nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Hazards of Russia’s radioactive trash in the Arctic

Arctic Frontiers forum totes up Russia’s northern nuclear hazards, When Norway assesses potential nuclear risks in Northern Russia, it counts among them not just decades of intentionally scuttled radioactive trash – including two entire nuclear submarines – but also vessels transporting spent nuclear fuel throughout the Arctic, specifically from Andreyeva Bay. Bellona     by Charles Digges, 

When Norway assesses potential nuclear risks in Northern Russia, it counts among them not just decades of intentionally scuttled radioactive trash – including two entire nuclear submarines – but also vessels transporting spent nuclear fuel throughout the Arctic, specifically from Andreyeva Bay.

These considerations were part of a seminar held at the Arctic Frontiers forum last week in Tromsø, Norway, which tallied up ongoing threats of nuclear environmental contamination in Northwest Russia.

For decades, Norway, along with numerous other donor nations, has invested millions of dollars in improving the safety and security of Northwest Russia’s vast Cold War nuclear legacy sites.

According to Øyvind Selnæs, a senior adviser with the Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority, Norway expects to see a spike in the number of ships passing through the Arctic carrying nuclear fuel and materials as Russia seeks to build new nuclear icebreakers to guide traffic along the Northern Sea Route. He also forecasted an increase the number vessels carrying spent nuclear fuel.

“It took many years and huge funds of international assistance to start exporting SNF from the former naval base in the Murmansk region – Andreeva Bay,” Selnaes said.” Last year, this process began, and it will take several years. Risks associated with the maritime transportation sector will now increase. ” ……http://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2018-01-arctic-frontiers-forum-totes-up-russias-northern-nuclear-hazards

January 31, 2018 Posted by | ARCTIC, oceans, Russia, wastes | Leave a comment

SCE&G customers may get reprieve from paying for failed nuke plant – at least temporarily

By Andrew Brown and Jamie Lovegrove abrown@postandcourier.com jlovegrove@postandcourier.com

    Jan 30, 2018 , COLUMBIA — A compromise being considered by state lawmakers would temporarily halt nuclear-related payments to SCANA until regulators and the state’s courts decide who should pay for the cancelled reactors at V.C. Summer.

The South Carolina House is set to amend legislation that would roll back the 2007 law that put in motion the eventual $9 billion construction failure in Fairfield County, according to three sources familiar with the amendment.

House leaders briefed the Republican and Democratic caucuses about the amendment Tuesday afternoon. The measure could be brought up for a vote as early as Wednesday. …….https://www.postandcourier.com/business/s-c-house-plans-to-suspend-nuclear-payments-to-scana/article_9fa23698-05e6-11e8-a13e-03634560ece0.html

January 31, 2018 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Risk of cyber hacking of medical CT scan machines

CT machines can now be hacked to boost radiation and cause ‘severe damage’ to patient, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev researchers warn that medical imaging devices aren’t properly protected against cyberthreats. Tech Republic By Conner Forrest | January 30, 2018 

  • Medical imaging device (MID) manufacturers and healthcare providers must work harder to protect these machines from cyberattacks. — Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 2018
  • An attackers could compromise a computer behind a CT machine, increase the radiation levels and cause “severe damage” and harm to a hospital patient. — Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 2018

In a new report detailing cyberattacks on medical imaging devices (MIDs), researchers at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) Malware Lab noted that attackers could hack a computed tomography (CT) device and cause “severe damage” to a patient.

In the paper— Know Your Enemy: Characteristics of Cyber-Attacks on Medical Imaging Devices—researchers explain that many medical devices like CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines don’t receive regular updates and are easy to exploit. For CT machines, an attacker could compromise the computer that controls it and up the radiation levels to hurt a patient. Attackers could also disable or block MIDs during a ransomware attack, according to a BGU press release.

Many traditional industries, such as healthcare, often rely on legacy tools as a means of remaining compliant or avoiding the arduous task of migrating data. Unfortunately, if these tools aren’t patched, they could easily be attacked and leveraged for financial gain……… https://www.techrepublic.com/article/ct-machines-can-now-be-hacked-to-boost-radiation-and-cause-severe-damage-to-patient/

January 31, 2018 Posted by | Israel, safety | Leave a comment

South Africa can’t afford nuclear build – renewable energy a wiser choice

NUCLEAR FAR FROM A DONE DEAL – ENERGY EXPERT http://ewn.co.za/2018/01/30/nuclear-far-from-a-done-deal-energy-expert  Deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa, who is next in line to lead the country, told reporters at the World Economic Forum that South Africa can’t afford to build a nuclear plant. Gia Nicolaides | 31 Jan 18, JOHANNESBURG – Deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa‘s remarks about South Africa not having money for nuclear power may halt plans for now, but some experts say that this depends on decisions taken in the next few months by the new political leadership.

