nuclear-news

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

War Crimes, War Powers and American Sovereignty: The USA + Israel = The Department of Forever War

While carrying a national debt approaching $40 Trillion, the Administration is increasing spending for its newly dedicated Department of War by 67% to upwards of $1.5 TRILLION per year. Simultaneously, with more than 42 million Americans unable to feed themselves, the administration is cutting federal food program

From war crimes and genocide abroad to moral, constitutional, and debt crises at home: Why Congress must reject the NDAA’s U.S.-Israel military and intelligence merger

 June 30, 2026 Dennis Kucinich, https://scheerpost.com/2026/06/30/war-crimes-war-powers-and-american-sovereignty-the-usa-israel-the-department-of-forever-war/

Against the horrific high- and low-tech butchery of Palestinians and Lebanese by Israeli ethno-nationalist psychopathic killers, this week there will be an effort in Congress to formally merge or integrate the military of Israel and the United States at the most advanced levels.

Section 219 (formerly Section 224) of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act of 2027, provides for an unprecedented unification. The nearly $4 billion in the NDAA for Israel’s offensive efforts pales next to Israel having direct access to determining use of $1.5 trillion in annual military resources of the United States.

Money can be appropriated one year and withdrawn the next. Institutional integration is permanent.

Section 219 creates permanent mechanisms through which military planning, intelligence sharing, weapons development, procurement, research, artificial intelligence, and strategic coordination become increasingly intertwined between the United States and Israel.

It is a proposal to embed another nation’s military establishment within the long-term planning and strategic architecture of the United States government.

Our own government – House, Senate and Administration – is in moral collapse, placing overwhelming emphasis on militarism instead of adequately funding America – housing, education, food, health, safety, and retirement security. Americans are standing at freeway exits, begging for food, while our tax dollars flow to weapons manufacturers.

While carrying a national debt approaching $40 Trillion, the Administration is increasing spending for its newly dedicated Department of War by 67% to upwards of $1.5 TRILLION per year. Simultaneously, with more than 42 million Americans unable to feed themselves, the administration is cutting federal food programs.

The practical implications extend far beyond dollars. With NDAA Section 219, Congress the legislation would create enduring institutional relationships affecting how those extraordinary military resources are developed, coordinated, and potentially employed.

No Congress has ever before considered legislation of this nature with any foreign nation.

If the Administration’s “America First” claim were to mean anything, it must first mean that America’s Constitution comes first. It must mean that American families, farmers, workers, veterans, and children come first. Section 219 turns that claim into a farce.

Section 219 of the NDAA would cause the United States to become dependent upon Israel making decisions about war, peace, military strategy, intelligence, and U. S. national security. This is the consequence of permanent institutional integration.

One week ago, a UN Commission of Inquiry determined that Israeli security forces deliberately targeted and killed Palestinian children, sometimes as a game, torturing them, subjecting children to sexual violence resulting in “unprecedented death, injury and trauma.”

Since Oct. 7, 2023, the IDF has been instrumental in the deaths of as many as 800,000 Palestinians, including children, emergency health care workers, doctors, nurses, journalists, and educators.

UN investigators and human rights observers have documented the killing of Palestinian children and have accused Israeli forces of deliberately targeting the children of Gaza.

These findings are reinforced by dehumanizing statements from Israeli political figures who have portrayed Palestinian children as future terrorists, so children are targets.

Essential civilian infrastructure has been devastated. Water systems, hospitals, schools, electrical networks, and sanitation facilities have been damaged or destroyed, eacerbating a man-made, humanitarian catastrophe.

In the occupied West Bank, armed “settlers” have been widely reported to have attacked Palestinian communities, burned homes, uprooted olive groves and other crops, destroyed property, and killed livestock, further displacing civilian populations.

Israel has used starvation as a weapon, setting food as a trap and, gunning down Gazans as they rush desperately to feed themselves and their children. Water supplies have been poisoned, wells filled with cement.

Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon are testing ground sfor increasingly sophisticated military technologies, destroying entire villages with increasingly powerful munitions, and using precision, artificial intelligence-assisted targeting systems. Human rights organizations have raised serious concerns about the speed of targeting decisions, civilian casualty rates, and the implications of delegating life-and-death decisions to algorithmic systems.

White phosphorous and other weapons banned by international treaty are in use.

The conduct of the IDF has earned world-wide condemnation. Twenty-nine UN member states do not have diplomatic relations with Israel. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

The Israel newspaper Haaretz recently reported that the ICC prosecutor is also seeking arrest warrants for Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich: “Gaza must be destroyed entirely.” and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Givr, who has said: “All of Lebanon must burn.” Will these be our new partners? If so, the fundamental question becomes: Who are WE?

What is to be lost further in an Israel-U.S. military merger?

If the U.S. combines our military capabilities with the twisted occupation and expansionist ethic of Israel’s use of military technology against civilian populations, will it be long before our own government militarizes the high -tech surveillance infrastructure already in place to use state violence against our own citizens who protest abuse of basic rights?

The First Amendment has already been taken down on college campuses, and in cities and states where Israel critics are sanctioned.

U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) officials have trained in Israel. The lessons learned there have come to America in terms of deportation, detention, and in some cases, physical abuse, injury and death at the hands of ICE government agents.

