3) A government investigation slightly lighter and slightly as oriented edges
a) almost immediate conclusions on the absence of sabotage
As for Chernobyl in Russia, government committees in charge of studying the problem have concluded very quickly technical failure and dismissed just as quickly the theory of sabotage.
four days after the accident, the FBI had already announced that the hypothesis of sabotage was ruled out and that the investigation was closed.
April 6 or 7 days after the accident, the FBI sent a telegram encrypted Cabinet Crisis of the White House saying that the sabotage was not the cause of the accident, as the member of the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) Harold Denton. As noted, there was no reasonable argument can lead to this conclusion Denton. The telegram is now in the National Archives is marked "Encrypted transmission for reasons only." Bits of this message are masked in black ink, then it is considered "unclassified", which can mean "unclassified" or "untreated." But whether one or the other, it means that it still should not have these shots of black felt.
On August 7, the Presidential Commission asked the FBI to determine the possibility of an investigation regarding the circumstances surrounding the closing of valves demineralisers. The presidential commission had the authority to request assistance to any state agency, and by vote, decided she needed the FBI. The FBI got in touch very quickly. But the NRC informed them that human error and equipment failure were the cause of the accident, and therefore an investigation was unnecessary.
be recalled that in aviation accidents, we will find downright tiny pieces Cabin on the seabed, and then reconstructs the plane, and is sought for years what has been causing the problem. There, then it is a national security problem, we know from the outset what caused the problem.
It's like what happened to the attacks of September 11, 2001. The U.S. government knew that Al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks even after half a day.
So it is clear that we wanted to eliminate any possibility of investigation and bury the affair as quickly as possible, retaining only the theory of the accident. Inevitably, since it was the government U.S. responsible for the sabotage. That he was not going to steer the investigation in this direction.
b) On the analysis of various technical problems occurred during the accident
On the problem of the valves of the secondary circuit of relief that had been closed and not reopened (and which one of LED light was hidden by label maintenance), the internal investigation did not consider the possibility of intentional closure. In addition, the NRC considered that it would take too much effort to interview the 750 people who had access to these valves. And finally, the NRC has never discovered the cause of this problem. As great investigation.
can not say they are the least bit suspicious. There is a hyper suspicious event. But they do not consider the possibility of sabotage. Well yes, obviously, since they were in cahoots. The
August 15, the presidential commission asked NASA to conduct an inspection system demineralisers. The plant managers had not even technical drawings of the equipment required for a proper inspection. NRC inspectors how could they do a decent job without these drawings? Well they could not do so simply.
Regarding the original problem of blocking valves demineralisers one of the secondary circuit, the NRC has speculated on the cause of that case: namely, that the water supply system was connected to the system pressurized air. Only when performing an experiment on demineralisers to test the hypothesis, they were unable to obtain the expected result. But despite the failure of their experience, they did not seek another possible reason the pumps stop. And they were not worried about not knowing the underlying cause of the problem.
When Airbus crash, for offending society, it is never the fault of the hardware, but almost always the pilot's. Ditto when a giant oil tanker sank on its oil and spread around scores. While there, the operators are responsible for anything. In general, companies tend to refuse to admit their responsibility in an accident. Or when there is an administration officials do not want the accident falls on their backs and defaulting to their subordinates. But here, no problem, they admit that the plant at full blast messing.
Moreover, a priori, as already mentioned above, we did not interview officials from the control center to find out what they thought of different times of disaster. It was just simply the fact that the alarms sounded from everywhere and it had not helped. Very light anyway. In any survey of this kind, usually, we try to determine exactly how the operators understood the situation during different times of disaster. Operators are asked why they did not understand the situation, and if they do not think, in retrospect, they could have done better if they did not make a mistake at a time to another. For pilots of aircraft, it's always like this. But here, no one is satisfied simply because the alarms were submerged.
c) investigators untrained and delays in the investigation
In June 1979, the NRC, through a group review of the investigation, acknowledged that his investigators had no training in investigative techniques, or knowledge of ways to find evidence or criminal investigation procedures. The NRC also wanted to believe they had no authority to compel people to take evidence under oath, when in fact they had.
