There is no amount of dollars that could make me trade my life or another's. The one with the most money doesn't win. More money can be "printed" to make everyone winners anyway. A real win would be tears and apologies from the guilty as well as a lifelong sentence of their power to reverse what they've done… not that anyone could expect those evil ppl to do a 180. Seriously, I've seen people satisfied when a murderer bursts in tears and pleads forgiveness. It shows the wrongdoer has changed and that they acknowledge right/wrong. I can dream, can't I? :/


      Report comment

  • Nick

    How about suing the watch companies whose watches stopped?

    We need more RAD-hardened timepieces!


    Report comment

  • Socrates

    Flatsville,

    What result if residents of Seattle sue GE for negligently designed reactors that showered residents with hot particles?


    Report comment

    • flatsville

      Socrates,

      What is your goal in this toxic tort? Monetary award from GE? Settlement?

      I'll be polite and say this might be a real stretch for any resident of Seattle who develops cancer and is a plaintiff in such a case.

      The sailors aboard the USS Ronald Reagan might have a better chance of proving cause and suing GE.

      But then again, NATO soldiers have attempted to sue GE for cancer causing ionizing radiation exposure from missile systems and lost.

      Like I said before…being "Crazy" may be a bonus with some of these cases.

      If your goal is entirely different than a toxic tort resulting in a monetary award or settlement…that's a different story.


      Report comment

      • Socrates

        Flatsville,

        I don't know if you are a tort lawyer. Yes, fear of cancer is compensible, especially where inhalation of hot particles is a substantial threat to health.

        Inhaled particles of plutonium and uranium as well as Cs. 137, are thought to be the most dangerous elements of fallout. Papillary thyroid cancer is highly trestable in respect to Iodine 131; lung cancer is not highly treatable.

        To call this fear "crazy" is a pro-nuclear delusion. The DOD has tested animals such as dogs with hot particles with a 100% MORTALITY in five years.

        10 hot particles per day being inhaled in Seattle or Portland means that hundreds or thousands of hot particles are lodged in some people's avrolar passages for life, emitting alpha radiation to the tissues of the lung 24/7/365. For young prople, that vould ho on for decades, if not a lifetime of 100 years.

        The question is one of jurisdoction rather than one of toxicology or epidemiology.

        GE designed the reactors and sold them knowing that the reactors could explode from hydrogen because of the venting design defects that their own engineers criticized in the 70s. These defective reactors fid explode and people in Seattle inhaled the particles. The question is whether residents of Seattle can sue GE.

        In the coming years, people ARE going to die from the hot particles, according to Arnie Gundersen and his experts. Seattle is just as downwind as Tokyo and measurements were the same for both cities.


        Report comment

        • flatsville

          Socrates, I think you misunderstand re: the "crazy" part.

          I also understand your point re: detection of hot particles.

          My concern is that the court won't see it that way.

          If I were plaintiff shopping I'd be looking at infants/babies/toddlers with hypothryroidism thyroid anomilies/cysts/cancers…

          Think about it.

          See why?


          Report comment

          • Socrates

            Harder to prove that. Hot particles have a signature. We take all cases. Many are thyroid. Low birth weight, leukemia, still birth, developmental defects, cretinism, learning deficits – it will depend on the location and the time of exposure and the age and prior medical history of the plaintiff.

            The grim reality is that there will be a leap in morbidity and mortality. Some will be harder to prove than others. Proving medical causation in mass torts may be easy or hard. So far, the nuclear industry has gotten away with it.


            Report comment

            • flatsville

              Socrates,

              >>>Proving medical causation in mass torts may be easy or hard.<<<

              Yes, agreed.

              Infants, babies and toddlers with thyroid conditions are extremely rare, in significant numbers even more so. The average adult suffering from cancer or the other myriad of radiation related illnesses not so much.

              When I discuss Chernobyl with peolple who are skeptical re: health effects, it is always the thyroid cancer stats among children that stops the conversation and gives them nowhere to go…because it is hard to deny at that point.


              Report comment

      • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

        I agree but isn't this putting the cart before the horse?

        Don't we need to wait for a study that shows a jump in west coast infant thryroid problems following Fukushima?

