nuclear-news

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

Ralph Nader: Ex-Presidents and Democratic Leaders Silent on the Impeachment of Donald Trump

Events can move very fast. First, Trump is the most powerful contributor to his own Impeachment. Day after day, this illegal closer of long-established social safety nets and services is alienating tens of millions of frightened and angry Americans.

By Ralph Nader, January 9, 2026, https://nader.org/2026/01/09/ex-presidents-and-democratic-leaders-silent-on-the-impeachment-of-donald-trump/

The staggering cowardliness by four ex-Presidents vis-à-vis Tyrant Trump’s wrecking of America cannot escape history’s verdict. However, there is still an opportunity for vigorous redemption by George W. Bush – whose life-saving AIDS Medicine Program in Africa was shut down by Trump – Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, if they have any self-respect for their patriotic duty.

As of now, these former Presidents are living lives of luxury and personal pursuits. They are at the apex of the ‘contented classes’ (see my column “Trump and the Contented Classes”, November 14, 2025) who have chosen to be bystanders to Trump’s tax cuts for the wRight off, they can upend the public discourse that Trump dominates daily with phony personal accusations, stunningly unrebutted by the feeble Democratic Party leaders. This counterattack with vivid, accurate words will further increase the majority of people who want Trump “Fired.” Just from their own observations of Trump’s vicious, cruel destruction of large parts of our government and civil service, which benefits and protects the populace, should jolt the former presidents into action.ealthy, deregulation, and the doling out of Trump’s corporatist welfare giveaways.

Imagine, if you will, what would happen if these four wealthy politicians, who still have most of their voters liking them, decided to band together and take on Trump full throttle. Privately, they believe and want Trump to be impeached (for the third time in the House) and convicted in the Senate. This time, on many impeachable actions that Trump himself boasts about, claiming, “With Article II, I can do whatever I want as President.”

Right off, they can upend the public discourse that Trump dominates daily with phony personal accusations, stunningly unrebutted by the feeble Democratic Party leaders. This counterattack with vivid, accurate words will further increase the majority of people who want Trump “Fired.” Just from their own observations of Trump’s vicious, cruel destruction of large parts of our government and civil service, which benefits and protects the populace, should jolt the former presidents into action.

Next, the bipartisan Band of Four can raise tens of millions of dollars instantly to form “Save Our Republic” advocacy groups in every Congressional District. The heat on both Parties in Congress would immediately rise to make them start the Impeachment Drive. Congressional Republicans’ fear of losing big in the 2026 elections, as their polls are plummeting, will motivate some to support impeachment. Congressional Republicans abandoned President Richard Nixon in 1974, forcing his resignation with Impeachment on his political horizon.

Events can move very fast. First, Trump is the most powerful contributor to his own Impeachment. Day after day, this illegal closer of long-established social safety nets and services is alienating tens of millions of frightened and angry Americans.

Daily, Trump is breaking his many campaign promises. His exaggerated predictions are wrong. Remember his frequent promise to stop “these endless wars,” his assurance that he would not impair government health insurance programs (tell that to the millions soon to lose, due to Trump, their Medicaid coverage), his promise of lifting people into prosperity (he opposes any increase in the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour) and he has signed GOP legislation to strip tens of millions of Americans from the SNAP food support and take away the Obama subsidies for Obamacare. Many Trump voters are among the vast number of people experiencing his treachery, where they live and raise their families, will lose out here. The catalytic opportunities of these four ex-presidents and their skilled operating teams are endless.

Further, this Band of Presidents, discovering their patriotic duty, will recharge the Democratic Party leaders or lead to the immediate replacement of those who simply do not want or know how to throw back the English language against this Bully-in-Chief, this abuser of women, this stunning racist, this chronic liar about serious matters, this inciter of violence including violence against members of Congress, this invader of cities with increasingly violent, law breaking storm-troopers turning a former Border Patrol force into a vast recruitment program for police state operators.

Trump uses the word “Impeachment” frequently against judges who rule against him, and even mentions it in relation to it being applied to him. Tragically, Democratic Party leaders Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have made talk of Impeachment a taboo, arguing the time is not yet ripe. How many more abuses of power do they need to galvanize the Democrats in the House and Senate against the most blatantly impeachable president by far in American history? He keeps adding to his list – recently, he has become a Pirate and killer on the High Seas, an unconstitutional war maker on Iran and Venezuela, openly threatening to illegally seize the Panama Canal, Greenland, and the overthrow of the Cuban government.

Constitutional scholar Obama can ask dozens of constitutional law professors the question: “Would any of the 56 delegates who signed our U.S. Declaration of Independence in 1776 and the 39 drafters who signed our U.S. Constitution in 1787, being told about Monarch King Donald Trump, oppose his immediate Impeachment and Removal – the only tool left he doesn’t control?” Not one, would be their studied response.

Trump, a serial draft dodger, pushes through another $150 billion to the Pentagon above what the Generals requested while starving well-being programs of nutrition for our children and elderly, and cutting services, by staff reductions, for American veterans, and stripmining our preparedness for climate violence and likely pandemics.

He promised law and order during the election and then betrayed it right after his inauguration, pardoning 1,500 convicted, imprisoned criminals, 600 of them violent, emptying their prison cells and calling them “patriots” for what they did to Congress on Jan. 6, 2021.

MR. EX-PRESIDENTS, JUST WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? WHAT ARE YOUR ESCAPIST EXCUSES? Call your friends who are ranking members of the GOP controlled Committees of Congress and tell them to hold prompt SHADOW HEARINGS to educate the public through witnesses about the TRUMP DUMP, impeachable, illegal, and unconstitutional government. The media would welcome the opportunity to cover such hearings. Congressman Jamie Raskin thought this was “a good idea” before being admonished by his frightened Democratic leaders to bide his time and remain silent.

As more of Trump’s iron boots drop on people’s livelihoods, their freedoms, their worry for their children and grandchildren, their antipathy to more aggressive wars against non-threatening countries, and their demands at town meetings and mass marches for action against Trump’s self-enriching despotism, the disgraceful, craven cowardliness of our former presidential leaders will intensify. Unless they wake up to the challenge. With the mainstream media attacked regularly and being sued by Trump’s coercive, illegal extortion, the action by the Band of Four will bolster press freedom, press coverage, and their own redemption.

