Watch: Japanese journalists reveal radiation cover-up after Fukushima (VIDEO)

Published: February 13th, 2013 at 12:39 pm ET
By

10 comments


Title: Issues of Radioactive Exposure are Considered Taboo on Japanese Media
Source: World Network for Saving Children from Radiation
Date Recorded: Dec. 20, 2012
Date Published: Feb. 13, 2013

At 2:30 in

Takashi Uesugi, Journalist: I can only write about the reality of nuclear power […]  Anything implying the danger of radiation is not [accepted].

At 3:30 in

Kazuhiro Haraguchi, former Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications: It is still taboo to talk about radiation exposure […] In June 2011 […] we also demanded the government evacuate at least women and children. [...] I think it is the Japanese government [that made it a taboo to discuss radiation exposure].

Watch the video here

Published: February 13th, 2013 at 12:39 pm ET
By

10 comments

10 comments to Watch: Japanese journalists reveal radiation cover-up after Fukushima (VIDEO)

  • Time Is Short Time Is Short

    "It is still taboo to talk about radiation exposure… In June 2011… we also demanded the government evacuate at least women and children."

    Prove it. Otherwise, it's just ass-covering.

    As the truth starts to spread, there will be many 'killers' looking to prevent the knowledge of their involvement. How many people at the Nuremburg trials said they did what they could to save human life, that they were not guilty of murder? All of them. Or will the Japanese government murderers say they were 'under orders'? Sound familiar?


    Report comment

  • PhilipUpNorth

    On 3/15/2011, when it was clear to the Japanese Government that Tokyo must surely be evacuated, officials thought about:
    The panic among 30,000,000 evacuees
    The logistics of moving so many people
    The impossibility of housing and feeding them in a new location
    The impact on the economy
    They just threw up their hands, and "Left the situation to luck."
    (The US Government would just as surely do the same exact thing! Does anyone have any doubt at all?)
    Well, as "luck" would have it, most of those 30,000,000 Tokyo residents will develop cancer or radiation-induced disease. And the economy will limp on, limited by sickness, for another ten years, or so.
    Japan is toast. I don't like thinking about what the future holds for the Japanese. "Support By Eating". "This seafood has been tested, and is safe for eating." "Incineration disperses radiation over such a large area that it is no longer harmful." So sad. But no help for it now. The die is cast. :(


    Report comment

  • Nuclear Power IS a cover-up from the word 'go'.

    IMO – The Nuclear Industry's thinking is backwards.

    First the 'dangers of radiation' should be discussed and understood.
    (Things like… the RISK to every living thing on the planet.)

    Second. Then, the 'reality' of Nuclear Power.
    (The reality would become clear.)

    ;)
    They don't talk much about the 'spread' of PLUTONIUM either.(?)


    Report comment

    • moonshellblue moonshellblue

      Yes, I was very disappointed hearing Arnie Gundersen say that he thinks that nuclear power plants can be safe. What about all the spent fuel? All that waste which is just growing and growing with no means of sage disposal even dry casks leak. I thought Arnie was anti-nuke or perhaps he is scared to condemn the industry and considering what they have put him through I certainly don't blame him but really, a safe nuclear power plant? As far as I'm concerned there is no such thing. JMHO


      Report comment

      • patb2009

        below 100 mw it's probbaly safer.


        Report comment

      • razzz razzz

        Arnie walks a fine line between not be prejudice pro/con nuke power. To maintain his scientific opinion as valid he tries hard not to be labelled other than a scientist. Besides, actions speak louder than words.

        Reporters are always trying to draw him into a category other than science.


        Report comment

        • Beliefs based in data are scientific.

          There is no "scientific" reason for neutrality on the issue of nuclear safety.

          There is now considerable empirical evidence that nuclear power is NOT safe and that radiation destroys DNA of all living organisms.

          I appreciate Gundersen's advocacy very much. I recently heard him say that nuclear is not in fact safe.

          Has he changed his stance on this?


          Report comment

          • Time Is Short Time Is Short

            I don't know of any information where Arnie feels any differently regarding the non-safety of even low levels of radiation, or any design of NPP that would be acceptable.


            Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Not just Japan ..radiation exposure is kept a secret worldwide. Europe, United States, and Japan's farmland is contaminated ..we need focus on outlawing the technology that's wrecking our planet.


    Report comment