Israel kills Arab children so they will not commit crimes in the future. Will Americans, as in the movie Minority Report be pitched into a dystopian world where predictive algorithms enable Israel-U.S. collaborators to hunt down, prosecute and even punish Americans for crimes not committed

As a Member of Congress, I questioned Benjamin Netanyahu during a hearing which took place prior to the 2003 Congressional vote on going to war against Iraq. He admitted he wanted not only Iraq to be attacked by the United States, but also Libya and Iran. It is widely known that the Israeli Prime Minister pushed President Trump into the disastrous war against Iran.

It is inevitable that as Israel’s aggression is maximally empowered, once placed inside the U.S. war-making establishment, the U.S. will be dragged into the Zionists’ expansionist designs on Iran, Turkey, Egypt and elsewhere. A greater Israel means a lesser United States. Congress, heavily influenced by the Israel lobby, is unable to reclaim its constitutionally based war power.

Since the merger is to be voted on, this week, before America celebrates the 250th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence, let us be reminded by Thomas Jefferson’s July 4, 1776 characterization of George III, King of Great Britain: “He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws….”

Our forefathers did not fight for freedom and for independence at Lexington and Concord, Bunker Hill, Trenton, Saratoga, and Yorktown, nor sacrifice American blood and treasure in battles in World War I and World War II to arrive at July 4, 2026, having willingly forfeited our sovereignty to a foreign nation, losing control of our future and putting in doubt “our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor.”

Call your congressperson today and tell them to stand for America’s independence and vote for the Massie-Khanna Amendment to remove Section 219 from the NDAA

July 3, 2026 Posted by | Israel, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The new nuclear madness is climate criminality

“We build, own and operate micro modular nuclear power plants.”

No, they don’t. Last Energy has never built, owned or operated any sort of nuclear power plant, micro, modular or otherwise. But claims such as these simply aren’t questioned by politicians and the media. Rather, they are repeated.

 by beyondnuclearinternational, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2026/06/28/the-new-nuclear-madness-is-climate-criminality/

From reviving ‘dead’ reactors to building new ones large and small, an atomic epidemic is running rampant, writes Linda Pentz Gunter

Many of us have been asking ourselves the same question recently. Why does there seem to be a collective taking leave of all senses gripping politicians everywhere when it comes to nuclear power?

And why is the media lapping up the nonsense and hype and repeating the plethora of false promises (to put it politely) being spewed by nuclear companies — new and old?

Here’s an example from Last Energy, a US nuclear startup hoping to build 20 megawatt pressurized water reactors. According to Nation Cymru, who receives Last Energy’s press materials, a statement on the company’s website reads: “We build, own and operate micro modular nuclear power plants.”

No, they don’t. Last Energy has never built, owned or operated any sort of nuclear power plant, micro, modular or otherwise. But claims such as these simply aren’t questioned by politicians and the media. Rather, they are repeated.

Last Energy — brilliant name, as it will be “last”, if it even goes forward at all — was created by Titans of Nuclear podcaster Brent Kugelmass. They have a pilot project underway in Texas for a 5 megawatt version of the four 20MW “micro-reactors” they want to build in a small community in South Wales, where I am speaking this week.

One of my discussants there, Debra Cooper, co-chair of the Bridgend Green Party, made an acute observation about the company in their early public meetings, poorly attended fiascos that have abruptly stopped. It appeared that not only does Last Energy have no experience with nuclear reactors, they are not that familiar with how British electricity works.

“Their PowerPoint Presentation computer indicated that it had low power and the panicked presenters rushed around fiddling with various wires,” Cooper reported of an early public meeting with Last Energy officials in 2025. “Eventually they ascertained that they had not switched on the plug point at the wall.”

The company also exemplified that patronizing approach we are so familiar with of the “benevolent” corporation that will not only deliver jobs but give back to the community. Such is the arrogant ignorance of companies such as these that First Energy spokespeople assured the good people of Llynfi Valley in Wales that they will graciously fund food banks.

“When I pointed out to them that what locals needed was a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work, without having to rely on food banks, this appeared to surprise them,” Cooper wrote. The proliferation of food banks is a tragic reminder of the scale of poverty and food insecurity across the country, not solved by adding more food banks but by addressing the root cause. 

Stateside, we have an atomic epidemic among US governors, Republicans and Democrats alike, who are falling over each other in their eagerness to welcome new nuclear reactors into their states. Mostly, it’s the so-called small modular reactor (SMR), almost all of which are, like Last Energy, lacking a certified design or commercial buyers. 

But some are willing to revive the dead — Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania, Duane Arnold in Iowa and Palisades in Michigan — and others are happy to accept the same fate as Georgia and welcome Westinghouse back into the game.

The Trump administration has announced it will sink $17.5 billion of taxpayer money into the formerly bankrupt Westinghouse for 10 new full sized AP1000 reactors. This, it is claimed, is in order to “speed the development of 10 new large nuclear reactors to meet the skyrocketing power demand from massive data centers,” reported the Associated Press.

Why pouring money into Westinghouse — now actually wholly owned by two Canadian companies, Brookfield Asset Management and Cameco Corporation — would speed up a process that has already proven to take lamentably long, is nowhere explained.

