DNA Mutations Discovered in The Children of Chernobyl Workers
Science Health15 February 2026, By David Nield, https://www.sciencealert.com/dna-mutations-discovered-in-the-children-of-chernobyl-workers
The DNA damage from ionizing radiation (IR) erupting from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster of 1986 is showing up in the children of those originally exposed, researchers have found – the first time such a transgenerational link has been clearly established.
Previous studies have been inconclusive about whether this genetic damage could be passed from parent to child, but here the researchers – led by a team from the University of Bonn in Germany – looked for something slightly different.
Rather than picking out new DNA mutations in the next generation, they looked for what are known as clustered de novo mutations (cDNMs): two or more mutations in close proximity, found in the children but not the parents. These would be mutations resulting from breaks in the parental DNA caused by radiation exposure.
“We found a significant increase in the cDNM count in offspring of irradiated parents, and a potential association between the dose estimations and the number of cDNMs in the respective offspring,” write the researchers in their published paper.
“Despite uncertainty concerning the precise nature and quantity of the IR involved, the present study is the first to provide evidence for the existence of a transgenerational effect of prolonged paternal exposure to low-dose IR on the human genome.”
The findings are based on whole genome sequencing scans of 130 offspring of Chernobyl cleanup workers, 110 offspring of German military radar operators who were likely exposed to stray radiation, and 1,275 offspring of parents unexposed to radiation, used as controls.
On average, the researchers found 2.65 cDNMs per child in the Chernobyl group, 1.48 per child in the German radar group, and 0.88 per child in the control group. The researchers say those numbers are likely to be overestimates due to noise in the data, but even after making statistical adjustments, the difference was still significant.
What’s more, a higher radiation dose for the parent tended to mean a higher number of clusters in the child. This fits with the idea that radiation creates molecules known as reactive oxygen species, which are able to break DNA strands – breaks which can leave behind the clusters described in this study, if repaired imperfectly.
The good news is that the risk to health should be relatively small: children of exposed parents weren’t found to have any higher risk of disease. This is partly because a lot of the cDNMs likely fall in ‘non-coding’ DNA, rather than in genes that directly encode proteins.
“Given the low overall increase in cDNMs following paternal exposure to ionizing radiation and the low proportion of the genome that is protein coding, the likelihood that a disease occurring in the offspring of exposed parents is triggered by a cDNM is minimal,” the researchers write.
To put this in perspective, we know that older dads are more likely to pass on more DNA mutations to their children. The subsequent risk of disease associated with parental age at the time of conception is higher than the potential risks from radiation exposure examined here, the researchers report.
There are some limitations to note. As the initial radiation exposure happened decades ago, the researchers had to estimate people’s exposure using historical records and decades-old devices.
Participation in the study was also voluntary, which may have introduced some bias, as those who suspected they’d been exposed to radiation may have been more likely to enrol.
Even with those limitations, we now know that with prolonged exposure, ionizing radiation can leave subtle traces in the DNA of the generations to come – emphasizing the need for safety precautions and careful monitoring for those at risk.
“The potential of transmission of radiation-induced genetic alterations to the next generation is of particular concern for parents who may have been exposed to higher doses of IR and potentially for longer periods of time than considered safe,” write the researchers.
The research has been published in Scientific Reports.
British taxpayers bankroll French nuclear giant while Hinkley Point C quietly receives 500-tonne reactor heart.
The contrast couldn’t be starker: French taxpayers owning British energy infrastructure, while British taxpayers guarantee the profits.
For a typical family using 3,000 kWh annually, the Hinkley surcharge could add £15-25 yearly to bills once the plant is operational. That might sound modest, but it’s on top of already record-high energy costs and other energy levies.
Olivia Hunt February 15, 2026, https://secom.es/hinkley-point-c-receives-500-tonne-reactor-heart-british-taxpayers-bankroll/
Sarah Mitchell stared at her energy bill in disbelief. £340 for the month. Again. The single mother from Bristol had already switched off the heating in two bedrooms and started cooking with just one burner. Yet somewhere across the Channel, a massive steel cylinder was being loaded onto a ship, destined for her county of Somerset. That 500-tonne nuclear reactor vessel would eventually power her home—and she was helping to pay for it, twice over.
