Watch: Police shoot protestor outside nuclear plant — Others jump into sea to avoid tear gas (VIDEO)

Published: September 10th, 2012 at 12:00 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
54 comments


h/t Ayako Oishi

Published: September 10th, 2012 at 12:00 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
54 comments

Related Posts

  1. *REMOVED* Report: Police target women & kids at nuclear protest — “They fired tear gas at us; Had I come a minute late, my 2 children would have died” September 11, 2012
  2. Explosion at French nuclear plant — At least one dead — Produces MOX fuel September 12, 2011
  3. Reuters: 7-hour emergency declared after reactor leak at Pakistani nuclear plant, no radiation damage reported ‘yet’ — Men in protective gear isolated part of plant October 20, 2011
  4. Man dies after being electrocuted at controversial new nuclear plant March 9, 2013
  5. Germany’s ‘Today’ Show rips Japan Gov’t, TEPCO — May help explain why country rejected nuclear power (VIDEO) October 21, 2011

54 comments to Watch: Police shoot protestor outside nuclear plant — Others jump into sea to avoid tear gas (VIDEO)

  • Paiute023 Paiute023

    Fukushima Fall-out in Southern Brazil ,Alert! 7.93uSV/h !!!! LAVA HOT !!! Purchase ALL 250kg Fuku Peaches @ Siam Paragon ,Bangkok,Thailand, then Dispose of ,Many thanks


    Report comment

  • m a x l i

    Did anyone ever here about brutal police action clearing the way, so solar panels or wind turbines could be installed? Sounds absurd? Because it is. But when it comes to nuclear, we somehow expect this to happen. It is normality – no matter on what continent, in what country. Nuclear power equals fascism.

    I feel for the family of the person killed. I don't think this is a fair price they had to pay for a bit of electricity.


    Report comment

    • Time Is Short Time Is Short

      This isn't about 'electricity'. It's about a worldwide race to accumulate more enriched uranium and plutonium for 'weapons of mass destruction'.

      Electricity generation is only a cover for the real purpose of these reactors. That's why the race in the Middle East to build them as fast as possible, and apparently India doesn't have enough of the stuff.

      If electricity was the urgency, it's far faster – and cheaper – to build natural gas plants. The world is swimming in natural gas, and it's dirt cheap. No, NPPs are all about weaponry. That's why the shooting will continue.


      Report comment

      • m a x l i

        @Time Is Short: I wholeheartedly agree with you. It's not about electricity. I already tried to express this in my little poem in the comment section here:
        http://enenews.com/japanese-citizens-altered-tepco-photo-hiding-hiding-video
        But that's what the nuclear shills are telling us: "Our beloved nuclear power plants have nothing to do with bombs, it's all about electricity, progress, prosperity, employment, comfort, bla, bla, bla…" But that's all lies. Anyone who has eyes and wants to see can see this, when protesters get shot.

        When someone knocks on your door, makes a friendly face and wants to sell you his products, and you say "No, thank you!", and he then pulls out a gun and shoots you, then his friendly mask is off and you see his ugly grimace. It is obvious, this behaviour is criminal. Only nuclear and other mafia organisations work like that.


        Report comment

      • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

        So true…

        And the race is 'good' for some, but not 'allowed' for others.

        Then the monopolies that have nukes create rules that are made up to prevent smaller countries from getting nukes, which would even the playing field, while others get nukes by violating those same 'rules'.


        Report comment

  • 8,000 protesters is not enough.

    "A desperate effort…" – newscaster
    "A last ditch attempt…" – Sam Daniel

    100,000 people (with Elephants) or more would be much better.

    Someday, somewhere, someone will take a stand that makes the difference. I hope that day comes soon!

    CNBC article:
    http://www.cnbc.com/id/48973611

    "First conceived in 1988, Russian-built Kudankulam was supposed to have gone into operation last year, but protesters surrounded the compound after an earthquake and tsunami hit Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, causing radiation leaks and forcing mass evacuations."