The report also said that:
" An experienced inspector should have been recruited with the initial inspection team to collect evidence (notes, checklists, etc. ...), which were lost during the first days after the accident .
In addition, the review group found that NRC's investigation was hampered by the delay in receiving transcripts of interviews with workers.
It should be noted that investigators still investigating belonging to the Office of Inspection and the Implementation of the instructions, did not arrive at the station only 2 weeks after the accident. All the time it took to make them disappear incriminating evidence.
Yes, it sure the government did not really want to investigate, since it was he who was behind the "accident".
Conclusion: we can see, the government has been very light in conducting the survey and the explanations about "the accident" (normal, since he has made sabotage). But it is on at the time, with the mass media, there really was not worried. You could throw any version completely bogus, it went smoothly. They never imagined that there would one day be a thing called the Internet that allow skeptics to come and say that none of it does makes sense.
b) The report Rogovin
Mitchell Rogovin, a lawyer for wealthy clients (he was hired first at Arnold & Porter, where he became partner. Then he founded his own firm of lawyers: Rogovin, Stern & ; Huge) and also former Deputy Prosecutor General of the Government and Chief Counsel of the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) in the 60s, then special adviser to the CIA (in 75/76), is a person hired by the NRC to conduct the investigation the accident.
3 years later, in 1982, released the report Rogovin. Coincidentally, it clears the operators responsible for the accident and it involved mostly organizational issues and the flood of alarms. The report cites a number of factors beyond the control of operators involved in human error:
"The inadequate training, poor procedures, lack of skill in the diagnosis of the group's share of site management, instrumentation misleading, deficiencies of the facility, and a poorly designed control room. For these faults, industry and the NRC must share responsibility with M and Ed
"... The operators at TMI in the early morning of March 28 were faced instrumentation misleading, parameters of reactors they had never been trained to understand and procedures offered no useful assistance. "
course, the purpose of this report was to clear the 6 traitors. Rogovin and was certainly one too.
4) revelations and coincidences ladles
a) The only two anomalies found by the NRC
Coincidentally, the NRC finds nothing at all weird, where everything is extremely suspicious. And the only mistake he finds, guides, again coincidentally, fortunately to a thesis very well calculated to turn people away from the truth.
few days before the accident, a surprise inspection of the NRC concerning the protection of the plant has led to the discovery of violations of access control, while the previous inspections, which had been announced, did not find anything tel. Moreover, at the time of the accident, TMI plant was not obliged to use the new rule of "two men", which should prevent a nobody is left alone in a vital area. The plant was also not updated for other new security measures.
These "revelations" about the security flaws, in that the sabotage was carried out by government agents, are actually intended to give weight to the argument of possible terrorist plot. This is information given to believe that we could enter the plant as in a mill and walk around where we wanted, so to pretend it was not a problem for terrorists to enter into that Central. While
is absolutely false. Already, one can not enter as they please at a power plant (there are few entries, and all are heavily monitored), which invalidates the possibility of a terrorist infiltration without staff. And we certainly can not get hired so easily, without any investigation on the person.
Especially because, in the case of a terrorist infiltration with some employees of the plant would have vanished into the wild immediately after the accident. And, given that the administration must keep pictures of staff, they were quickly identified. However, a priori, it is not the case. We never had a revelation like what terrorists had infiltrated the staff.
The problem for the U.S. government is that if the conspiracy theory of terrorism is disqualified, and if you doubt the official account, we head straight to the conspiracy theory of government. Hence the attempt to steer people toward the suspicious terrorist conspiracy theory, while keeping a big blur on the subject, given the limited credibility of the case and given the original intent to favor the theory of accident.
All this may have been made to have a plan B in case a large amount of people would put not to believe the official version of the accident. But it is more likely that these beginnings of information were left bound for the most suspicious people, to guide them towards a red herring. This is the principle of gatekeepers.
