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

Extremely rare brain cancer appearing in people who attended a New Jersey school, close to former nuclear weapons fuel plant

94 former staff and students from Colonia High School in the Woodbridge Township School District have been stricken by the devastating diagnoses in recent years.

While the exact number of former faculty and staff diagnosed with glioblastoma is not precisely known, the cancer is exceedingly rare. According to the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, glioblastoma has an incidence of 3.21 per 100,000

Nearly 100 people at this NJ school got brain tumors — a survivor demands answers,

By Andrew Court

A cancer survivor is vowing to untangle the twisted mystery of why almost 100 people associated with a New Jersey high school have developed “extremely” rare malignant brain tumors.

Al Lupiano is among the 94 former staff and students from Colonia High School in the Woodbridge Township School District who have been stricken by the devastating diagnoses in recent years.

“I will not rest until I have answers,” Lupiano, 50, declared in an interview with and the Star-Ledger on Thursday. “I will uncover the truth.”

Among the others diagnosed with brain cancer was Lupiano’s younger sister, who passed away from the disease in February at the age of 44.

The devoted brother promised his sister on her deathbed that he would get to the bottom of what was causing the apparent cancer cluster at Colonia High. On Tuesday — after a public push by Lupiano — local officials approved an emergency probe of the school.

“There could be a real problem here, and our residents deserve to know if there are any dangers,” Woodbridge Mayor John McCormac said in a statement. “We’re all concerned, and we all want to get to the bottom of this. This is definitely not normal.”

Starting this weekend, various radiological assessments will be conducted across the school’s 28-acre campus, including the testing of indoor air samples for radon.

Lupiano was diagnosed with a brain tumor back in the late 1990s, at the age of 27. He went on to recover from the disease.

Last year, his wife — who also attended Colonia — was diagnosed with a rare brain tumor. On the exact same day, Lupiano’s younger sister, Angela DeCillis, another alumna of Colonia, learned that she too had brain cancer.

After his sister’s death in February, Lupiano became convinced of a link between the Colonia campus and the brain cancers that he, his wife and his sister had developed. Last month, he started a Facebook group asking locals whether they knew of any other people associated with the school who had been stricken by similar diagnoses.

In less than six weeks, Lupiano says, he has gathered the names of 94 people connected with the school who have developed brain tumors.

The disturbing development became headline news this week after CBS News took it national. A subsequent TikTok video discussing the medical mystery has also racked up more than 2.2 million viral views in just 24 hours.

The vast majority of those who have developed brain tumors “graduated between 1975 and 2000, although outliers have come as recently as a 2014 graduate,” according to the Star-Ledger.

The diagnoses include “several types of primary brain tumors, including cancerous forms like glioblastoma and noncancerous yet debilitating masses such as acoustic neuromas, haemangioblastomas and meningiomas.”

“To find something like this … is a significant discovery,” Dr. Sumul Raval, one of New Jersey’s top neuro-oncologists, told the outlet. “Normally speaking, you don’t get radiation in a high school … unless something is going on in that area that we don’t know,” Raval added, calling for an immediate investigation.

The viral TikTok video discussing the purported cancer cluster was posted Wednesday by popular personality Dr. Joe Whittington.

Whittington — a board-certified MD in California — claimed several of the brain tumors developed by ex-Colonia High staff and students are glioblastoma multiforme — an aggressive cancer which spreads to brain tissue.

While the exact number of former faculty and staff diagnosed with glioblastoma is not precisely known, the cancer is exceedingly rare. According to the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, glioblastoma has an incidence of 3.21 per 100,000.

Meanwhile, the TikTok video sparked panic and a range of conspiracy-theory style comments, with people claiming mold, toxic waste, asbestos and nearby cellphone towers could all be causing the cluster.

Lupiano also spoke with CBS News on Thursday, saying he now believes ionizing radiation must be responsible for the health issues.

“What I find alarming is there’s truly only one environmental link to primary brain tumors, and that’s ionizing radiation,” he declared. “It’s not contaminated water. It’s not air. It’s not something in soil. It’s not something done to us due to bad habits.”

The school was built back in 1967 on acres of empty land, with McCormac telling the news network he is stumped as to what could be causing the cancers.

Lupiano alleges that some contaminated soil was removed from the site when it closed down in 1967 — the same year Colonia High School was built. He now wonders whether some of that soil ended up on the school grounds.CBS2

He has reached out to the state Department of Health, Department of Environmental Protection and the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry for help — which is reportedly still in the “early stages,” according to the CBS News report.

Lupiano told NJ Spotlight News that the school is located less than 12 miles from the Middlesex Sampling Plant — a site that was used, under the direction of the Manhattan Project, to crush, dry, store, package and ship uranium ore for the development of the atomic bomb.

He alleges that some contaminated soil was removed from the site when it closed down in 1967 — the same year Colonia High School was built. Lupiano is wondering whether some of that soil ended up on the school grounds.

Today, Colonia enrolls approximately 1,300 students, with many said to be “anxious” about the possible cancer cluster.

“We are looking at possible things that we can do between the town and school, and they said they will look at anything we come up with,” McCormac said.  at top


April 16, 2022 Posted by | health, Reference, USA | Leave a comment

In Ukraine, with the blessing of the Western countries, those who are in favor of a negotiation have been eliminated – Jacques Baud

Retired Swiss Military-Intelligence Officer. Is it possible to actually know what has been and is going on in Ukraine? Jacques Baud, The Unz Review 02 Apr 2022

” ……………………………. Conclusions. As an ex-intelligence professional, the first thing that strikes me is the total absence of Western intelligence services in accurately representing the situation over the past year. In fact, it seems that throughout the Western world intelligence services have been overwhelmed by the politicians. The problem is that it is the politicians who decide — the best intelligence service in the world is useless if the decision-maker does not listen. This is what has happened during this crisis.

That said, while a few intelligence services had a very accurate and rational picture of the situation, others clearly had the same picture as that propagated by our media. The problem is that, from experience, I have found them to be extremely bad at the analytical level — doctrinaire, they lack the intellectual and political independence necessary to assess a situation with military “quality.”

Second, it seems that in some European countries, politicians have deliberately responded ideologically to the situation. That is why this crisis has been irrational from the beginning. It should be noted that all the documents that were presented to the public during this crisis were presented by politicians based on commercial sources.

Some Western politicians obviously wanted there to be a conflict. In the United States, the attack scenarios presented by Anthony Blinken to the UN Security Council were only the product of the imagination of a Tiger Team working for him — he did exactly as Donald Rumsfeld did in 2002, who “bypassed” the CIA and other intelligence services that were much less assertive about Iraqi chemical weapons.

The dramatic developments we are witnessing today have causes that we knew about but refused to see:

  • on the strategic level, the expansion of NATO (which we have not dealt with here);
  • on the political level, the Western refusal to implement the Minsk Agreements;
  • and operationally, the continuous and repeated attacks on the civilian population of the Donbass over the past years and the dramatic increase in late February 2022.