Ramaphosa, who is next in line to lead the country, told reporters at the World Economic Forum that South Africa can’t afford to build a nuclear plant.

This differs from President Jacob Zuma’s approach, who has pushed to build as many as eight reactors worth around R1 trillion.

Energy expert Chris Yelland had a meeting at the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS) on Monday.

“A representative of the Department of Energy spoke and he indicated that the officials at the DoE are in a state of limbo with the change in political leadership at the ANC and perhaps even a Cabinet reshuffle. Nuclear is far from a done deal.”

However, the Coalition Against Nuclear Energy’s Mike Kantey says that when it comes to affordability a deal can always be made.

“There’ve been a few deals around the world – Turkey and also in Egypt – where what they talk about is a build, own and operate model, where the payback is over 35 years at a specific rate. So, money can be found. Our problem with all of this is that it defies the logic of renewable energy.”

January 31, 2018 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Nuclear risks an Liability for Nuclear Damage

Contracting within the nuclear sector , World Nuclear News, Elina Teplinsky and Vincent Zabielski  30 Jan 18,  “………..Liability for Nuclear Damage……… Geographical Coverage – Nuclear damage can be transboundary and there is no single international nuclear liability regime that covers all jurisdictions. The three international nuclear liability regimes – the Vienna Convention, Paris Convention and Convention of Supplemental Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC) – provide a patchwork of protections by channelling nuclear liability, yet each contains large geographical gaps in coverage. This means that, even though a customer country is party to a nuclear liability convention, a supplier could be sued for transboundary damage in a country that is not a member of that convention. Further, a number of major nuclear markets like China and the Republic of Korea are not party to any nuclear liability regime, maintaining only domestic legislation. Finally, protections can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction even among parties to the same nuclear liability treaty.

Significance of the Gaps – The risks arising out of the gaps in geographic coverage vary greatly. These risks are significantly related to plaintiffs’ economic incentives. Lack of coverage in a country where the vendor has significant access presents a greater risk than a gap in a country where the vendor has none. Further, plaintiffs may have little incentive to sue in countries where no nuclear damage compensation funds have been established. Finally, some jurisdictions (such as the United States) are more likely to allow suit with tenuous connections to the damage than others. For example, the Ninth Circuit allowed U.S. service members’ $1 billion lawsuit for injuries related to the Fukushima disaster to proceed against Tokyo Electric Power Company. ………http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/V-Contracting-within-the-nuclear-sector-30011801.html

January 31, 2018 Posted by | 2 WORLD, Legal | Leave a comment

New renewables cheaper than old coal/nuclear

EGEB: New renewables cheaper than old coal/nuclear, Jersey applying carbon tax, heterojunction solar cells from Russia, more, Electrek, John Fitzgerald Weaver– Jan. 30th 2018 

Utility CEO: new renewables will be cheaper than existing coal plants by the early 2020s – Unsubsidized new wind: 2.0-2.5 cents per kilowatt-hour/Unsubsidized new solar: 3.0-4.0 cents per kilowatt-hour/Variable operating costs of existing coal or nuclear plants: 3.5-5.0 cents per kilowatt-hour. Let me point out a few key phrases in this proclamation: New renewables, existing coal/nuclear– That means building new hardware, from the ground up, is cheaper than using old hardware. And then the kicker, unsubsidized. Of course, this is before we start to consider the subsidies that fossil fuels get – free pollution.

New Jersey Embraces an Idea it Once Rejected: Make Utilities Pay to Emit Carbon – One of the larger states on the East Coast, now going to start taking responsibility for its pollution. This matters a lot.

New Tariffs to Curb US Solar Installations by 11% Through 2022 – Utility-scale solar will take the brunt of the impact, accounting for 65 percent of the anticipated 7.6-gigawatt decline. 2019 is expected to be the most painful year for the utility-scale sector, with a 1.6-gigawatt decline in installations compared to GTM Research’s original forecast. The new analysis shows that new and emerging state solar markets are disproportionately affected by the tariffs, with Southern states like Texas, Florida and South Carolina among the most significantly impacted by the tariffs. The logic I wanted to show here is that people are going to buy solar at a certain price, and this logic is based upon past data. Utility scale groups build based upon small differences in pricing, but they’re getting hit the most with this tax due to their broader efficiency. And states that have no environmental laws and little solar support – Texas/Florida – are also getting hacked just as they get going.