It’s a story playing out across Britain right now. While families ration their heating and businesses close early to save on electricity, a French-built nuclear giant is making its way to British shores. The destination is Hinkley Point C, the controversial power station that’s become a symbol of everything complicated about Britain’s energy choices.
The scene in Cherbourg was deliberately low-key. No cameras, no politicians cutting ribbons. Just dockworkers watching as France’s most sophisticated nuclear technology rolled toward a waiting vessel, bound for a country that’s paying through the nose for foreign expertise.
Hinkley Point C represents the biggest bet Britain has made on its energy future in decades. When the deal was struck in 2016, it looked like smart planning. Today, with energy prices through the roof and household budgets stretched thin, it feels more like an expensive gamble with other people’s money.
The reactor pressure vessel now crossing the English Channel is the beating heart of what will become Britain’s newest nuclear power station. Built by Framatome, France’s state-owned nuclear champion, this steel colossus will sit at the center of two European Pressurised Reactors (EPR) designed to generate enough electricity for six million homes.
“This vessel represents the pinnacle of nuclear engineering,” explains Dr. James Crawford, a nuclear physicist at Imperial College London. “But the question isn’t whether it’s impressive technology—it’s whether British taxpayers should be funding French state enterprises while struggling with their own energy costs.”
The numbers behind Hinkley Point C make for uncomfortable reading. The project has ballooned from an initial estimate of £18 billion to potentially over £35 billion. Meanwhile, British households are locked into paying a guaranteed “strike price” of £92.50 per megawatt-hour for the electricity it produces, inflation-adjusted over 35 years.Follow the Money: Who Pays and Who Profits
The financial structure of Hinkley Point C reads like a masterclass in how to transfer risk from private companies to ordinary citizens. Here’s how the money flows:
| Who Builds | Who Owns | Who Pays | Who Guarantees |
| EDF (French state-owned) | EDF (66.5%) + CGN (Chinese, 33.5%) | British bill payers | British government |
| Framatome (French) | Foreign shareholders | British taxpayers | British taxpayers |
The strike price mechanism means British energy users will pay a premium for Hinkley’s electricity regardless of market conditions. If wholesale prices fall, we top up the difference. If they rise above £92.50 per MWh, EDF keeps the extra profit up to a point—but taxpayers still carry the underlying risk.
Key financial commitments include:
- £92.50 per MWh guaranteed electricity price (2012 prices, now worth over £110 with inflation)
- 35-year contract duration with built-in price increases
- Government loan guarantees reducing EDF’s borrowing costs
- Planning and regulatory costs covered by British authorities
- Decommissioning fund contributions from British sources
“It’s the most expensive electricity deal in Europe,” notes energy economist Professor Michael Roberts from Oxford University. “We’re essentially giving EDF a 35-year annuity underwritten by British households, while they retain ownership of a strategic asset.”
Real Homes, Real Bills, Real Consequences
While the nuclear reactor makes its journey from France, the human cost of Britain’s energy choices plays out in living rooms across the country. The Hinkley Point C contract means every household will contribute to EDF’s guaranteed profits through their electricity bills for the next three and a half decades.
For a typical family using 3,000 kWh annually, the Hinkley surcharge could add £15-25 yearly to bills once the plant is operational. That might sound modest, but it’s on top of already record-high energy costs and other renewable energy levies.
The timing feels particularly brutal. As the French-built reactor vessel crosses the Channel, British families are making impossible choices between heating and eating. Food banks report unprecedented demand, partly driven by people choosing groceries over gas bills.
“My constituents are furious,” says MP Caroline Davies, whose constituency includes several towns near Hinkley Point C. “They see foreign companies profiting from guaranteed contracts while they’re choosing between turning on the heating or buying school uniforms for their kids.”