The only Westinghouse AP1000 project to complete in the US at all, at Vogtle 3 and 4 in Georgia, took 14 years to get here and soared in cost from a predicted $14 billion to at least $35 billion. But these problems were not caused by a lack of money. 

The project received $12 billion total in federal loan guarantees, more than 68% of what is now being offered to likely six different utilities to build 10 more AP1000s.

The utilities rumored to be lined up to collect the dough, if not actually deliver the reactors, are Dominion Energy, DTE Energy, Entergy, PSEG (Public Service Enterprise Group) and WEC Energy Group.

Westinghouse’s other two-reactor project, the AP1000s at V.C.Summer, collapsed mid-build, contributing to the company going bankrupt and almost taking down its then Japaneses parent company, Toshiba, with it. Utility executives were convicted of crimes and went to jail. But now there are even efforts to revive this financially catastrophic debacle.

The project received $12 billion total in federal loan guarantees, more than 68% of what is now being offered to likely six different utilities to build 10 more AP1000s.

The utilities rumored to be lined up to collect the dough, if not actually deliver the reactors, are Dominion Energy, DTE Energy, Entergy, PSEG (Public Service Enterprise Group) and WEC Energy Group.

Westinghouse’s other two-reactor project, the AP1000s at V.C.Summer, collapsed mid-build, contributing to the company going bankrupt and almost taking down its then Japaneses parent company, Toshiba, with it. Utility executives were convicted of crimes and went to jail. But now there are even efforts to revive this financially catastrophic debacle.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright, himself a former nuclear (and gas) executive, assures us as his nose grows ever longer, that it will all be different this time around with likely “dozens of these built going forward.”

Have small modular reactors been forgotten, given their poor economies of scale and absence of certified designs, upfront factories and commercial interest? Not according to the state governors embracing this expensive fantasy.

SMRs have turned into today’s atomic fad toy — a nuclear Labubu! Everyone wants one — or most likely more than one; some of these reactors are as small as 10 megawatts. One by itself might be able to power a smaller data center but the main thrust is to build hyperscale and AI-focused data center campuses.


This means that SMRs are actually intended to meet a need we don’t need; energy (and water) guzzling AI mega data centers, designed to enrich tech bros and impoverish the rest of us, fiscally, environmentally and morally.

But the nuclear nuttiness is by no means confined to English (or Welsh) speaking countries.

The Swedish parliament, known as the Riksdag, has just voted to reclassify uranium mines as not a nuclear facility. This allows for the radioactivity they release and the waste they create— and mainly leave behind— to be treated like any other mineral. 

There was no science behind this thinking, just a deeply undemocratic rationale, as a World Nuclear News article explained: “With uranium mines no longer regulated as nuclear facilities, uranium extraction will no longer require explicit municipal consent.” Sweden had already lifted its uranium mining ban in January 2026. Needless to say, the uranium companies are jubilant.

Just as bad, and arguably madder, the Riksdag also “voted in favor of the government’s proposal to amend Sweden’s environmental code to enable the expansion of nuclear power in more places on the coast,” the WNN article said. 

There is a new political phenomenon known as “climate hushing”, but building reactors on coastlines when, due to our failure to address climate change adequately or in time, sea-level rise is an inevitability, is climate criminality.

Linda Pentz Gunter is the founder and executive director of Beyond Nuclear. She is the author of  No To Nuclear. Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress And Provokes War , published by Pluto Press and also available on Amazon.



July 3, 2026 Posted by | spinbuster | Leave a comment

Canada’s Nuclear Energy Strategy a “Cash Cow” for the Nuclear Industry

Gordon Edwards, 30 June 2026

Ottawa – Critics from civil society organizations and academia are calling out the Nuclear Energy Strategy for Canada released by the Federal Government as a cash cow for the nuclear industry and a hubris-driven attempt to grab world “energy superpower” status based on past-Century technology.

The Strategy, released on June 22, is an ambitious agenda to spend public funds on new nuclear reactors to the detriment of readily available clean renewable sources, and to short-circuit independent oversight of nuclear projects.

The document reads like a wish list of nuclear developments, including the goal of 10 new large reactor projects in Canada by 2040. It parallels a US announcement made the next day, also promising 10 new large reactor projects and standing to benefit some of the same corporations.

Critics are calling the Canadian strategy a gross economic mistake, dangerous for human health and security, and a diversion from urgently needed action on safer, faster and cheaper energy alternatives. The federal initiative would seriously delay or derail an urgently needed energy transition, buying time for the fossil fuel sector and funneling billions of tax dollars to well-connected nuclear industry players.


“While the world moves urgently to clean renewables and storage to meet electricity needs, Canada is diverting major resources to dirty, dangerous and absurdly expensive Cold War era technology which will burden future generations,” commented J. P. Unger, director with the Greenspace Alliance of Canada’s Capital.

“The strategy reads like a public relations fantasy rather than the cost data and financial risks analysis that would attract private investment” said Dr. Susan O’Donnell, Sustainability and Environmental Studies Program, St. Thomas University.