In other words, we can naturally deplore and condemn the Russian attack. But WE (that is: the United States, France and the European Union in the lead) have created the conditions for a conflict to break out. We show compassion for the Ukrainian people and the two million refugees. That is fine. But if we had had a modicum of compassion for the same number of refugees from the Ukrainian populations of Donbass massacred by their own government and who sought refuge in Russia for eight years, none of this would probably have happened.

Whether the term “genocide” applies to the abuses suffered by the people of Donbass is an open question. The term is generally reserved for cases of greater magnitude (Holocaust, etc.). But the definition given by the Genocide Convention is probably broad enough to apply to this case.

Clearly, this conflict has led us into hysteria. Sanctions seem to have become the preferred tool of our foreign policies. If we had insisted that Ukraine abide by the Minsk Agreements, which we had negotiated and endorsed, none of this would have happened. Vladimir Putin’s condemnation is also ours. There is no point in whining afterwards — we should have acted earlier. However, neither Emmanuel Macron (as guarantor and member of the UN Security Council), nor Olaf Scholz, nor Volodymyr Zelensky have respected their commitments. In the end, the real defeat is that of those who have no voice.

The European Union was unable to promote the implementation of the Minsk agreements — on the contrary, it did not react when Ukraine was bombing its own population in the Donbass. Had it done so, Vladimir Putin would not have needed to react. Absent from the diplomatic phase, the EU distinguished itself by fueling the conflict. On February 27, the Ukrainian government agreed to enter into negotiations with Russia. But a few hours later, the European Union voted a budget of 450 million euros to supply arms to the Ukraine, adding fuel to the fire. From then on, the Ukrainians felt that they did not need to reach an agreement. The resistance of the Azov militia in Mariupol even led to a boost of 500 million euros for weapons.

In Ukraine, with the blessing of the Western countries, those who are in favor of a negotiation have been eliminated.This is the case of Denis Kireyev, one of the Ukrainian negotiators, assassinated on March 5 by the Ukrainian secret service (SBU) because he was too favorable to Russia and was considered a traitor. The same fate befell Dmitry Demyanenko, former deputy head of the SBU’s main directorate for Kiev and its region, who was assassinated on March 10 because he was too favorable to an agreement with Russia — he was shot by the Mirotvorets (“Peacemaker”) militia. This militia is associated with the Mirotvorets website, which lists the “enemies of Ukraine,” with their personal data, addresses and telephone numbers, so that they can be harassed or even eliminated; a practice that is punishable in many countries, but not in the Ukraine. The UN and some European countries have demanded the closure of this site — but that demand was refused by the Rada [Ukrainian parliament].

In the end, the price will be high, but Vladimir Putin will likely achieve the goals he set for himself. We have pushed him into the arms of China. His ties with Beijing have solidified. China is emerging as a mediator in the conflict. The Americans have to ask Venezuela and Iran for oil to get out of the energy impasse they have put themselves in — and the United States has to piteously backtrack on the sanctions imposed on its enemies.

Western ministers who seek to collapse the Russian economy and make the Russian people suffer, or even call for the assassination of Putin, show (even if they have partially reversed the form of their words, but not the substance!) that our leaders are no better than those we hate — sanctioning Russian athletes in the Para-Olympic Games or Russian artists has nothing to do with fighting Putin.

What makes the conflict in Ukraine more blameworthy than our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya? What sanctions have we adopted against those who deliberately lied to the international community in order to wage unjust, unjustified and murderous wars? Have we adopted a single sanction against the countries, companies or politicians who are supplying weapons to the conflict in Yemen, considered to be the “worst humanitarian disaster in the world?”

To ask the question is to answer it… and the answer is not pretty.

About the author

Jacques Baud is a former colonel of the General Staff, ex-member of the Swiss strategic intelligence, specialist on Eastern countries. He was trained in the American and British intelligence services. He has served as Policy Chief for United Nations Peace Operations. As a UN expert on rule of law and security institutions, he designed and led the first multidimensional UN intelligence unit in the Sudan. He has worked for the African Union and was for 5 years responsible for the fight, at NATO, against the proliferation of small arms. He was involved in discussions with the highest Russian military and intelligence officials just after the fall of the USSR. Within NATO, he followed the 2014 Ukrainian crisis and later participated in programs to assist the Ukraine. He is the author of several books on intelligence, war and terrorism, in particular Le Détournement published by SIGEST, Gouverner par les fake newsL’affaire Navalny. His latest book is Poutine, maître du jeu? published by Max Milo.

This article appears through the gracious courtesy of Centre Français de Recherche sur le Renseignement, Paris. more

April 16, 2022 Posted by | politics international, Reference, secrets,lies and civil liberties, spinbuster, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Recent history sheds light on the Ukraine situation . Part Three- Denazification

Retired Swiss Military-Intelligence Officer. Is it possible to actually know what has been and is going on in Ukraine?
Jacques Baud, The Unz Review 02 Apr 2022

”………………………………………………………………….. Denazification

In cities like Kharkov, Mariupol and Odessa, the Ukrainian defense is provided by the paramilitary militias. They know that the objective of “denazification” is aimed primarily at them. For an attacker in an urbanized area, civilians are a problem. This is why Russia is seeking to create humanitarian corridors to empty cities of civilians and leave only the militias, to fight them more easily.

Conversely, these militias seek to keep civilians in the cities from evacuating in order to dissuade the Russian army from fighting there. This is why they are reluctant to implement these corridors and do everything to ensure that Russian efforts are unsuccessful — they use the civilian population as “human shields.” Videos showing civilians trying to leave Mariupol and beaten up by fighters of the Azov regiment are of course carefully censored by the Western media.

On Facebook, the Azov group was considered in the same category as the Islamic State [ISIS] and subject to the platform’s “policy on dangerous individuals and organizations.” It was therefore forbidden to glorify its activities, and “posts” that were favorable to it were systematically banned. But on February 24, Facebook changed its policy and allowed posts favorable to the militia. In the same spirit, in March, the platform authorized, in the former Eastern countries, calls for the murder of Russian soldiers and leaders. So much for the values that inspire our leaders.

Our media propagate a romantic image of popular resistance by the Ukrainian people. It is this image that led the European Union to finance the distribution of arms to the civilian population. In my capacity as head of peacekeeping at the UN, I worked on the issue of civilian protection. We found that violence against civilians occurred in very specific contexts. In particular, when weapons are abundant and there are no command structures.

These command structures are the essence of armies: their function is to channel the use of force towards an objective. By arming citizens in a haphazard manner, as is currently the case, the EU is turning them into combatants, with the consequential effect of making them potential targets. Moreover, without command, without operational goals, the distribution of arms leads inevitably to settling of scores, banditry and actions that are more deadly than effective. War becomes a matter of emotions. Force becomes violence. This is what happened in Tawarga (Libya) from 11 to 13 August 2011, where 30,000 black Africans were massacred with weapons parachuted (illegally) by France. By the way, the British Royal Institute for Strategic Studies (RUSI) does not see any added value in these arms deliveries.