Hevel achieves heterojunction cells with 22.8% efficiency as plant ramps – Russia-based integrated PV manufacturer Hevel Group, which has switched production from amorphous silicon thin-film technology to silicon heterojunction (HJ) has said it has been successful in ramping to its 160MW nameplate capacity and achieving cell conversion efficiencies of 22.8%. I think heterojunction/multijunction products will bring solar panel efficiencies above 30% eventually. From what I’ve read, silicon on its own will max out in the upper 20%’s. Panasonic and SolarTech Universalare two manufacturers we’ve talked about recently…….https://electrek.co/2018/01/30/egeb-new-renewables-cheaper-than-old-coal-nuclear-jersey-applying-carbon-tax-heterjunction-solar-cells-form-russia-more/

January 31, 2018 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

TEPCO refused in 2002 to calculate possible tsunami hitting Fukushima: ex-gov’t official

reactor 3 nov 2017.jpg
The No. 3 reactor at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant is seen from a Mainichi Shimbun helicopter on Nov. 21, 2017
Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), operator of the disaster-stricken Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant, refused in 2002 to calculate the potential effects of tsunami in case of an earthquake off Fukushima Prefecture when a now-defunct nuclear watchdog told the utility to conduct an evaluation, the Mainichi Shimbun has learned.
A former safety screening division official of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) told the Mainichi Shimbun on Jan. 29 that TEPCO did not accept the agency’s request even though the latter tried to convince the utility after the government released a long-term assessment report that a major earthquake could hit off the Pacific coast including areas off Fukushima Prefecture, possibly triggering massive tsunami. This is the first time that exchanges between the then nuclear agency and TEPCO following the release of the government report have come to light.
In July 2002, the government’s Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion released the long-term assessment report saying that an earthquake similar to the 1896 Sanriku Earthquake could hit off the Pacific from the northern Sanriku to Boso areas. The official held a hearing on TEPCO the following month as to whether the report would affect safety measures at the Fukushima No. 1 plant.
According to the official as well as the statement submitted by the government to the trial of a lawsuit filed by Fukushima nuclear evacuees against TEPCO and the state, NISA told the utility to calculate a possible earthquake-tsunami disaster off the coast from Fukushima to Ibaraki prefectures, pointing out that Tohoku Electric Power Co. had been considering conducting an assessment on areas quite far south. In response, TEPCO representatives showed reluctance, saying that the calculation would “take time and cost money” and that there was no reliable scientific basis in the assessment report. The TEPCO officials reportedly resisted for about 40 minutes on the matter. In the end, the agency accepted the utility’s decision to shelve the earthquake-tsunami estimate.
In 2006, NISA again requested TEPCO to prepare its nuclear plants for massive tsunami exceeding envisioned levels, but the company did not comply, before finally conducting a calculation in 2008. The utility concluded that waves up to a height of 15.7 meters could hit the Fukushima plant, but did not take measures according to the estimate.
The former nuclear agency official said as someone involved in the screening of earthquake resistant measures it was very unfortunate that the accident at the Fukushima plant occurred, but stopped short of commenting on the legitimacy of the agency’s handling of the matter, saying, “I can’t put it in words casually.”
The attorney representing Fukushima nuclear evacuees in the redress suit commented that the finding exposes the maliciousness of TEPCO, while also pointing to the responsibility of the central government. A TEPCO public relations official, meanwhile, said that the company would not comment on the matter because the trial was ongoing.
https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20180130/p2a/00m/0na/017000c

January 31, 2018 Posted by | Fukushima 2018 | , , , , | Leave a comment

With the nuclear weapons race, is the unthinkable now becoming a comfortable idea?

With nuclear weapons, we’re getting too comfortable thinking the unthinkable, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/with-nuclear-weapons-were-getting-too-comfortable-thinking-the-unthinkable/2018/01/30/3e1edb3c-051a-11e8-8777-2a059f168dd2_story.html?utm_term=.b55752f45ba6, By Richard A. Clarke and Steven Andreasen January 30

Richard A. Clarke, chairman of Good Harbor Security Risk Management, was special adviser to the president for cybersecurity in the George W. Bush administration. Steve Andreasen was the National Security Council’s staff director for defense policy and arms control from 1993 to 2001 and teaches at the Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs.

 A dangerous disconnect is emerging between the horrific impacts of even the limited use of nuclear weapons, and leaders and policymakers who seem intent on threatening nuclear use in an ever-expanding range of scenarios. If this continues, the risk that a nuclear weapon will be used for the first time in more than 70 years — deliberately or otherwise — will grow. We must return to a more sober dialogue and approach to policy.