Note also, that just happened unexpectedly this survey about the seriousness of access controls was made by the NRC itself, and this a few days before the disaster. Yep, it was a surprise inspection shortly before the disaster. A similar control, leading to the same conclusions that would have made six months before the terrorist conspiracy theory less easy to defend, because it would lead to the reinforcement of security.
So there, in retrospect, one might even say they were a little too much, they are a little too revealing. Because the four elements: the negative results of this unannounced inspection, the fact that it is a surprise inspection while there had apparently not been for a long time that it was made just before the disaster, and that it was made by the NRC itself, are a bit too good to be true. They may have thought this little manipulation would never detected.
Another "anomaly" revealed. The presidential commission has obtained an internal memo from the Central IMT, which was written 10 months before the accident, saying "it's time to really do something about this problem before a serious accident occurs . If polishers (the demineralisers) fail for themselves when the plant is near its full capacity, the resulting damage could be very important. "
Again, there is fortunately a memo accusing the element that will be supposedly the cause of the accident. Again, luck is a little too good. So, again, we can think we invented the memo (Or is that the well established 10 months before) to justify after the fact "the accident".
b) In the same vein, a newspaper warning about the low level of plant safety
few months after the accident, a journalist with "The Guide", a Robert Kapler, a warning about the low level of security inside the plant. He managed to get hired as a security guard. Then he managed to walk alone in strategic locations in the plant.
The goal is the same as for the "revelations" of the NRC. It a ruse to divert the minds of people suspicious of the idea that the sabotage came from within, from people in the plant. This guide them towards the idea of a terrorist plot. Perhaps also the instigators of the plot have said that the history of the NRC unannounced just before the disaster would appear suspicious, or is insufficient, and wanted to increase the credibility and weight by adding this history of infiltration by a journalist.
journalist who managed to get himself appointed safety officer should be part of the operation to believe that anyone can get hired at a nuclear plant (And therefore a terrorist). The fact that it was taken as a security guard had to be arranged.
c) Hollywood released a film of anti-nuclear at the same time just
15 days before the disaster at Three Mile Island was released a film called "The China Syndrome" starring Jane Fonda and Michael Douglas. It tells the story of an incident from a nuclear plant. This incident can lead to melt the heart of the reactor, as what happened at Three Mile Island. Here is a synopsis of the film, found on Wikipedia:
Kimberley Wells, a journalist on television, films during a documentary Incident at nuclear plant at Point Conception. His cameraman shows a nuclear engineer. In a nuclear power plant, following the runaway nuclear reaction, the heart may melt, fall into the tank, then to attack it and then begin its journey through the Earth, it cross - as if he was coming to China, hence the name.
The topic of the film of interest is that the plant has fundamental flaws that may lead to a disaster at any time. Something to scare ordinary people, enough paranoia to properly maintain the energy Nuclear.
course, in the film, the government seeks to hide the dangers of the plant to the people. That way, when in reality, a government official or a specialist on nuclear energy trying to defend this, people influenced by the film will tend not to believe them. And it's not a matter of propaganda that has been used in this film. It is found regularly in newspapers or in the movies for years.
The output of this film just before the catastrophe is obviously no coincidence. The film was released to increase the impact of the "accident" at Three Mile Island in the collective imagination.
But then, with the mass media kings, and controlled by the clique that rules the world, in the absence of alternative information, like all journalists favored the thesis that leaving this movie just before the disaster was an incredible coincidence, everyone has believed.
In addition, as is the kind of information that passes quickly in newspapers before being replaced by another, people do not have time to think about the problem. And unless they are on their guard, they accept the information without thinking about it. Magma daily news prevents reflection really different to the problems presented, if we do not allow that knowledge from the start to doubt the information. The use of emotional supports also the absence of reflection.
5) The motive for the sabotage
Why the U.S. government would do such a thing? Well, as for the Russian government about Chernobyl, just to put a halt to development of nuclear power in the world. As already mentioned in other sections, nuclear energy is a good market that allows a state to be energy independent For years, see for decades with the introduction of fast breeder reactor plants. And that's bad when one wants to control the country. While with the hydrocarbons (gas, oil, coal), one can easily turn off the tap in case of rebellion within a country.
