DNA Mutants at Nuke Plant Confirmed!

Senior Adviser: Mystery bacteria growing on nuclear fuel rods have unknown DNA sequence — “Right now we are trying to figure out what they’re using for food”

LINK

A mysterious, cobweblike growth with a fondness for Savannah River Site’s spent nuclear fuel has been identified – but not formally named.
[...]
The “white, stringlike” substance was first observed in October among old fuel assemblies
[...]
“We were able to identify a large portion of the bacteria making up the cobwebs, but there were certainly some where the DNA sequencing came back as unknown,” [Christopher Berry, the senior technical adviser of the Savannah River National Labortory (sic)] said.
Although rare, bacterial colonies have been observed in a few nuclear environments, including a Canadian reactor and at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania, where a growth developed in the site’s spent fuel basin after its 1979 accident.
[...]
“Right now we are trying to figure out what these bacteria are using for food,” Berry said.
[...]
Water in which spent fuel is stored is carefully filtered, treated and deionized
[...]

Tweet

NYPD Shoots, Kills Robbery Victim

Killed by NYPD

Seems as though the NYPD is making a real habit of shooting innocent people lately. In this case, on Franklin Avenue in the Bronx, police rushed to the scene of a robbery attempt. The 20-year old bodega work fled from the masked gunman inside, only to be shot dead by police on the sidewalk outside.

Witnesses say that police said nothing before firing a fatal shot, and that they saw his body drop to the pavement. Police say the shooting was accidental, and that the victim slammed into the cop without seeing him, causing an accidental discharge of the weapon. Other witnesses believe that the police officer thought the victim was one of the robbers, because he came running out without his hands up, in the same fashion as the store owner, who with his hands up, declared "They're robbing me! They're robbing me!"

Personally, I tend to believe the multiple witnesses in this case. It would not surprise me at all to learn that a cop was too quick to shoot, once again. He may have thought he was taking a shot at one of the "bad guys" but even if that were the case, you can't go shooting unarmed suspects just to make sure they don't flee. Not legally anyway, But cops are real cowboys, and this is not an unheard of practice at all, especially on the tough streets of the Bronx and in NYC.

Even if this were a genuine accidental discharge, it would appear that the officer was inept at not only securing his own weapon, but also in protecting himself. What if that innocent man had actually been the robber? The officer should have never let a suspect get that close to him to start with, within range to potentially struggle of the officer's weapon. Of course, it's all too east to Monday-morning quarterback the play by play, and these street scenes really are but split-seconds of chaos. But at the end of the day, the fact remains, that the police have killed yet another innocent hard-working American citizen.

You can read the article from the NY Daily News for more details.


Tweet

Another Useless 'Amber-Alert' Jolts Public

As with so many of these "novelty" public warning systems put into action by "feel-good" legislation, the Amber-Alert system seems to be an utter failure.

On the surface, it seems like it might be a good idea. But on a practical level, one sees that this system has done more harm than good. A system of  "crying wolf" meant to make people feel safe, but at the same time, putting the public on edge frequently, without true cause. We don't usually hear if the missing child has ever been found all, or how the alert was finally resolved. Instead, we get a bunch of quick headlines on the news ticker, a flash on the highway traffic sign, and our Facebook walls are inundated for a day. But we never hear how things wound up.

Which is probably because, in most cases, these alerts are activated of a custody dispute, not a genuine abdusction.

But I thought this one was different. So I jumped on the public-concern bandwagon and posted about how a little girl was abducted right off the street, kicking and screaming, by two men in a truck. It sounded to me like this might be the genuine article, or the sort of case this alert system was really meant for.

As it turns out, the police can't tell when a few kids on a playground are lying and would rather create public panic rather than reach a proper investigative conclusion before crying wolf and getting the public all riled up for nothing.

According to Mid-Hudson News:

NEWBURGH – City Police in Newburgh have examined the South Junior High surveillance videos along with street camera video and footage from privately owned surveillance systems in the area of Monument Street where a five-year-old girl was reported abducted Wednesday by two men and have determined there is no indication that the abduction or any incident that could be perceived as an abduction had occurred.

There was no pickup truck, other vehicle or small child during the time of the reported incident, police said Thursday. The children who reported the supposed incident were observed on the video playing around the school without incident.

Police have not received any missing person reports and have determined the incident did not occur and have closed the investigation.

After the neighborhood children reported the incident, police issued an Amber Alert looking for two men in a pickup truck with green writing on it. The girl purportedly abducted was said to be wearing a pink shirt at the time.

One really begins to wonder why we even have programs like this in place at all. "Boutique" laws and systems named after some poor child who died in a horrific manner, and is brought back from the dead to make a cameo appearance every time the government wants to jolt the public into submission and soak us for even more dollars for inflated police budgets.

Tweet

$100 Scorpion Sting is $83,000 in U.S.

 Just goes to show how we are being royally fucked by the corporate health system. This is unchecked capitalism my friends. There is nothing wrong with making a buck. But as far as I'm concerned, there is a problem with fucking us at the drive-thru. Free-market my ass. This is a monopoly. And Obama-care is part of it. Not that there is a better choice right now of course. Do you really believe that Romney will repeal it? Bwahahaha!