        I'm still hoping there won't be an increase so large it proves causation.

        How about signing up some shellfisherman who we know have suffered economic harm because they can't sell to China?


        Report comment

      • Sally Sally

        flatsville, keep on him.

        All of a sudden on Dec19 we get an anonymous chicken-little-sky-is-falling lawyer popping up and trolling for business with scare tactics.

        Is this guy trolling the other threads?

        I'm not sure what the California Bar rules are on this sort of solicitation of business without marking it "advertisement," but here's someone who might know: WC Bibb.

        http://www.yellowbook.com/profile/william-c-bibb-law-offices_1870878607.html


        Report comment

        • Kassandra

          Sally Socrates has been around for awhile and is hardly a chicken-little-sky-is-falling lawyer. The evidence of exposure exists:

          First: In 2013, Mangano and Sherman published findings from a study linking increased incidences of congenital hypothyroid cases in west coast newborns to Fuku exposure. They correlated elevated airborne beta levels in the Pacific/West Coast US states with hypothyroidism in newborns. They found that the number of congenital hypothyroid cases in Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington in the period ranging from 17 March to 31 December 2011 was 16 percent greater than for the same period in 2010. This finding compared to a three percent decline in 36 other US States (p < 0.03). A 28 percent divergence between the Pacific/West Coast states and the 36 others occurred in the period March 17-June 30 (p < 0.04).


          Report comment

        • flatsville

          Sally, I think you are confused about who is saying what

          I think there is great merit in filing Fuku related lawsuits in US Dist Courts for a variety of reasons. I would choose my plaintiffs differently from Socrates in a suit with GE.

          Re: obewan, for weeks (months?) we have read his continuous declarations to close all NPPs globally, how attys working 5 hrs. each could shut this down,and lately, how one good int'l atty could do this.

          I found him an int'l atty and gave him the number three times. He can't be bothered to pick up the phone…if for no other reason to ask why Boyle hasn't done this already sine he thinks this will be a walk in the park before an Int'l Court.


          Report comment

        • Sally Sally

          @Kass: Sally Socrates has been around for awhile

          I'm sure he has. What a great spot to pick up a few paranoid clients looking for a payout! I think the bulk of the people here have developed stress-related doom-dementia, which is surely compensable if you have the right lawyer.

          Kass, thank you for the references, you are a scholar. Rare on this site is a person with actual references backing up assertions. Let me do some reading.

          I recall when the first Fuki Xenon analysis came out (I think it was an European group) Charlottesville, VA was a hot spot. Hotter than Seattle I believe, which was shocking. Wonder how those Cavaliers' thyroids are doing. Better than their football team, I hope.

          Also wondering where to run and hide to get out of the NW . . . apparently not the east coast.


          Report comment

          • Socrates

            Sally,

            Quick buck? How is that to be accomplished? If someone's treating physician tells them that a pathology report indictated that person has cancer, and there is evidence of a hot particle in the lung, it still has to be proved where that radiation came from. Then there is the issue of finding a domestic defendant and proving the individual case.

            So where is the quick buck for the plaintiff's attorney?

            But if Helen Caldicott and Arnie Gundersen are not eating sea food from the Pacific Ocean, and Steven Starr tells me that Cs-137 is bioaccumulating and concentrates in several vital organs, I am concerned about that fact. If n7clear energy had to pay victims for damage, it would be less profitable to take the risks they do.

            I suspect that you are a shill and a troll. I you want to refer "nuclear cases" to any law firm in the nation, please give me the name and they can take my cases, too.

            Given time, there could be a very elevated incidence of mortality and morbidity in the US. In that event, many lawyers will attempt to assign blame. Are you with us or against us?

            Your ad hominem attacks on me as misplaced.

            Maybe your firm wants to promote public health?


            Report comment

          • CaptD CaptD

            Sally
            Easy to throw comments when others choose to not reply in kind, perhaps you can list the things you personally have done Pro Bono to help others, which will help all of us that have been around a while to equate what you are saying to what others have already done!


            Report comment

  • yohananw

    Although it loses the protest expose value of tort suit, it may be best for injured sailors to go for a private settlement with the complicit US Navy.