    "Nuclear accounts for less than 3 percent of total capacity."
    (currently in India)

    However…
    "India plans to add 63 gigawatts of nuclear power by building 30 REACTORS by 2032." :(

    I hope the people and families of India learn from those in Japan.

    Draw a line in the sand.
    http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1188/964853217_3736a1b688.jpg


    Report comment

  • Atomfritz Atomfritz

    My high respects to our Indian friends, who even risk death to stop the nuclear madness!

    @ maxli
    I am not really sure whether it's only about weapons. India is poor of oil, gas and coal and they perceive a need for alternatives.
    imho it isn't the need of plutonium. A few kilograms of plutonium is sufficient to deter belligerent USA, see North Korea.
    However, it's difficult, as India isn't that nuclear-mad as Uncle Sam or the Tsar ("Putin") and accepts reactor plutonium for bomb usage also. They have three reprocessing plants and try to develop an indigenous nuke industry. It's some matter of defending oneself against the Anglosaxon hegemony.


    Report comment

    • JustmeAlso

      The shackles of mother England still haunting India!


      Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      "…Anglosaxon hegemony." Atomfritz? Now that was an entertaining bit of PC. I'm supposed to believe Europeans or Americans still have a say in who's to be a nuclear player? That power was ceded-away long ago. And if you doubt that, go ask the Iranians why they're pariahs and India isn't. Oh, that's right! Because we've been 'informed' as much by our 'betters'…


      Report comment

  • Maggie123

    Earlier this morning I viewed a 1994 Canadian Film Board documentary that IMO is strongly relevant to the nuclear industry's power.

    The documentary "Who's Counting – Sex, Lies, and Global Economics", presents experiences and findings of New Zealand's Marilyn Waring's from when she took a seat in New Zealand's parliament with intent to serve her rural constituents. She eventually found herself exploring global "economic rules".

    The struggle between the people of this fishing village and an economically powerful industry is a "today" example of what Marilyn Waring tried to say years ago.

    http://www.nfb.ca/film/whos_counting/#. (Documentary is about 59min. long.)

    On nuclear and all other "earth care vs powerful industrial economic interests", I believe this still timely excellent documentary reminds us who/what the villagers, and the rest of us, are dealing with.


    Report comment

    • Radio VicFromOregon

      Thx, i'll watch.


      Report comment

    • Radio VicFromOregon

      Oh, yea! What a good reminder, Maggie123. I knew of Marilyn's work, and the fact that i did got archived in the recesses of my mind, yet she is still firmly and quietly influencing my thinking on deeper levels, especially in recognizing widely entrenched paradigms. Her model is brilliant making the whole current money/value-devalue system apparent for us all! A pure moment of genius on her part. I will definitely watch this vid again.


      Report comment

    • Maggie123

      If I apply lessons of Marilyn Waring's documentary (link above), fishing village activity would be counted as having no or certainly low "value to society". The only way their fishing and related small industries might count is through products they "market through regular market channels."

      If they sell fish to a cannery, this would count as "valued productivity". If they use the fish to feed themselves and neighbors in a low or no-cash local economy, it has no status as "economic productivity".

      By comparison, the "learned paradigm" would say a power plant has huge value, and would dismiss village concerns as uninformed.

      Movers/shakers who make big industrial decisions about land, water, and other resource use assign zero value to healthy earth/sea. The fishing practices may feed lots of people with minimal impact on shore/ocean habitat – zero value.

      The agreed upon 'checklist' that attributes value to "human activity X" is used even at national and also UN levels – it is fully global. (History briefly told in documentary.)

      I don't know how much this may have changed since docu, but from my observation – industrial decisions continue in every direction to devalue or assign zero value to "industry" such as practiced by a village. (I haven't researched this village – am making general assumptions.)

      Time to speak the language of decision makers to reach them? To describe "$$ value" to life/earth care they presently ignore?

      Time…


      Report comment

      • Maggie123

        … time for a paradigm shift!