Moreover, by delivering arms to a country at war, one exposes oneself to being considered a belligerent. The Russian strikes of March 13, 2022, against the Mykolayev air base follow Russian warnings that arms shipments would be treated as hostile targets.

The EU is repeating the disastrous experience of the Third Reich in the final hours of the Battle of Berlin.War must be left to the military and when one side has lost, it must be admitted. And if there is to be resistance, it must be led and structured. But we are doing exactly the opposite — we are pushing citizens to go and fight, and at the same time, Facebook authorizes calls for the murder of Russian soldiers and leaders. So much for the values that inspire us.

Some intelligence services see this irresponsible decision as a way to use the Ukrainian population as cannon fodder to fight Vladimir Putin’s Russia. It would have been better to engage in negotiations and thus obtain guarantees for the civilian population than to add fuel to the fire. It is easy to be combative with the blood of others.

4. The Maternity Hospital At Mariupol

It is important to understand beforehand that it is not the Ukrainian army that is defending Mariupol, but the Azov militia, composed of foreign mercenaries.

In its March 7, 2022 summary of the situation, the Russian UN mission in New York stated that “Residents report that Ukrainian armed forces expelled staff from the Mariupol city birth hospital No. 1 and set up a firing post inside the facility.” On March 8, the independent Russian media, publishedthe testimony of civilians from Mariupol who told that the maternity hospital was taken over by the militia of the Azov regimentand who drove out the civilian occupants by threatening them with their weapons. They confirmed the statements of the Russian ambassador a few hours earlier.

The hospital in Mariupol occupies a dominant position, perfectly suited for the installation of anti-tank weapons and for observation. On 9 March, Russian forces struck the building. According to CNN, 17 people were wounded, but the images do not show any casualties in the building and there is no evidence that the victims mentioned are related to this strike. There is talk of children, but in reality, there is nothing. This does not prevent the leaders of the EU from seeing this as a war crime. And this allows Zelensky to call for a no-fly zone over Ukraine.

In reality, we do not know exactly what happened. But the sequence of events tends to confirm that Russian forces struck a position of the Azov regiment and that the maternity ward was then free of civilians.

The problem is that the paramilitary militias that defend the cities are encouraged by the international community not to respect the rules of war. It seems that the Ukrainians have replayed the scenario of the Kuwait City maternity hospital in 1990, which was totally staged by the firm Hill & Knowlton for $10.7 million in order to convince the United Nations Security Council to intervene in Iraq for Operation Desert Shield/Storm.

Western politicians have accepted civilian strikes in the Donbass for eight years without adopting any sanctions against the Ukrainian government. We have long since entered a dynamic where Western politicians have agreed to sacrifice international law towards their goal of weakening Russia………………. more

April 16, 2022 Posted by | politics, Reference, secrets,lies and civil liberties, spinbuster, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Recent history sheds light on the Ukraine situation . Part Two Outbreak of war.

Retired Swiss Military-Intelligence Officer. Is it possible to actually know what has been and is going on in Ukraine?

Jacques Baud, The Unz Review, 04 Apr 2022
Part Two: The War

As a former head of analysis of Warsaw Pact forces in the Swiss strategic intelligence service, I observe with sadness — but not astonishment — that our services are no longer able to understand the military situation in Ukraine. The self-proclaimed “experts” who parade on our TV screens tirelessly relay the same information modulated by the claim that Russia — and Vladimir Putin — is irrational. Let’s take a step back.

1. The Outbreak Of War

Since November 2021, the Americans have been constantly threatening a Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, the Ukrainians at first did not seem to agree. Why not?

We have to go back to March 24, 2021. On that day, Volodymyr Zelensky issued a decree for the recapture of the Crimea, and began to deploy his forces to the south of the country. At the same time, several NATO exercises were conducted between the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea, accompanied by a significant increase in reconnaissance flights along the Russian border. Russia then conducted several exercises to test the operational readiness of its troops and to show that it was following the evolution of the situation.

Things calmed down until October-November with the end of the ZAPAD 21 exercises, whose troop movements were interpreted as a reinforcement for an offensive against Ukraine. However, even the Ukrainian authorities refuted the idea of Russian preparations for a war, and Oleksiy Reznikov, Ukrainian Minister of Defense, states that there had been no change on its border since the spring.

In violation of the Minsk Agreements, Ukraine was conducting air operations in Donbass using drones, including at least one strike against a fuel depot in Donetsk in October 2021. The American press noted this, but not the Europeans; and no one condemned these violations.

In February 2022, events came to a head. On February 7, during his visit to Moscow, Emmanuel Macron reaffirmed to Vladimir Putin his commitment to the Minsk Agreements, a commitment he would repeat after his meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky the next day. But on February 11, in Berlin, after nine hours of work, the meeting of political advisors to the leaders of the “Normandy format” ended without any concrete result: the Ukrainians still refused to apply the Minsk Agreements, apparently under pressure from the United States. Vladimir Putin noted that Macron had made empty promises and that the West was not ready to enforce the agreements, the same opposition to a settlement it had exhibited for eight years.

Ukrainian preparations in the contact zone continued. The Russian Parliament became alarmed; and on February 15 it asked Vladimir Putin to recognize the independence of the Republics, which he initially refused to do.

On 17 February, President Joe Biden announced that Russia would attack Ukraine in the next few days. How did he know this? It is a mystery. But since the 16th, the artillery shelling of the population of Donbass had increased dramatically, as the daily reports of the OSCE observers show. Naturally, neither the media, nor the European Union, nor NATO, nor any Western government reacted or intervened. It would be said later that this was Russian disinformation. In fact, it seems that the European Union and some countries have deliberately kept silent about the massacre of the Donbass population, knowing that this would provoke a Russian intervention.

At the same time, there were reports of sabotage in the Donbass. On 18 January, Donbass fighters intercepted saboteurs, who spoke Polish and were equipped with Western equipment and who were seeking to create chemical incidents in Gorlivka. They could have been CIA mercenaries, led or “advised” by Americans and composed of Ukrainian or European fighters, to carry out sabotage actions in the Donbass Republics.

In fact, as early as February 16, Joe Biden knew that the Ukrainians had begun intense shelling the civilian population of Donbass, forcing Vladimir Putin to make a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem, or to stand by and watch the Russian-speaking people of Donbass being crushed.

If he decided to intervene, Putin could invoke the international obligation of “Responsibility To Protect” (R2P). But he knew that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention would trigger a storm of sanctions. Therefore, whether Russian intervention were limited to the Donbass or went further to put pressure on the West over the status of the Ukrainethe price to pay would be the same. This is what he explained in his speech on February 21. On that day, he agreed to the request of the Duma and recognized the independence of the two Donbass Republics and, at the same time, he signed friendship and assistance treaties with them.

The Ukrainian artillery bombardment of the Donbass population continued, and, on 23 February, the two Republics asked for military assistance from Russia. On 24 February, Vladimir Putin invoked Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which provides for mutual military assistance in the framework of a defensive alliance.