Send these four politicians, who are friendly with one another, petitions, letters, emails, satiric cartoons, or whatever communications that might redeem them from the further condemnation of history.

Rest assured, with Trump in the disgraced White House, THINGS ARE ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE, MUCH WORSE! For that is the predictable behavior from the past year and from his dangerously unstable, arrogant, vengeful, and egomaniacal personality.

January 14, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

The Non-Peaceful Atom

Vladimir Slivyak, January 7, 2026, https://www.posle.media/article/the-non-peaceful-atom

In what ways does Russia use nuclear energy as a strategic tool? Why have sanctions failed to end Europe’s dependence on the Russian nuclear industry? How is Rosatom involved in the war? Vladimir Slivyak, co-chair of the Eco-Defense group, answers these questions

As a strategic instrument of the Kremlin, Rosatom helps to create and entrench geopolitical dependencies. This dependence rests on the promotion of nuclear energy but has ramifications that extend far beyond the energy sector. Rosatom is both directly and indirectly involved in Russia’s war against Ukraine. In particular, Rosatom played a key role in Russia’s seizure of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and has offered to procure materials and components for Russian arms manufacturers under sanctions.

Nevertheless, the European nuclear industry continues to collaborate with Rosatom. For instance, Rosatom supplies uranium to Framatome’s ANF nuclear fuel plant in Lingen, Germany. Rosatom is also involved in expanding this facility, even though the German authorities have not yet approved such cooperation. If the Framatome-Rosatom project, which has been in development for over three years, goes ahead, the Russian regime will further strengthen its political influence in Western Europe despite the war in Ukraine.

Rosatom as a Civil-Military State Corporation

Rosatom is a state-owned corporation that operates in both the civilian and military spheres of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. As the successor to Russia’s Ministry of Atomic Energy, Rosatom brings together over 350 companies engaged in nuclear activities. The corporation was created by a decree by Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2007.

Rosatom is directly owned by the Russian state. It is one of seven Russian “state corporations,” grouped together with RostecRoscosmos, and others. In 2012, former Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev described Rosatom as a “corporation of a special kind” that not only seeks to expand its activities but also carries out “certain ministerial tasks.”

The corporation’s Supervisory Board is its main decision-making body. This board includes Sergey Kirienko, the deputy head of the Russian presidential administration, who is currently under sanctions from the EU, the UK, and the US, as well as Sergei Korolev, the first deputy director of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (the main successor to the Soviet KGB). In relation to the war in Ukraine, Korolev has also been sanctioned by the EU, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Switzerland, the UK, and Ukraine. The Supervisory Board also includes two Russian deputy prime ministers and two aides to President Vladimir Putin. 

The European Parliament has repeatedly called for sanctions on Rosatom and for an end to all nuclear cooperation with Russia, including uranium imports and investments in critical infrastructure. 

Participation in the War

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began, Rosatom has been directly and indirectly involved in the war. According to a letter obtained by Ukrainian intelligence and published in the American press, Rosatom offered assistance to the Russian arms industry in securing goods needed for the production of weapons, tanks, and aircraft after that sector had been hit by international sanctions.

In his December 2022 address to Rosatom on the occasion of its 15th anniversary, President Vladimir Putin praised the corporation for its “enormous contribution to the development and deployment of advanced weapons systems and military equipment.”


In the early days of the invasion, Rosatom employees assisted Russian troops who occupied the Chernobyl exclusion zone in Ukraine. The Russian state corporation also facilitated the illegal seizure of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. Rosatom employees have taken over key management positions at the facility. Following a decree by the Russian president, Rosatom created a new subsidiary specifically tasked with taking control of the plant.

In October 2023, Ukrainian nuclear operator Energoatom reported that the safety culture at the plant was deteriorating under Rosatom’s control. This deterioration included poorly performed work, insufficient staffing, and inadequate inspections. The company stated that these problems had led to significant damage to critical components of the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (NPP), including leaks in the radioactive primary coolant circuit. There is also credible evidence that Rosatom employees assisted the Russian military in selecting targets at the Zaporizhzhya NPP; they reportedly “helped direct Russian artillery fire at the plant.” 

Rosatom as a Geopolitical Tool 

Rosatom is a central player in the Russian regime’s “geopolitics.” The company’s goal is to make as many countries as possible dependent on Russian nuclear technology, services, and fuel. Rosatom purchases essential equipment for nuclear reactors under construction from European companies and supplies the EU with unenriched and enriched uranium, fuel, and other nuclear services. This cooperation helps fund the continuation of the war in Ukraine. It also locks Europe into dependence on Russian nuclear fuel and services, which ultimately translates into political influence. 

Hungary is perhaps the clearest example. It is almost entirely dependent on Russia for nuclear energy services and has repeatedly blocked any attempt by the EU to impose sanctions on Rosatom. Russia controls the supply of nuclear fuel and the maintenance of existing Hungarian reactors and has provided a €10 billion loan for the construction of Paks-2 nuclear power plant. In addition, Siemens Energy and Framatome are providing key equipment and control systems for new Russian-made reactors in Hungary.

Rosatom states that it is currently building more than 30 new reactors in about a dozen countries. Last year, its subsidiaries exported approximately $2.2 billion worth of nuclear energy-related goods and materials. The Russian state budget covers more than 90% of the cost of Rosatom’s construction of new nuclear power plants around the world.

Rosatom has signed agreements with nearly 20 African countries to build nuclear power plants and research reactors. So far, however, only one plant is actually under construction: the Al Dabaa plant in Egypt. Rosatom has also purchased a uranium mine in Tanzania. A previous attempt to build a nuclear power plant in South Africa collapsed due to resistance from environmental activists. In South America, Rosatom is involved in smaller but still significant projects, such as a research reactor and lithium mining in Bolivia.

Despite Russia’s war in Ukraine, the French nuclear company Framatome continues to purchase uranium from Rosatom. Between 2022 to 2023, at least ten shipments of uranium went from Russia to the ANF nuclear fuel plant in Lingen, a Framatome subsidiary. According to the German government, these deliveries took place under two federal government licenses issued in September, November, and December 2022, as well as in April and May 2023. In August 2023, German authorities granted a new license authorizing up to 40 more shipments. Deliveries are still ongoing. 