        The documentary gave me an aha realization. As a general rule, the heavy-duty movers/shakers are totally brainwashed on what has "economic value for all society" and what does not.

        I say brainwashed because the paradigm runs so deep in standard business thinking that we don't know it's only a paradigm. It's why few if any societies place any value on child-care, for example. The paradigm, I think, is one reason those in favor of nuclear are able and willing to dismiss massive public protest.


        Report comment

        • PavewayIII PavewayIII

          All rational, healthy individuals on this planet are empathetic. It's in our DNA – we are dependent on each other and form groups because it increases our chance of survival. That empathy is projected through any group or organization that healthy people create as a collective empathy for groups other healthy people create. That, too, increases our chance of survival.

          Antisocial people – psychopaths – do not have the capability to perceive other people's feelings the way normal people do. They have an illness. Its a defect/disease because its anti-survival. A certain percentage of all people (6% by Lobaczewski's reconing) have that disease as a genetic defect.

          Healthy people can be infected (non-genetically) with this disease. Healthy organizations can be infected – a certain percentage of psychopaths in leadership positions will tip the balance. A sick organization will reward other sick people and exploit healthy people. Some healthy people can be infected by the organization's psychopathic behavior and become psychopathic themselves.

          The 'standard business thinking' you're describing is antisocial and anti-survival. It cannot be fixed by convincing a psychopathic organization or its leaders to think of others (or other groups) feelings – they are incapable of it.

          I'll challenge your last sentence's 'able and willing'. It's not a moral calculus for them, no more than a color-blind individual is 'able and willing' to ignore blue. They simply…


          Report comment

          • dharmasyd dharmasyd

            PavewayIII…Absolutely correct analysis of our situation, predicament, and a pointing in the direction of our survival in thriving togetherness. Is is too late? I hope not. Your dissection is exact and right on! May we evolve and live.


            Report comment

          • Maggie123

            Pavewaylll, I'm aware of stats on born psychopaths but I'm skeptical – not to the possibility, but to a firm percentage. My reasons are OT, or 'tangential' – it's my observation we human folk may be over-enthusiastic in accepting "brain chemistry" to explain ourselves. For me, "brain chemistry" readings are like snapshots – of the moment. I'm slow to agree that any person's pathology is permanent, (while agreeing it certainly appears so with some!) I'm a pretty solid believer that "environmental influences" are hugely complex and are the strongest sources of what we believe.

            The documentary (Canadian NFB, Waring, linked above) explains why Western powers "needed" categories that allowed decisions re "overall value" of human activity. There was a sense of urgency, an existing proposed system was implemented even though it was meant only a proposal to be developed. Eventually the UN used the same system.

            If we only had 6-7% true psychopaths, the rest of us should have been able to see through them long ago, but we haven't. We've accepted the system until fairly recently, and many accept it still.

            I think you and I fundamentally might agree, based on your statement: "Some healthy people can be infected by the organization's psychopathic behavior and become psychopathic themselves."

            I taught young children for years – it's possible to shift them from "anti-social" to "cooperative" behaviors, with vibrant community the result. (more…)


            Report comment

            • Maggie123

              It's much more difficult to shift adults, who've spent decades operating in paradigms and don't even recognize they're doing so. I wondered if there's value to "speaking the language of cost/benefit using dollars as measure". That's the language many movers/shakers speak. This is already being done when earth-care groups tackle "externalized costs" in dollar language.

              As to possibility of success "speaking dollar language", I'm not completely optimistic. It's not been a winning approach in discussions of true $$ costs to households and community in American health care reform debates.

              Re nuclear and other earth/life care, I don't know what we can do beyond what we're doing – using any/every persuasive possibility we can. It seems pretty clear the non-psychopathic large portion of the population is not aware of why it allows the mover/shakers to escort us to our doom. I've studied how this is based on psychology and dynamics but for sure would be OT if I delved into it here! :)


              Report comment

              • PavewayIII PavewayIII

                "…I wondered if there's value to "speaking the language of cost/benefit using dollars as measure?…"

                Absolutely not. A psycopath does not care how much *other* people have to spend. What's the most effective communication method to convince a person that an obviously infected wound is not infected?