The broader economic impact extends beyond household bills:
- Small businesses closing early to avoid peak-rate electricity charges
- Manufacturers relocating to countries with cheaper, more predictable energy costs
- Public services cutting back on heating and lighting in schools and hospitals
- Pensioners rationing heating despite rising winter fuel allowances
Meanwhile, EDF’s shareholders—ultimately the French state—benefit from one of the most generous infrastructure deals in recent British history. The contrast couldn’t be starker: French taxpayers owning British energy infrastructure, while British taxpayers guarantee the profits.
The situation raises fundamental questions about energy sovereignty and democratic accountability. When foreign state-owned companies control critical infrastructure that British citizens are compelled to fund, traditional notions of national ownership become meaningless
Energy analysts warn this model could extend to other major projects. If Hinkley Point C proves profitable for foreign investors at British expense, similar deals for future nuclear plants, offshore wind farms, and other infrastructure become more likely.
As that 500-tonne reactor vessel approaches British waters, it carries more than just sophisticated nuclear technology. It represents a profound shift in how Britain powers itself—and who controls the switch.
Trump buildup for war with Iran mimics George W. Bush’s buildup for 2003 Iraq war.
Trump frames the ongoing negotiations as designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This despite Trump’s bragging that he completely destroyed their nuclear program with his one-off bombing last June
Walt Zlotow West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL, 17 Feb 26
Back in 2002 the US demanded Iraq give up its WMD, weapons of mass destruction, ostensibly to prevent another 911 attack a year earlier. To back up its demand the US threatened attacking the Iraqi regime to safeguard the Homeland.
Along with most Americans, I fell for the line that the US would stand down due to the weapons inspectors and intelligence resources in Iraq concluding Iraq had no WMD and was not a threat to America whatsoever.
Then in August 2002, I read a report buried deep in the Chicago Tribune describing America’s massive military buildup, concluding with the strong implication that such a buildup made attack on Iraq inevitable with nothing Iraq could do to prevent it.
At that moment I knew everything the Bush administration said about the Iraqi danger was a vicious lie in service of ousting Saddam Hussein and conquering Iraq. Seven months later, contrary to all the evidence, Bush did precisely that.
I’m getting the same ominous feeling when I hear Trump bragging out his massive buildup of air and naval forces near Iran poised to attack should Iran not capitulate to Trump’s non-negotiable demands that Iran give up its missile defense resources and cease supporting its regional allies.
Trump frames the ongoing negotiations as designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This despite Trump’s bragging that he completely destroyed their nuclear program with his one-off bombing last June in support of Israel’s 12 day war on Iran that utterly failed to topple the Iranian regime.
The current negotiations in Geneva have nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear weapons program since, like Iraq’s imaginary WMD program in 2002, Iran has none. Indeed, for verification Iran is willing to negotiate limited nuclear enrichment for peaceful domestic purposes; even allow inspections to verify compliance But they will never negotiate away their missile program which is their only defense against further Israeli, US attacks such as they incurred last June.
Another similarity to Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq 23 year ago? It had nothing to do with vital US national interests. It had to do with Israeli demands that successive US administrations, bought up with Israel Lobby money, take out any Israeli rivals for Middle East hegemony.
Trump’s fealty to Israeli demands, encouraged by their near quarter billion in campaign support, fueled Trump’s blowing up Obama’s sensible 2015 Iran nuclear agreement in 2018. He lied to us then how the deal favored Iran by not ending its nuclear bomb program that did not exist. Trump is lying to us now on the urgency of destroying Iranian sovereignty which includes the right to self-defense.
But there is one huge difference between Trump’s trumped up Iranian threat likely presaging all out war today and George W. Bush’s falsified Iraqi threat in 2002. Unlike Iraq which had no defensive military means and no powerful allies to assist his defense, Iran has both.
They have thousands of missiles scattered thruout their large country capable of inflicting massive damage on US and Israeli forces. In addition they are getting defensive support from Russia and especially China in the form of intelligence resources to track approaching US bombers and provide accurate targeting information in retaliation.