    While the USS Reagan sailors did not have access to uncensored news, internet or radiation monitors, their ship command, officers and USA government certainly did. It's easier for US sailors to sue TEPCO than to sue the US Navy, the US NRC, the US government. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Tomodachi#Radiologic_incidents

    Also some Fukushima citizens reportedly are suing TEPCO albeit in different context. However there is less litigation in the legal system in Japan. Class action litigation is unlikely in Japan see http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/08/05/reference/u-s-style-class-action-unlikely-for-tepco-suits/#.Uq9hf_QW0rU

    As for GE’s part in the Fukushima NPP Disaster, will the Price-Anderson Act in USA and weak liability law in Japan protect GE?

    Another interesting unknown is about decontamination of the USS Reagan after the event and presumably in its 13+ month Jan 2012-Mar 2013 Docked Planned Incremental Availability (scheduled repair and maintenance). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Ronald_Reagan_(CVN-7


    Report comment

    • Socrates

      There are interesting legal issues presented for residents of Seattle and Portland where there is evidence of inhalation of hot particles by residents. These particles were measured by Arnie Gundersen and his associate who used air filters and photographic paper to document the existence of these particles in Fukushima and Tokyo, as well as in Seattle and Portland. Particles from these filters were sent for laboratory analysis. Levels in Tokyo and Seattle were comparable. This is because of the jet stream and rotation of the Earth which produces a Corioles effect.

      Engineers have concluded that the Mark I reactors had design defects. Bystanders often have tort remedies. The issues of immunity usually involve operation of nuclear power plants within the USA as regards residents of the USA. Unless a Treaty provides immunities or some domestic law, residents in the USA might want to explore their own rights with a mass tort lawyer.

      I worked for a firm that represented Bhopal residents in the Union Carbide disaster. A Treaty was passed which granted the rights to the government of India to receive the compensation. I firmly believe that residents of the USA should not have to absorb the losses without compensation . Feel free to contact me confidently at wcbibb@pacbell.net if you feel you might have been a victim of negligence. I cannot guarantee a result but there will be no charge for a consultation.


      Report comment

  • Socrates

    If you were exposed to hot particles in Seattle, Washington or Portland, Oregon, please contact me at wcbibb@pacbell.net

    We are exploring potential legal remedies available in the USA.


    Report comment

  • Socrates

    Judge Janis Sammartino is someone whom I knew while she was a state court judge. I have spoken to plaintiffs' counsel Paul Garner who practices in the same town I do.

    I have represented a sailor who was injured aboard a nuclear sub in the San Diego Bay when a defective racket extension he was using explosively fragmented causing him to lose an eye. The tool was available on the civilian market and therefore did not fall within the Feres Doctrine. The tool was embrittled by defective heat treatment during tempering. Hydrogen embittered is detected by using scanning electron microscopy. The fracture surface must be prevented from oxidizing which was done by spraying an acrylic on the fracture surface.


    Report comment

    • Sally Sally

      Socrates: I have spoken to plaintiffs' counsel Paul Garner who practices in the same town I do.

      Socrates @ Dec19 2:07pm: Paul Garner took on the case. I offered my services but he did not take me up on that offer. . . He is not from San Diego.

      ??? Socrates, are you both from Encinitas? Then you, also, are not from SD. Is that your point?

      The CA State Bar lists Garner's address as
      Garner Law
      c/o Brooks Associates
      PO Box 232472
      Encinitas, CA 92023

      Same POB as Daryl J. Brooks Spi4u.net
      http://www.spi4u.net/

      This guy, MC Bibb, also in Encinitas, could probably clear up everything.

      http://www.northcountyaccidentlawyer.com/

      I'm really concerned this site will fill up with ambulance-chasers trolling for business in violation of the lawyers' ethics rules.


      Report comment

      • Kassandra

        How long have you been around Sally?


        Report comment

      • flatsville

        Sally,
        >>>I'm really concerned this site will fill up with ambulance-chasers trolling for business in violation of the lawyers' ethics rules.<<<

        I wouldn't worry about this. Attys in toxic torts take thr cases on contingecy. Plaintffs should be wary of paying fees to an atty upfront in these cases.