Prospects

In the four years since Russia’s full-scale invasion began, the EU has adopted nearly twenty packages of sanctions against the Russian economy and industry. Other countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Japan, have also imposed sanctions. However, Russia has faced virtually no pressure in the field of nuclear energy, one of its key sectors with both civilian and military significance. On the contrary, Rosatom has expanded its operations and almost tripled its profits from trade with Western countries. 

Europe’s dependence on Russia in the nuclear sphere is roughly comparable to its reliance on pipeline gas supplies before the war. First, Putin used gas deliveries as leverage over Europe, and then the Russian pipeline was destroyed in an act of sabotage. Without these developments, we would now likely be talking about the EU’s crippling dependence on Russia for both uranium and pipeline gas. In such a situation, it is reasonable to assume that Ukraine would not have been able to rely on the level of support it currently enjoys in Europe. 

This dependence on Russian supplies did not arise by a happy accident for Moscow but from strategic steps the Russian regime has taken over the past 10–15 years. It is not known for certain whether Putin had been planning a full-scale war throughout this entire period. However, it is clear that making Europe’s economy as dependent as possible on Russian energy supplies was one of Moscow’s strategic priorities. Under this strategy, many European countries were meant to end up in the position Hungary finds itself in today.

As a result of the war in Ukraine, Europe’s dependence on Russian supplies has fallen sharply, though it has not disappeared. For instance, Germany, the EU’s largest economy, no longer relies on Russian pipeline gas. The fight against the “shadow fleet” transporting Putin’s oil to fund the war is under way, albeit with mixed results. Furthermore, Russian coal has been completely banned from Europe. Russia’s coal industry, one of the most profitable, is currently in a deep crisis — direct evidence that Russia has been unable to offset the consequences of Europe’s refusal to buy Russian coal. Even in the nuclear energy sector, the least affected by sanctions, there have been notable shifts. For instance, Finland has abandoned plans to build a major nuclear power plant with Russian involvement. In several cases, European companies have been unable to supply Rosatom with equipment for its projects in other countries.

Unfortunately, efforts to reduce dependence on Russian uranium are progressing extremely slowly, and there is still no clear timeline for this process. A full break with Russian uranium in the foreseeable future seems unlikely, especially if Hungary goes ahead with a new nuclear power plant project involving Rosatom. Russia is also trying to increase its liquefied natural gas exports to Europe. However, it now seems unlikely that European authorities will once again allow a situation in which Vladimir Putin can make their economies dependent on Russia.

Rosatom is arguably the biggest Russian thorn in Europe’s flesh today, and half-measures won’t remove it. A “surgical extraction”  would cause severe and painful shocks to the economies — and, in turn, the politics — of several EU member states. The problem is not that the threat is underestimated; Europe understands it perfectly well. The issue is that freeing itself from this nuclear dependence would require enormous time and effort. The question is: will there be enough of either? 

January 14, 2026 Posted by | politics international, Russia | Leave a comment

Cuba Vows to Defend Itself Against Trump to ‘The Last Drop of Blood’

“Cuba is a free, independent, and sovereign nation. Nobody dictates what we do,” said Cuba’s President Miguel Diaz-Canel in response to the latest threat from the authoritarian US president.

Jon Queally, Jan 11, 2026, https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-threatens-cuba

President Donald Trump was ripped by humanitarians and anti-war voices on Sunday after he again threatened Cuba by saying the US military would be used to prevent oil and other resources from reaching the country, threats that come just over a week after the American president ordered the unlawful attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

In a social media post Sunday morning, Trump declared:

Cuba lived, for many years, on large amounts of OIL and MONEY from Venezuela. In return, Cuba provided “Security Services” for the last two Venezuelan dictators, BUT NOT ANYMORE! Most of those Cubans are DEAD from last weeks U.S.A. attack, and Venezuela doesn’t need protection anymore from the thugs and extortionists who held them hostage for so many years. Venezuela now has the United States of America, the most powerful military in the World (by far!), to protect them, and protect them we will. THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA – ZERO! I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DJT

Cuba’s President Miguel Diaz-Canel rejected Trump’s latest comments and threat of military force, saying the island nation was ready to defend itself.

“Cuba is a free, independent, and sovereign nation. Nobody dictates what we do,” Diaz-Canel said in a social media post. “Cuba does not attack; it has been attacked by the US for 66 years, and it does not threaten; it prepares, ready to defend the homeland to the last drop of blood.”

Progressive critics of the US president were also quick to hit back. Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the anti-war group CodePink, said the “true extortionist” in this situation is Trump himself, as she detailed the mutual benefit of the relationship between the Venezuelan and Cuban governments over recent decades:

“What is extortion?” Benjamin asks. “It’s what Donald Trump is doing: taking over those oil tankers, confiscating 30-50 million tons of oil—that is extortion. And saying to Venezuela, ‘We’re going to run your country.” Donald Trump is the greatest extortionist our country has seen.“

Reuters reports Sunday, citing shipping data, that Venezuela has been Cuba’s “biggest oil supplier, but no cargoes have departed from Venezuelan ports to the Caribbean country since the capture of Maduro.

Speaking with CBS News on Sunday, Rep. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) said that Trump’s threats to strangle the people of Cuba by enforcing a resource blockade were “like magical” in her ears and those of her right-wing constituents who live in Miami’s large community of Cuban exiles.

Welcoming Trump’s efforts to bully Cuba into submission, Salazar claimed that Cuba’s government is “hanging by a threat” she said, before correcting herself, “a thread, I should say.”

Oddly—but notably—Salazar continued her remarks by saying it was Cuba that has been an “immense” threat to the United States, as she described it as a nation “with no water; they have no electricity; they have no food—nothing. So if you think Maduro is weak, Cuba is even weaker. And now they do not have one drop of oil coming from Venezuela.”

But progressive voices opposed to Trump’s authoritarian violations of international law, his bullying of allies and enemies alike with claims that the US can do whatever it likes in the name of national security and claims of national interest, are warning that the threats against Cuba and other nations represent a chilling development that must be met with international opposition and condemnation.

“The US blockade of Cuba is the longest-standing act of collective punishment in the world,” said David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International, pointing to Trump’s remarks. “It is condemned by the entire international community every year at the UN. And now, the US president is doubling down on this cruel and illegal punishment. Enough.”