In order to make the Russian intervention seem totally illegal in the eyes of the public, Western powers deliberately hid the fact that the war actually started on February 16. The Ukrainian army was preparing to attack the Donbass as early as 2021, as some Russian and European intelligence services were well aware.

In his speech of February 24, Vladimir Putin stated the two objectives of his operation: “demilitarize” and “denazify” the Ukraine. So, it was not a question of taking over Ukraine, nor even, presumably, of occupying it; and certainly not of destroying it.

From then on, our knowledge of the course of the operation is limited: the Russians have excellent security for their operations (OPSEC) and the details of their planning are not known. But fairly quickly, the course of the operation allows us to understand how the strategic objectives were translated on the operational level.


  • ground destruction of Ukrainian aviation, air defense systems and reconnaissance assets;
  • neutralization of command and intelligence structures (C3I), as well as the main logistical routes in the depth of the territory;
  • encirclement of the bulk of the Ukrainian army massed in the southeast of the country.
  • destruction or neutralization of volunteer battalions operating in the cities of Odessa, Kharkov, and Mariupol, as well as in various facilities in the territory.


2. Demilitarization

The Russian offensive was carried out in a very “classic” manner. Initially — as the Israelis had done in 1967 — with the destruction on the ground of the air force in the very first hours. Then, we witnessed a simultaneous progression along several axes according to the principle of “flowing water”: advance everywhere where resistance was weak and leave the cities (very demanding in terms of troops) for later. In the north, the Chernobyl power plant was occupied immediately to prevent acts of sabotage. The images of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers guarding the plant togetherare of course not shown.

The idea that Russia is trying to take over Kiev, the capital, to eliminate Zelensky, comes typically from the West. But Vladimir Putin never intended to shoot or topple Zelensky. Instead, Russia seeks to keep him in power by pushing him to negotiate, by surrounding Kiev. The Russians want to obtain the neutrality of Ukraine.

Many Western commentators were surprised that the Russians continued to seek a negotiated solution while conducting military operations. The explanation lies in the Russian strategic outlook since the Soviet era. For the West, war begins when politics ends. However, the Russian approach follows a Clausewitzian inspiration: war is the continuity of politics and one can move fluidly from one to the other, even during combat. This allows one to create pressure on the adversary and push him to negotiate.

From an operational point of view, the Russian offensive was an example of previous military action and planning: in six days, the Russians seized a territory as large as the United Kingdom, with a speed of advance greater than what the Wehrmacht had achieved in 1940.

The bulk of the Ukrainian army was deployed in the south of the country in preparation for a major operation against the Donbass. This is why Russian forces were able to encircle it from the beginning of March in the “cauldron” between Slavyansk, Kramatorsk and Severodonetsk, with a thrust from the East through Kharkov and another from the South from Crimea. Troops from the Donetsk (DPR) and Lugansk (LPR) Republics are complementing the Russian forces with a push from the East.

At this stage, Russian forces are slowly tightening the noose, but are no longer under any time pressure or schedule. Their demilitarization goal is all but achieved and the remaining Ukrainian forces no longer have an operational and strategic command structure.

The “slowdown” that our “experts” attribute to poor logistics is only the consequence of having achieved their objectives. Russia does not want to engage in an occupation of the entire Ukrainian territory. In fact, it appears that Russia is trying to limit its advance to the linguistic border of the country…………………………… more

April 16, 2022 Posted by | politics, Reference, secrets,lies and civil liberties, spinbuster, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Recent history sheds light on the Ukraine situation . Part One

Retired Swiss Military-Intelligence Officer. Is it possible to actually know what has been and is going on in Ukraine?

The integration of these paramilitary forces into the Ukrainian National Guard was not at all accompanied by a “denazification,” as some claim.

Among the many examples, that of the Azov Regiment’s insignia is instructive.

Jacques Baud
The Unz Review 02 Apr 2022
I  Just recently I came across perhaps the clearest and most reasonable account of what has been going on in Ukraine. Its importance comes due to the fact that its author, Jacques Baud, a retired colonel in the Swiss intelligence service, was variously a highly placed, major participant in NATO training operations in Ukraine. Over the years, he also had extensive dealings with his Russian counterparts. His long essay first appeared (in French) at the respected Centre Français de Recherche sur le Renseignement. A literal translation appeared at The Postil (April 1, 2022). I have gone back to the original French and edited the article down some and rendered it, I hope, in more idiomatic English. I do not think in editing it I have damaged Baud’s fascinating account. For in a real sense, what he has done is “to let the cat out of the bag.” — Boyd D. Cathay

Part One: The Road To War

For years, from Mali to Afghanistan, I have worked for peace and risked my life for it. It is therefore not a question of justifying war, but of understanding what led us to it.

Let’s try to examine the roots of the Ukrainian conflict. It starts with those who for the last eight years have been talking about “separatists” or “independentists” from Donbass. This is a misnomer. The referendums conducted by the two self-proclaimed Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk in May 2014, were not referendums of “independence” (независимость), as some unscrupulous journalists have claimed, but referendums of “self-determination” or “autonomy” (самостоятельность). The qualifier “pro-Russian” suggests that Russia was a party to the conflict, which was not the case, and the term “Russian speakers” would have been more honest. Moreover, these referendums were conducted against the advice of Vladimir Putin.

In fact, these Republics were not seeking to separate from Ukraine, but to have a status of autonomy, guaranteeing them the use of the Russian language as an official language — because the first legislative act of the new government resulting from the American-sponsored overthrow of [the democratically-elected] President Yanukovych, was the abolition, on February 23, 2014, of the Kivalov-Kolesnichenko law of 2012 that made Russian an official language in Ukraine. A bit like if German putschists decided that French and Italian would no longer be official languages in Switzerland.

This decision caused a storm in the Russian-speaking population. The result was fierce repression against the Russian-speaking regions (Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, Lugansk and Donetsk) which was carried out beginning in February 2014 and led to a militarization of the situation and some horrific massacres of the Russian population (in Odessa and Mariupol, the most notable).

At this stage, too rigid and engrossed in a doctrinaire approach to operations, the Ukrainian general staff subdued the enemy but without managing to actually prevail. The war waged by the autonomists consisted in highly mobile operations conducted with light means. With a more flexible and less doctrinaire approach, the rebels were able to exploit the inertia of Ukrainian forces to repeatedly “trap” them.

In 2014, when I was at NATO, I was responsible for the fight against the proliferation of small arms, and we were trying to detect Russian arms deliveries to the rebels, to see if Moscow was involved. The information we received then came almost entirely from Polish intelligence services and did not “fit” with the information coming from the OSCE [Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe] — and despite rather crude allegations, there were no deliveries of weapons and military equipment from Russia.

The rebels were armed thanks to the defection of Russian-speaking Ukrainian units that went over to the rebel side. As Ukrainian failures continued, tank, artillery and anti-aircraft battalions swelled the ranks of the autonomists. This is what pushed the Ukrainians to commit to the Minsk Agreements.