Indeed, as in Chernobyl, this is not the U.S. government itself is behind the coup, but the clique that rules the world.
The plot against nuclear energy was in two shots: Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Three Mile Island gave a severe blow to the development of nuclear power in the world. Chernobyl and gave the coup de grace. Before
sabotage at Three Mile Island, 70% of Americans were for civil nuclear power. Just after the "accident", it was more than 50% (if the survey is not bogus of course).
But people's opinions, that's not all. It takes the media, whose power weighed heavily in the balance. One could say that it has a minimum for a correction of the view of + or - 20%. So with the media at first subtly, then more and more openly anti-nuclear, when we were 70/30 in the opinion, it was actually rather 50/50. And then when we took the 50/50, it was instead of 30/70. It must also take account of motivation in both camps. If one side, there are no longer just for people, good composition and good liver and other people who have the bit between his teeth, which are very motivated against nuclear power, ready to be in bad times for the cause, it does not have the same strength. So we can still reduce the ratio of real power.
That said, maybe the polls are cans. But whatever. These people only need to have a pretext to present to public opinion. So, true or not true, the excuse was there. And then they could stop the nuclear program peacefully. It's like weapons of mass destruction that the U.S. government has put forward to attack Iraq in 2003. It was clear from the outset they did not exist. But whatever. Is to have an excuse to present to public opinion was important, as fallacious as it is.
Then, during the early '80s, the development of civilian nuclear power has undergone a sharp slowdown in the world. Then in the late 80s, after Chernobyl, it was almost completely stopped.
6) What's really happening
Apparently, that night, there were only 3 people in the control room: William Zewe (in some documents it was Bill instead of William), the supervisor, and 2 operators and Edward Frederick Craig Faust . Incidentally, they had all three of the army. A central
2 reactors, an average 600 people who work there. But most of the performers. Everything is decided in the control room for the essentials. So, just as some people working in the control room are traitors, and 3 or 4 technicians working in the field. The traitors in the field have only trigger first big failure, so that later, everything goes from the control room. If there are honest people on the staff of the control room, you can also send them to conduct audits in the plant to keep them away.
So, a priori, that's how it happened. At least 6 people were traitors. The two operators who have sabotaged demineralisers valves and injection safety, foreman Fred Sheimann; and 3 operators in the control room (Bill Zewe supervisor, and Craig and Edward Frederick Faust).
At 4 hours, two technicians working on demineralisers sabotage them. Detail, there was a party held with the staff just at that time (almost to the minute) to celebrate the first year of operation of the plant. Probably the saboteurs took the opportunity to remove some people where going to pass the initial sabotage. Then, the operators of the control room take over to continue the sabotage. They had previously sabotaged the discharge valve so that it can not heal. The two operators who had looked after the plumbing valves closed circuit water injection safety in the secondary circuit. And they also put a label maintenance to mask the signal for closing the valve in question, to justify that they did not see during the "accident". Maybe the software has simply been sabotaged so that certain elements are defective. Moreover, as noted, few minutes after the start of the "accident", they turned off the water injection automatic safety.
They were so easy to play those who do not understand what was happening, and let the water escape slowly from the primary circuit. They waited quietly for three hours as it is emptied of its water and the heart partly based. They played as fools for all the indicators that might make them realize what was happening. For example, they could see perfectly well that in reality the pressure gauge indicated that it decreased. And alerts to radioactivity should work perfectly.
They have erased all traces of their lies about the indicators by purging the memory of the printer. And then, once the heart sufficiently damaged, and once dropped radioactive steam outside the plant, they presented the heart under water. The objective was achieved. Then, the official commission of inquiry was charged to bury the case quickly done well. Everything was done overnight, so that there is the least possible reactions.