        Where Fuku is concerned, a US atty filing in a US Dist Court against a US company over a nuclear incident that took place in a foreign country on behalf of US plaintiffs living in the US at the time of the event is, well…uncharted territory AFAIK.

        That my be one freakin' expensive ambulance chase for any atty.

        I would want the best plaintiff pool I could find. That's why I like babies.

        (I like babies for other reasons too.)


        Report comment

        • Sally Sally

          flatsville: I would want the best plaintiff pool I could find. That's why I like babies

          Love it. I have entered that into my little black book of practice tips. . . babies.

          But my point is not about how to win a lawsuit. It's about lawyer ethics.

          I would never anonymously solicit potential clients to contact me to talk over litigation options after anonymously filling up a thread with scary factoids about "hot particles" in Seattle and Portland, bolstered by some total BS comment about the "Corioles effect," presumably meaning the Coriolis effect. I don't think you would either, at least if you wanted to keep your ticket.

          We hear all the time about perverts "grooming" kids online. Well, the same sort of online grooming tactics are used by lawyers looking for lawsuits. Stuff like the following from Socrates concerns me. When taken in the context of the scary stuff he's posting about hot particles in Portland, it looks to my eyes like a solicitation made with the assistance of duress.

          "If you were exposed to hot particles in Seattle, Washington or Portland, Oregon, please contact me at wcbibb@pacbell.net
          We are exploring potential legal remedies available in the USA."

          If a hot particle went up my nose and I knew it, this guy would be the last guy I'd call. Probably even after Paul Garner.


          Report comment

          • flatsville

            Sally, I think Socrates is genuinely well-intentioned. I believe the global implications of Fukushima contamination is overwhelming for many to contemplate. This is one giant open air experiment. Many people who have bothered to do their homrwork are apprehensive at best and fearful at worst. I expect that I'll have to get up every morning and continue on for many years. We may be surprised as to what happens with that site (and others) in the future. Some remediation is possible.


            Report comment

          • Socrates

            Sally,

            We are looking for plaintiffs with serious disease that might be related to radiation from Fukushima. Cs-137 will bioaccumulate according to Steven Starr, Arnie Gundersen, Helen Caldicott, and many others.

            The situation will only get worse with time. Eating seafood and breathing particles all cause bioaccumulate on and concentration in organs. Cs-137 will be a factor in mortality and morbidity in the US, whether you understand the problem or not.

            The best law firms in California are looking for a way to seek compensation for children and young women against defendants who may he responsible and amenable to litigation. If you believe this investigation is pointless, I suspect your motives or intentions.

            I refer you to the work of Joseph Mangano and Jeanette Sherman.


            Report comment

          • CaptD CaptD

            Sally
            I'm glad this forum provide you with a vehicle to air your opinion, but unlike you I believe that the more discussion there is about this subject, and you can't have credible discussion without seeking out those that think they were affected!

            Suggesting that others don't have honorable intentions, only tends to color your own opinions…


            Report comment

          • NoNukes NoNukes

            It sounds like the nuclear industry doesn't like your project, Socrates. Keep up the fight.


            Report comment

  • name999 name999

    hey there raking muck, that was surprising to read your posts. Having information to share is helpful, excoriating folks for not knowing what you know, reading the case, knowing the attny personally…well, your rant did not inspire confidence in your take on this. Taking your frustrations out on the wrong people…
    I mention the lawsuit against the Canadian Government and the CIA described in the book The Sleep Room as it describes the brutal process of such suits, the costs and the years involved. But it also was a very important case, not a win, but eventually some vindication for the victims of human experimentation in hospitals. Take a look…it at least creates a record of what happened so that it is not forgotten, ignored. CBC made a mini-series about it …the book was written by Anne Collins…


    Report comment

    • Socrates

      Many people have cognitive distortions such as over – generalizing or black – and- white thinking. False attributions are common, too.

      To say, "All lawyers are bad," for example is an example. That idea does not empower the victim.

      So many people believe that lawyers are offered huge sums of money to back off from representing victims. I have never been offered a penny to back off. I get a percentage of the settlement anyway.