The Trump administration appears poised to expand the circumstances under which the United States might use nuclear weapons, including in response to a cyberattack.

The time when leaders and policymakers in the United States, Russia and other countries had anything close to a personal connection with the effects of even a single nuclear weapon is becoming more distant. Memories of a smoldering Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the stark fear generated by the Cuban missile crisis or the massive protests sparked in the early 1980s by the deployment of U.S. and Soviet intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe no longer drive or even inform policy. As former secretary of state George P. Shultz told Congress last week, “I fear people have lost that sense of dread.”

When nuclear theory or war-gaming moved from the Pentagon to the White House during the Cold War, it was more often than not met by a skeptical president and civilian leadership, who rightly recoiled from risking nuclear catastrophe. That is not the case now.

Five years ago, the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board published a report equating the impact of Chinese and Russian capabilities to launch an “existential cyber attack” against the United States with the impact of a nuclear attack — and recommended that the United States be prepared to threaten the use of nuclear weapons to deter cyberattacks. When the board’s recommendation was exposed to the light of day by the two of us and others in 2013, it was publicly rebuked and, as a matter of policy, quietly discarded.

But just last month, the board’s proposal became U.S. policy. In December, the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy quietly expanded the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. defense plans, stating they are “essential” to prevent “non-nuclear strategic attacks” — i.e., cyberattacks.

This week, the Trump administration is expected to release its “Nuclear Posture Review.” A leaked pre-decisional draft reaffirms the policy of threatening nuclear use to prevent cyberattacks, but goes even further — expanding the role of U.S. forward-deployed nuclear weapons in NATO’s European defenses.

For decades, the United States has been moving to reduce the relevance of forward-deployed nuclear weapons in Europe, and for good reason: U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe have virtually no military utility, and their storage at bases in multiple countries presents a serious security risk. Removing them would reduce the risk of terrorism and instability, and would free up resources across NATO for other urgent defense tasks.

 Moreover, as NATO has repeatedly stated, “The supreme guarantee of the security of the Allies is provided by the strategic forces of the Alliance.” With three nuclearized member states — the United States, Britain and France — NATO has a robust nuclear deterrent capable of being employed anywhere in defense of NATO interests.

The Trump Nuclear Posture Review not only rejects this logic, it ties our forward-deployed forces to NATO’s strategic forces as part of the bloc’s “supreme guarantee.” So rather than move in the direction of reducing nuclear risks by removing nuclear weapons from vulnerable sites, we will instead further cement them in place — when there is ample evidence of terrorist interest in nuclear facilities and, as is presently true in Turkey, evidence that the security of U.S. nuclear weapons reportedly stored there can change literally overnight.

Raising the profile of nuclear weapons in our defense plans comes at a time when the disastrous consequences of even limited nuclear use is becoming even more apparent. Alan Robock and his colleagues at Rutgers University — using newly updated climate models and the much greater computing power now available — have concluded that even a limited nuclear exchange (50 to 100 weapons) could create a “mini-nuclear winter” whose effects could last two to three years and create tens of millions of deaths from starvation because of the collapse of grain crops brought on by climate change.

Nuclear weapons present a unique threat of national devastation and global extinction. They are good for only one purpose: deterring nuclear attacks. Policies equating cyberthreats to nuclear threats, or raising the profile of nuclear weapons in our conventional defenses, undermine the credibility of nuclear deterrence by threatening use for lesser contingencies and makes nuclear use more likely.

January 31, 2018 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | 1 Comment

The health cost of America’s uranium and nuclear industries

To make and maintain America’s nukes, some communities pay the price https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-01-30/make-and-maintain-americas-nukes-some-communities-pay-price  Things That Go Boom, January 30, 2018 ·  By Laicie Heeley   Prior to the 1970s, the US and other countries conducted more than 500 nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere. The tests blanketed the world with radioactive fallout, and in 2002, a study by the CDC and National Cancer Institute found that any person living in the US since 1951 has been exposed.

But communities around the uranium mines and test sites needed for the production of nuclear weapons — places which are often socio-economically disadvantaged already — have been especially impacted by the health and environmental costs of nuclear weapons production.

The Navajo Nation is just one example — where cancer rates doubled from the 1970s to the 1990s due to the impacts of testing, mining and milling in the southwestern US. Mining companies extracted millions of tons of uranium between 1944 and 1986. At the time, Navajo children played in mine debris piles and pools, and livestock drank contaminated water. Some homes were even built with materials from uranium mines and mills.

But communities around the uranium mines and test sites needed for the production of nuclear weapons — places which are often socio-economically disadvantaged already — have been especially impacted by the health and environmental costs of nuclear weapons production.