History shows that sending a military armada near a pretend enemy never gets recalled. Its sole purpose is to attack and destroy based on a tissue of lies. And any lie and any ludicrous demand to negotiate an impossible deal in furtherance of war will be used to justify attack.
George W. Bush got 4,497 soldiers and 1,487 civilian contractors killed for nothing in his made up Iraq war. Trump’s march to war with Iran may make Bush’s folly pale in comparison.
Small modular nuclear reactors for developing countries: Expectations and evidence Open Access
Friederike Friess , Maha Siddiqui , M V Ramana, PNAS Nexus, Volume 5, Issue 2, February 2026,
https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/5/2/pgag006/8419276
Abstract
Many developing countries have shown interest in acquiring nuclear power plants, particularly small modular reactors (SMRs). By analyzing presentations made by national representatives at International Atomic Energy Agency conferences, we identified 3 key expectations of SMRs expressed by many officials: that they generate electricity at low cost, that the design be demonstrated through operating experience elsewhere, and that there be potential for local manufacturing associated with the nuclear power project.
However, based on the available evidence regarding SMR designs, we demonstrated that these expectations are unlikely to be fulfilled.
SMRs do not benefit from economies of scale, unlike large nuclear power plants. Because electricity from large nuclear plants is expensive, SMRs will produce more costly power.
Second, it is unrealistic to expect that SMRs will qualify as proven technology in the near future because of the very limited number of SMRs currently in operation or under construction. The performance of currently operating SMRs has also been underwhelming.
Finally, the idea of local manufacturing conflicts with the proposed economic model of mass production. At the same time, the skilled local workforce needed to operate these reactors is not readily available in many newcomer countries.
Major leak at Highland nuclear site triggers hunt for mystery bunkers
A 1960s bunker at a Highland nuclear site quietly leaked radioactive water
for at least a year before the alarm was raised – and officials have now
ordered a hunt for other similar hidden structures that may be leaking too,
the Sunday National can reveal.
Dounreay, on the Caithness coast, was the
UK’s centre for experimental fast‑reactor research from the 1950s until
the 1990s and is now a major nuclear decommissioning site. The clean‑up
is funded by the UK Government’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority and
carried out locally by Nuclear Restoration Services (NRS), which runs the
site and is responsible for managing its ageing reactors, waste pits and
other legacy facilities.
The National revealed last year that radioactive
material had been accidentally released at Dounreay between July 2023 and
August 2024 and that Scotland’s environmental watchdog, SEPA, found the
operator had breached its permit.
But now, a new internal investigation
report, released to the Sunday National under freedom of information, goes
further: it warns that other underground structures with “unrevealed
hazards” may still be waiting to be found. The original leak source was a
disused underground carbon bed filter – essentially a concrete bunker –
built in the early 1960s as part of a ventilation system for one of
Dounreay’s facilities. It was taken out of normal use decades ago and
left as a legacy structure to be dealt with during decommissioning.
The report notes that it “was never designed to retain water”, yet by 2017,
it was known to contain thousands of litres of radioactive liquor and had
already been identified as a possible source of contamination at one of the
site’s outfalls.
A spokesperson for the Scottish Environment Protection
Agency (SEPA) said: “In June 2024, Nuclear Restoration Services Ltd (NRS)
notified SEPA of a potential leak of radioactively contaminated water from
a carbon bed filter on the Dounreay site. It was subsequently established
that there was a small leak from the carbon bed filter. Monitoring by the
operator has not detected any increase in radioactivity in groundwater
downstream.
“SEPA’s investigation concluded that the operator had
breached conditions of its Environmental Authorisations (Scotland)
Regulations 2018 (EASR) authorisation. To secure compliance, we have issued
a Regulatory Notice requiring NRS to take specified steps, including
reviewing groundwater monitoring arrangements and undertaking
characterisation to establish the extent of contamination which has arisen
from the leak from the carbon bed filter.”