“Lost is the memory of massive cost overruns and extensive delays that plagued the construction of the current fleet of reactors in the 1970s and ‘80s. Those decisions led to the demise of “Ontario Hydro” – death by drowning (in debt),” said Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

“Gone is the “sticker shock” that caused Ontario to cancel the last push for a nuclear “renaissance” in the early 2000s. Forgotten are the financial realities of previous international sales, where Canada swallowed huge losses (Argentina) or accepted goods like strawberries rather than actual money (Romania) in exchange for the CANDU reactors they were peddling overseas”.


The document also promises to “streamline” the regulation of nuclear projects by removing independent oversight and speeding up approvals. This presents a huge public risk when dealing with inherently dangerous technology like nuclear power.

The government is also promoting the export of home-grown CANDU reactors, something that will facilitate the proliferation of nuclear weapons, as happened when Canada gifted reactor technology to India, sparking an arms race in South Asia.

“Putting all our eggs in the nuclear exports basket completely ignores the risk of a major nuclear accident anywhere in the world, which history has shown will immediately tank enthusiasm for this technology,” said Anne Lindsey, an organizer with the Manitoba Energy Justice Coalition’s No-Nukes campaign
The pressing issue of nuclear waste is sandwich

“This strategy is not fooling anyone who is serious about the energy transition. Private money is pouring into wind, solar and energy storage developments, not nuclear energy – by far the most expensive way to generate electricity.”


“Lost is the memory of massive cost overruns and extensive delays that plagued the construction of the current fleet of reactors in the 1970s and ‘80s. Those decisions led to the demise of “Ontario Hydro” – death by drowning (in debt),” said Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

“Gone is the “sticker shock” that caused Ontario to cancel the last push for a nuclear “renaissance” in the early 2000s. Forgotten are the financial realities of previous international sales, where Canada swallowed huge losses (Argentina) or accepted goods like strawberries rather than actual money (Romania) in exchange for the CANDU reactors they were peddling overseas”.

The document also promises to “streamline” the regulation of nuclear projects by removing independent oversight and speeding up approvals. This presents a huge public risk when dealing with inherently dangerous technology like nuclear power.

The government is also promoting the export of home-grown CANDU reactors, something that will facilitate the proliferation of nuclear weapons, as happened when Canada gifted reactor technology to India, sparking an arms race in South Asia.

“Putting all our eggs in the nuclear exports basket completely ignores the risk of a major nuclear accident anywhere in the world, which history has shown will immediately tank enthusiasm for this technology,” said Anne Lindsey, an organizer with the Manitoba Energy Justice Coalition’s No-Nukes campaign

The pressing issue of nuclear waste is sandwiched into the section of the strategy on massive expansion of uranium production, with false claims and reassurances that the problem has been solved by handing the long-term management of nuclear waste over to the nuclear industry. A deep geological repository for high-level waste proposed for northwestern Ontario is taken as if already established despite major questions and opposition, including legal challenges.


Two days after the Nuclear Strategy was released the federal government announced that the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s proposed Deep Geological Repository was being considered for listing as a “Project of National Interest” under the Build Canada Act, meaning that its approval would be guaranteed.

“Designating NWMO’s DGR project as a Project of National Interest would be a betrayal of public trust”, commented Brennain Lloyd with the northern Ontario based environmental coalition Northwatch.


“The project is unprecedented, it’s still at a conceptual stage of development, the transportation will impact millions along the route, and the waste is lethal virtually forever. That project approval could be a foregone conclusion – despite the lack of evidence that the project can be done safety – is absolutely beyond reason”.

The nuclear strategy followed the discussion paper Getting Major Projects Built in Canada and the National Strategy for an Electrified Canadian Economy, both released in early May. The discussion paper announces plans to gut the impact assessment process for nuclear projects, while the electricity strategy promotes nuclear power ahead of lower cost options such as renewable energy and energy efficiency which could be brought online much more quickly.

Unlike the discussion paper and the electricity strategy, there is no public comment period on the Nuclear Energy Strategy for Canada.

July 3, 2026 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

We’re Expected To Remember October 7 But Never Ask Questions About It

29 June 26, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/were-expected-to-remember-october?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=203967336&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

The Israeli press are reporting that police documents on the security for the October 7 2023 Nova music festival were mysteriously deleted at some point in early January 2024. The Jerusalem Post reports that “it is unknown who removed them and whether copies still exist.”

A new article from the Israeli outlet YNet reports that the IDF had planned to kill an Israeli soldier who was captured by Hamas in 2006, with one document stating “Hannibal in effect.” The Hannibal Directive is an Israeli military protocol ensuring that extreme measures be taken to prevent Israelis from capture by Palestinian resistance groups, even if it means killing the Israelis.

Israel’s Channel 12 has shown footage of Israeli officers demanding that the Hannibal Directive be implemented on October 7 to prevent hostages from being taken by Hamas, with a senior officer saying “(Strike) Gaza. Break it all apart. Along with the soldiers who got abducted.”

Many Israeli soldiers and civilians are on record saying that Israeli forces fired upon their own people on October 7.

How many of the 1,195 people killed in Operation Al-Aqsa Flood were actually killed by Israeli forces? We don’t know, and we’re not allowed to know. Electronic Intifada’s Asa Winstanley has argued that the number was in the hundreds.

Did Israel deliberately leave its people undefended from an impending Hamas attack in order to advance pre-existing agendas? We don’t know, and we’re not allowed to know, but there are mountains of evidence indicating that they did.