The Navajo Nation is just one example — where cancer rates doubled from the 1970s to the 1990s due to the impacts of testing, mining and milling in the southwestern US. Mining companies extracted millions of tons of uranium between 1944 and 1986. At the time, Navajo children played in mine debris piles and pools, and livestock drank contaminated water. Some homes were even built with materials from uranium mines and mills.


Runit Dome, on Enewetak Atoll, serves as a living reminder of US nuclear testing that continues to threaten the islands today. The 18-inch concrete cap covers 111,000 cubic yards of radioactive debris left behind after 12 years of nuclear tests. Today, scientists fear the effects of climate change could damage the dome, releasing its contents into the ocean.

The lands of some indigenous communities still house nuclear waste today. Tribes play host to this waste because their reservations are not subject to the same environmental and health standards as US land.

“In the quest to dispose of nuclear waste, the government and private companies have disregarded and broken treaties, blurred the definition of Native American sovereignty, and directly engaged in a form of economic racism akin to bribery,” Bayley Lopez of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation told Scientific American, citing examples of companies taking advantage of the “overwhelming poverty on native reservations by offering them millions of dollars to host nuclear waste storage sites.”

Whether this characterization and those like it are fair, it’s an unfortunate fact that the people who live near the hallmarks of the US nuclear industrial complex — like test sites in Nevada and the Marshall Islands, mines in the western half of the US, and the indigenous communities that still house nuclear waste today — have been disproportionately affected by the cost of what it takes to keep the rest of us safe.

January 31, 2018 Posted by | health, USA | Leave a comment

Kazakhstan’s U.N. ambassador – nuclear testing harmed his country, dismantling nuclear arsenal has benefited it

Former nuclear power Kazakhstan shares lessons for North Korea, Nikkei Asian Review, January 30, 2018  UN ambassador highlights benefits of denuclearization, harm suffered by testing, ARIANA KING, UNITED NATIONS –– Few nuclear powers have ever volunteered to dismantle their arsenals, but Kazakhstan’s U.N. ambassador makes the case that a country stands only to gain by such a dramatic gesture.

 Kazakhstan, which once held the fourth-largest nuclear stockpile with over 1,400 warheads, relinquished all of these Soviet-era weapons by April 1995.

“With the time passing, we more and more are convinced that that was a very right decision at the right moment,” Kairat Umarov, the ambassador and current president of the Security Council, told the Nikkei Asian Review in a recent interview. “And today we are very much proud of this decision,” he said, because Kazakhstan “gained a lot from this step.”……….

“The nuclear-free status of Kazakhstan may serve as an example and as practical guidance for other countries,” Nazarbayev said at that meeting, noting the “high international standing” his country gained by renouncing nuclear weapons. “We call upon all other states to follow our example. We called upon Iran to do so. Now we call upon North Korea to do so.”

“One thing we know for sure: Nuclear capability is not a good defense,” Umarov told The Nikkei. “It’s not a good way to protect a country.”

Possessing such weapons makes a country a target for other nuclear-armed nations, the ambassador added. “So that’s our experience, and we think that anything can be avoided if there is enough political will,” he said.

Umarov said attempts to persuade his North Korean counterparts of the merits of denuclearization have not been fruitful. “But at the end of the day, we think that it is political courage of leaders which really makes things different,” he said. A decision by North Korea to denuclearize would be “received with applause in the international community.”

For Kazakhstan, however, the voices of the victims of nuclear testing at the Semipalatinsk site also led Nazarbayev to dismantle the country’s nuclear program, Umarov said. Though decades have passed since the former Soviet republic closed Semipalatinsk, the legacy of nuclear testing continues.

“We right now have 1.5 million people who are suffering from the nuclear testing site,” Umarov said, citing genetic deformities that have plagued the population and continue to affect newborn children — three generations later.

“It is a very acute, sensitive issue for us,” Umarov asserted, recalling his work for a nongovernmental group in which he fought to shut Semipalatinsk. “So it’s not just we are playing with the politics, or trying to show that we are so principled because of political reasons. It is a very real thing with our population, with our people, and we are reflecting here the will of the people on that issue.”……….https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Former-nuclear-power-Kazakhstan-shares-lessons-for-North-Korea

January 31, 2018 Posted by | Kazakhstan, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Legacy Press Betray Assange As His Freedom Hangs In The Balance!

