Out-of-Control Nuclear Apocalypse in Japan is Here!

One of my all time favorite quotes is this: A religious man goes to church and thinks about fishing whereas a spiritual man goes fishing and thinks about god.

ELVIS COSTELLO - WAITING FOR THE END OF THE WORLD

I've been to church many times in my life. I was brought up in a Baptist household yet went to Catholic school. I've seen fire and brimstone. I been shamed into tithing.


Whenever a priest, pastor or minister screams from the pulpit spewing forth fire and brimstone about "the end," "apolcalypse" or redemption, is it so necessary for you to hear "evidence" of this from that man and his "proof" as written in scriptures? 


No, right? You know where he's coming from.


I have heard all the evidence before many times in my ife... It's always quotes from a 2,000 year old book. Nothing wrong with that. 2,000 years is an excellent run on the top seller list.


These men will go on and quote for you the exact place and chapter where "it is written"... 


The bombast continues... "The scriptures speak of the end of the world! Current events were predicted in the bible!" 


Or my favorite:


"The apocalypse is upon us!"


Like most of you who have heard this stuff, I yawn. I've been hearing this stuff all my life. Humans have heard these claims since the beginning of society. Hell, the end of the world happened just last May.


I'm still here. How about you? 


Whenever I hear people using this type of terminology like "apocalypse" or "the end" or "redemption," I usually question their sanity. Unless, of course, they are behind the pulpit whereby, instead of questioning their sanity, I know exactly what they want; I reach for my wallet. 


People who use these sorts of terms are usually trying to scare you into doing something that you wouldn't normally do or they intend to scare you into paying them money.


Gee, if the end is so near and the apocalypse is upon us, then what do they need money for? If I really knew the world was going to end soon, I certainly wouldn't be going to work and trying to make a living. Would you? I'd be out having fun or stone drunk.


I most certainly wouldn't be writing this blog, that's for sure.


In 1977, I fell in love with Punk Rock music. I really liked the nihilistic fatalism idea that many of the kids had back then. I thought it was much more realistic than the "Rah-rah High School!" nonsense that most of the brain dead were spewing.


I don't know if all of us so-called "Punks" believed that nihilism and fatalism (I didn't) but it sure was funny when applied properly.


One of my favorite times was when I was hanging out with some punks and some guy was complaining incessantly about how crappy his job or love life was (I can't remember the details and I think he was combing his hair while doing it), and this girl, instead of saying, "Shut up!" to him snarled, "Why don't you just kill yourself and do us all a favor?"


I laughed so hard. I thought that was hilarious! I still laughed when I think about that. 


I still think about that sometimes whenever I hear too much complaining. I always think that whenever I hear too much preaching... Whether or not that preaching is related to religion or not.


Today I was sent another pile of rubbish written by a nonsense writer (albeit very erudite, I'm sure) named Keith Harmon Snow who writes sensationalism to the extreme.


The article was entitled: Fukushima and the Mass Media Meltdown - The Repercussions of a Pro-Nuclear Corporate Press.


I was asked to read it and give an opinion. First off, I was wondering what Pro-Nuclear Corporate Press he was talking about? 


Was it Nancy Grace?

Or CNN's Anderson Cooper? Who garnered this criticism from a Japanese publication that followed him around.

In a live back-and-forth [from Japan] with a nuclear expert back in the studio in America, Cooper peppered his fellow reporters with questions like “How far are we from Fukushima?” and “Which way is the wind blowing?” Upon hearing that he was more than 100 kilometers distant from the Fukushima reactors, he exclaimed “Then shouldn’t we get out of here?” Whether he was doing this in order to build a sense of drama, or out of sincere apprehension, we don’t know. But what is clear is that he made no attempt to calmly ascertain the facts of the situation, and in so doing needlessly fanned the fears of the audience.'

If Anderson Cooper is not main stream mass media, then I'm colonel Sanders. You can go here, to the JP Quake Wall of Shame and find a litany of nonsense and exaggerration reported by the mainstream media.


Anyway, on the article in question, I couldn't read past the first paragraph. It totally gave this writer away. He is ranting, he is preaching. In his first paragraph, he described the following article as:

"... A sociological and technological discussion -- in the wake of the out-of-control nuclear apocalypse in Japan..."

Stop the presses!!! Did this guy actually write, "nuclear apocalypse in Japan"!? Nuclear apocalypse!? Oh really? 


Immediately I raise my hand and stand waving towards the pulpit. 


"Mr. Preacher, sir. Are you aware of the definition of 'apocalypse'?" 


"Indeed son, I am," says he. He holds the bible to his chest, closes his eyes, raises his hand and begins quoting the scripture from memory for his evidence. 


I, on the other hand, open my iPhone and look up the definition of apocalypse. 


It says:


Apolcalypse. Noun. Bible. The Book of Revelation


a) Any of a number of anonymous Jewish or Christian texts from around the second century B.C. to the second century A.D. containing prophetic or symbolic visions, especially of the imminent destruction of the world and the salvation of the righteous.


b) Great or total devastation; doom: the apocalypse of nuclear war

Gee! Great or total devastation? That sounds pretty bad. Nuclear war? Imminent destruction of the world? Salvation of the righteous? Wow! It's over, my friends. The end of the world!