                Communication, by its very nature, depends on rational, healthy, empathetic people at both ends or through time.

                Psycopaths are especially good at identifying feelings in others to exploit. They can identify and mimic empathy in others, they just lack the ability to experience empathy themselves. This makes them appear very successful – they thrive in large organizations. In a sick organization, the best ones are at the top. They are the LEAST likely to be affected by calls for change based on a benefit to *others*.

                "…It seems pretty clear the non-psychopathic large portion of the population is not aware of why it allows the mover/shakers to escort us to our doom…"

                Because of the naive assumption that psychopathic leaders are influenced by – or can be 'rationalized' into empathy. If you encounter a primitive civilization that dies from infectious wounds even though they do the mystical health dance, what would you do? It starts by educating them on the genesis of infection: the existence and nature of bacteria.


                Report comment

                • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

                  Indeed, one has only to read Karl Grossman's book,Cover Up: What You are Not Supposed to Know About Nuclear Power, available here for free http://www.thepermanentpress.com/p-354-cover-up.aspx to understand that the psychopaths knew that nuclear, for power, was more dangerous, and more costly to the rate payer, than any other form of energy generation, and still chose this madness, which can only substantiate some sort of financial incentive for our elected.

                  on page 51 of the pdf..which is an excerpt of Congressional Report 95-1009(adopted by Congress)based on a study by the Environment, Energy, and Natural Resource committees, "..If the Federal Government spent even a fraction of what it has spent on nuclear power development, for the commercialization of solar power, solar generated electricity would become economically viable within 5 years…" and that was in 1978!!!!! Our government knew, few jobs, dangerous toxins, and cheaper alternatives..but have gone full steam ahead spending our tax dollars on this insane money making machine that only benefits the top 1/4 of 1%.


                  Report comment

                • Maggie123

                  Hi Pavewaylll – I guess I wasn't clear. My interest is not in reaching "true" psychopaths but in reaching through the paradigm fog of the huge "non-psychopath" population that so far is willing to "go along with utter destruction". I think you offered valuable insight with: "A sick organization will reward other sick people and exploit healthy people. Some healthy people can be infected by the organization's psychopathic behavior and become psychopathic ('behavior' – my insert) themselves."

                  The problematic "paradigm", while not offering full explanation of cooperative behavior toward destruction, is, I suspect, another useful insight. .. just my opinion.

                  I have tracked and studied psychology a lot – it's been party of my life's work, both professionally and as independent study, and I'm in my senior years! :)


                  Report comment

                  • PavewayIII PavewayIII

                    'Paradigm fog' is a control tool by psychopaths.

                    Healthy individuals always struggle with complex decisions but are still able to make them. They allow for the fact that they may be wrong and have to change something later on – empathy is part of that equation.

                    Psycopaths running organizations don't hate healthy people, they just need to control them to fully exploit them. Easiest way? Disrupt healthy communication.

                    Rule #1: Manufacture a threat

                    Rule #2: 'Justifiable' censorship or distortion (issues of national security, 'terrorists' might use these facts, people will panic)

                    That's it. If people are not given the facts and asked to make a decision now based on limited or unknown information – a decision that would result in other people's suffering – then they tend to delay deciding rather than unintentionally making the wrong one. That's normally a healthy and appropriate response in many cases. Psycopaths are bound by no such constraint. It's far easier to decide based on maximizing their own benefit.

                    A psycopath can disrupt healthy people from communicating between themselves and making healthy (or any) decisions for a very long time. Learned helplesness results.

                    You can undo ignorance by freeing information. You can't undo learned helplessness that way. People need to understand the nature of their sick masters or the cycle will simply be repeated.