But just after signing the Minsk 1 Agreements, the Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko launched a massive “anti-terrorist operation” (ATO/Антитерористична операція) against the Donbass. Poorly advised by NATO officers, the Ukrainians suffered a crushing defeat in Debaltsevo, which forced them to engage in the Minsk 2 Agreements.

It is essential to recall here that Minsk 1 (September 2014) and Minsk 2 (February 2015) Agreements did not provide for the separation or independence of the Republics, but their autonomy within the framework of Ukraine. Those who have read the Agreements (there are very few who actually have) will note that it is written that the status of the Republics was to be negotiated between Kiev and the representatives of the Republics, for an internal solution within Ukraine.

That is why, since 2014, Russia has systematically demanded the implementation of the Minsk Agreements while refusing to be a party to the negotiations, because it was an internal matter of Ukraine. On the other side, the West — led by France — systematically tried to replace Minsk Agreements with the “Normandy format,” which put Russians and Ukrainians face-to-face. However, let us remember that there were never any Russian troops in the Donbass before 23-24 February 2022. Moreover, OSCE observers have never observed the slightest trace of Russian units operating in the Donbass before then. For example, the U.S. intelligence map published by the Washington Post on December 3, 2021 does not show Russian troops in the Donbass.

n October 2015, Vasyl Hrytsak, director of the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU), confessed that only 56 Russian fighters had been observed in the Donbass. This was exactly comparable to the Swiss who went to fight in Bosnia on weekends, in the 1990s, or the French who go to fight in Ukraine today.

The Ukrainian army was then in a deplorable state. In October 2018, after four years of war, the chief Ukrainian military prosecutor, Anatoly Matios, stated that Ukraine had lost 2,700 men in the Donbass: 891 from illnesses, 318 from road accidents, 177 from other accidents, 175 from poisonings (alcohol, drugs), 172 from careless handling of weapons, 101 from breaches of security regulations, 228 from murders and 615 from suicides.

In fact, the Ukrainian army was undermined by the corruption of its cadres and no longer enjoyed the support of the population. According to a British Home Office report, in the March/April 2014 recall of reservists, 70 percent did not show up for the first session, 80 percent for the second, 90 percent for the third, and 95 percent for the fourth. In October/November 2017, 70% of conscripts did not show up for the “Fall 2017” recall campaign. This is not counting suicides and desertions (often over to the autonomists), which reached up to 30 percent of the workforce in the ATO area. Young Ukrainians refused to go and fight in the Donbass and preferred emigration, which also explains, at least partially, the demographic deficit of the country.

The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense then turned to NATO to help make its armed forces more “attractive.” Having already worked on similar projects within the framework of the United Nations, I was asked by NATO to participate in a program to restore the image of the Ukrainian armed forces. But this is a long-term process and the Ukrainians wanted to move quickly.

So, to compensate for the lack of soldiers, the Ukrainian government resorted to paramilitary militiasIn 2020, they constituted about 40 percent of the Ukrainian forces and numbered about 102,000 menaccording to Reuters. They were armed, financed and trained by the United States, Great Britain, Canada and France. There were more than 19 nationalities.

These militias had been operating in the Donbass since 2014, with Western support. Even if one can argue about the term “Nazi,” the fact remains that these militias are violent, convey a nauseating ideology and are virulently anti-Semitic…[and] are composed of fanatical and brutal individuals. The best known of these is the Azov Regiment, whose emblem is reminiscent of the 2nd SS Das Reich Panzer Division, which is revered in the Ukraine for liberating Kharkov from the Soviets in 1943, before carrying out the 1944 Oradour-sur-Glane massacre in France.

The characterization of the Ukrainian paramilitaries as “Nazis” or “neo-Nazis” is considered Russian propaganda. But that’s not the view of the Times of Israel, or the West Point Academy’s Center for Counterterrorism. In 2014, Newsweek magazine seemed to associate them more with… the Islamic State. Take your pick!

So, the West supported and continued to arm militias that have been guilty of numerous crimes against civilian populations since 2014: rape, torture and massacres…

The integration of these paramilitary forces into the Ukrainian National Guard was not at all accompanied by a “denazification,” as some claim.

Among the many examples, that of the Azov Regiment’s insignia is instructive: see above

In 2022, very schematically, the Ukrainian armed forces fighting the Russian offensive were organized as:

  • The Army, subordinated to the Ministry of Defense. It is organized into 3 army corps and composed of maneuver formations (tanks, heavy artillery, missiles, etc.).
  • The National Guard, which depends on the Ministry of the Interior and is organized into 5 territorial commands.

The National Guard is therefore a territorial defense force that is not part of the Ukrainian army. It includes paramilitary militias, called “volunteer battalions” (добровольчі батальйоні), also known by the evocative name of “reprisal battalions,” and composed of infantry. Primarily trained for urban combat, they now defend cities such as Kharkov, Mariupol, Odessa, Kiev, etc……. more

April 16, 2022 Posted by | politics, Reference, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Nuclear power stations UK: the new and existing sites at threat of flooding from 2030 amid rising sea levels

NationalWorld investigates how safe the locations of both the current and proposed nuclear power stations are amid rising sea levels

By Isabella Boneham,, 15th April 2022  All of the current and proposed locations of nuclear power stations in the UK will be at “significant risk” of being flooded from 2030 due to extreme weather events becoming more frequent, a Greenpeace chief scientist told NationalWorld.

UK seas have risen by over 16.5cm since 1901, bringing into question the safety, security and viability of nuclear power stations on Britain’s coastlines. However, in the Government’s latest energy strategy, Boris Johnson ramped up the drive for nuclear energy, proposing plans to build eight new stations with one being approved each year until 2030.

Where are the current and proposed locations of nuclear power stations in the UK?

There are eight nuclear power stations currently generating in the UK

  • Hunterston, a coastal area in Ayrshire, Scotland
  • Torness, east coast of Scotland
  • Hartlepool, located in County Durham
    • Heysham, located in Lancashire
    • Sizewell, located on the Suffolk coast
    • Dungeness, on the coast of Kent
    • Hinkley Point, located in Somerset
    • Wylfa, on the island of Anglesey in Wales
  • In June 2011, eight sites across Britain were chosen as locations for new nuclear stations.
  • In the Government’s new energy strategy, announced on 7 April 2022, Boris Johnson confirmed plans for these eight sites:
    • Bradwell B is a proposed new nuclear power station at Bradwell-on-Sea in Essex and is currently in the public consultation stages.
    • Hartlepool in County Durham was confirmed as a ‘designated nuclear site’ in the Government’s 7 April energy strategy. The town’s existing EDF nuclear power station is due to cease production in 2024.
  • Heysham in Lancashire was named in the UK government’s new major energy strategy.