Surely, Keith Harmon Snow knows something that we all don't.

Wait a minute! In the definition of apocalypse, under a (above), it says, "anonymous Jewish or Christian texts"? Anonymous? You mean, some guys, who wish to remain anonymous write this stuff? Two thousand years ago and they didn't want to put their names on it and we are supposed to fear this?


At least Keith Harmon Snow has the guts to put his name on his panic-stricken excesses. 

Then, in the article in question, after the author's introductory note, in his very first sentence, he writes:

"There is overwhelming evidence that a nuclear power catastrophe in the United States is highly probable."

OK. Well, since Mr. Harmon choose not to present us with that "overwhelming" evidence, I guess we'll just have to take his word for it. I wonder how well this sort of argument would stand up in court?


I wonder why any thinking person would bother to read anymore of this bombast? Isn't it obvious that this guy is neither neutral nor fair?


Just who is Keith Harmon Snow and what are his qualifications for making any claims concerning nuclear power? Is he any more qualified to make statements about nuclear accidents than, say, some Hollywood actor does about Global Warming?


Here's what SourceWatch says about Keith Harmon Snow:

"is an independent journalist, war correspondent and photographer. He has also worked as a genocide investigator and consultant to the United Nations and other international bodies. He has won three Project Censored awards for his Central Africa reportage, is a member of the Asiana Press Agency (www.Asiana-Press-Agency.com), and he also recently worked in Afghanistan." 

"Keith Harmon Snow has worked in varying capacities in some 16 countries in Asia, Latin America and Europe, and 14 countries in Africa. A human rights investigator [formerly] working with Genocide Watch and Survivor's Rights International, he attended the International Criminal Tribunal on Rwanda, and has testified at a congressional hearing in Washington, D.C.

What an excellent record on photography and being a war correspondent... Seems a tad bit light on the nuclear engineer and radiation expert department. But hey, maybe he read, "Nuclear Accidents for Dummies!" and got real good, real fast.

Probably not.

That a supposed reputable independent research publication like Global Research would publish this pablum is a complete embarrassment. This is tabloid sensationalism level "reporting."

Even Harmon himself exposes how credible what these "sources" that he claims are as proof in his first sentence in his "Author's Note." It says:

The following report was written after learning about the pro-nuclear and corporate bias of the Society of Environmental Journalists. The American Thinker has run a good article exposing the Society of Environmental Journalists that I suggest you read. It is entitled Global Warming Propaganda Factory. Here's a quote:

I have often wondered how the media are in such lock step on Global Warming. Well, I wonder no more. Recently, I came across a website for the Society of Environmental Journalists (SEJ).  http://www.sej.org/  This website is veritable tool box for any budding reporter assigned to the global warming beat. If you're an editor at the Palookaville Post, all you have to do is send your cub reporters to this site and they'll have everything they need to write an article that fits the template and action line perfectly...


(snip)


The site is largely a compendium of links to global warming promoters. Many of the links use adjectives like prestigious, best respected, and reputation unrivaled to burnish their credibility. The so-called deniers on the other hand are described with adjectives like, highly polemical, outright false, and deceptive partisan attack dogs. The description of the Competitive Enterprise Institute is especially derisive, citing the often leveled false accusation that they are the tool of Exxon Mobil. And this is journalism at its finest?

The article in question that was published on Global Research By Mr. Snow is not neutral nor credible reporting. It is hysterical hyperbole. There are no basis in facts in that article. His very first sentence shows that he has abandoned all pretense of objectivity. 


By publishing pablum like this, the Global Research publication is losing relevance quickly and some editors need to be fired and quickly. Since when has Global Research become a sounding board for Global Warming propaganda?

That some writer, who knows nothing about the nuclear industry or the facts on the ground in Japan, would be allowed to write such idiocy is an embarrassment. That Global Research would publish this is a disgrace.

"Nuclear Apolcalypse"? Indeed.

That Keith Harmon Snow would write this stuff just shows what his intentions are: to sell stories so that he can collect money. When a pastor at the pulpit screams out about the end of the world and apocalypse, at least he has a 2,000 year old document. For his sources, Keith Harmon Snow has a bunch of poorly paid drinking buddies at the Society of Environmental Journalists.

Seriously, Keith Harmon Snow, if you really do think this is the apocalypse, then there's no hope. Everything is ruined. We're dead. You might as well give up your job and stop paying your rent. 

For the rest of us, we have lives to lead and a family to feed. We have dreams too.

If Mr. Snow, you stick by these preposterous words, "Nuclear Apocalypse" and really do think this is true, then, as my punk friends would say,

"Why don't you just kill yourself and do us all a favor?" 


Sorry, Snow, we have enough troubles on our own without hearing your nonsense. Unfortunately, just like the minister or pastor, the real reason Keith Harmon Snow writes this crap is because he wants to sell his articles & name for money. Sensationalist sh*t is a pretty easy sale.

I doubt that Keith Harmon Snow believes this nonsense he wrote. That's the difference between him and a minister... At least most of the men of the cloth believe in what they are saying....