“This is an emergency,” Progressive International explained in a dispatch last week, warning about Trump’s overt hostility toward Cuba, Colombia, Mexico, and other nations in the wake of the US attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of Maduro and Flores.

“The United States is rapidly escalating its assault on the Americas—and the principle of self-determination at large,” warned the international advocacy group. “Under the banner of the Monroe Doctrine, Donald Trump and his cronies are leading a campaign of imperial aggression that stretches from Caracas to Havana, Mexico City to Bogotá.”

According to the dispatch:

What we are witnessing today is class struggle played out through imperial violence. The United States stands as the political and military instrument of capital: Big Oil bankrolling politics; arms manufacturers profiting from destruction; and financial power thriving on plunder and permanent war. These sections of capital pay for the policies they desire and are richly rewarded. The share prices of US oil majors soared around 10% following Maduro’s kidnapping, representing a return of around $100 billion on an investment of $450 million in the last US elections.

The government serves its donors, so aggression can proceed without consent. Public opinion has repeatedly shown opposition to U.S. military action in Venezuela — a gap between elite appetite and popular will bridged by force, not democracy.

Venezuela — like many nations before it — represents a different possibility: that the popular classes might govern themselves, control their resources, and chart a future beyond imperial command. And that possibility represents an existential threat to empire.

The group said Sunday’s latest threat by Trump against Cuba—openly saying that the US military might will be used to prevent life-sustaining resources from reaching the island nation—should be seen for what it is: a coercive “threat to strangle Cuba of critical energy and resources” at the end of a barrel of a gun.

“Through manipulation, coercion, and now direct military action,” the group warns, the US government under Trump “has made absolutely clear its intention to dominate Latin America.”

January 14, 2026 Posted by | SOUTH AMERICA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

‘Vomiting blood’: Witness claims US used powerful mystery weapon during Maduro raid

January 11th, 2026, https://www.couriermail.com.au/technology/innovation/vomiting-blood-witness-claims-us-used-powerful-mystery-weapon-during-maduro-raid/news-story/598d8a6d39bc5a8dc5f9d129e6e0e80c

The US used a powerful mystery weapon that left Venezuelan soldiers “bleeding through the nose” and vomiting blood during the Maduro raid, a witness claims.


Don’t miss out on the headlines from Innovation. Followed categories will be added to My News.
follow

The US used a powerful mystery weapon that brought Venezuelan soldiers to their knees, “bleeding through the nose” and vomiting blood during the daring raid to capture dictator Nicolas Maduro, according to a witness account posted Saturday on X by the White House press secretary.

In a jaw-dropping interview, the guard described how American forces wiped out hundreds of fighters without losing a single soldier, using technology unlike anything he has ever seen — or heard.

“We were on guard, but suddenly all our radar systems shut down without any explanation,” the guard said. “The next thing we saw were drones, a lot of drones, flying over our positions. We didn’t know how to react.”

Moments later, a handful of helicopters appeared — “barely eight”, by his count — deploying what he estimated were just 20 US troops into the area.

But those few men, he said, came armed with something far more powerful than guns.

“They were technologically very advanced,” the guard recalled. “They didn’t look like anything we’ve fought against before.”

What ensued, he said, was not a battle, but a slaughter.

“We were hundreds, but we had no chance,” he said. “They were shooting with such precision and speed — it felt like each soldier was firing 300 rounds per minute.”

Then came the weapon that still haunts him.

“At one point, they launched something — I don’t know how to describe it,” he said. “It was like a very intense sound wave. Suddenly I felt like my head was exploding from the inside.”

The effects were immediate and horrific.

“We all started bleeding from the nose,” he said. “Some were vomiting blood. We fell to the ground, unable to move. We couldn’t even stand up after that sonic weapon — or whatever it was.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a question regarding whether Karoline Leavitt’s sharing of the post — captioned, “Stop what you are doing and read this …” — indicated the administration was verifying the veracity of the eyewitness account.

An estimated 100 Venezuelan security forces were killed in the January 3 attack, according to the country’s Interior Ministry.

It is unclear if any of those were caused by the mystery weapon.

The outmatched defenders were helpless as the small US unit wiped them out, the guard said.

“Those 20 men, without a single casualty, killed hundreds of us,” he claimed. “We had no way to compete with their technology, with their weapons. I swear, I’ve never seen anything like it.”

The US has had so-called directed energy weapons technology for years, an ex-US intelligence source told The Post, noting that some systems have the capability to produce at least some of the symptoms, including “bleeding, inability to move or function, pain and burning”.

“I can’t say all of those symptoms. But yes, some,” the source said. “And we’ve had versions for decades.”

After the raid, the message couldn’t be more clear — don’t tread on Uncle Sam, the Maduro loyalist said.

“I’m sending a warning to anyone who thinks they can fight the United States,” he said. “They have no idea what they’re capable of. After what I saw, I never want to be on the other side of that again. They’re not to be messed with.”

The guard said the raid has already sent shockwaves across Latin America — especially after President Donald Trump recently warned that Mexico is now “on the list”.

“Everyone is already talking about this,” he said. “No one wants to go through what we went through. What happened here is going to change a lot of things — not just in Venezuela, but throughout the region.”

This article originally appeared on NY Post

January 14, 2026 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Results are in for one of the clearest measures of global heating in 2025. It should be raising alarm bells

 The world’s oceans absorbed more heat in 2025 than in any year since
modern records began, according to a major international analysis. Ocean
heat content rose by 23 zettajoules – the equivalent of detonating
hundreds of millions of Hiroshima atomic bombs, or roughly 200 times
humanity’s global electricity consumption in 2023 – according to the
analysis published in Advances in Atmospheric Sciences. Unlike sea surface
temperatures, ocean heat content is a measure of how much excess energy the
world’s oceans are storing over time, including at depth.