    • The Government has backed the construction of Hinkley C in Somerset, which will be the largest nuclear station in Britain – it is set to open by the end of 2026.
    • Oldbury in south Gloucestershire was mentioned as a candidate for a new nuclear reactor site.
  • Moorside nuclear power station is proposed for a site near Sellafield in Cumbria – it has received full business case approval from the government.
  • There are proposals for a nuclear plant on the coastline of Suffolk called Sizewell C, with ministers throwing in £100m investment to EDF Energy’s £20bn nuclear power station.
    • Small Modular Reactors will form a key part of the nuclear project pipeline, with both Trawsfynydd and Wylfa tipped as sites.
    • How will rising sea levels affect UK nuclear power stations?
  • All of the locations of current and proposed nuclear power stations are deemed to be unsafe.A new interactive tool that looks at flooding risk to coastal regions has revealed the severity of the rising sea level threat to the location of nuclear power stations.

  • The searchable map from Climate Central, a non-profit organisation focused on climate science, shows the expected rise of sea levels and what areas of the UK are most at risk from flooding.By 2030, based on the current pollution trajectory, it is clear that the locations of current and proposed stations are at threat from rising sea levels.
  • The coastlines of these areas, where nuclear stations are located, are at threat of floods from 2030 onwards.These maps identify places that require deeper investigation of risk and are based on global-scale datasets for tides in addition to sea level rise projections.
  • Dr Paul Dorfman, Chair of the Nuclear Consulting Group, an independent institute providing expert research and analysis of nuclear issues, told NationalWorld that current and proposed nuclear power stations will be vulnerable to flooding due to rising sea levels and more frequent and severe storms.

How big is the climate threat?

The UK’s sea level has risen by over 16.5cm since 1901, according to the state of the UK Climate Report 2020 published last year by the Met Office.

It also found that 2020 was the third warmest year, fifth wettest and eight sunniest on record.

No other year has fallen in the top 10 for all three variables for the UK

  • It also marked the eighth warmest year for UK near-coastal sea-surface temperature in a series from 1870.Parts of the UK will be at risk of being flooded in 2030 due to rising sea levels and warming temperatures.
  • Areas at risk of being flooded in 2030 are Portsmouth, East Riding of Yorkshire, Arun (West Sussex), London boroughs on either side of the Thames including Canary Wharf and Fulham, Chichester (West Sussex), Weston-Super-Mare, Cardiff, Great Yarmouth (Norfolk), and West Berkshire (Berkshire) and Worthing (West Sussex), according to Climate Central’s interactive tool.
  • Dr Scott Kulp, a senior scientist at Climate Central and lead author of the study, said that these maps show the “potential of climate change to reshape cities, economies, coastlines, and entire global regions within our lifetimes.”
  • He added: “As the tideline rises higher than the ground people call home, nations will increasingly confront questions about whether, how much, and how long coastal defences can protect them.”Over 1.3 million residential and commercial addresses in Britain will be at risk of flooding by 2050, intelligence provider Gamma has said.
  • What has the government said?
  • A spokesperson from the Government’s Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy, said: “Site licence holders in the civil nuclear industry are required to meet robust standards, overseen by independent regulators, including ensuring that sites have the necessary defences in place to protect them against the effects of climate change, such as flooding, rises in sea levels, coastal erosion and drought.”

The spokesperson added: “The Office for Nuclear Regulation and environmental regulators would not allow a nuclear power station to be developed on a site, or to operate, if they judged that it was not safe to do so.”

April 16, 2022 Posted by | climate change, UK | Leave a comment

Reclaim the Word “Clean” from the Nuclear Industry 15 Apr 22,


King Midas turned everthing he touched into gold. This is what the most toxic industry would have us believe nuclear power is …”clean” and “green” and puppy dogs tails. The dark heart of this industry resides in another heartland. That of Nannashire near Preston where the UK’s Nuclear Fuel Manufacturing site hunkers down like a well camouflaged toxic toad between the well known, vigorously and sucessfully opposed fracking sites of Preston New Road and Roseacre. Unlike fracking, Nuclear has co-opted so many ordinary folk with its unprecedented PR machine and largesse to good causes (using public money). And now it has even co-opted the English language with the naming of the “Clean Energy Technology Park” even while it gears up to rip up uranium from far flung countries and manufacture ever more nuclear fuel. There is no “away” for nuclear wastes apart from the Midas curse of turning all life on this fragile biosphere to a nuclear wasteland. How can we fight the “Clean Energy Technology Park” when even language has been twisted so out of shape for the nuclear cause…

What absolute idiot does not want “Clean Energy”?

Its CLEAN ENERGY Why are you Opposing it??

The first step to resistance is to reclaim the world “CLEAN” from the nuclear industry. Join us and sign the petition which will be handed in on the anniversary of the ongoing Chernobyl disaster – 26th April.

To: Trading Standards, Lancashire County Council. “CLEAN” ENERGY TECHNOLOGY PARK IS A NUCLEAR NIGHTMARE We the undersigned call for the the word “clean” to be removed from the UK’s Nuclear Fuel Manufacturing plant which the industry has re-named the Clean Energy Technology Park. We call for Removal of the word “CLEAN” from the CLEAN ENERGY TECHNOLOGY PARK to be replaced with the accurate description of “NUCLEAR”.

To describe Nuclear energy as “clean” is fraudulent and the claim amounts to a mass marketing scam perpetrated on the British public.

Why is this important?

“Clean” Energy Security? The raw material for nuclear is uranium which can be found in in the UK in the Orkneys but which our government buys from, for example Kazakhstan where it is largely mined by leaching out the uranium from the rock using massive amounts of fresh water and chemicals

. “Clean” Carbon footprint? Nuclear is at least the third highest carbon emitter after coal-fired plants and natural gas. As uranium becomes more scarce more energy and chemicals are needed to get the uranium out of the ground. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority have calculated their carbon footprint for 2019/20 as 1,046,950 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). This does not include operation of nuclear reactors or include the building of Hinkley Point C with the biggest pour of concrete in the UK ever. The nuclear and fossil fuel industry are mutually intertwined. The biggest gas plant being constructed in the UK right now is at Sellafield, home to 80 percent of the UK’s existing nuclear waste which needs to be kept cool. The heating effect of discharges to the atmosphere and sea and also the use of water as a coolant for reactors and nuclear wastes are all contributing to ocean temperature rise and climate change. An honest description of Nuclear would be : Radioactive Fossil Fuel by proxy

“Clean” Radioactive Emissions Radioactive emissions occur at every stage of the nuclear fuel cycle from the mining of uranium to enrichment, to fuel manufacture, to operation of the reactors, to the “disposal” of nuclear wastes. These emissions occur both routinely and accidentally and have already resulted in large swathes of the world’s land and oceans becoming irreversibly polluted with man-made radioactive isotopes.

“Clean” and Healthy? Radiation can damage the DNA in our cells. High doses of radiation can cause Acute Radiation Syndrome or Cutaneous Radiation Injuries. There is no such thing as a “safe dose” of radiation

The “Clean Energy Technology Park” just 3.9 miles from the centre of Preston is planning an incinerator to burn intermediate level radioactive wastes from across Europe. This would result in daily plumes of chemical and radio-toxic airborne fine particle emissions blowing accross Preston City Centre. We call for the word “Clean” to be replaced by – Nuclear – at the

“Clean Energy Technology Park”.


