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 organization relies on all of the infrastructure and technology required to maintain a working hospital as well as advanced prosthetic equipment not often found in regular hospitals.

The data presented could be used for medical professionals to better understand the cause of similar symptoms, or to treat patients involved in a similar incidents. The methods of research presented could be used by academics and researchers in further study.

This report addresses the long term effects of a nuclear disaster and the potential health risks of radiation. The findings presented in this report are important when considering the long term effects of a disaster and the clean-up aspects of responding to a disaster that may continue for months or even years following the initial event. The Committee’s plan for the 2014-2019 period includes consideration of a network of experts to share information amongst the scientific community as a method of increasing awareness of and preparation for potential nuclear industry disasters. 

The most persuasive part of the film was when the palliative care doctor discussed the importance of understanding a patients goals. Everyone has different priorities and will make decisions on their treatment based on those priorities. The ideas presented in the film that deal with the point where treatment is no longer the best course of action are more widely accepted now but still challenge doctors whose entire professions focus on saving lives.