That said, perhaps in reality, none of this has happened, and everything was bogus to pretend that such a thing happened. At the moment there is conspiracy, the conspirators have mastered and where the mass media to 100%, everything can be suspect.
a) almost immediate conclusions on the absence of sabotage
As for Chernobyl in Russia, government committees in charge of studying the problem have concluded very quickly technical failure and dismissed just as quickly the theory of sabotage.
four days after the accident, the FBI had already announced that the hypothesis of sabotage was ruled out and that the investigation was closed.
April 6 or 7 days after the accident, the FBI sent a telegram encrypted Cabinet Crisis of the White House saying that the sabotage was not the cause of the accident, as the member of the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) Harold Denton. As noted, there was no reasonable argument can lead to this conclusion Denton. The telegram is now in the National Archives is marked "Encrypted transmission for reasons only." Bits of this message are masked in black ink, then it is considered "unclassified", which can mean "unclassified" or "untreated." But whether one or the other, it means that it still should not have these shots of black felt.
On August 7, the Presidential Commission asked the FBI to determine the possibility of an investigation regarding the circumstances surrounding the closing of valves demineralisers. The presidential commission had the authority to request assistance to any state agency, and by vote, decided she needed the FBI. The FBI got in touch very quickly. But the NRC informed them that human error and equipment failure were the cause of the accident, and therefore an investigation was unnecessary.
be recalled that in aviation accidents, we will find downright tiny pieces Cabin on the seabed, and then reconstructs the plane, and is sought for years what has been causing the problem. There, then it is a national security problem, we know from the outset what caused the problem.
It's like what happened to the attacks of September 11, 2001. The U.S. government knew that Al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks even after half a day.
So it is clear that we wanted to eliminate any possibility of investigation and bury the affair as quickly as possible, retaining only the theory of the accident. Inevitably, since it was the government U.S. responsible for the sabotage. That he was not going to steer the investigation in this direction.
b) On the analysis of various technical problems occurred during the accident
On the problem of the valves of the secondary circuit of relief that had been closed and not reopened (and which one of LED light was hidden by label maintenance), the internal investigation did not consider the possibility of intentional closure. In addition, the NRC considered that it would take too much effort to interview the 750 people who had access to these valves. And finally, the NRC has never discovered the cause of this problem. As great investigation.
can not say they are the least bit suspicious. There is a hyper suspicious event. But they do not consider the possibility of sabotage. Well yes, obviously, since they were in cahoots. The
August 15, the presidential commission asked NASA to conduct an inspection system demineralisers. The plant managers had not even technical drawings of the equipment required for a proper inspection. NRC inspectors how could they do a decent job without these drawings? Well they could not do so simply.
Regarding the original problem of blocking valves demineralisers one of the secondary circuit, the NRC has speculated on the cause of that case: namely, that the water supply system was connected to the system pressurized air. Only when performing an experiment on demineralisers to test the hypothesis, they were unable to obtain the expected result. But despite the failure of their experience, they did not seek another possible reason the pumps stop. And they were not worried about not knowing the underlying cause of the problem.
When Airbus crash, for offending society, it is never the fault of the hardware, but almost always the pilot's. Ditto when a giant oil tanker sank on its oil and spread around scores. While there, the operators are responsible for anything. In general, companies tend to refuse to admit their responsibility in an accident. Or when there is an administration officials do not want the accident falls on their backs and defaulting to their subordinates. But here, no problem, they admit that the plant at full blast messing.
Moreover, a priori, as already mentioned above, we did not interview officials from the control center to find out what they thought of different times of disaster. It was just simply the fact that the alarms sounded from everywhere and it had not helped. Very light anyway. In any survey of this kind, usually, we try to determine exactly how the operators understood the situation during different times of disaster. Operators are asked why they did not understand the situation, and if they do not think, in retrospect, they could have done better if they did not make a mistake at a time to another. For pilots of aircraft, it's always like this. But here, no one is satisfied simply because the alarms were submerged.
c) investigators untrained and delays in the investigation
In June 1979, the NRC, through a group review of the investigation, acknowledged that his investigators had no training in investigative techniques, or knowledge of ways to find evidence or criminal investigation procedures. The NRC also wanted to believe they had no authority to compel people to take evidence under oath, when in fact they had.