The National 15th Feb 2026, https://www.thenational.scot/news/25854472.major-leak-highland-nuclear-site-triggers-hunt-mystery-bunkers/
The Unelected Overlord: How Kushner Turned the White House into Israel’s Backroom Deal Den
Viewed closely, a pattern emerges, pointing to a presidency where private capital, foreign networks, and personal access converge to shape outcomes that consistently serve Israeli interests, and not Americans
Freddie Ponton, 21st Century Wire, February 2, 2026 , https://21stcenturywire.com/2026/02/02/the-unelected-overlord-how-kushner-turned-the-white-house-into-israels-backroom-deal-den/
”Trump did not walk into the White House alone. He stormed in with a promise to “drain the swamp,” but trailing in his shadow was Jared Kushner, carrying a tangled web of private financial networks, offshore holdings, and foreign capital so deeply embedded it functioned like a quiet engine at the heart of the presidency. Years later, FBI documents released alongside the Epstein files crystallised the danger, with a Confidential Human Source (CHS) alleging that Trump had been compromised by Israel, and that Kushner was the true centre of gravity, orchestrating both the Trump Organisation and the White House from within.
Here -documents: [on original]
DOCUMENT: Federal Bureau Of Investigation (FBI) – CHS Reporting Document, 10/19/2020 (Source: US DOJ)
This is not theatre. Intelligence reporting rarely accuses outright; it maps vulnerability, flags leverage, and exposes the invisible pathways through which foreign influence can seep into the corridors of American power, remaining unnoticed, unchallenged, and structurally unstoppable
The question is not whether the allegation would hold up in court. The question is whether the record itself, including Trump’s 2025 mandate, his cascade of executive orders, and his most consequential foreign policy moves in the Middle East, confirms the risk it described. Viewed closely, a pattern emerges, pointing to a presidency where private capital, foreign networks, and personal access converge to shape outcomes that consistently serve Israeli interests, and not Americans’. The decisions emanating from the Trump 2:0 administration appear to be dictated from within rather than guided by democratic oversight. As this story unfolds, it becomes clear that these are not isolated incidents or accidental alignment—they are structural, enduring, and deeply consequential.
READ MORE: Trump Team Didn’t Just Collude with Israel, Kushner was Acting as Foreign Agent for Tel Aviv
A Presidency Rewired from the Inside
Continue readingThe global elite in the shadow of Jeffrey Epstein
17 February 2026 AIMN Editorial, https://theaimn.net/the-global-elite-in-the-shadow-of-jeffrey-epstein/
The mainstream media is largely ignoring the real scandal in this story.
By Antony Loewenstein
For years, I mostly ignored the Jeffrey Epstein story. Not because it wasn’t interesting and relevant but there was a distinct lack of hard evidence backing the (often) wild conspiracy theories connecting Epstein to the global political and financial elites, and Israel.
It’s now undeniable that Epstein was incredibly close to Israeli intelligence, a fact that remains largely ignored in the Western media. What this says about the nature of Epstein’s vast criminality, against children and women, speaks volumes about the wilful blindness expressed by legacy media outlets.
The US outlet, Drop Site News, have produced many stunning stories on how Epstein became a key power broker connecting Israel and its defence/surveillance sectors to innumerable nations from Mongolia to the Ivory Coast.
One of the writers of these investigations, Murtaza Hussain, explains both the significance of the revelations and the reticence of corporate media to explore it:
Because of elite capture of many institutions, the coverage of Epstein’s activities by establishment news outlets feels a lot more like damage control than accountability. Despite his extensively documented political influence and even his role in shaping frontier research in AI and biotechnology, Epstein himself has attempted to be quarantined as merely a “con-man” and “dead pervert.” What is being covered up here are not his sexual abuses, but what his role and activities reveal about how power actually operates today.
With some notable exceptions, the general public has had to read independent mediato really understand the Epstein scandal while outlets like the New York Times produce huge amounts of coverage and mostly ignore the late paedophiles’ ties to global intelligence networks.
On my recently launched weekly podcast series, I examined how Epstein, Israel and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak were key nodes in an international campaign to deepen the Jewish state’s influence:
Trump Team Didn’t Just Collude with Israel, Kushner was Acting as Foreign Agent for Tel Aviv.