Marcie Edmonds was tearing open a box of air-conditioner filters in her garage last June when she felt a sharp sting in her abdomen.

The 52-year-old Ahwatukee Foothills woman had never felt a scorpion sting before that day. She had no intention of seeking medical help, but within an hour of the sting, Edmonds' mild tingling sensation worsened with throat tightness, blurry vision, darting eyes and tense muscles. She could not walk and had trouble breathing.

With the help of a friend, she called Poison Control and was advised to go to the nearest hospital that had scorpion antivenom, Chandler Regional Medical Center. At the hospital, an emergency room doctor told her about the antivenom, called Anascorp, that could quickly relieve her symptoms. Edmonds said the physician never talked with her about the cost of the drug or treatment alternatives.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/20120831scorpion-sting-leaves-woman-big-bill.html#ixzz25ZLI3Q6R

Tweet

Judge Finds Jail Not Appropriate for Voyeur Who Spied on Child

Dutchess County, NY - A 50-year old former Catholic high school teacher has been found guilty of spying on a 13-year old girl for his own sexual gratification. The man had placed a hidden camera in the bedroom of the young teen, who was the daughter of his live-in girlfriend. The woman contacted police when she discovered the pen-camera, and the man was arrested in November of 2011.

The Poughkeepsie Journal reports...

"Judge Stephen L. Greller found that jail was inappropriate because McCoy failed to grasp the impact his actions had on the victim."

Wait, what? Is that a typo, or are they really telling us that a judge believes a criminal does not belong in jail because that person doesn't understand the impact of their crime on the victim? Or maybe just doesn't even care?

To be intellectually honest here, there is the principal of mens rea, which basically tells us that a person cannot be guilty of a crime unless they understand that their actions were indeed criminal. This is how we sometimes see that a person is not guilty be reason of mental default, the old "insanity defense" so to speak. I don't dispute the validity of this measure of criminal liability. This principal is also how we distinguish, in cases of a homicide, between murder and manslaughter, as another example. Between a person who intentionally kills another person, as opposed to a person that didn't know they were going to kill someone, but should have known that their actions might get someone killed unintentionally.

But we are not talking about guilt or not here. This deviant's mind is clearly aware that what he was doing was both wrong, and a crime, hence the conviction. I ask, what relevance is it then that this man does not recognize the gravity of his crime? Either he is not guilty at all, under the principal of mens rea, or he should be sentenced according to the standard measures by which this crime would be sentenced. Things like his history, character, remorsefulness, whatever judges normally use to sentence a convict, including the impact the crime has had on the victim. The actual impact, often clarified at sentencing through victim impact statements, not by what the perpetrator believes the impact was.

To look at this another way, let us suppose that a man rapes a prostitute. Should he get off with no prison time, simply because he believes raping a hooker is no big deal? Or what about a murderer? Let's say one gang-banger who kills another? Is the crime any less serious because the killer believes it is not serious? Or what about a full-blown child molester pedophile, who believes that his victim actually "wanted it" and doesn't see the true impact of their crime?

The standard applied in this case is completely absurd, and frankly, it sounds like cronyism to me. Favoritism shown to this man because he spent years as a schoolteacher rather than as a cab driver, or some-such. It seems that a bias of some sort is the real justification for the light sentence applied.

And truth be told, that is the only issue I am really addressing here. The absurdity of the court's statement, not even the actual sentence itself, which I do find reasonable actually. The man was found guilty of Unlawful Surveillance in the Second Degree, which is a Class E felony violation of NYS Penal Code 250.45
.
He was sentenced to 4 months in jail, ten years of probation, and fined $1,425. Again, the sentence itself does not sound unreasonable to me if this is a first offense. On the other hand, the lack of remorse does seem to allude to the likelihood of recidivism too. It is also very alarming that the victim was a minor. Finally, why wasn't he charged with a felony count for each and every instance he observed the girl, rather than just for one count of deploying the device and watching the girl? Still, it was a non-violent offense and I hate to be a knee-jerk reactionary when it comes to certain crimes where many people would shout "off with his balls!" He didn't actually touch the girl, though it certainly seems that some mental health evaluations might be in order here too.

At the end of the day though, for a first-offense class-E felony the sentence does not seem out of line, only the reasoning by which the judge explains why he didn't throw the book at the offender. It's almost as if the judge was being apologetic to the public for not putting a sex offender on the stake, and at a loss to explain why. A political liablity for him of course. I would have much more respected he simply said just because the man was a sex offender, that doesn't warrant an unduly harsh sentence based on a social bias against sex offenders.

In this day and age it must be difficult for a judge to push back against the tide of public opinion, and follow his conscience, to even follow the law itself, when the public is so easily swayed by rhetoric. So we wind up now with jutice wrapped in untruths and obfuscation rather than people willing to stand up and tell it like it is.

We have become a nation of people who lack the courage of their own convictions.



Tweet