The report also said that:
" An experienced inspector should have been recruited with the initial inspection team to collect evidence (notes, checklists, etc. ...), which were lost during the first days after the accident .
In addition, the review group found that NRC's investigation was hampered by the delay in receiving transcripts of interviews with workers.
It should be noted that investigators still investigating belonging to the Office of Inspection and the Implementation of the instructions, did not arrive at the station only 2 weeks after the accident. All the time it took to make them disappear incriminating evidence.
Yes, it sure the government did not really want to investigate, since it was he who was behind the "accident".
Conclusion: we can see, the government has been very light in conducting the survey and the explanations about "the accident" (normal, since he has made sabotage). But it is on at the time, with the mass media, there really was not worried. You could throw any version completely bogus, it went smoothly. They never imagined that there would one day be a thing called the Internet that allow skeptics to come and say that none of it does makes sense.
b) The report Rogovin
Mitchell Rogovin, a lawyer for wealthy clients (he was hired first at Arnold & Porter, where he became partner. Then he founded his own firm of lawyers: Rogovin, Stern & ; Huge) and also former Deputy Prosecutor General of the Government and Chief Counsel of the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) in the 60s, then special adviser to the CIA (in 75/76), is a person hired by the NRC to conduct the investigation the accident.
3 years later, in 1982, released the report Rogovin. Coincidentally, it clears the operators responsible for the accident and it involved mostly organizational issues and the flood of alarms. The report cites a number of factors beyond the control of operators involved in human error:
"The inadequate training, poor procedures, lack of skill in the diagnosis of the group's share of site management, instrumentation misleading, deficiencies of the facility, and a poorly designed control room. For these faults, industry and the NRC must share responsibility with M and Ed
"... The operators at TMI in the early morning of March 28 were faced instrumentation misleading, parameters of reactors they had never been trained to understand and procedures offered no useful assistance. "
course, the purpose of this report was to clear the 6 traitors. Rogovin and was certainly one too.
4) revelations and coincidences ladles
a) The only two anomalies found by the NRC
Coincidentally, the NRC finds nothing at all weird, where everything is extremely suspicious. And the only mistake he finds, guides, again coincidentally, fortunately to a thesis very well calculated to turn people away from the truth.
few days before the accident, a surprise inspection of the NRC concerning the protection of the plant has led to the discovery of violations of access control, while the previous inspections, which had been announced, did not find anything tel. Moreover, at the time of the accident, TMI plant was not obliged to use the new rule of "two men", which should prevent a nobody is left alone in a vital area. The plant was also not updated for other new security measures.
These "revelations" about the security flaws, in that the sabotage was carried out by government agents, are actually intended to give weight to the argument of possible terrorist plot. This is information given to believe that we could enter the plant as in a mill and walk around where we wanted, so to pretend it was not a problem for terrorists to enter into that Central. While
is absolutely false. Already, one can not enter as they please at a power plant (there are few entries, and all are heavily monitored), which invalidates the possibility of a terrorist infiltration without staff. And we certainly can not get hired so easily, without any investigation on the person.
Especially because, in the case of a terrorist infiltration with some employees of the plant would have vanished into the wild immediately after the accident. And, given that the administration must keep pictures of staff, they were quickly identified. However, a priori, it is not the case. We never had a revelation like what terrorists had infiltrated the staff.
The problem for the U.S. government is that if the conspiracy theory of terrorism is disqualified, and if you doubt the official account, we head straight to the conspiracy theory of government. Hence the attempt to steer people toward the suspicious terrorist conspiracy theory, while keeping a big blur on the subject, given the limited credibility of the case and given the original intent to favor the theory of accident.
All this may have been made to have a plan B in case a large amount of people would put not to believe the official version of the accident. But it is more likely that these beginnings of information were left bound for the most suspicious people, to guide them towards a red herring. This is the principle of gatekeepers.
