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?

This policy doesn't specifically address the needs of vulnerable popluations. 

Three ways the arguements made in this article are supported includes:

1. The article provides background information on what the narrative of an illness is and gives an analisys of what effects how a patient will percieve and present their narrative.
2. the article presents stories of epilepsy patients in Ankara, who describe their diagnosis and treatment
3. statistics and analytics generated by studies of the region

The American Red Cross was founded in 1881 with the experiances of the Civil War still fresh on people's minds. After touring Europe and seeing the swiss Red Cross in action, Civil War nurse Clara Barton founded the American Red Cross to provide disaster relief and first aid both on the homefront and the front line. Early on, the Red Cross served to educate the public about topics such as first aid and water safety, while starting nursing programs and providing assistance to the military and military families. As new needs, such as blood donation, made themselves apparent, the Red Cross met these needs, starting donation programs and doing labratory research on the blood dontation technology and techniques starting in the 1960's.

Emergency response in the context of "boots on the ground" aid is not directly discussed in this article, however the greater complexities of humanitarian aid, which often do include medical emerency response, is the primary focus of this article.  This article focuses more on humanitarian efforts and gender based violence which can be important when considering the methods and social reprecussions of giving emergency aid.