Ask why there’s been so much violence in the middle east these last three years and you’ll be told it’s because of October 7.

Ask why October 7 happened and you’ll be called an antisemite.

Ask what specifically transpired on that day and you’ll be called a conspiracy theorist.

It’s just so crazy how often apologists for Israel and the western empire will cite October 7 as the spark that set off all these wars of far-reaching consequence, but it’s taboo to talk about exactly what happened on that day, and it’s taboo to talk about how Israel’s abuses provoked the attack.

The official mainstream position on October 7 is that Hamas killed 1,195 Israelis for no reason other than because they are evil and wanted to kill Jews, and that anyone who suggests it may have happened for actual material reasons is an antisemitic monster. Whenever anyone spouts the official mainstream position on October 7 at me I just want to make “goo goo ga ga” baby noises at them until they shut up and go away, because such people are not thinking like adults.

Everyone who’s been watching Israel’s behavior since October 7 now understands why Palestinian resistance fighters carried out October 7 in the first place. We’re expected to avert our eyes from the glaring plot holes in the official narrative and never suggest that Israel’s horrific abuses of the Palestinians may have played some role in giving rise to the attack, but after watching a live-streamed genocide month after month after horrifying month, we all know October 7 was just Israel reaping what it sowed.

And we know there is no evil these freaks are not capable of.

July 3, 2026 Posted by | Israel, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Iran trumps US on Hormuz

US President Donald Trump’s innate inability to empathise with others and lack of intelligence to foresee consequences are likely to hand Iran a long-term financial advantage and incidentally, but more importantly, threaten the treaty that has been the most productive of peace and prosperity in recent history – the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Crispin Hull,June 30, 2026, https://www.crispinhull.com.au/2026/06/30/iran-trumps-us-on-hormuz/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_source_platform=mailpoet&utm_campaign=crispin-hull-column


The tit-for-tat breaches of the US-Iran 60-day ceasefire in the past few days certainly point that way. Let me explain.

Of 193 members of the UN, 44 are landlocked. The other 149 have coastlines linking each of their coastlines to the other 148 countries’ coastlines such that they can as a practical matter drive to those other nations by boat or ship with no natural barrier or no requirement to use easily blocked roads or railways.

The UN convention took eight years to negotiate in the 1970s. It was a triumph of diplomacy and law over the assertion of power and force. It resulted in one of the greatest trade-offs in history between powerful nations, on one hand, and less powerful nations, on the other. 

In short, before the convention, powerful trading nations saw their economic interests in both the unfettered exploitation of the resources of the oceans and in having freedom of navigation across the oceans to help free trade, but ultimately they were willing to forgo the former in order to secure the latter. 


The trade-off was enormous. Rich, powerful nations thought that freedom of navigation across the world’s oceans was so important for trade and hence prosperity that they were willing to grant poor and less powerful nations significant exclusive rights to their adjacent oceans in return for that freedom.

The question posed by the negotiators was how to achieve peace and greater prosperity. The answer was negotiation and compromise.

Each nation, even the militarily and economically weak, got the exclusive rights to all the ocean’s resources, particularly fishing and mining, up to 200 nautical miles from their shore and the total sovereign rights of territorial waters up to 12 nautical miles from their shore. 

n return vessels from any nation, especially militarily strong and rich trading nations could sail anywhere on the oceans, but if they came within 12 nautical miles of another nation’s shores they had to inform that nation of their passage, and make their passage expeditious – no more lingering with menace close to other nations’ shores (gunboat diplomacy).

The arrangement facilitated trade and made the passage of warships less threatening. Good all round. 

Before that, the three-nautical-mile limit was the general unwritten rule. Within that limit, nation states could do whatever they liked with their ocean and beyond that foreign vessels could do whatever they liked – from fishing to playing wargames.

Three nautical miles was of practical importance. In the nineteenth century that was the limit of a cannon shot. It meant that a ship outside that limit could not hit land and that land-based artillery could not hit a ship.

But It also meant that the nations either side of major choke points in world navigational routes – especially Gibraltar, Malacca and Hormuz – which did not have at least a little strip of international waters in the middle had to permit free passage of all vessels. 

The latest US-Iran talks and spats over Hormuz, now puts this arrangement in jeopardy. At its narrowest Hormuz is less that 24 nautical miles wide. It means that the territorial waters of Iran to the north and Oman to the south overlap in the middle. It means any ship travelling through has to identify itself to either Iran or Oman and travel expeditiously, or it could be prevented from passage.

Under the ceasefire agreement Iran agreed to allow free passage, but the agreement was vaguely worded. Vessels seeking passage opted to travel as close to the Omani side as possible. Iran read that as a breach of the ceasefire and fired on those vessels. The US retaliated by hitting Iranian targets on the coastline.

It is clear that Iran wants to come to some arrangement with Oman to charge vessels fees in the future in return for passage rather than allowing Oman to let its side of the Strait be used for free safe passage. Whether those fees are characterised as fees for services or a toll, they will still be contrary to the convention. And once one nation starts, others will surely follow.

With drones and rockets we now have the reverse of the 19th century position. Instead of a nation worrying about ship-based weapons firing on its land, ships now have to worry about land-based weapons firing upon ships. 