                    Report comment

      • @Maggie123
        September 10, 2012 at 10:52 pm
        Beautifully put across. It strikes a living chord in me: Take a look at
        http://practicethevedas.blogspot.in
        and http://indiahumanpopulation.blogspot.in
        Thats why modern civilization is built on false foundations and given enough time will destroy itself…shortly.
        ASSS(Antony Swamy's supreme sacrifice) will not go in vain. The protesters have not given up. 10000 and counting are still at work. How long will witches survive till the people haul them up? Not much longer. Just you wait. Just you wait.
        What a witch the CM of TN is! She calls Kudankulam(Stands for all nukes)safe! The witch does not know that she does not know that its the International Commission on Radiological Protection(sic)'s witchcraft which finds zero infant mortalities from nuclear activities when in fact my data shows that at least 26 million extra infant mortalities over the prenuclear era average for India, have occurred in India alone from internal exposure to Sr90. We are blessed with prenuclear era data and so the robustness of the results. y, the Annual Indian infant mortality from 1945 to 1997 per unit Cumulative annual Sr90 release in PBq(10^15 Becquerels) fits almost 100% with a logarithmic fit:y= -1.0196Ln(x) +14.886, with R^2= 0.9957; x= Cumulative annual Sr90 release. Demographic data from official census figures and from UNSCEAR 2000 for Sr90 releases.Thats why Opeartion Sunshine secretly collected dead baby bones from India to lie.


        Report comment

        • @Ramaswami Kumar
          September 11, 2012 at 1:34 am
          Note: PBq of Sr90 annual release, Northern Hemisphere


          Report comment

        • Maggie123

          Ramaswami Kumar: the blogspot link you give is a perfect example of genuine earth-care value, even high dollar value, left out of mover/shaker cost-benefit analyses: "Hacking away old trees for broadening roads is the worst form of crass consumerism. We need trees. An audit of Bangalore's trees has shown that (Bangalore)Bengaluru meets the need of drinking water entirely by its trees: …In the process it generates a water cash flow annually amounting to three trillion rupees!"

          Those opposing cutting those valuable established trees, and all they represent, are attempting to use "dollar language" to penetrate the paradigm of those who would cut them "on behalf of progress".

          We have such a tremendous task – shifting this mind-set!!


          Report comment

          • Maggie123

            Trees discussed here: practicethevedas.blogspot.in
            (I didn't make clear which link.) Your other link is as distressing or worse! I think it's the one you cite notes from re the nuclear age's deadly effects to the population of India, dating from 1945! Buckminster Fuller's prognosis for humanity: "touch and go whether we'll make it".

            Ayiee!


            Report comment

          • @Maggie123
            September 11, 2012 at 12:23 pm
            Thanks Maggie123 for the trouble of reading thru the blog and giving your reactions. Yes it is a mammoth task,but as Wendell Berry would say: In its difficulty lies the possibility of success in achieving by action the value- our desire to be fulfilled. I think in my own way that the Amishes are a good example of one way to live. Have you met them and are you familiar with their way of life?


            Report comment

            • Maggie123

              Ramaswami Kumar: I've not lived near Amish communities but am familiar and am even more familiar with Mennonite. Mennonite practices vary widely in simplicity – have known some who've shifted entirely to secular economic values, and others very mindful of earth-care and simplicity. I think both cultures have much to offer as insights on minimizing earth destruction – but have to also say I'd not thrive in these communities due to other fairly rigid expectations, especially gender based. My reservations however do not stop me one iota from deep respect and appreciation for wisdom available from these communities! :)


              Report comment

  • Radio VicFromOregon

    Interesting discussion beginning to form on the social and economic forces that underpin the choice or compliance of developing nations to accept nuclear power generation. All relevant, and i'd add that it is the form of power generation that comes with lots of Western dollars to build if you are thought to be allies.