89f8bfbb6d53014f63e2b15d070a6f59
Elizabeth Vos

The last two months have seen tectonic shifts regarding Julian Assange’s hopes of being able to safely leave the Ecuadorian embassy in London after what is now over seven years of arbitrary detention. The Wikileaks Editor In Chief was granted an Ecuadorian passport in December, which conferred on him the right of Ecuadorian citizenship. Potentially even more significant was Ecuador’s move to classify Assange as a Diplomat.

Wikileaks specifically noted Reuters’ coverage of these latest developments: “Depo Akande, an international law professor at Oxford University, said that Ecuador could argue that Britain had no right under international law to reject its declaration that Assange had diplomatic status.”

Additional press reports indicate that if the UK were ordered by the International Court to accept Ecuador’s decision to treat Assange as a diplomat, and were then to “declare him persona non grata, it would then ‘have to give him facilities to leave’ the country unhindered.” One hopes that the current Ecuadorian President, Lenín Moreno, will not bow to pressure from the United States to withdraw support from Assange. Ecuador’s former President, Rafael Correa, has indicated that this is a real possibility.

So far, legacy press has not taken the UK to task for attempting to “ignore” Assange’s new diplomatic role. Now more than ever, the media’s silence is important in informing or misinforming the public regarding Assange’s situation. The legal implications of Ecuador’s decision to confer Assange diplomatic status are potentially massive, but many outlets have been atrociously silent on the matter when they are not outright lying regarding Assange’s circumstances.

In light of the precariousness of recent events, human rights activist, journalist and Wikileaks supporter Randy Credico recently issued a call for Wikileaks supporters to ‘mobilize‘ in his support. This is a statement which should be taken seriously by the public and by independent media, which has increasingly been tasked with filling the void left by mainstream outlets that no longer function in the interest of honest reporting.

Telesur recently reported that former Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa had warned: “It will only take pressure from the United States to withdraw protection for Assange.” He added: “Surely it’s already being done, and maybe they await the results of the Feb. 4 (referendum) to make a decision.” Correa also referred to Ecuador’s current president as a “traitor.”

Over the last twelve months, Disobedient Media has reported extensively on the hypocrisy of legacy press, including The Washington Post. The outlet’s recent coverage of Assange’s circumstances serves as an emblem of the overall problem of intelligence agency narratives being pushed by a corporate press with which they are entangled.

The Washington Post exemplified the issue when it published an article erroneously titled: “Ecuador’s president calls Julian Assange ‘more than a nuisance.” The article in question incorrectly referenced Assange in the following incorrect terms: “the WikiLeaks founder was wanted in Sweden on sexual assault charges. Those have since been dropped. ” Assange was never charged with sexual assault, and Sweden ended their investigation into the subject.

Although false narratives around Wikileaks are nothing new for establishment press, the latest smear attempts are particularly important due to the precarious nature of Assange’s current position.

The Washington Post’s allusion to non-existent sexual assault charges dishonestly paints Assange and the reasons for his exile in the Ecuadorian embassy in a light that not only is factually untrue, but conveniently distracts from the manifold ways in which Assange and Wikileaks employees have been directly targeted as a result of their journalistic endeavors. As this author previously reported, there have been a plethora of calls to assassinate Assange from media pundits, as well as individuals associated with the Democratic Party establishment.

In light of all this, it is absurd to discuss Assange’s predicament without also addressing the intelligence community and plutocratic establishment that has fundamentally driven the situation from the beginning.

UN rulings on the matter of Assange’s detention have stated: “Assange has been arbitrarily detained by Sweden and the United Kingdom since his arrest in London on 7 December 2010, as a result of the legal action against him by both Governments, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention said today.” In essence, even the UN has recognized that Assange’s longstanding exile in the Ecuadorian embassy is due to governments who feel threatened by the content of Wikileaks publications.

At this juncture, it bears reminding that Jeff Bezos, the current owner of the Washington Post, has a $600 million contract with the CIA in relation to his monolithic company Amazon. The Nation wrote in 2013:

“Amazon, under the Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a “private cloud” for the CIA to use for its data needs. Critics charge that, at a minimum, the Post needs to disclose its CIA link whenever it reports on the agency. Over 15,000 have signed the petition this week hosted by RootsAction.”

The Nation’s coverage of the CIA’s contract with Amazon has since been removed from their web page for unknown reasons, but is available through archive services.

When discussing The Washington Post’s exercise in gaslighting, it is important to keep the outlet’s well-documented financial connection with the CIA through Bezos in mind. In so doing, it is also pertinent to note that the CIA has made its hatred for Assange very clear, especially over the course of the last year. CIA Director Mike Pompeo put the agency’s hatred for Wikileaks were on full display as recently as yesterday, when the CIA Director lambasted the journalistic organization as a threat on par with Al Qaeda. Pompeo said of Al Qaeda and Wikileaks: “They don’t have a flag at the UN, but they represent real threats to the United States of America.”