So Trump’s éminence grise, the wunderkind, who some people have called the President In-Law, is really Israel’s man inside the White House
Granted, this is a very serious charge – which comes with some serious consequences if Kushner would ever be indicted, but the facts clearly demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt, that then President-elect’s son-in-law was using his proximity to the incoming Commander and Chief to execute a series of highly sensitive foreign policy maneuvers at the request of a foreign country.
So what exactly are Jared Kushner’s credentials in international relations and diplomacy that he has been charged with negotiating Middle East affairs for the United States of America? Without sounding too cruel here, it’s difficult to find anything to say in his defense. In the end, his only visible qualification is that he’s married to the President’s daughter, and that’s he’s “a good friend” of Netanyahu. That’s really it
December 7, 2017 By NEWS WIRE Patrick Henningsen, 21st Century Wire
Much was made this week in the US media about Michael Flynn’s recent guilty plea to making false statements to the FBI, as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s never-ending “Russia probe.” Beyond the political window dressing however, there’s a much bigger and more profound story lingering in the background.
Continue readingVery traumatic for whom Mr. Trump?
Walt Zlotow West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL, 15 Feb 26 , https://theaimn.net/very-traumatic-for-whom-mr-trump/
President Trump recapped his sixth meeting this year with his real boss, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, by stating it will be “Very traumatic” for Iran if a nuclear deal isn’t reached soon.
With his vast military armada perched on Iran’s doorstep, Trump’s warning is clear. The US is preparing a massive attack to decapitate the Iranian regime and splinter Iran into a failed state. Of course this has nothing to do with US national security interests. It’s about Israel’s decade’s long demand that its US servants remove Israel’s last hegemonic rival for Middle East supremacy.
When asked about a timeline for Iran to capitulate to every US, Israeli demand that would essentially nullify Iranian sovereignty, Trump said “I guess over the next month. They should agree very quickly.” Netanyahu echoed that delusional assessment stating “The president believes the Iranians now understand who they are dealing with” (and that) “conditions could emerge for achieving a good agreement.”
Trump and Netanyahu know full well Iran will never negotiate away their ballistic missile defense which will devastate both US military forces and Israel itself once Trump launches all out war.
Knowing no deal is possible, Trump and Netanyahu likely spent their 3 hour meeting discussing when and how to destroy Iran militarily. The Israeli news site Ynet, concurred, stating the two leaders discussed military options and that Israeli officials expect the US will eventually attack Iran.
Best we in the peace community can hope for is that someone close to Trump convinces him that the trauma Trump threatens Iran with will boomerang into unfathomable trauma for the US and Israel as well as Iran.
Netanyahu pushing to turn US into ‘slave state for Israel’s expansionist dreams’: Analyst
“Now, with increased US military presence in [West Asia], Trump is preparing strikes on Iran — not for American interests, but to appease his Zionist bosses. This isn’t ‘peace’; it’s escalating conflicts to advance Greater Israel fantasies, displacing millions and looting American taxpayers.”
Wed, 11 Feb 2026, https://www.sott.net/article/504639-Netanyahu-pushing-to-turn-US-into-slave-state-for-Israels-expansionist-dreams-Analyst
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been deliberately steering the United States toward confrontation with Iran in an escalation that pushes America into a “slave state for Israel’s expansionist dreams,” says an American analyst.
In an interview with the Press TV website, Michael Rectenwald, an author and former professor, pointed to the strong Zionist influence in the US policy-making:
“The Zionist stranglehold on US policy prioritizes Israel’s aggression over American sovereignty. Netanyahu knows that provoking Iran draws in US forces and funds, turning our country into a slave state for Israel’s expansionist dreams.”
He noted that Tel Aviv’s push to see an all-out Iran-US war is not “just a willingness” but “a calculated strategy to bleed America dry.”‘Rectenwald, founder of the Anti-Zionist America Political Action Committee (AZAPAC), said Trump’s record stood in stark contrast to his campaign vows to end wars:
“He ran on ending endless wars and putting America first. In practice, his administration had served as Israel’s munitions depot and ATM, bombing countries like Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and others at Israel’s behest while funneling billions in arms and aid to support Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza and beyond.”