    As for the need for enriched uranium to make more weapons – yeah, perhaps, but we have so much of the stuff now that the US is using it for bomb casings. I'd argue that the deeper motivation is still profit and power, but in the making of the stuff, not in the accumulating of it. One main development branch in the nuclear power field is the MOX fuel programs, hoping to get rid of the stuff by reusing it, which, in their minds, once they figure out how to do accomplish it, will be their long awaited answer to what to do with spent fuel, and thus, tada!, rendering nuclear power safe, barring ay reactor disasters.


    Report comment

    • m a x l i

      @VicFromOregon, I'm note sure what you mean by "bomb casings", but I thought for that purpose 'depleted' uranium is being used, which is in a sense the opposite to 'enriched' uranium (or call it the waste product of uranium enrichment!)


      Report comment

    • @VicFromOregon
      September 10, 2012 at 4:16 pm
      Choice arising mostly by either ignorance or neglecting to do homework on energy audit of nuclear power programmes from start to finish. Irresponsible witches. Nuclear power programmes consume much much more energy than they ever deliver during their entire lifetime. As far as safety is concerned they are all cooked up. Criminals.


      Report comment

      • m a x l i

        @Ramaswami Kumar, you said: "Nuclear power programmes consume much much more energy than they ever deliver during their entire lifetime."

        That is a claim which I'm inclined to believe (after all I learned the last 18 month), but difficult to prove. If this was a proven fact, it would shorten up all discussions about nuclear power greatly. I would like to know what brings you to that conviction.


        Report comment

        • VanneV anne

          Uranium Reserve, Nuclear Fuel Cycle Delusion,CO2 Emission from the Sea, and Electricity Supply: Reflections after the Fuel Meltdown of Fukushima Nuclear Power Units more
          http://tokushima-u.academia.edu/KozoMayumi/Papers/944940/Uranium_Reserve_Nuclear_Fuel_Cycle_Delusion_CO2_Emission_from_the_Sea_and_Electricity_Supply_Reflections_after_the_Fuel_Meltdown_of_Fukushima_Nuclear_Power_Units

          "Do nuclear power stations emit greenhouse gases?
          The "smoke like gas" emitted from nuclear power stations is water vapor. And though water vapor is technically a "greenhouse gas", the amount emitted by nuclear power stations is a drop in the bucket compared to all the other sources of water vapor. However these gases are released at high temperatures, so they are injected high into the atmosphere.
          "Nuclear power produces far less emissions than a coal-burning power plant, but it is not entirely "emissions-free", as some people claim.
          "To dig up the uranium and extract the ore produces between 10 and 50 tonnes of carbon dioxide for every tonne of uranium oxide.
          "A normal nuclear power plant producing 1000MW needs 200 tonnes of uranium oxide per year, which means between 2000 and 10 000 tonnes of Carbon dioxide per year, just mining the fuel. Not to mention the carbon from the shipping of the fuel."
          http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_nuclear_power_stations_emit_greenhouse_gases


          Report comment

          • @anne
            September 11, 2012 at 7:19 am
            Thank you Anne for providing the link to Maxli and associated disc. There is a very important point that comes up when one discusses the energy audit regarding the release of massive amounts of greenhouse gases by a nuclear power programme as it proceeds year after year during a growth phase of meeting electricity needs. It will be noticed that the nuclear reactor stations under construction require enormous amounts of energy for their construction, for example to manufacture steel and cement for them. This has to come from the grid via thermal power plants fired by coal and hydroelectric power to meet load changes. Both are vociferous greenhouse gas emitters. If you look at the USA and Indian nuke programmes the growth phase may last 30 years and throughout this period coal fired plants deliver the energy to the nuke industry for this construction purpose. Further steel canisters are required to store the nuclear wastes and energy is required to keep the spent fuel pools cool. See USA programme at
            http://energyauditofnuclearfuelcycles.blogspot.in/
            Now there are nukes which undergo decommissioning. Energy is required for this as part of the programme. If a significant emission reduction from nukes is to be quickly brought about the growth cannot be brief because the fossil peaking would begin to hurt! And year after year the added nuke capacity goes to meet the needs of the nukes and not society outside nuke industry! GHG catastrophe!