 Independent 9th Jan 2026,
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/ocean-heat-record-2025-b2895936.html

January 14, 2026 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

“Another Monroe Doctrine”: Journalists Warn U.S. Strikes on Venezuela Signal a New Era of Intervention

By Joshua Scheer, January 5, 2026, https://scheerpost.com/2026/01/05/another-monroe-doctrine-journalists-warn-u-s-strikes-on-venezuela-signal-a-new-era-of-intervention/

ith reporting from the streets of Caracas and analysis from Vijay Prashad, BreakThrough News breaks down what’s unfolding in Venezuela — from local resistance to the United States’ emerging new Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuelan journalist Andreína Chávez Alava, reporting from Caracas, describes the aftermath of the U.S. strikes and the capture of President Maduro. According to her reporting, local communities are organizing, following guidance from authorities, and preparing to “resist in the streets” in a show of solidarity. Chávez characterizes the attack as “an illegal U.S. bombing against a civilian population” and frames it as part of a broader effort to force regime change and assert control over Venezuela’s political direction and oil resources. She also warns that the operation may mark the opening phase of a wider U.S. campaign in Latin America, referring to it as “another Monroe Doctrine,” and says she intends to “continue denouncing by every means necessary” what she views as an assault on Venezuela.


In an interview from Caracas, Venezuelan journalist Andrea Nach Chavez describes the aftermath of a pre-dawn U.S. military attack on Venezuela, reporting that strikes hit multiple locations, including residential areas—contradicting Washington’s claim that only military targets were struck. Chavez asserts that President Nicolás Maduro has been kidnapped by the United States, rejecting U.S. narratives of an arrest or lawful capture and calling for proof of life and his immediate return.

Chavez reports that crowds have gathered in the streets of Caracas, not in celebration—as some Western outlets have suggested—but in solidarity and outrage, denouncing the attack as an illegal act of war and a renewed attempt at regime change aimed at seizing control of Venezuela’s oil resources. She dismisses U.S. claims about democracy promotion and drug trafficking as long-standing pretexts for intervention.

The interview also addresses what Chavez describes as a coordinated campaign of psychological warfare and misinformation, particularly on social media, contrasting it with the Venezuelan government’s insistence that Maduro remains the country’s legitimate president and its call for popular and institutional resistance.

Contrary to portrayals of chaos, Chavez describes a population responding with calm vigilance: businesses largely closed, communities checking on one another, and people focused on securing essentials rather than celebrating political upheaval. She emphasizes that years of U.S. sanctions—especially the devastating measures imposed in 2017–2018 that crippled the oil industry and triggered a humanitarian crisis—have hardened Venezuela’s capacity for resilience and self-organization.

Chavez points to community-based food distribution programs and renewed domestic production as evidence that Venezuela has become less vulnerable to external pressure. She concludes by stressing the strength of the civilian-military alliance and the necessity of international solidarity from Latin America and the Global South, warning that the current assault signals a broader U.S. interventionist strategy rooted in a revived Monroe Doctrine. The interviewer underscores the critical role of independent and community journalists in countering Western media narratives and documenting events on the ground.

Vijay Prashad, Executive Director of the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research, offers his analysis of the U.S. strikes on Venezuela and the capture of President Maduro. In his view, the operation is driven by Washington’s long‑standing interest in controlling Venezuela’s oil reserves and weakening the Bolivarian Revolution. Prashad describes what he calls the “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine, placing the current actions within a broader historical pattern of U.S. intervention in Latin America. He also warns that Trump’s recent claim that the United States will “run Venezuela” could lead to what he characterizes as “a worse fiasco than Iraq.”

Prashad interprets Trump’s remarks not merely as bluster but as an implicit admission that Washington lacks a viable civilian proxy capable of governing Venezuela. He points to the political weakness and internal divisions of the U.S.-backed opposition—particularly the inability of figures like María Corina Machado to consolidate power—as well as the reconvening of Venezuela’s National Assembly, which complicates U.S. plans for a clean political handover.

Drawing on Trump’s past criticisms of the Iraq War, Prashad recalls Trump’s argument that the U.S. should have directly seized Iraq’s oil to finance the occupation. He notes that the legal groundwork for U.S. intervention in Venezuela predates Trump, tracing it to a 2015 Obama-era executive order that declared Venezuela a national security threat—an order Trump has expanded and weaponized.

While skeptical of the U.S. capacity to directly govern Venezuela—given catastrophic failures in Iraq and Afghanistan—Prashad warns that Trump’s rhetoric cannot be dismissed as harmless. Even limited intervention, he argues, could result in a debacle surpassing previous U.S. military disasters.

The discussion situates recent U.S. military strikes and electronic warfare operations in the Caribbean within a broader strategic doctrine. Prashad explains that Trump’s national security strategy revives the Monroe Doctrine, asserting unilateral U.S. dominance over the Western Hemisphere—a doctrine he describes as updated through a “Trump corollary” that justifies intervention by any means necessary. He likens recent operations to the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden, suggesting a similar strategy of overwhelming force combined with symbolic spectacle.

Prashad further argues that Venezuela is only one node in a larger destabilization strategy aimed at isolating Nicaragua and Cuba, while facilitating a regional political shift. He points to the decline of Latin America’s “pink tide” governments and the rise of an “angry tide” of right-wing regimes, warning that upcoming elections in countries like Brazil and Colombia could further consolidate this shift.

Addressing economic justifications for intervention, Prashad rebuts claims—such as those made by Stephen Miller—that Venezuelan oil constitutes stolen “American wealth.” He explains that the Chávez government did not nationalize oil outright, but instead asserted greater state control over surplus extraction through the 2001 hydrocarbons law. The framing of Venezuelan oil as inherently American, he notes, has long been central to U.S. policy, reinforced by figures like Rex Tillerson, the former ExxonMobil CEO and Trump’s secretary of state.

Prashad emphasizes that U.S. interest in Venezuela is not driven by domestic energy needs—since the U.S. is a major oil exporter—but by the desire to control global energy flows and prevent oil revenues from supporting left-wing governments or international solidarity efforts, such as aid to Haiti.

In closing, Prashad offers a personal reflection on President Maduro, describing him as a reluctant leader who inherited a historic crisis rather than seeking power. He cautions against sections of the left abandoning Maduro without reckoning with the broader structures of imperial power at play. The discussion concludes with a call to engage with Tricontinental’s research on hyperimperialism and the shifting political terrain of Latin America and the Global South.