It puts Iran in the box seat. With that threat in place Iran can insist on payment of a fee before guaranteeing safe passage. Iran can just use the insurance system to enforce payment. Without insurance no ship-owner will transit, and without guarantee of safe passage no insurer will grant insurance to a vessel.

All very foreseeable. But it would require thinking in a way that strategists usually think – asking the question: what would I do if I were in the enemy’s position? How would I react if I were the enemy? But Trump is incapable of viewing anything from any perspective but his own.

Arguably, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has done more in the past 40 years to prevent hostilities and to create the certainty for shipping that generates trade and prosperity than all the force and threat of force that any single nation can muster.

But Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have always preferred force to negotiation.

From the start, they asked the wrong question and got the wrong answer. Netanyahu, facing an election this October, asked how could he stay in power after the Hamas-inspired attack on Israel in October 2023 so he does not have to face questions about how he allowed such a lapse of security? Trump asked, having torn up the well-negotiated Obama deal with Iran to prevent its acquisition of nuclear weapons, how can he ensure Iran does not get those weapons.

The wrong answer they got was: war. In Netanyahu’s case it was genocidal war. If only they chose negotiation and the rule of law rather than force, the world would not be facing an even stronger Iran and an indefinite economic threat to the world that its stranglehold over Hormuz now gives it.

If the world had insisted that Israel follow the 1947 UN resolution that called for the termination of the British Mandate and the partition of historic Palestine into independent, democratic Arab and Jewish states with guaranteed rights for all citizens, there would now be peace in the Middle East.

Trump has always preferred force and the threat of force over the rule of law – domestically and internationally. What he does at home is for the Americans to worry about. After all, they voted him into office. But there is little or no redress for those affected by what he does in the world – usually foolishly and impetuously.

That is why Australia should use whatever tools it has to steer international affairs towards the rule of law and negotiation and away from the use of force.

July 3, 2026 Posted by | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Israel rebrands scheme to ethnically cleanse Gaza of Palestinians as ‘Freedom of Movement Plan’: Report

Tel Aviv is intensifying its efforts to depopulate Gaza and replace the strip’s Palestinian inhabitants with Jewish settlers

News DeskJUN 29, 2026, https://thecradle.co/articles/israel-rebrands-scheme-to-ethnically-cleanse-gaza-of-palestinians-as-freedom-of-movement-plan-report

Israel has rebranded its controversial plan to expel Palestinians from Gaza, dropping the euphemism “voluntary migration” and replacing it with “Freedom of Movement Plan,” Israeli media reported on 29 June.

Channel 13 reported that Israeli security officials and the Mossad have been instructed to stop using the term “voluntary migration,” which has drawn condemnation as a thinly veiled reference to Israel’s effort to ethnically cleanse Gaza of its Palestinian residents.

According to Channel 13, Israeli officials believe that rebranding the initiative name could make it easier for foreign governments to support the plan.

The officials “expressed optimism that the change in terminology could help shift those countries’ positions and revive the plan after earlier setbacks,” the channel added.

Israel has lobbied multiple countries to accept large numbers of Palestinians from Gaza as refugees, including South Sudan, Chad, the Congo, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Libya.

Tel Aviv has also proposed sending Palestinians to the breakaway region of Somaliland. In December, Israel became the first UN member state to recognize Somaliland’s independence from Somalia.

Last week, the new head of Israel’s National Security Council, Shmuel Ben Ezra, convened an urgent meeting with defense establishment officials to discuss the issue of “encouraging the voluntary emigration” of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.

In a meeting attended by Israeli military and Shin Bet security service officials, Mossad officials said that no countries have agreed to accept Palestinians from Gaza.

An Israeli defense official who spoke with Haaretz said that the revival of the plan to expel Palestinians from the strip may be connected to quiet agreements reached recently between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump.

The official added that the US may agree to the Israeli plan as “compensation for painful concessions” that Washington imposed on Israel as part of its deal with Iran.

Since the start of the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza in October 2023, Israel has sought to cleanse the strip of Palestinians while presenting the effort as a humanitarian initiative.

On 28 October 2023, Israeli culture magazine Mekomit published a leaked document issued by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence recommending the occupation of Gaza and total transfer of its 2.3 million inhabitants to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula.

The document recommended that Israel evacuate the Gazan population to Sinai during the war, establish tent cities and new cities in northern Sinai to accommodate the deported population, and then create a closed security zone stretching several kilometers inside Egypt.

The expelled Palestinians would not be allowed to return to any areas near the Israeli border.

The plan stated the government must launch a public relations campaign that will promote the expulsion of Palestinians in a way that does not damage Israel’s reputation.

The deportation of Palestinians from Gaza must be presented as a necessary humanitarian measure to receive international support, the document added. 

Such a deportation could be justified if it will lead to “fewer casualties among the civilian population compared to the expected number of casualties if they remain.”

Since that time, Israeli bombing has killed at least 75,000 Palestinians, the majority women and children, according to a tally by the Gaza Health Ministry. However, independent estimates of the death toll are much higher, reaching into the hundreds of thousands.

Over a million Palestinians in Gaza are displaced and living in tents after Israeli bombing destroyed their homes.

