Search

The documentary is missing because the documentary is as safe as the fence it mocks in its title.
In the beginning we are asked to bear witness to the construction and use of the most devastation weapon of indiscriminate death the world has ever seen, and all the harm the construction of such a tool, yet its construction and its use is justified near instantaneously by repeating the same old propaganda.
In continuation, we are asked to bear witness to the continuous production of similar weapons and the devastation caused by the mishandling of the waste that accumulated in their production, yet why such a production took place is not only left unquestioned, but simple hints of cold war propaganda is left in their places for safekeeping.
In the end, we are asked to bear witness to a sombre victory, same spectres of patriotism and nation-of-God watching over our shoulder, yet how the pitiful situation of being forced to celebrate even such a small victory is never explored.
To sum up, we are shown people, good people, who struggle against the symptoms of a disease, yet this disease itself never named, nor challenged. It could not have been challenged, as it would force a complete change in their discourse.

If we sincerely would like to critique how the bodies of these workers were made disposable; used, harmed, dislocated and discharged as deemed necessary; if we wish to explore this topic as the necropolitical issue it is, we cannot stop halfway through. This inability to stop chasing connections, relationalities wherever it fits our ideology, is not a call for “objectivism”, it’s a call to respect the term of Anthropocene with all its rhizomatic connections.

An investigation of nuclear waste, that does not factor the use of its product, the socio-political effects of said product, and the historical conditions that even led to the possibility of producing it in such ways and such quantities, are of no use for us.  It cannot penetrate the barrier of capitalist realism. If it could, at least a single mention of workers unions would have existed. Instead, it has confessionals by atomic weapons lawyers whose heart goes out to these workers.
An America that refuse to face up to the fact that it is what it is by the great necropolitical project it led for hundreds of years, I struggle to accumulate sympathy for, what I can easily accumulate is rage however, which this documentary is missing..
Wish the documentary would have at least attempted to say something radical, instead of praising these disposable bodies for being patriotic about it. There are lives who never had false fences built as idols for safety, the collective idols of old America, the patriotic nation under God were built upon their broken bodies, what would you ask of them?

The main argument Knowles develops in this article is structural and engineering integrity of buildings and equipment is not always questioned until a disaster occurs and there is public outcry for regulations to be put in place. Whereas if building codes and safety equipment was being regularly tested and enforced, when disasters occured they would not be as tramatic. 

First the article makes claims to research on populations affected primarily by natural disasters such as hurricanes and how the population was selected, as in were they directly affected by the disaster, lived near the disaster, or had relations to people affected by the disaster. The article then looked at the risk factors for each population at the different parts of the disaster (pre, peri, post) and the state of individuals at each of those times; were some already struggling with depression, would employment be effected, did they have kids to care for, ect. Lastly the article discussed what interventions emergency responders can take to reduce the risk of mental illness and supported those claims with statitics from the CBT about debriefs with victims and having counselors readily available, in person or virtually. 

The main stakeholders portrayed in this film is the Marines and family members of Marines living at Camp Lejeune. Many of them have been diagnosed with cancer, likely caused by chemicals in the base's water supply. Several of the victims have united to question the government and the actions they failed to take after reports of polluted water.

Healthcare professionals, from all levels, doctors to even students, are invited to share and discuss conditions and diseases.