Note also, that just happened unexpectedly this survey about the seriousness of access controls was made by the NRC itself, and this a few days before the disaster. Yep, it was a surprise inspection shortly before the disaster. A similar control, leading to the same conclusions that would have made six months before the terrorist conspiracy theory less easy to defend, because it would lead to the reinforcement of security.
So there, in retrospect, one might even say they were a little too much, they are a little too revealing. Because the four elements: the negative results of this unannounced inspection, the fact that it is a surprise inspection while there had apparently not been for a long time that it was made just before the disaster, and that it was made by the NRC itself, are a bit too good to be true. They may have thought this little manipulation would never detected.
Another "anomaly" revealed. The presidential commission has obtained an internal memo from the Central IMT, which was written 10 months before the accident, saying "it's time to really do something about this problem before a serious accident occurs . If polishers (the demineralisers) fail for themselves when the plant is near its full capacity, the resulting damage could be very important. "
Again, there is fortunately a memo accusing the element that will be supposedly the cause of the accident. Again, luck is a little too good. So, again, we can think we invented the memo (Or is that the well established 10 months before) to justify after the fact "the accident".
b) In the same vein, a newspaper warning about the low level of plant safety
few months after the accident, a journalist with "The Guide", a Robert Kapler, a warning about the low level of security inside the plant. He managed to get hired as a security guard. Then he managed to walk alone in strategic locations in the plant.
The goal is the same as for the "revelations" of the NRC. It a ruse to divert the minds of people suspicious of the idea that the sabotage came from within, from people in the plant. This guide them towards the idea of a terrorist plot. Perhaps also the instigators of the plot have said that the history of the NRC unannounced just before the disaster would appear suspicious, or is insufficient, and wanted to increase the credibility and weight by adding this history of infiltration by a journalist.
journalist who managed to get himself appointed safety officer should be part of the operation to believe that anyone can get hired at a nuclear plant (And therefore a terrorist). The fact that it was taken as a security guard had to be arranged.
c) Hollywood released a film of anti-nuclear at the same time just
15 days before the disaster at Three Mile Island was released a film called "The China Syndrome" starring Jane Fonda and Michael Douglas. It tells the story of an incident from a nuclear plant. This incident can lead to melt the heart of the reactor, as what happened at Three Mile Island. Here is a synopsis of the film, found on Wikipedia:
Kimberley Wells, a journalist on television, films during a documentary Incident at nuclear plant at Point Conception. His cameraman shows a nuclear engineer. In a nuclear power plant, following the runaway nuclear reaction, the heart may melt, fall into the tank, then to attack it and then begin its journey through the Earth, it cross - as if he was coming to China, hence the name.
The topic of the film of interest is that the plant has fundamental flaws that may lead to a disaster at any time. Something to scare ordinary people, enough paranoia to properly maintain the energy Nuclear.
course, in the film, the government seeks to hide the dangers of the plant to the people. That way, when in reality, a government official or a specialist on nuclear energy trying to defend this, people influenced by the film will tend not to believe them. And it's not a matter of propaganda that has been used in this film. It is found regularly in newspapers or in the movies for years.
The output of this film just before the catastrophe is obviously no coincidence. The film was released to increase the impact of the "accident" at Three Mile Island in the collective imagination.
But then, with the mass media kings, and controlled by the clique that rules the world, in the absence of alternative information, like all journalists favored the thesis that leaving this movie just before the disaster was an incredible coincidence, everyone has believed.
In addition, as is the kind of information that passes quickly in newspapers before being replaced by another, people do not have time to think about the problem. And unless they are on their guard, they accept the information without thinking about it. Magma daily news prevents reflection really different to the problems presented, if we do not allow that knowledge from the start to doubt the information. The use of emotional supports also the absence of reflection.
5) The motive for the sabotage
Why the U.S. government would do such a thing? Well, as for the Russian government about Chernobyl, just to put a halt to development of nuclear power in the world. As already mentioned in other sections, nuclear energy is a good market that allows a state to be energy independent For years, see for decades with the introduction of fast breeder reactor plants. And that's bad when one wants to control the country. While with the hydrocarbons (gas, oil, coal), one can easily turn off the tap in case of rebellion within a country.