January 14, 2026 Posted by | media | Leave a comment

HOW ONTARIO KEEPS THE TRUE COST OF NUCLEAR POWER OFF YOUR HYDRO BILL

Toronto Star, MARCO CHOWN OVED CLIMATE CHANGE REPORTER, 11 Jan 2026, https://www.pressreader.com/article/282007563777540

Elec­tri­city prices in Ontario have long proven to be polit­ic­ally toxic.

Rapid increases between 2009 and 2016 con­trib­uted to the down­fall of the Lib­eral gov­ern­ments of Dalton McGuinty and Kath­leen Wynne.

Doug Ford and his Pro­gress­ive Con­ser­vat­ives were elec­ted on a pledge to bring hydro bills down, and the rapid increases have since ended — though it’s not because power is cheaper. The true costs are now invis­ible to the con­sumer.

For 15 years, Ontari­ans saw the cost of nuc­lear power on their hydro bills each month. Between 2002 and 2017, there was a line item called the “debt retire­ment charge” that enlis­ted every rate­payer to chip away at more than $20 bil­lion in debt left over from the split­up of Ontario Hydro — debt largely run up by con­struc­tion over­runs at the Dar­ling­ton nuc­lear plant, which was com­pleted in 1993. The nuc­lear debt was removed from bills in 2018 — but it didn’t dis­ap­pear. Instead, it was added onto the pro­vin­cial books, where it is now con­sidered part of the gen­eral pub­lic debt. As of last year, more than 30 years after Dar­ling­ton went online, there was still $11.9 bil­lion in debt remain­ing.

The province also brought in the Ontario Elec­tri­city Rebate, which sub­sid­izes power bills with tax­payer dol­lars. While the rebate was intro­duced under McGuinty, Ford recently nearly doubled it — with an estim­ated price tag of $8.5 bil­lion annu­ally — to absorb an almost 30 per cent hike to the price of elec­tri­city.

The Ford gov­ern­ment has blamed rate increases on the pre­vi­ous Lib­eral gov­ern­ment’s Green Energy Act, which paid a premium for renew­able energy in an effort to kick­start a domestic wind and solar industry. The domestic renew­ables man­u­fac­tur­ing sec­tor failed to take off in the face of com­pet­i­tion from China, but more than 33,000 renew­able projects remain on the grid at inflated prices on 20­year con­tracts. Today, these leg­acy con­tracts have pushed the cost of solar power up to the point that it’s the highest among all types of gen­er­a­tion in Ontario, when meas­ured by kilo­watt hour (kWh) of elec­tri­city pro­duced. Wind isn’t far behind.

But what the per kWh fig­ures hide is that renew­ables make up such a small pro­por­tion of the energy pro­duc­tion mix that they can­not be respons­ible for over­all rate increases, accord­ing to a Star ana­lysis of Ontario Energy Board and Inde­pend­ent Elec­tri­city Sys­tem Oper­ator data. Even though solar costs three­and­a­half times more than nuc­lear per kWh, it only accoun­ted for two per cent of the total cost of elec­tri­city in 2024 — too little to drive over­all cost increases. Nuc­lear, by con­trast, accoun­ted for 56 per cent of Ontario’s total cost of elec­tri­city last year. And while the costs of leg­acy renew­ables are inflated, they’re fixed or even going down as their con­tracts expire and have been renewed at 30 per cent less than they were paid pre­vi­ously.

In con­trast, nuc­lear costs keep going up. The refur­bish­ment of the Pick­er­ing plant will cost three times more per kWh than the refur­bish­ments of Dar­ling­ton and four times more than Bruce. The costs of these refur­bish­ments will start to be added to hydro bills when they return to ser­vice.

Because nuc­lear makes up such a large part of the elec­tri­city mix, even a little increase to the cost of nuc­lear will affect the price Ontari­ans pay for elec­tri­city — either via monthly bills or tax­payer funds.

January 14, 2026 Posted by | Canada, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Spend­ing big on nuc­lear

Ontario is invest­ing bil­lions into react­ors — even as the rest of the world turns to solar and wind. Is this the wrong bet?

Toronto Star, MARCO CHOWN OVED, 11 Jan 2026, https://www.pressreader.com/article/281865829856772

In the race to pre­pare for an elec­tri­fied future of AI, data centres, EVs and heat pumps, Ontario has placed a big bet on nuc­lear.

With more than $73 bil­lion com­mit­ted to build­ing new and refur­bish­ing old react­ors — and two more plants in the pipeline that could add tens of bil­lions more — Ontario tax­pay­ers are count­ing on nuc­lear energy to pay off for dec­ades to come.

Widely hailed for its abil­ity to provide massive amounts of stable, emis­sions­free power that the province will need to elec­trify the eco­nomy, nuc­lear has emerged as a solu­tion advoc­ates say is cru­cial to avoid the worst effects of cli­mate change — all while sup­port­ing a well­estab­lished local industry. A single nuc­lear plant can provide the same amount of power as tens of thou­sands of solar pan­els and wind tur­bines — even when the wind isn’t blow­ing, and the sun isn’t shin­ing.

“Nuc­lear brings a set of attrib­utes and char­ac­ter­ist­ics that you really can’t find with any other gen­er­at­ing source,” said Brendan Frank, Dir­ector of Policy and Strategy at Clean Prosper­ity, a cli­mate policy think tank. It’s large scale, [?] clean and reli­able with a small land foot­print, he says. “There’s a lot to like about nuc­lear.”

But the prom­ise of nuc­lear power is tempered by the poten­tial for peril.

Crit­ics say nuc­lear pro­ponents have never been able to address exist­ing react­ors’ sig­ni­fic­ant short­com­ings, includ­ing dec­ade­long con­struc­tion timelines, con­sist­ently large cost over­runs, and the tiny but nonzero risk of cata­strophic acci­dents. The cost con­sid­er­a­tions alone risk under­min­ing the fight against cli­mate change by mak­ing clean power more expens­ive than burn­ing fossil fuels.

“Baked right into the nuc­lear option is cent­ral­iz­a­tion, a reli­ance on tech­nical elites, the need for long­term stew­ard­ship and para­mil­it­ary secur­ity, a low tol­er­ance for fail­ure, and the accept­ance of unin­sur­able risks,” said Ralph Tor­rie, the head of research with Cor­por­ate Knights and a vet­eran energy ana­lyst.