      There is an antidote to the "cognitive distortions." By Googling "stinkin' thinkin'" or "cognitive distortions" one may identify these faulty thought patterns and finally begin to see reality. People think better and feel better.


      Report comment

    • rakingmuck

      Point taken. On the same day (yesterday) I offered my assistance on the CBS thread as having lived a lifetime at the head of the media chain I understand exactly who owns what, have key contacts at the top and phone numbers. I was completely ignored. Sorry for venting frustration.


      Report comment

      • Socrates

        Don't be sorry, be well. We are all on the same side here.

        Nobody likes lawyers, especially when you have been through a divorce or a frivolous lawsuit. You might remember the Karen Silkwood case. That was one of the first nuclear cases. You might remember Gerry Spence, the lawyer in the deerskin coat. Taking on the big corporations is a challenge. Multi – plaintiff cases against mega – corporations are the best. Ford Pinto, asbestos, Actos, airbags, tobacco, Deputy hip replacements… that's my bag.

        We need to be able to sue the bas-tards!


        Report comment

      • How would that insider mass media knowledge benefit ENenewsers?


        Report comment

  • Socrates

    The beagals (dogs) that were used as guinea pigs in hot particle (fuel flea) experiments all died within five years.

    Hot particles leave proof on autopsy as a cause of death. Likewise, on surgical pathology, if one were to have pulmonary surgery, spiculated (spiked) scar tissue lessons could be identified.

    As many know, asbestos left many victims with fibrosis and mesothelioma. A similar fate may await victims who inhale hot particles. Pulmonary disease is very unpleasant. This is the time to explore potential legal remedies. The statute of limitations may begin to run as soon as one has knowledge and/or appreciable disease. This might depend on the jurisdiction in which the victim resides or upon the statute of limitations in another jurisdiction. No specific legal advice can be given. The sooner you consult a lawyer, the better since the mere passage of time may cause you to lose the rights to monetary compensation (money damages).

    I am very concerned about victims in the USA.


    Report comment

  • name999 name999

    …and also raking muck, I have read your posts eagerly and appreciate your time spent and contributions here…


    Report comment

    • rakingmuck

      The ICC is The Hague. It consists of several Tribunals including (1) Crimes Against Humanity and (2) Maritime Tribunal. The USA is not a signed member of either. Japan is a signed member of the Maritime Tribunal. A case can be brought before the ICC even if a country is not a signed member. If they are it is mandatory they bring a defense and show up if the case is taken on by Hague. Japan would be required to show up. If the US was also named as a defendant it is not mandatory.


      Report comment

  • Socrates

    Flatsville posted Judge Janis Sammartino ' s ruling. Plaintiffs can refile.

    In federal practice there are no Demurrer to the Complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Instead, the Motion to Dismiss is used to test the sufficiency of the Complaint.

    I will review her ruling carefully and will be researching the issues involved. Frankly, I am concerned with remedies for those of us who have been exposed here in the USA.

    Few lawyers seem to be interested in environmental quality. Occasionally, a large toxic tort case can be brought against domestic defendants. My Dream Team is researching this issue at the moment. The evidence is there. We all got exposed, some worse than others.

    Paul Garner took on the case. I offered my services but he did not take me up on that offer. "Never stand alone" is my motto. Paul probably had many offers and may have gotten good advice. We should reserve judgment on that. He is not from San Diego. Again, few lawyers will take cases where the I industry has achieved comprehensive "tort reform" in 1957!!!!!

    Is GE immune from suit? I would like to crowd source that legal question. I am referring to Seattle victims since their exposures are well documented.


    Report comment

    • lickerface lickerface

      Regarding "Is GE immune from suit?":

      What criteria are evident to prove GE had acted negligently? I'd imagine anything showing GE proceeded with their design <i>despite<i> known/realized implications/consequences would easily be sufficient. Can any party really be immune from suit when it comes to something of this scale? I'd hope legal technicalities (waiver of liabilities) can't be used as roadblocks against prosecutors here. Socrates, what are you thinking there? Is it possible a court would deem GE immune from suit?

      We appreciate your drive.