In Rectenwald’s assessment, the expansion of US military assets in the region signaled preparation for direct confrontation with Tehran.
“Now, with increased US military presence in [West Asia], Trump is preparing strikes on Iran — not for American interests, but to appease his Zionist bosses. This isn’t ‘peace’; it’s escalating conflicts to advance Greater Israel fantasies, displacing millions and looting American taxpayers.”
Trump’s rhetoric has sharpened in recent months. Following economic protests in Iran, which were later hijacked and turned into terrorist riots by US and Israeli spy agencies, he had warned that military action remained on the table and said that “help is on its way.”
In late January, he stated that “another beautiful armada” of warships was “floating beautifully toward Iran,” later suggesting the deployment might pressure Tehran back into nuclear negotiations,while Tehran said it had never abandoned talks.
Trump further threatened that failure to reach a deal would bring consequences “far worse” than the previous strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Tehran responded with its own warnings, declaring that any aggression would meet a swift and forceful response.
After an attack on its nuclear facilities in June — which ironically came during indirect Tehran-Washington talks — Iran launched a barrage of missiles at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, which hosted US forces and equipment.
Rectenwald argued that the push toward confrontation with Iran could not be understood without examining Israel’s strategic calculus and its influence in Washington. He contended that Netanyahu had been actively seeking a broader war between Washington and Tehran.
Rectenwald noted that Trump himself had been complicit in this pattern:
“Netanyahu and the Zionist regime in Israel are desperate for an all-out war between the US and Iran, as it would eliminate a key regional rival while keeping the US entangled as Israel’s military golem.
“Trump is no anti-war president; he’s a Jewish mobster puppet, dragging the US into more bloodshed for a parasitic state.”
Rectenwald described the president’s foreign policy as subservient to Israeli priorities rather than grounded in American sovereignty.
The risks of confrontation with Iran, he argued, were neither abstract nor hypothetical. Rectenwald said Trump had been fully aware of Iran’s military capabilities, particularly its missile arsenal.
“Trump is fully aware of Iran’s formidable missile capabilities, which have already pierced Israel’s multi-layered defenses and could devastate US assets and troops scattered across the region.”
Despite that awareness, Rectenwald believes the president had been influenced more by hardline voices aligned with Israel than by strategic caution. He described Trump as “more beholden to Zionist hawks like those in his administration and the pro-Israel lobby that dictates US policy.”
In making his case, Rectenwald contrasted Iran’s posture with Israel’s record:
“Iran hasn’t attacked US ships like the USS Liberty (that was Israel), nor does it control our political class or siphon our resources for genocide; that’s Israel’s playbook,.”
He argued that Trump had ignored the strategic dangers while appealing to domestic political instincts. The president, he said, had been “pumping up his base with pre-war rhetoric and aligning with figures who see siding with Israel as ‘good vs. evil.'”
Rectenwald warned:]”Attacking Iran would be another disastrous war for Israel, not fought for America, endangering our troops and economy.”
The latest round of talks between Tehran and Washington took place in Muscat on February 6, mediated by Omani Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidi. The delegations exchanged their views and approaches through Omani channels.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi described the process as a “good start” and said that the continuation of talks depended on refraining from threats and pressure.
However, Rectenwald repeated his warning against Israeli influence, which can derail the talks as happened in June.
“Trump isn’t acknowledging Iran’s power; he’s blinded by Zionist influence, risking catastrophe to serve foreign interests,” he said.
For Rectenwald, the stakes extended beyond a single military decision. The broader issue, he argued, concerned sovereignty and governance. “We must end this control and reclaim American governance for Americans.”
1 This Month
19 February – VIRTUAL EVENT-Decision Time: AI and Our Nuclear Arsenal
12:45 p.m. Central / 1:45 p.m. Eastern
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- February 2026 (192)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 