July 3, 2026 Posted by | spinbuster | Leave a comment

UK: Inside Labour Together’s secret war against Jeremy Corbyn

Documents disclosed to Corbyn expose covert efforts by Starmer’s former chief of staff to combat the British left

DECLASSIFIED UK, PAUL HOLDEN, Jessica Murray and JOHN McEVOY, 24 June 2026

  • Labour Together monitored views on antisemitism in Labour while stoking that crisis
  • Media outlet The Canary was targeted amid concerns it was trusted among Labour members 
  • John McDonnell says new information about Labour Together “makes a call for a public inquiry overwhelming”

Newly released documents reveal the inner workings of Labour Together and its role in covertly undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour party.

The documents were disclosed to Corbyn in response to a subject access request. They contain emails from Labour Together’s two key figures Morgan McSweeney and Josh Simons.

McSweeney went on to be Keir Starmer’s chief of staff while Simons became a cabinet minister until he resigned following revelations that he had hired a reputation management firm to “proactively undermine” journalistic investigations into Labour Together, McSweeney and Sir Keir Starmer. 

Simons subsequently vacated his Makerfield constituency seat for Andy Burnham.

Internal documents detail how Labour Together under McSweeney’s watch (2017-20) conducted polling of the Labour membership to monitor its views on the incidence of antisemitism in the party.

This polling allowed McSweeney and his allies to track responses to the antisemitism narrative that they were simultaneously helping to sustain by placing arguably alarmist stories in the media.

The documents further detail how The Canary media outlet was highly trusted among Labour members and identified as a political challenge because it defended Corbyn amid antisemitism accusations.

The Canary was subsequently targeted by the McSweeney-linked Stop Funding Fake News campaign with an advertiser boycott, which helped to diminish its revenue.

Weaponising antisemitism

McSweeney quietly inflamed the “antisemitism crisis” that would dog Corbyn’s leadership from at least 2018.

He did so by seeding and placing stories into the press that helped to build the narrative that Corbyn’s Labour had become riddled with antisemitism and that this flowed inexorably from a resurgent left-wing anti-imperialism. 

At the same time, the new documents show, Labour Together was paying YouGov to repeatedly poll Labour members on whether they agreed with the framing of the party as a hotbed of antisemitism.

The goal was apparently to gain a detailed guide to the opinions of the party’s membership as McSweeney sought to detach it from Corbyn’s leadership.

Although the precise cost is unknown, polling of this kind was likely to be expensive. 

It was also at this time that Labour Together unlawfully failed to declare most of its donations, amounting to over £700,000, with key funders of the organisation including hedge fund manager Martin Taylor and pro-Israel lobbyist Trevor Chinn.

‘Deliberately exaggerated’…………………………………………………..

‘Dreadful performance’…………………………………………………..

The Canary……………………………….

Stop Funding Fake News

When read against other emails and Labour Together’s polling, the briefing note points to concerns about how The Canary was undermining the antisemitism narrative that McSweeney and his allies were covertly helping to inflame in this period.

In March 2019, McSweeney and his ally Imran Ahmed would launch the Stop Funding Fake News (SFFN) campaign, which sought to demonetise The Canary by pressuring companies to withdraw advertising from its website. 

While being led by factional Labour insiders, the SFFN campaign presented itself as a project run by committed grassroots activists who were concerned with the proliferation of “fake news”.

Interestingly, the internal briefing note, which appears to have been a precursor to the SFFN campaign, made no mention of the accuracy of The Canary’s reporting.

The emphasis was on its political influence, strongly suggesting the subsequent campaign was initiated in response to The Canary’s challenge to the political ambitions of Labour Together, onto which claims of “disinformation” were grafted.

Indeed, McSweeney reportedly told Labour Together colleagues: “Destroy the Canary or the Canary destroys us”.

That campaign, alongside changes to social media algorithms, played a powerful role in circumscribing the impact and reach of The Canary by late 2019. 

By then, Labour Together’s plan to install Sir Keir Starmer as the leader of the Labour Party was well-advanced.

McSweeney and Labour Together’s fixation on polling would carry over the organisation while led by Josh Simons (2022 – 2024).

These intense polling efforts apparently also helped the organisation to create caricatures of target voters for the Labour party which were at once crude, bizarre, and insulting.

A version of the “Workington Man” curated by Labour Together was 62 years old, white, “absolutely despised Jeremy Corbyn”, “hates Europe and European culture”, drives an “Audi A4”, and “thinks South Asians who live nearby are terrible drivers”…………………………………………..

Labour Together is now called ThinkLabour. Think Labour, Josh Simons, Imran Ahmed and Morgan McSweeney were asked to comment.


Paul Holden is a journalist for Shadow World Investigations and author of the book The Fraud: Keir Starmer, Morgan McSweeney and the Crisis of British Democracy. Between 2020 and 2021, Holden worked directly with the Zondo Commission to assist its investigations into complex money laundering schemes used to hide and dissipate state capture loot in South Africa. https://www.declassifieduk.org/inside-labour-togethers-secret-battle-against-jeremy-corbyn/

July 3, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Jeffrey Sachs: The Greater Israel Project is Collapsing

 June 27, 2026, https://scheerpost.com/2026/06/27/jeffrey-sachs-the-greater-israel-project-is-collapsing/

For further reading, the interview references the article “Stop ‘Greater Israel’ to Make Peace”: In which Jeffrey Sachs and Sybil Fares argue that the ideology of “Greater Israel” has become the driving force behind decades of conflict across the Middle East, describing it as an expansionist doctrine that continues to fuel war rather than security.