And unlike nuc­lear oppon­ents of the 1980s, today’s crit­ics have a ready altern­at­ive in renew­able energy, which is being built at an unpre­ced­en­ted speed and scale all over the world. Last year, more than 90 per cent of new power brought online glob­ally has been wind and solar. Mean­while, the nuc­lear industry has been mired in a 25­year decline with more react­ors decom­mis­sioned than built, accord­ing to the Inter­na­tional Atomic Energy Agency.

Nuc­lear power is yes­ter­day’s tech­no­logy, the crit­ics say.


“Every dol­lar we spend on new nuc­lear plants or recon­di­tion­ing 20th­cen­tury nuc­lear steam gen­er­at­ors drives up the cost of build­ing a sus­tain­able energy sys­tem in Ontario and puts us fur­ther behind in the energy trans­ition that is a defin­ing fea­ture of suc­cess­ful 21st­cen­tury eco­nom­ies,” Tor­rie said.

In the search for cli­mate solu­tions, the debate over nuc­lear power is par­tic­u­larly acute. For pro­ponents, global warm­ing can­not be addressed without a nuc­lear renais­sance. For oppon­ents, nuc­lear is a trap that diverts resources from bet­ter solu­tions while com­mit­ting us for dec­ades to a tech­no­logy that has never lived up to its prom­ises.

And Ontario has already picked its side.

“We’re doub­ling down on nuc­lear,” Energy Min­is­ter Stephen Lecce told the Star in an inter­view.

“If you care about jobs for Cana­dians, if you care about an eth­ical sup­ply chain using a clean grid, not a coal­fired grid, if you care about human rights, the rule of law, fun­da­mental Cana­dian val­ues, and the eco­nomic advant­ages for the work­ers, for the women and men who work in this province, then you will unapo­lo­get­ic­ally defend and pro­mote Ontario’s nuc­lear advant­age, which is now an envy of the world.”

Why nuc­lear is con­sidered a `very expens­ive’ option

This June, the province laid out a 25­year road map for the elec­tri­city sys­tem that relies over­whelm­ingly on nuc­lear. It projects a massive 75 per cent increase in demand for power, the equi­val­ent of adding four­and­a­half Toron­tos to the grid. While there have been some invest­ments in bat­tery stor­age and hydro, most of this energy will come from refur­bish­ing the exist­ing fleet of react­ors and build­ing new ones, includ­ing one in Wes­leyville — on the shore of Lake Ontario to the east of the exist­ing Pick­er­ing and Dar­ling­ton plants — that would be the world’s biggest nuc­lear plant. In doing so, the province would triple its nuc­lear gen­er­a­tion, exceed­ing the entire elec­tri­city sys­tem’s out­put today.

“Ontario is put­ting a lot of eggs in a very expens­ive bas­ket,” said David Pickup, an energy ana­lyst at the Pem­bina Insti­tute and the author of a report high­light­ing the risks of the province’s nuc­lear build out……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.pressreader.com/article/281865829856772

January 14, 2026 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

Here’s who really weaponizes children in the Russia-Ukraine conflict

As accusations of abductions resurface, it’s clear the West doesn’t care about facts on the ground if they contradict the narrative.

By Eva Bartlett, a Canadian independent journalist. She has spent years on the ground covering conflict zones in the Middle East, especially in Syria and Palestine (where she lived for nearly four years).  9 Jan, 2026 https://www.rt.com/news/630762-russia-ukraine-abducted-children/

For the last three years, Ukraine and concerted legacy media campaigns have been screaming that Russia has abducted, or forcibly displaced, thousands of Ukrainian children – even up to 1.5 million!

The accusations resurged in December, with a UN General Assembly vote on a draft resolution on the return of Ukrainian children.

During the meeting, Ukraine’s Deputy Foreign Minister Mariana Betsa once again pushed claims that “at least 20,000 Ukrainian children have been deported to Russia,” in spite of the fact that months prior, during the June Istanbul talks, the Ukrainian side finally provided a list of the children it accuses Russia of abducting: 339 children, surprisingly far fewer than the number alleged for years.

The absence of over 19,500 on the list indeed leads to many questions, mainly: is Ukraine lying again? Recall that in 2022, the accusations by the (now former) Ukrainian ombudswoman, Lyudmila Denisova, about “sexual atrocities” allegedly committed by Russian soldiers, were revealed to be lies and propaganda. So much so that Denisova was sacked. But before her dismissal, legacy media and the UN all backed the lies.

Some recent accusations are that children were being sent to labor camps in Russia – “165 re-education camps where Ukrainian children are militarized and Russified” – or even of being sent to North Korea, as Katerina Rashevskaya of the Ukrainian Regional Center for Human Rights told the US Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs on December 3.

The footnotes of the claims made by Rashevskaya, instead of a source for the information, say “The Regional Human Rights Center can provide information upon request.” In other words, her sources are “trust me, bro.”

Regarding the North Korean camp in question, if two Russian teens were sent there, they’d potentially be made to enjoy water slides, basketball and volleyball courts, an arcade room, a rock climbing wall, art and performance halls, an archery range, a private beach, and hikes in the mountains.

Regarding the list of 339 children Ukraine says were abducted by Russia, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova remarked“30 percent of the names on the list could not be verified, as most of those children were never in Russia, are now adults, or have already returned to their families. As for the Ukrainian children who are actually in our country, they are under state care in appropriate institutions. They are safe now; in many cases, their evacuation from combat zones saved their lives. Local children’s rights commissioners are now working to reunite them with their relatives.”

Just as legacy media has whitewashed the eight years of Ukraine’s war against Donbass civilians prior to Russia commencing its military operation in 2022, including the Ukrainian shelling which killed 250 children starting in 2014, media likewise ignore the children Russia says are missing.

During the talks in Istanbul, Zakharova noted, “the Russian side presented Ukraine with a list of 20 Russian children who are either currently in Ukraine or relocated from Ukraine to Western Europe, including to countries that endorsed this very statement. Now, the burden falls on these states to provide Russia with a substantive response regarding our ‘list of 20.’”