      Report comment

      • Socrates

        My legal Dream Team is looking at all the potential defenses that GE might have. I am interested in the public health issues. The medical issues I find interesting. Helping people is my vocation.

        Some are heavy hitters in trial; others are library athletes. I enjoy trial work but liability and damage issues are the most satisfying.

        Making an industry pay for their damage to the environment and the health of people is the best deterrent. No regulator can ever hope to regulate such an industry without the threat of legal liability, including punitive damages.

        So far, they have gotten a free ride because of defense. No more. They have injured people in this country and are now going to pay. This is a multi – plaintiff action, not a class action. Most injuries will manifest in the Pacific Northwest.

        we have accepted dozens of cases just today. We are investigation. No guarantees can be given.

        Eventually, we will all be affected. Do not fool yourselves; Fukushima will only get worse. The long – term effects will play out over the decades and centuries. One – thousand years from now, people will suffer.

        We got nuked real bad. Ask Arnie. Ask Helen. This is NOT a drill.


        Report comment

        • Alaskan Ice Alaskan Ice

          Socrates,

          These are some advertising posts that don't say much. "My legal dream team". Really modest. . .

          You don't have to worry about the "political question" issue from the ruling that Flatsville posted but your putative cases have other warts. First is causation: west coast residents got exposed to less than the sailors offshore Fukushima and likely have less pronounced and less statistically frequent illnesses as a result.

          My concern is that signing up a bunch of histrionic hypochondriacs, up all night biting their nails over Fukushima, and claiming that they have suffered damages because of their legitimate "fear" of inhalation of hot particles from Fukushima, will weaken our cause here. Not to mention marginalizing your reputation. Although I may agree with your analysis of the sufficiency of that claim, these putative cases will be high profile, and it is historically too easy for the press to ridicule negligent infliction of emotional distress cases.

          Why not wait six months and sign up fishermen who can't sell radioactive fish?


          Report comment

          • bo bo

            Alaskan Ice: I think in 6 months we will have enough infants on west coast with thyroid abnormalities… no? Last I checked it was 28% had abnormalities. That is more than one in four.

            Why I pull out this extremely sad fact is because nobody can say that infants are 'a bunch of histrionic hypochondriacs, up all night biting their nails over Fukushima, and claiming that they have suffered damages because of their legitimate "fear" of inhalation of hot particles from Fukushima"

            Sadly I think ( I assume just from those numbers on the infants) there are already quite obvious physical symptoms that are appearing on the west coast than just 'nail biting'.


            Report comment

          • flatsville

            Alaskan Ice and bo,

            Exactly why I brought up the issue of infants/babies/toddlers with thyroid issues with Socrates. A Seattle-wide casting call is not the way I'd approach assemblimg a plantiff pool to win a case…and with the right patient pool, this case is winnable and the PR value against nuclear enormous.


            Report comment

          • Socrates

            Dream Team refers to several top litigation firms. The ON Simpson team was just a few criminal defense lawyers. It is a misnomer.

            I would hate to cheapen your precious anti-nuclear concepts by suggesting that victims of low – dose but continuous exposures just might be entitled to compensation. If there are hypochondriac out there do you not trust juries to look at each person's claims?

            Many non – tort lawyers do not know a multi – plaintiff action from a class action. Do you?

            The guys aboard the USA Reagan are no more discarding of compensation that the children of Chernobyl, Fukushima, or the USA.

            I could lecture to you about the effort that is long overdue by lawyers to take this effort on. Where were you with Bhopal or Exxon – Valdez?


            Report comment

  • 6feetunder 6feetunder

    http://celdf.org/blog

    community environmental defense fund is not listing anything about Fuku or GE, Tepco


    Report comment

  • ManWithThePlan ManWithThePlan

    HOW MUCH MORE PROOF DOES ANYBODY NEED?! These people are in peak physical conditions, they are (were) probably healthier than anyone on these forums right now/any 'experts' monitoring their case/nuke shills/MSM; on top of that, they're serving their country (for better or worse) without question, yet they have to have their word doubted for some reason? What kind of an upside world do we live in when these soldiers' hard evidence is taken under scrutiny, and the subjective word of some douchebag on TEPCO's payroll is taken as scientific fact?