Indeed, as in Chernobyl, this is not the U.S. government itself is behind the coup, but the clique that rules the world.
The plot against nuclear energy was in two shots: Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Three Mile Island gave a severe blow to the development of nuclear power in the world. Chernobyl and gave the coup de grace. Before
sabotage at Three Mile Island, 70% of Americans were for civil nuclear power. Just after the "accident", it was more than 50% (if the survey is not bogus of course).
But people's opinions, that's not all. It takes the media, whose power weighed heavily in the balance. One could say that it has a minimum for a correction of the view of + or - 20%. So with the media at first subtly, then more and more openly anti-nuclear, when we were 70/30 in the opinion, it was actually rather 50/50. And then when we took the 50/50, it was instead of 30/70. It must also take account of motivation in both camps. If one side, there are no longer just for people, good composition and good liver and other people who have the bit between his teeth, which are very motivated against nuclear power, ready to be in bad times for the cause, it does not have the same strength. So we can still reduce the ratio of real power.
That said, maybe the polls are cans. But whatever. These people only need to have a pretext to present to public opinion. So, true or not true, the excuse was there. And then they could stop the nuclear program peacefully. It's like weapons of mass destruction that the U.S. government has put forward to attack Iraq in 2003. It was clear from the outset they did not exist. But whatever. Is to have an excuse to present to public opinion was important, as fallacious as it is.
Then, during the early '80s, the development of civilian nuclear power has undergone a sharp slowdown in the world. Then in the late 80s, after Chernobyl, it was almost completely stopped.
6) What's really happening
Apparently, that night, there were only 3 people in the control room: William Zewe (in some documents it was Bill instead of William), the supervisor, and 2 operators and Edward Frederick Craig Faust . Incidentally, they had all three of the army. A central
2 reactors, an average 600 people who work there. But most of the performers. Everything is decided in the control room for the essentials. So, just as some people working in the control room are traitors, and 3 or 4 technicians working in the field. The traitors in the field have only trigger first big failure, so that later, everything goes from the control room. If there are honest people on the staff of the control room, you can also send them to conduct audits in the plant to keep them away.
So, a priori, that's how it happened. At least 6 people were traitors. The two operators who have sabotaged demineralisers valves and injection safety, foreman Fred Sheimann; and 3 operators in the control room (Bill Zewe supervisor, and Craig and Edward Frederick Faust).
At 4 hours, two technicians working on demineralisers sabotage them. Detail, there was a party held with the staff just at that time (almost to the minute) to celebrate the first year of operation of the plant. Probably the saboteurs took the opportunity to remove some people where going to pass the initial sabotage. Then, the operators of the control room take over to continue the sabotage. They had previously sabotaged the discharge valve so that it can not heal. The two operators who had looked after the plumbing valves closed circuit water injection safety in the secondary circuit. And they also put a label maintenance to mask the signal for closing the valve in question, to justify that they did not see during the "accident". Maybe the software has simply been sabotaged so that certain elements are defective. Moreover, as noted, few minutes after the start of the "accident", they turned off the water injection automatic safety.
They were so easy to play those who do not understand what was happening, and let the water escape slowly from the primary circuit. They waited quietly for three hours as it is emptied of its water and the heart partly based. They played as fools for all the indicators that might make them realize what was happening. For example, they could see perfectly well that in reality the pressure gauge indicated that it decreased. And alerts to radioactivity should work perfectly.
They have erased all traces of their lies about the indicators by purging the memory of the printer. And then, once the heart sufficiently damaged, and once dropped radioactive steam outside the plant, they presented the heart under water. The objective was achieved. Then, the official commission of inquiry was charged to bury the case quickly done well. Everything was done overnight, so that there is the least possible reactions.
That said, perhaps in reality, none of this has happened, and everything was bogus to pretend that such a thing happened. At the moment there is conspiracy, the conspirators have mastered and where the mass media to 100%, everything can be suspect.
0 comments:
Post a Comment