Over 500 Ukrainian orphans abused in Türkiye

Recently, Donbass-based journalist Christelle Néant wrote about a report published on a pro-Ukrainian website which broke the story of 510 Ukrainian children who had been evacuated by a Ukrainian oligarch in 2022 from Dnepropetrovsk to Türkiye, where the benevolent foundation which brought them there allegedly allowed its staff to beat the children, sexually assault them, and deny them food if they refused to perform on camera to raise funds for their lodging. These are just some of the reported violations of the orphans’ rights.

The details of the report show that the children suffered physically and psychologically. Additionally, two underage teens were impregnated by staff at the hotel they stayed in, with educators allegedly aware of the interactions.

According to Néant, the orphanage director’s response to the fact of one of the teens in her care becoming pregnant was to blame the girl: “This young girl comes from an asocial family. Well, this way of life is already inscribed in every cell, in the blood of these children.”


“In almost 10 years of work in Donbass,”
 Néant wrote, “I have conducted or filmed many humanitarian missions to orphanages in the region. And never ever have I heard a director make such vile remarks about one of the children in her care. Even the most difficult and recalcitrant were cared for with pedagogy, love, and patience.”

Ukraine hunting down children

In April 2023, Christelle Néant and I interviewed Artyomovsk civilians who had recently been rescued by Russian soldiers. In addition to being deliberately shelled by Ukrainian forces who knew they were sheltering in the basement of a residential building, the civilians we spoke to told us about Ukrainian military police hunting for children.
The evacuees told us some of these police went by the name ‘White Angels’, and were taking childrenaway without their consent or that of their parents.

Around that time, more reports came out about these abductions or attempted abductions, including an 11-year-old girl who spoke of how White Angels, who introduced themselves as military police, came to the basement she was sheltering in with a photo of her, looking for her, and saying they needed to take her away, because “Russia killed her mother.” According to the girl, her mother was alive and with her.

Reports of these abductions also emerged in AvdeyevkaKupyansk, Slavyansk, Chasov Yar and Konstantinovka, as well as in Ukrainsk and Zhelannoye.

Néant wrote of a July 2023 conference on Ukraine’s crimes against the Donbass children, in which Liliya and her daughter Kira from Schastye, in the Lugansk People’s Republic, spoke. 

They gave evidence of how, “at the start of the special military operation (when Ukraine controlled Schastye), around ten children were taken from a school in Schastye to western Ukraine by the headmistress of the school, on orders from Kiev, without informing their parents.”

The children were even forbidden to call their parents, Néant wrote, “But Kira knew her mother’s telephone number by heart and managed to call her to let her know that they were in Lviv and then Khoust. Thanks to Liliya’s determination to find her daughter, we discovered how Kiev ‘exports’ the children it abducts.” Ukraine had forged a new “original” birth certificate for Kira. The girl said she and the other children were to be sent to Poland.

Former SBU officer Vasily Prozorov spoke at the same conference, where he explained, according to Néant, “that one of his investigations had revealed that some of the children abducted by Ukraine are sent to pedophile networks in Great Britain, via a whole network of Ukrainian and British officials or former officials who work together. On the British side, members of MI6 and the Foreign Office are involved.”

Prozorov, she wrote, spoke of “another of his investigations on organizations registered in EU countries involved in ‘exporting’ children from Ukraine under the pretext of providing them with shelter. These organizations take unaccompanied Ukrainian children out of Ukraine. What happens to them afterwards is unknown.”

Evacuees from Kherson reject ‘abduction’ claims

In November 2022, in the southern Russian seaside city Anapa, I met numerous people displaced from Kherson who were being lodged in hotels and apartments in the city.

The first site I visited was a few minutes by taxi outside of the city, one of many hotels along the coast. The hotel director showing me around said they don’t call them refugees, “we call them guests of the building,” and spoke affectionately of them, how grateful they were to be there, far from any shelling. Just under 500 refugees had been living there since October, she told me.

No guards monitored the entrance/exit; the refugees walked around tidy grounds. But in any case, I asked about their freedom of movement, or lack thereof.

“They move freely, of course. We don’t prohibit them from going out. Many aren’t here now because they’re in town, looking for jobs, getting documents. Children are at school.”

With my hired translator, I spoke with two Kherson women, a young mother and her own mother, to hear their stories.

“We were living with explosions at night, it was very scary, not only for myself, but for my children and for my grandchildren,” the older woman said. “When you go to bed, you don’t know if you will get out of bed in the morning. We were forced to leave.”

I asked who was shelling them. “Word of mouth transmits very clearly, and people around us spoke about it. We were bombed by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Russian soldiers protected us.”

The younger woman said she used to speak with the Russian soldiers there. “They are friendly. We wanted to hug them, because we felt protected. They helped us, gave us humanitarian aid, brought it to the house.”

Some minutes’ taxi ride away, I visited an apartment complex that could have served tourists in summer.  There, fifty buildings housed around 1,500 refugees who had also arrived in October, mostly from Kherson Region.

My translator and I walked around, passing playgrounds, a pharmacy, a library, a swimming pool, a gym, a small petting zoo with peacocks, and a kindergarten. Near a playground, I spoke with a mother sitting on a bench with two of her four children.

“In the early days, there was bombing. We spent two and a half weeks in the basement. It was unbearable, the children were very afraid.” One of her daughters became ill. “She had acute inflammation of the lower jaw, we think due to hypothermia. We took her to Simferopol and she had surgery.” 

In Anapa, she said, her children had full medical examinations. “We were helped by the mayor of the city of Anapa. We are grateful for everything.”

I mentioned that according to Western media, she and her family were kidnapped by Russia. She replied that her husband’s parents had demanded to see the children, having been told that children were being separated from their parents in Russia.

“His mother called three days in a row, saying, ‘Where are the children?’ We answered, ‘They went to the cinema. They’re playing, etc.’ She said, ‘Show me the children, they say that they took your children from you.’”

Details matter

Whereas legacy media continue to push the “Evil Russia child kidnapper” narrative, there is ample evidence that Ukraine is guilty of doing precisely what it accuses Russia of. The is also a significant absence of evidence regarding the ‘20,000 kidnapped children’ claims still being pushed.

Will media investigate the reports of abuse of Ukrainian children in Türkiye? Surely not. It wouldn’t suit their scripted anti-Russia bias.

January 14, 2026 Posted by | Atrocities, Ukraine | Leave a comment