    "Around 5 months after 3/11 his] body began to betray him"

    It isn't the soldiers bodies that are betraying them, it is the nuclear industry.

    In the article, the soldier mentions his mindset being affected. As a sidenote, I'm interested in the mental effects of radiation on these soldiers as well as on Fukushima victims in Japan/elsewhere, if someone could briefly describe some of the problems in a sentence, I would be very grateful and would give that person(s) $10 internet dollars.


    Report comment

    • Sally Sally

      Do you have any idea how long the Agent Orange lawsuits went merely trying to establish causation? Millions and millions in legal fees were burned up over, what?, more than a decade?


      Report comment

      • ManWithThePlan ManWithThePlan

        Oh, I'm sure if we can build nanomachines and harness the power of cloud computing, we can figure out how to fool those bureaucrats at their own game and gather enough proof to at least give the soldiers and their families some closure. I'm an optimist.

        Also, whether or not they win or lose the lawsuit at this point is largely irrelevant. At the very least, this case will succeed in turning the public's naive eye to what their government is doing to their military. These soldiers are just the beginning in a line long line of victims in an international crime. Pardon my language, but when the nuclear shit hits the fan (for real this time, not this little 'practice' that we've been having for the last 3 years), the people will very quickly remember these soldiers, and they're not going to care whether or not the lawsuit was successful. They will just hate; hate the government, hate Obama's spineless, bureaucratic administration; they'll hate the nuclear corporations and the entire corporatocracy even more than they do now – and that's really all that this movement is missing at this point, a bit of good ol' fashioned hate for the sociopaths in charge of this mess.

        I'm sorry, and I mean you no offence, but you and anyone that thinks that all we anti-nukers want is a winning lawsuit are naively mistaken.

        This is a movement. We do realize that scientific facts, logic and common sense WILL NOT WORK against those perpetuating the crimes.


        Report comment

        • ManWithThePlan ManWithThePlan

          As banal and cheesy as it may sound, what this movement requires right now is simple belief, spirit and determination. CEOs and governments are used to reducing everything to democratic processes, numbers, etc. The higher the number in their bank account, the higher the number on the streets, the higher the number of poisons in their food, the more they will be inclined to believe. These people live in a realm of phallic obsession where bigger means better and therefore has an absolute truth to it. Bigger guns, bigger jets, bigger armies, bigger cars, wallets, mansions, statues, government bodies – you name it, they value it.

          There are millions of people opposed to the way that world is run today – almost none of them voice this opposition. As such, the governments largely ignore

          Just look at the truckers that rode to DC to protest Obama's policies. Whichever side you may be on, you have to respect their ability to get noticed, be heard, and start a discussion.

          Agent Orange – I say LOL to you good madame, as proving Agent Orange's effects on the health of Vietnam Vets is both useless and impossible at this point. Too many records manipulated, erased; too many victims dead and buried a long time ago; too many bought out with compensation.

          WE know the truth; people like us know the truth. What IS productive at this point is to support the truth about what is happening to these soldiers, their families and everybody else that is being affected by Fukushima.


          Report comment

    • KiloCharley KiloCharley

      @ManWithThePlan, If you haven't already seen it, I suggest watching "Nuclear Savage", and/or searching "project 4.1".
      The US is perfectly willing to use humans as guinea pigs. This is only one example!
      As for mental stress on Fukushima victims, it is very real and easily searched. (and dare I say, it will become very real for the downwinders as well!). Be well, be informed.
      Do it for your children, and theirs.


      Report comment

      • ManWithThePlan ManWithThePlan

        Thanks a lot for the suggestion and link KiloCharley. I've watched both trailers – although it is painful to watch such documentaries, especially with what is going on at the moment, I am interested and will watch both documentaries to familiarise myself more with these bits of American history (not actually history, sadly).

        There's plenty of politicians that are interested in the nuclear tests; couldn't they just put them on some island and toss them a nuke? How could all those countries do this to people that weren't even their enemies?