April 16, 2022 Posted by | spinbuster, UK | Leave a comment

Fears sunken Russian warship Moskva was carrying nuclear weapons

There are fears that sunken Russian warship The Moskva was carrying nuclear weapons that could now cause a “broken arrow” incident.

Megan Palin, April 16, 2022  There are fears that sunken Russian warship The Moskva that is now believed to be resting at the bottom of the Black Sea was carrying nuclear weapons.

Maksym Marchenko, the governor of the Odesa region, said Ukraine struck the ship with two Neptune missiles and caused “serious damage” on Thursday.

The Russian Defence Ministry denied there had been an attack by Ukraine on the ship, which would normally have about 500 sailors aboard, and said the heavily damaged Moskva sank in a storm under tow after being gutted by fire.

Speaking at the Pentagon on Friday, a senior US defense official said the Moskva warship was hit by two Ukrainian Neptune missiles, prompting its sinking.

In a chilling revelation, sources say it’s likely that several nuclear missiles are on the sunken vessel, and there is now real concern that could lead to a nuclear accident – otherwise known as a “broken arrow” incident in American military slang.

Mykhailo Samus, director of a Lviv-based military think-tank; Andriy Klymenko, editor of Black Sea News; and Ukrainian newspaper Defence Express all warned today that the Moskva was designed to carry warheads which could fit in the nose of its supersonic P-1000 “Vulkan” missiles – designed to take out American aircraft carriers.

“On board the Moskva could be nuclear warheads – two units,’ Samus said, while Klymenko called on other Black Sea nations – Turkey, Romania, Georgia, and Bulgaria – to insist on an explanation. Where are these warheads? Where were they when the ammunition exploded,” he asked.

This is HUGE. Russia’s defense ministry admits Moskva, their flagship in Black Sea fleet, slava class cruiser, has SUNK! It was key to intelligence & air defenses for the Russian ships. IMO this is on the level big as stopping Russians from taking Kyiv.— John Spencer (@SpencerGuard) April 14, 2022

BlackSeaNews editor-in-chief Andriy Klymenko called for an urgent international probe into whether the Moskva was carrying nuclear weapons.

“Friends and experts say that there are two nuclear warheads for cruise missiles on board the Moskva,” he said…………..

April 16, 2022 Posted by | incidents, Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Once Rocked by Nuclear Disaster, Fukushima Is Now a Renewables Hub, 15 Apr 22,

More than a decade after a major nuclear power plant disaster, Fukushima, Japan is seeing extensive renewable energy development on abandoned lands, as satellite imagery from NASA shows.

When an earthquake and resulting tsunami hit the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in 2011, damaged reactors released radioactive material into the surrounding area, rendering large swaths of farmland unusable. Today, some of those fields are home to sprawling solar arrays.

The Fukushima prefecture has set a goal of 100 percent renewable power by 2040. Around 40 precent of its power currently comes from renewables, with plans underway to spend $2.75 billion on the development of 11 solar farms and 10 wind farms on contaminated or abandoned lands.

“A strong desire to never see a repeat of such an accident was the most important starting point” for Fukushima’s renewable push, Noriaki Saito, energy director at the prefecture’s planning department, told AFP.

April 16, 2022 Posted by | Japan, renewable | Leave a comment

Ukrainian blogger gets 15 years gaol for saying that Zelensky govt takes orders from other governments Mike Mapes 15 Apr 22,

Ukrainian blogger Gleb Lyashenko has been sentenced for “betrayal” to 15 years in prison after writing on a post:

“Zelensky was wrong. It has been years that the Russia has been asking us for a reasonable agreement, that is to stay out of the Nato. But there was no change of course. This is why our government takes orders from others, who use us Ukrainians for their purposes. The result was this absurd war. “

Since yesterday Ukraine also has its Assange and Snowden.

“All wars start with lies. But all wars can be stopped by the truth!”

April 16, 2022 Posted by | Legal, secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine | Leave a comment

No room at the dump: NFLA fears Johnson’s nuclear ambitions will lead to need for second unwanted underground facility

Like the standing joke about buses turning up late and in pairs, the
Nuclear Free Local Authorities fear that Boris Johnson’s commitment to
treble Britain’s nuclear generating capacity by 2050 will create so much
new toxic nuclear waste that the government will want to build a second
underground nuclear dump in the next two decades.

A large, and much maligned, element in last week’s UK Energy Security Strategy was the
pledge to build up to eight new large nuclear power stations over the next
three decades, generating 24 gigawatts of electricity, and the UK could run
out of room to store the resultant radioactive waste if the Prime
Minister’s plan becomes reality.

Professor Claire Corkhill is Chair in
Nuclear Material Degradation and EPSRC Early Career Research Fellow and
Reader at the University of Sheffield, and a member of the Committee on
Radioactive waste Management (CORWM) which advises the government.
Professor Corkhill has publicly commented that existing plans for the dump
will only provide sufficient capacity to take the legacy waste from 70
years of operations and waste from up to 16 gigawatts of nuclear new build,
and has expressed concern about ‘rushing to expand nuclear power until
the implementation of radioactive waste policy [i.e. the GDF] has
progressed further’.

 NFLA 13th April 2022

April 16, 2022 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Carelessness of Russian soldiers around Chernobyl – shows danger of nuclear sites in wartime

As we learn more about the negligence of Russian generals who ignored
warnings that the radioactive forest surrounding Chornobyl was a hazardous
staging ground for their assault on Kyiv, environmental historian Kate
Brown flags an ill-recognized reality: humanity is ill prepared for what
happens when nuclear facilities are held hostage during war.

Known as the
“Red Forest”—its pine trees turned red from radiation exposure after
a reactor at Chornobyl melted down in April 1986—the area where Russian
soldiers bulldozed and dug trenches and bunkers is the most contaminated
region of the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone, which is itself “one of the most
toxic places on Earth,” writes the New York Times.

But Russian generals did not seem troubled by the fact that their troops were digging and
bunking down in earthworks that may have had radiation levels 1,000 times
above ambient.

 Energy Mix 12th April 2022

April 16, 2022 Posted by | incidents, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Ukraine crisis a risk to nuclear security

By Li Zhe | China Daily | 2022-04  The risks to nuclear security have increased with the continuation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The geopolitical game involving Russia and Ukraine but also the United States and some European countries poses a big threat to nuclear nonproliferation and nuclear deterrence.

Perhaps a bigger threat is that the nuclear risks will carry with them the hidden dangers to nuclear security in the post-conflict era.

Strategic stability is possible only if the arms race among major powers ends, and the nuclear powers pledge to non-first use of nuclear weapons. That’s why the US and the Soviet Union signed treaties to limit, rather reduce, their nuclear arsenals………….