That a group who publishes information that is inconvenient for the CIA would be likened to a terrorist network speaks to the threat which Wikileaks represents not to the safety of the American public, but to the plutocratic class and the American deep state.

Pompeo is well known for his previous reference to Wikileaks as a “non-state hostile intelligence service.” The Hill wrote of the incident: “In his first major public appearance since taking the top intelligence post in the Trump administration, Pompeo took aim at WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden…” The Hill also cited Pompeo’s characterization of Assange as a: “fraud, a coward hiding behind a screen.”

Pompeo’s vitriolic characterization of Wikileaks is helpful, because it demonstrates that the CIA’s response to Wikileaks is on par with the force with which terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda are pursued. In that light, the magnitude of the threat faced by Assange and Wikileaks associates cannot be over-estimated. Pompeo’s words are not only absurd in light of Wikileaks being an extremely accurate journalistic organization, but also depict the real impetus behind Assange having been trapped in the Ecuadorian embassy for years.

The CIA Director’s statements, even taken at face value, completely undercut the manipulative coverage of Wikileaks and Assange by outlets like the Washington Post. That providing evidence of corruption is considered an existential threat by the establishment is indicative of the value of Wikileaks to the public. The publisher is only a threat to those whose lies are exposed by their publications. The same plutocracy that has aggressively targeted Assange and Wikileaks has progressively strangled free press and freedom of thought in the United States and the world for decades.

The anger of intelligence agencies towards Assange and Wikileaks may seem superficially unrelated to the disgracefully inaccurate treatment of the publisher in American press. However, it is necessary to view mainstream outlet’s coverage of Assange, including both their misinformation and their resounding silence on his having been targeted by the intelligence community, as an expression of aggression from the American ‘deep state.’ This is especially noteworthy given the close ties of the intelligence community to legacy media, as encapsulated by The Washington Post.

Disobedient Media previously reported on the unanimous echo chamber of establishment political think-tanks and apparently left-wing news organizations when it comes to issues pushed by the intelligence community, including the reauthorization of deeply flawed FISA legislation. In the case of Assange, the litany of lies and gaps in coverage over the years are too numerous to recount in full, but represent a concerted effort to silence truth through deflection and manipulation.

Alternative media must refuse to be silenced by the American deep state’s fanatical crusade against Wikileaks and its supporters. If it were not for Wikileaks, the growing niche of independent journalism would have virtually zero factual standing when attempting to counter disinformation by press outlets that have completely abandoned their role as a watchdog against government abuses.

If there was ever a time to support Wikileaks and its Editor in Chief, that time is now. To abandon Assange at this critical moment would be more profound than its deleterious effect on the life of an individual: it would represent a complete forfeiture of integrity across the entire spectrum of journalistic endeavors.

See link for associated tweets; https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/01/op-ed-washington-post-legacy-press-betray-assange-as-his-freedom-hangs-in-the-balance/

January 31, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Over 2 mcSv/h in Namie, Fukushima Prefecture with soothing music- Video

Measurement day December 31, 2017 Namie-cho Fukushima Prefecture Route 114 → → Route 49 Route 2-1

計測日2017年12月31日 福島県浪江町 国道114号線→ 県道49号線２-１

Screenshot from 2018-01-31 05:20:29

Here is a soil contamination map of the area;

namie-cho-july-22-2017

Source for radioactive contamination map and description;  https://nuclear-news.net/2017/07/31/soil-radioactive-contamination-measurements-of-namie-fukushima/

Source for the  screenshot of reading taken in a car;

kienaiyoru

Published on 30 Jan 2018

December 30, 2017 – December 31, 2017
Measurement time 7 hours 40
Movement distance 298 km
Movement fee 2857 yen

See Kienaiyoru YT channel description for details to donate to this ongoing thorough documentation of contamination areas in Fukushima Prefecture

January 31, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

China reacts to Pentagon plans for nuclear weapons expansion plans!

NPT-map

Jan 31st 2018

Members of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) take part in the national flag-raising ceremony to mark the New Year, the first since it took over the duty from paramilitary police, on Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China January 1, 2018. Reuters

  • The official newspaper of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army says that China needs to strengthen its nuclear capabilities.
  • The reasoning was based on US President Donald Trump’s plans to pursue development of new nuclear weaponry and delivery systems.
  • The paper also mentioned Russia’s nuclear arsenal as a reason to maintain a strong nuclear deterrent

BEIJING (Reuters) – China must strengthen its nuclear deterrence and counter-strike capabilities to keep pace with the developing nuclear strategies of the United States and Russia, the official paper of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) said on Tuesday.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration may be pursuing the development of new nuclear weaponry and could explicitly leave open the possibility of nuclear retaliation for major non-nuclear attacks, according to a draft of a pending Nuclear Posture Review leaked by the Huffington Post.