        Maybe I'm being paranoid, but this whole thing so far feels a lot like a nuclear test on a global scale…


        Report comment

        • ManWithThePlan ManWithThePlan

          Goddamn, that kid in the 'Nuclear Savage' video looks like he got the pigment burned right out of his skin, even though his flesh seems to be intact!

          Yeah…. I think I'll stick with 'ineffective' solar panels and geothermal energy for now thanks…


          Report comment

      • ManWithThePlan ManWithThePlan

        I don't have kids, and I'll be lucky to have them in the future what with our water turning into a massive nuclear cooling system, and our air into a giant microwave oven.

        The stress aspect, and other psychological factors that are exhibited by bomb testing/meltdown victims is something that interests me for some reason. Perhaps because before 3/11, I've never heard of people's mental health being affected by radiation. You learn something new every disaster, I guess.


        Report comment

  • CaptD CaptD

    I'd like to see every sailor in the carrier group join the lawsuit, what they don't know can affect their future health!

    Being downwind from Fukushima or even living near a nuclear reactor has health issues:

    CHILD CANCER DEATHS SOAR IN ORANGE COUNTY

    In the most recent decade (1999-2009), the Orange County cancer death rate among children age 0-19 was 28% greater than the U.S. rate. This compares to just a 1% excess for the 30 years prior. A total of 312 Orange County children died from cancer in 1999-2009. The high rate in Orange County is statistically significant. While many factors can contribute to child cancer risk, radioactivity released into the environment from the aging San Onofre nuclear reactors should be considered as one potential cause.

    Source: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC Wonder. http://wonder.cdc.gov/mortSQL.html

    NOTE: Any attempt by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's to conduct a study of cancer near nuclear plants represents a serious conflict of interest. For decades, the NRC ignored the health issue of cancer near nuclear plants in its decisions to grant new reactor licenses and extend existing ones, but it has consistently maintained that the relatively low levels of radioactivity emitted from reactors fall below federally-set limits, and are not harmful to the public. Thus, the NRC has demonstrated consistent bias on the health/cancer issue, and any study it commissions and manages will also be biased…


    Report comment

  • CaptD CaptD

    Remember this is a Nuclear Aircraft Carrier Fleet, so they had the technology and training to ID all radioactive contaminates they were exposed to! These Lawyers need to do a FOI request to the US Navy and ask for answers to what levels of what radionuclides were detected when and what their orders were concerning protecting their personnel and ships!

    Salute to all Servicemen and Servicewomen…

    Politics should not trump Nuclear Safety!

    BTW: Another thing that these Lawyers need to find out is what happened to the large US barge that contained clean water that the US Navy towed to Fukushima right after 3/11/11.

    Where is it and what is its condition?

    Was it given to Japan and/or was it sunk (if so where) to get rid of it & why?


    Report comment

    • Socrates

      Nice to see you back CaptD!

      Some people do not understand that my work on nuclear at SONGS has been 100% PRO BONO.

      Every major plaintiffs' firm has rejected cases from Fukushima because of difficulty in finding domestic defendants. Causation is next to impossible to prove, although the risk of many diseases are increased. Thus liability has been evaded for 6 decades.


      Report comment

  • There were a number of boats in and out of that harbor.. we asked that question before as well.

    Where did these ships go, what did they do? Did they load up with rad water and then dump it?


    Report comment

  • Socrates

    I believe that consumers are entitled to compensation for injuries caused by negligence of others. A case against the nuclear industry is the most difficult and expensive in history. I would never take this on by myself.

    In the years to come, many residents of Canada and the US and Mexico may become sickened by exposure to Cs-137. This is not about me. This is a serious public health problem. The problem will get worse rather than better if the experts are right.

    I believe for every wrong there is or should be a right. Why should consumers suffer the losses while those who designed and promoted these dangerous reactors not be held liable. One day, your own doctor may shake his head and say, as they did with smoking, that you probably ate too much sushi or that you breathed too much air.

    I hope that we will have a remedy. The word is out there that people may have rights against those responsible. They SHOULD have rights if they don't. Call any Consumer Attorneys Association and get a referral. Participate in NRC hearings. Pay attention to Public Utility Commission hearings where these nuclear companies want to shift their loses to the ratepayers.

    If everyone was active, we would not face what we are.


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.