Ukraine and Belarus respectively are allied with the US and Russia, and both want to repossess nuclear weapons. This shows the political wrestling between the US-led West and Russia has shaken countries caught in the middle and could prompt many of them to develop or get nuclear weapons.

Besides, Polish Deputy Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski said in a recent interview with German newspaper Die Welt that Poland was open to stationing US nuclear warheads on its soil.

Ukraine and Belarus do not possess nuclear weapons. Under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Guarantees, they transferred the nuclear weapons inherited from the Soviet Union to Russia for decommissioning in exchange for security assurances from the US and the United Kingdom and Russia. Also, despite not being in a position to acquire or develop nuclear weapons, they are caught in the vortex of large-scale political, economic and military confrontations and conflicts between the West and Russia.

With the Korean Peninsula and Iran nuclear issues yet to be resolved, the attempts of Ukraine and Belarus to acquire nuclear weapons could fuel a new round of nuclear proliferation.

Since Biden took office, the US administration’s stance on nuclear nonproliferation has been wavering and ambiguous. Early in his tenure, Biden talked about the necessity of nuclear arms control, including reducing the nuclear weapons arsenal, saving the cost of competition, preventing nuclear proliferation, and maintaining nuclear stability. But of late, he has been talking about great power competition, providing nuclear deterrence to US allies, and has not ruled out the use of nuclear weapons as deterrence.

The nuclear posture review of the Biden administration, too, is unclear, and it is likely to use the Russia-Ukraine conflict to accord higher priority to nuclear weapons in national security, and accordingly increase the defense budget to finance Washington’s geopolitical games. In fact, the administration has already proposed a huge budget including higher spending, of $813 billion, on defense………………

Global nuclear security has deteriorated over the past few years and the Ukraine crisis has made the future gloomier. So it is imperative that all parties make concerted efforts and restrain their respective military actions, and exhibit courage to hold talks on arms control and nuclear nonproliferation.

April 16, 2022 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Ukraine MoD Asserts No Evidence That Russia Will Deploy Nuclear Weapons Amid War

The spokesperson of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry, Oleksandr Motuzianyk stated that Ukraine perceives no indicators that Russia will deploy nuclear weapons.

Written By Rohit Ranjan Republic World,  15th April, 2022 

Amidst the ongoing war, time and again there were concerns that Russia might use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. However, the spokesperson of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry, Oleksandr Motuzianyk stated that Ukraine and its foreign allies currently perceive no sight that Russia could deploy nuclear weapons against its neighbour. As per the reports of Interfax, Motuzianyk stated that Russia’s so-called last trump card is nuclear weapons and at this time, there are no indications that Russia will be able to utilize these weapons in the ongoing war.

.Motuzianyk further stated at a press conference held on Friday at the Ukraine media centre in Kyiv that such records are not kept by the intelligence services. He claimed that the international colleagues and intelligence agencies, with which they cooperate and share information, have not yet confirmed the fact of Russia using nuclear weapons. However, he also added that they must be prepared for any change in the situation, including the possibility of such a disastrous situation. He continued by stating that they cannot forecast this at this time………………

April 16, 2022 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Scientist fired after raising questions about safety at nuclear waste plant

4 Investigates: Scientist fired after raising questions about safety at nuclear waste plant

Brittany Costello, April 14, 2022 CARLSBAD, N.M— There are some things we just leave up to the experts – that includes the science and research that goes into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, New Mexico, the only-of-its-kind facility that stores transuranic radioactive waste from around the country.

What if we told you there are questions about the science of its long-term safety? KOB 4 spoke with a former scientist who said he lost his job after raising the red flag.

There’s an expectation, a reputation that follows the name Sandia National Labs. Its advanced scientific work is something many of us take for granted. Not Dr. Charles Oakes, who is a geochemist who used to work for Sandia National Labs in Carlsbad at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, also known as WIPP.

Part of his job was to make sure WIPP, and all of the transuranic radioactive waste stored inside, is safe for years to come.

This is a case where they weren’t, not only were they not doing their job, they were claiming they were doing their job but falsifying all the evidence that went into the claims that they were doing the job,” Dr. Charles Oakes said.

From the outside, there’s not much to see at WIPP.  That’s because all the waste is stored more than 2,000 feet below ground.

“WIPP is the only facility of its kind in the world, deep geologic repository for nuclear waste,” said Don Hancock, Director of the Nuclear Waste Program a Southwest Research and Information Center.

Hancock has served as a WIPP watchdog even before the first disposal at the Department of Energy site in 1999.

“Essentially what’s in WIPP are elements that are contaminated from the manufacturing of components in nuclear weapons, particularly the plutonium core, the heart of it,” said Hancock. “That includes machinery that includes gloves, and booties, that includes sludges.”

It might sound complex, but the key to safe storage of radioactive material is simple: accurate, reliable science and research. Regulators at the Environmental Protection Agency demand it.

Sandia National Labs is contracted to do it, at a cost of $18-million a year.

It’s so important that, in order for WIIPP to continue accepting waste, every five years, it has to recertify that its projections show the facility will be safe after it’s filled up and closed down.

Safe from that point and 10,000 years beyond it.

“The most common feared way that the radiation will get to the surface is through the flow of water,” said Dr. Oakes.  “There are some aquifers in the rock of the repository. One of the fears is that a well will be drilled through the repository or near to this repository and water may flow through the repository and intersect with a well bore.”

Dr. Oakes said his job was to look at how much of that radioactive material would make it to the surface.

“If you do have radioactive material dissolved in the water, will it react with rocks, minerals along the way, and be removed from the water, in which you removed the threat, or will it carry on its merry way dissolved and get to the surface where it can potentially hurt people and the environment,” he said.

During his time at Sandia National Labs, Dr. Oakes said he discovered inaccuracies that called into question WIPP’s long-term safety, what he believed to data errors.

Oakes said he brought it up to his bosses, the Department of Energy and even the EPA.

After he spoke up, Oakes said Sandia labeled him a problem employee and showed him the door.

Oakes is being represented by attorney Timothy White – and Nick Davis of Davis Law. Their goal is to address much more than what they believe to be retaliatory discharge.

“We’re trying to achieve a certain safety standard here and the information that is being used to allegedly show that we’ve achieved that standard, that we should be recertified to manage the WIPP project, is built on bad science leading to fraud,” said White.

KOB 4 wanted to hear from Sandia National Labs. A spokesperson told us they cannot comment on these accusations because of the pending lawsuit.

There are a number of defendants named in the suit: Honeywell International, National Technology and engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, Carol Adkins, and Paul Shoemaker.

Attorneys representing the defendants have responded in court. Documents allege Oakes was fired after multiple “inappropriate interactions with colleagues” but they did not go into detail.

 Attorneys are also asking a federal judge to dismiss the case.

As far as all of that expansive data is concerned, officials at the Department of Energy, with the WIPP project, said there are quality assurance procedures in place including several independent reviews.

They said a recertification decision is expected later in April or early May.

April 16, 2022 Posted by | employment, Legal, USA | Leave a comment