This “unprecedented” move by the United States, combined with continuous quality improvements of nuclear arsenals in both the U.S. and Russia, means that both countries place greater importance on deterrence and real combat usability, the commentary in the PLA Daily said.

“In the roiling unpredictability of today’s world, to upgrade the capability of our country’s deterrence strategy, to support our great power position… we must strengthen the reliability and trustworthiness of our nuclear deterrence and nuclear counterstrike capabilities,” it said.

The article was written by two researchers from the PLA Academy of Military Science, a top research institute directly responsible to China’s Central Military Commission.

A change was necessary despite China having developed nuclear weapons to avoid bullying from nuclear powers, the paper said, adding that China would always stick to the principle of “no first use” and a final goal of eliminating nuclear weapons.

Chinese ballistic missilesMilitary vehicles carrying DF-26 ballistic missiles travel past Tiananmen Gate during a military parade to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II in Beijing Thursday Sept. 3, 2015. Reuters

Neither Russia nor the United States is abandoning nuclear weapons as each adopts new high-tech weapons capabilities, the paper said, pointing to the U.S. Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of maintenance and modernization of the U.S. nuclear arsenal over the next 30 years costing more than $1.2 trillion.

This spend, the paper said, has led to a corresponding Russian military modernization program, aiming to boost the share of advanced armaments in its nuclear triad to at least 90 percent by 2021.

Chinese President Xi Jinping is overseeing an ambitious military modernization program, including developing advanced nuclear-capable missiles. China carried out its first nuclear weapons test only in 1964.

Trump’s strong embrace of his predecessor President Barack Obama’s nuclear modernization program has led some former senior U.S. government officials, legislators and arms control specialists to warn of risks from the U.S. stoking a new arms race.

A U.S. national defense strategy released on Jan. 19 shifted priorities to put what Defense Secretary Jim Mattis called a “great power competition” with China and Russia at the heart of the country’s military strategy.

(Reporting by Christian Shepherd; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

http://www.yoritrade.com/chinese-military-paper-urges-increase-in-nuclear-capabilities-to-keep-up-with-russia-and-the-us/

January 31, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

South Africa’s Eskom cannot commit to nuclear expansion: acting CFO

nuclear fossil fuel 1 percent solar wind 99 percent Thinking People

January 30, 2018

JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) – South Africa’s power utility Eskom cannot afford a nuclear power station expansion, acting Eskom chief financial officer Calib Cassim said on Tuesday during the release of its financial results.

South Africa’s government has said it will push ahead with its nuclear expansion plan but will now do so at a slower pace due to weak economic growth. With the only nuclear power station on the continent, South Africa is seeking to expand its nuclear, wind, solar and coal power capacity.

“I can’t go and commit to additional expenditure on a nuclear programme,” said Acting Eskom chief executive officer Calib Cassim during its results presentation.

The sole power supplier in Africa’s most industrialised economy’s reported a 34 percent drop in interim profits for the six months ending Sept 30. 2017, down to 6 billion rand ($504 million) due to declining sales and higher finance costs.

New Eskom chairman Jabu Mabuza said the utility would review its cost structure and was considering ways of reducing its indebtedness.

The power utility which has been embroiled in a governance crisis and allegations of undue influence in awarding tenders, said it would address governance concerns and stabilise the firm through its new board.

“We must have credibility, and we must have consistency,” said Mabuza.

The government named a new Eskom board earlier this month, ending a power vacuum that dates back to mid-2017 when then chairman Ben Ngubane resigned and government reversed Eskom’s decision to reinstate Brian Molefe as chief executive..

Reporting by Alexander Winning; Writing by Tanisha Heiberg; Editing by James Macharia

https://africareportonbusiness.com/2018/01/30/south-africas-eskom-cannot-commit-to-nuclear-expansion-acting-cfo/

January 31, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Former U.S. Ambassador Thomas Graham calls for nuclear weapon-free zones

January 30th, 2018  KBVR TV

Nuclear Weapons: Former U.S. Ambassador Thomas Graham participated in OSU School of History, Philosophy, & Religion’s Citizenship and Crisis series. Graham gave his take on the current state of the world’s nuclear affairs while sharing his new book “The Alternate Route: Nuclear Weapon-Free Zones”

January 31, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

    Next Entries »