            Report comment

            • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

              Ramaswami Kumar, thank you for the link that Anne has shared :) I found it by accident some time ago, after truly becoming convinced we were net zero or less with regards to using nuclear as power, and I have been sharing your blog around ever since.. I did leave a comment, on your blog, asking about updated information. Do you know if this work has continued? Is there any update, or one forthcoming, as the data occurs to only be through 1991.

              This data supports the notion that the consumer has been duped! ..and the taxpayer is a fool. baaa baaa baaa (sheeple translation)


              Report comment

            • VanneV anne

              Actually, Cataclysmic pointed it out to me on the General Discussion Forum recently. TY, to both of you.


              Report comment

            • @Maxli, Anne and Cataclysmic
              September 11, 2012 at 1:01 pm
              The Indian programme audit is at:
              http://energyauditnuclearprogrammeindia.blogspot.in/
              Yes the discussion ends at around 1991 for the USA and also the India programme analysis covers a 30 year span.
              The audit goes on and on in the same way in a growth phase because more nuke construction means more energy from coal etc. But then the dangers go on accumulating and waste management and spent fuel pools and decommissioning all become intractable. Until finally you land at five or more times the energy that these programmes ever generate during each reactor's lifetime, for the nuclear ventures! But as discussed the safety audit becomes another nightmare with earthquakes around with their nuclear effects.The dangers of MOX are still an unknown factor. This is a futile programme the nukes leading as you have all been discussing- to extinction from illth and filth and explosions.


              Report comment

  • PavewayIII PavewayIII

    So, I *did* watch. Which part had the police shooting the protester?

    The first links refers to a fisherman being shot by police, but at some other location, not 'at the nuclear plant' or during the part of the protest *at* the plant.

    The second link is on a subscription site and agrees with the title, but only briefly in the 'free' summary.


    Report comment

    • aigeezer aigeezer

      Other links are starting to show up. Perhaps worth comparing versions. I get 7890 results from a "kudankulam protest" query, including this spin-loaded version:

      http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_protesters-getting-support-from-foreign-ngos-govt_1739124

      Looks like we've got some homework to do.


      Report comment

      • PavewayIII PavewayIII

        This is titled "Watch: Police shoot protestor outside nuclear plant…" What is there to compare? It's like a tabloid headline on the National Enquirer.

        There was a big protest at the plant – police fired tear-gas.

        A fisherman with some connection to the overall protest was killed by police in a different place the previous night(?).

        I'm starting to see a pattern of sensational but deceptive headlines here. Does ENEnews make money somehow for someone clicking on a headline?


        Report comment

        • aigeezer aigeezer

          Reuters put it this way:

          "(Reuters) – A fisherman was killed on Monday after police opened fire to clear a highway blocked by demonstrators protesting against the country's largest nuclear power project, due to start up within weeks after months of opposition."

          http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/10/india-nuclear-kudankulam-protesters-idINDEE88908920120910

          The Hindu (online) throws a nuke shill letter to the editor into the mix: "A comparison with Japan — Fukushima — is not appropriate. It was not the failure of a nuclear reactor that caused the Fukushima disaster; it was a tsunami triggered by an earthquake that affected the reactor (sic)."

          Times of India put it this way:

          "Anti-Kudankulam protests turn violent, one killed in police firing. A 44-year old fisherman was killed when police opened fire at a group of people who clashed with them while blocking a road in Manapad coastal village as the protest spilled to neighbouring Tuticorin District, police said."

          On and on – the usual media mixed bag. Plenty more (to compare). Admin's headline seems about the same as many to my eyes, although it might disappoint anyone looking forward to watching the actual shooting. There appears to be no doubt that a protestor was shot and killed by police though. Surely that is the main point.


          Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    The only way to safeguard India from a Fukushima Daiichi type nuclear disaster (is to not allow the nuclear power plant).


    Report comment