Sachs and Fares argue that lasting peace in the Middle East requires rejecting the ideology of “Greater Israel,” which they contend has driven decades of conflict in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and, most recently, Iran. The authors claim that Israeli expansionism—backed by both secular nationalists and religious extremists, and enabled by unwavering U.S. political support—has repeatedly fueled wars that have devastated the region while ultimately undermining Israel’s own security and international standing. They maintain that the recent U.S.-Iran ceasefire demonstrates diplomacy is more effective than military force and argue that a durable peace depends on ending the war in Gaza, halting Israeli occupation and expansion, withdrawing from neighboring territories, and establishing an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel within the 1967 borders.

The authors highlight what they characterize as increasingly hardline rhetoric among Israel’s leadership, writing that the ideology is rooted in “secular hardliners like Netanyahu who say that Israel must control all the land from the river to the sea to be safe, and damn the eight million Palestinians in the way.” They also point to statements by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who has declared there is “no such thing as a Palestinian” and vowed that Israel “won’t commit suicide to make them happy” by relinquishing military control of the West Bank, Gaza, or occupied territory in Lebanon and Syria. Sachs and Fares contend that these views help explain continued military action despite diplomatic breakthroughs, arguing that “Greater Israel” advocates view peace itself as a setback. As evidence, they note that “even after the deal was sealed, Israel has continued to bomb Lebanon,” arguing that the ideology remains a major obstacle to a lasting regional peace.

Click the Image Below [on original]to Read the Full Article

July 3, 2026 Posted by | Israel, politics | Leave a comment

More issues reported during manufacture of Sizewell C’s reactor vessels than Hinkley Point C’s

01 Jul, 2026 By Tom Pashby, https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/more-issues-reported-during-manufacture-of-sizewell-cs-reactor-vessels-than-hinkley-point-cs-01-07-2026/

“Quality issues” relating to the manufacture of the reactor pressure vessels (RPVs) for Sizewell C have been identified by the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) during an inspection by the regulator.

The number of “non-conformance reports” has increased at Framatome St Marcel (FSM) – the French manufacturer of the RPVs – compared to when it was manufacturing the RPVs for Hinkley Point C.

Sizewell C and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) have regularly highlighted how Sizewell C will be delivered more efficiently than Hinkley Point C because of how much design work can be copied over.

The Sizewell C – Inspection ID: 54200 report from the ONR, which was carried out in April 2026 and published on 22 June, reported that “manufacturing quality issues” had been identified at FSM.

The ONR stressed the importance of the RPV in its report. “The reactor pressure vessel (RPV) is manufactured by Framatome (manufacturer of nuclear equipment based in France),” it said.

“The RPV is a nuclear safety class 1 component which forms part of the primary circuit. It has been categorised as a high integrity component (HIC) within the SZC safety case.

“Therefore, the consequences of failure during operation cannot be tolerated and a highest reliability claim is made on the structural integrity of the RPV.”

The aim of the ONR’s inspection was for it to “make an informed judgement on the adequacy of SZC’s specification, control and oversight of RPV manufacture at FSM in compliance with LC12 and LC19.”

LC12 means License Condition 12, and required that “the licensee (meaning Sizewell C) shall make and implement adequate arrangements to ensure that only suitably qualified and experienced persons perform any duties which may affect the safety of operations on the site or any other duties assigned by or under these conditions or any arrangements required under these conditions.”

Meanwhile, LC19 requires that “where the licensee proposes to construct or install any new plant which may affect safety the licensee shall make and implement adequate arrangements to control the construction or installation.”

July 3, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Regulator says additional scrutiny was not required over Hinkley Point C bullying concerns

26 Jun, 2026 By Tom Pashby

An MP’s claim that the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) increased
scrutiny of Hinkley Point C over bullying allegations has been contested by
the regulator, NCE understands.

Liberal Democrat MP for Tiverton and
Minehead Rachel Gilmour raised concerns about bullying at Hinkley Point C
(HPC) during the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) evidence
session on Sizewell C on 8 June. MPs challenged senior representatives of
Sizewell C on the project’s commitment to transparency around possible
future cost overruns.

Representatives also provided new details on the
infrastructure being built at the site. During the session Gilmour said:
“I want to ask about bullying […] my constituency includes Hinkley A,
Hinkley B and Hinkley C. Once elected, I was inundated with whistleblowers
and people who have great concerns about the bullying culture at Hinkley C,
to such an extent that I had a meeting with Simone Rossi, the chief
executive of EDF Europe, and the ONR.

“The ONR felt that the situation
was so bad that they had to put in extra scrutiny. I was joined by
WhistleblowersUK in that.” However, NCE understands that it is ONR’s
position that no additional regulatory measures or scrutiny have been
required at Hinkley Point C for any bullying or harassment issues.

 New Civil Engineer 26th June 2026,
https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/regulator-says-additional-scrutiny-was-not-required-over-hinkley-point-c-bullying-concerns-26-06-2026/

July 3, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment