Safety concerns persist at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP)
Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) lost its immediate
back-up 750 kV power supply to the reactor units for several hours during
the week of 15 January.
This was the latest incident underlining persistent
nuclear safety and security risks at the site, director general Rafael
Mariano Grossi of the International Atomic Energy Agency said on 19 January
during its Update 207 report. Thursday’s failure of two of the ZNPP’s
back-up power electrical transformers showed the continuing vulnerability
in the availability of external power, which the plant needs to cool its
six reactors and for other essential nuclear safety and security functions.
Modern Power Systems 30th Jan 2024
https://www.modernpowersystems.com/news/newssafety-concerns-persist-at-znpp-iaea-update-11474827
The Future of Pickering Nuclear Generating Station and Its Impacts on Ontario
News Networl Ledger ,By James Murray, January 30 2024
THUNDER BAY – POLITICS – The Ontario government has recently announced its support for Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) plan to refurbish the “B” units (units 5-8) of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station. ………………………………………………… Energy Minister Todd Smith emphasized the role of this refurbishment in attracting global business, noting that it would help Ontario compete for significant investments……………………………………………………..
Concerns and Challenges
However, this announcement has also raised concerns. Groups like Northwatch have criticized the plan for its potential environmental impact, particularly regarding the generation of highly radioactive waste. Brennain Lloyd, a spokesperson for Northwatch, expressed concerns about the absence of a long-term plan for managing this waste.
“Rebuilding the four aging reactors to allow an additional 30 years of operation will cost the province’s ratepayers many billion dollars – the Minister refused to estimate the total cost – and will add to the growing stockpile of highly radioactive nuclear fuel waste and refurbishment wastes,” states Northwatch.
“The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO), a consortium of nuclear utilities led by Ontario Power Generation, has been working on a plan to construct a deep geological repository for Canada’s reactor fuel wastes for over twenty years, but is still at the “concept” stage and has yet to secure a site for the proposed used fuel processing facility and the underground complex of tunnels where the waste would be placed”.
“There was not a single word of acknowledgement that this refurbishment will generate large volumes of high-level radioactive waste which will require care and containment into the far, far future. The Mayor of Pickering professed that his municipality is a willing host for the refurbishment project, but there is no willing host for the wastes it will generate,” commented Brennain Lloyd, a spokesperson with the northern Ontario based environmental coalition Northwatch.
The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is currently investigating potential sites for a deep geological repository to store Canada’s reactor fuel wastes. The additional waste from the refurbished Pickering reactors complicates this plan, potentially requiring a reassessment of the NWMO’s project and its impacts.
Residents along the transportation routes and near the proposed repository sites are worried about radiation exposure, transportation accidents, and environmental releases from the processing facility and underground storage.
Regulatory Oversight and Future Steps
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) will oversee the regulatory approval process for the refurbishment, ensuring a rigorous and transparent review. The project will only proceed if it aligns with the best interests of Ontario and its ratepayers.
……………. The decision to move forward with this project will have long-lasting implications for the province, both in terms of its energy landscape and its environmental footprint. https://www.netnewsledger.com/2024/01/30/the-future-of-pickering-nuclear-generating-station-and-its-impacts-on-ontario/
The provisional measures of the International Court of Justice

by Thierry Meyssan, VOLTAIRE NETWORK | PARIS (FRANCE) | 30 JANUARY 2024, Translation
Roger Lagassé
The International Court of Justice has just taken provisional measures to protect the Gazan population from possible genocide. This decision is nothing new, but provides legal support for the political position of the United States. This decision in no way prejudges the judgment on the merits, which would condemn Israel if it were made, but probably never will be. International justice is still in its infancy, and is still struggling to apply the law.
The International Court of Justice, presided over by former U.S. State Department official Joan Donoghue, has issued a protective order in the case between South Africa and Israel. Unsurprisingly, the Court took exactly the same decision as the United States: Israel must do everything in its power to prevent genocide, while continuing its war against Hamas.
INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE IS STILL IN ITS INFANCY
The Court is an embryo of international justice within the United Nations. It replaces the Permanent Court of International Justice, which was created in 1922 within the League of Nations. The system is only a century old. Its aim is to ensure that each State applies the commitments it has entered into. However, since 1942, the Anglo-Saxons, who accepted this court in 1945, have been seeking not to apply international law, but to establish their governance over the world. When they signed the Atlantic Charter, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and US President Franklin D. Roosevelt asserted, in the name of their states, that they alone should decide disputes between states in the post-war world. This was the original cause of the Cold War and today’s conflicts.
Consequently, contrary to the image we have of it, the International Court of Justice is not a finished court, but a battlefield where the Anglo-Saxon unipolar project of the world confronts the multipolar project of most other states. This is how we should interpret the Gaza massacre order.
The only means of pressure on governments available to the Court is not an army, but public opinion in each country. No government accepts the idea of being presented to its people as a criminal. It is therefore particularly important to understand the Court’s decisions.
MAGISTRATES HAVE TO SAY WHAT’S RIGHT, BUT THEY’RE NOT ALL THAT INDEPENDENT
The Court’s fifteen permanent magistrates are nominated by their own governments and elected by all. They must use legal reasoning to justify their decisions. However, their decisions generally reflect their national prejudices. It is very rare for judges chosen by their own government to rule against it. Two additional magistrates are appointed by the two parties to the conflict. They come to defend their country and look for legal arguments to back up their case……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
First of all, no one has asked the Court to judge the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and international law has nothing to do with politics. Secondly, South Africa was careful not to accuse Israel of genocidal intent, but it did cite enough genocidal statements by Israeli leaders to call for provisional measures, an argument which the Israeli judge considered valid. Finally, let’s come to the last point: the absence of Hamas from the proceedings cannot authorize Israel to allow genocide to be perpetrated…………………………………………………….
The Court did not rule on South Africa’s other demands, which could not be dealt with as a matter of urgency, but exclusively on the merits: reparation measures for Palestinian victims and the condemnation by Israel of individuals guilty of genocide. Above all, it did not say that “the Israeli State must immediately suspend its military operations in and against Gaza”……………………………………………………………
PROVISIONAL ORDER DOES NOT PREJUDGE JUDGMENT ON THE MERITS
The Court’s order is binding not only on Israel and South Africa, but also on the 151 other States that have signed the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Depending on their situation, each of them is obliged to associate itself with the provisional measures. Some could interpret this as justifying an embargo on all armaments, or prohibiting their dual nationals from taking part in this potentially genocidal war.
………………………………………… there is already a case in the Northern California District Court between Defense for Children International and Joe Biden, Antony Blinken and Lloyd Austin, and another in London between Global Legal Action Network and the British government. Both are based on the premise that supplying arms to Israel at this time is participation in the massacre in Gaza. They now have a chance to succeed.
It could also be brought before the International Criminal Court, which could be called upon to judge certain Israeli leaders. Several countries have already referred the case to the Court.
Moreover, this order is only precautionary until the Court has ruled on the merits of the case. However, we must not dream: the Court may shy away and declare itself incompetent. In that case, there will never be a ruling on the merits of the case, and the protective measures will lapse.
This is the most likely outcome. Yet the Court itself has already dismissed the argument that South Africa’s previous approaches to Israel would not have given it time to respond. It could still nitpick over “genocidal intent”. In the event of the complaint being deemed inadmissible. The massacre could resume.
We must not delude ourselves about the International Court of Justice. It represents a major step towards international law, but is still a long way off. https://www.voltairenet.org/article220359.html
NATO chief says more war is way to secure lasting peace in Ukraine
30 Jan 2024 https://www.sott.net/article/488375-NATO-chief-says-more-war-is-way-to-secure-lasting-peace-in-Ukraine
More weapons and ammunition to Kiev is the “path to peace,” according to the bloc’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg
Any negotiations between Moscow and Kiev about a peace agreement are “inextricably” linked to the situation on the battlefield, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has stated, insisting that the bloc must send even more military aid to Kiev.
Speaking in Washington at a joint press conference with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Stoltenberg said that aid to Ukraine is“not charity”but is an“investment into our own security.”
He also shared his view that, in order to achieve a lasting peace in Ukraine, the West needs to ramp up its support for Kiev and send it more weapons and ammunition, proclaiming that “weapons to Ukraine is the path to peace
The comments come as the future of Western aid to Ukraine looks increasingly uncertain, with many of Kiev’s backers running out of resources to help the country. The Ukrainian leadership is also reportedly losing hope of success against Russia, without Western support.
Stoltenberg also argued that a Ukrainian surrender could not be considered a “just peace,” which, he prescribed, can only be reached by having Russian President Vladimir Putin “realize that he will not get what he wants on the battlefield.”
Comment: The phrase that aid to Ukraine is “not charity” but is an “investment into our own security is not original. Stoltenberg used at the recent WEF meeting and just a few days ago, US senator,Jeanne Shaheen, in the Boston Globe wrote:
America’s targeted assistance to Ukraine is not charity, nor is it a blank check. It is a strategic investment with oversight that bolsters US deterrence, protects democracies across Europe, and strengthens the US industrial base — including to contractors in New England.
The US senator is a member of the CFR and in the above, it is clear that what she writes above is from the same script as Stoltenberg and Blinken. It is equally clear that none of them are at all interested in what happens to Ukraine as a country or what happens to ordinary Ukrainians. To them it is a war against Russia because they see it to be a real threat to their hegemonic ‘rules based’ order. They argue by saying that allocating more money to Ukraine is also good for the US as the money in truth gets funnelled to the American military industrial complex, where many of them get serious ‘donations’.
Blinken nonetheless admitted during their press conference that the lack of foreign military aid to Kiev, especially now that Washington has run out of the military assistance it has been providing to it, has put Ukraine in a tough spot on the battlefield.
The Secretary of State reiterated the White House’s calls on Republican lawmakers in Congress to approve Joe Biden’s $60-billion additional military aid package for Kiev, which has been stuck in the House of Representatives for several months now. The GOP has refused to greenlight the bill unless Biden agrees to revise and tighten the US’ border-control laws.
Blinken stressed that it is “vital” that Congress pass the president’s supplemental budget request in order to “ensure that Ukraine knows success and Russia knows strategic failure,” noting that without US assistance, “everything that Ukrainians achieved … will be in jeopardy.“
Moscow, meanwhile, has repeatedly denounced Western military support to Ukraine, stressing that “pumping” the country with more weapons and ammunition has only served to prolong the fighting and cause more bloodshed without affecting the inevitable outcome of the conflict.
Comment: So everything that Ukrainians achieved …will be in jeopardy. He doesn’t mention what Ukraine achieved yet he likely isn’t referring to the total destruction of Ukraine, the loss of 1 – 1.5 million men, the flight abroad of 10-15 million Ukrainians and the loss of 20% of Ukrainian territory…so far, to mention a few things.
He is most likely referring to what US Senator Lindsey Graham said when he visited Kiev to reassure Zelensky that “the Ukraine war was the best money the US ever spent because we get to kill Russians!“.
Neck Deep in the Big Media Muddy
This is madness. But in the context of mainstream reportage, this is nothing more than Israel defending itself
By Robert C. Koehler, http://commonwonders.com/neck-deep-in-the-big-muddy/ 31 Jan 24
Read the news, hup, two, three, four!
“Top United States officials prodded Israel on Monday to do more to protect civilians in the Gaza Strip . . .”
Thus began a recent, and oh so typical, piece of war reportage. It was purveyed by the New York Times but it’s something you find in almost any mainstream source. The essence of the news is that the U.S. will continue to support Israel’s right to “defend itself” by bombing the crap out of Gaza and will keep feeding it the military equipment necessary to do so, but it sternly urges Israel to try not to kill too many babies or other civilians. Get it? War must be — and is, when we wage it — a moral undertaking.
And Yoav Gallant, Israeli defense minister — the guy who once declared that Palestinians are “human animals” — assured the world: “Unlike our enemies, we are defending our values, and we operate according to international law. The IDF is operating to minimize the harm to civilian populations.”
Yeah, this is the news! Context-free, reality-free. War is difficult, but war is necessary. When I slog through the verbiage, I can’t help but hear Pete Seeger singing: ‘We’re waist deep — we’re neck deep — in the Big Muddy, and the big fool says to push on.”
Missing from this simplistic, “objective” reportage is any awareness that you cannot kill your way to peace, let alone that humanity is in mortal danger of destroying itself unless we learn to evolve — unless we learn what we already know (except at the highest levels of power). Much of this knowledge is remarkably obvious, indeed, so obvious you’d think the New York Times and other such news outlets would be aware of it and work it into the context of their war reportage.
For instance: “Israel can never have security until Palestinians have security.”
Such a clear, basic truth is almost never part of the mainstream news . . . the Big Muddy. The words are those of Daniel Levy, former Israeli peace negotiator in the governments of Ehud Barak and Yitzhak Rabin, and current president of the U.S. Middle East Project, in an Al-Jazeera interview.
Levy also said: “I hope one day Palestinians, of course, but also Jewish Israelis experience the idea of how liberating it can be to no longer be an oppressor — because when you are oppressing people you know in the back of your mind that you are generating a desire for retribution.”
The point here is not that there’s a simple, quick-and-easy path to peace in any global conflict, but rather that there are obvious, horrific ways to prolong — eternalize — a conflict. In our Big Muddy reportage, the best thing that can happen in a conflict is that it gets “resolved,” sort of, and the violence temporarily stops. You know, a ceasefire is called. What could be better than a ceasefire? This would give surviving Gaza residents a chance to dig corpses out of the rubble in peace. What more could they ask?
Oh God. “Resolving” a conflict generally leaves the opposing sides separate from one another and still in possession of their grievances, or still enduring the hell that they are forced to live in. I would say that creating real peace is a never-ending journey, but can only happen when conflicts aren’t so much resolved as transcended. Another word for this is evolution.
What would that mean with regard to Israel and its ongoing — insane — assault on Palestine? The siege has so far resulted in over 26,000 deaths in Gaza and over 64,000 people injured, not to mention virtually everyone there suffering from hunger, lacking access to clean water, vulnerable to disease. This is madness. But in the context of mainstream reportage, this is nothing more than Israel defending itself — you know, against Hamas, a terrorist organization. Legitimate governments wage war, according to the Big Muddy. Only fringe organizations commit terrorism. Oh, by the way, committing genocide is a war crime, so you shouldn’t do it.
What I’m trying to say here is that war is nothing, nothing, nothing but terrorism and has to be stopped before any sane look at what to do next can even begin. In regard to Israel and Palestine, what might that mean? Certainly it means an end to Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank — and probably a one-state solution in which everyone has fully equal rights, which requires the creation of a society that is trans-Zionist.
As an American, I can’t think about this without deeply, painfully reflecting on my own country’s genocidal actions against the land’s original occupants and the kidnapping and enslavement of Africans. Our painfully slow process of political and social evolution is hardly finished, but we have begun creating a trans-racist society — yes, much to the distress of racist true believers. But there have been changes, which in an earlier period were probably unimaginable.
My point is not to dwell solely on the wrongs of this history, but to acknowledge that history evolves, that social structures change. While war and other forms of violence may be part of the change, lasting solutions evolve nonviolently.
I return to the words of Daniel Levy, who acknowledges, speaking of the war on Palestine: “Things look incredibly bleak.
“I don’t want to spread false optimism,” he goes on, “but perhaps this disruptive moment, where everything has been turned on its head, will cause people to stare into the abyss. Israel has proved how insecure it is when it continues down this path. The hope is that as we stare into the abyss, we can turn this around. That’s not going to happen quickly.”
But it can happen. The future is ours to create, even if we’re neck deep in the Big Muddy.
States defunding UNRWA may be violating genocide convention: expert
https://www.newarab.com/news/gaza-defunding-unrwa-may-be-violating-genocide-convention 31 Jan 24
A number of countries – including Australia, Britain, Finland, Germany and Italy – on Saturday followed the lead of the United States in pausing UNRWA funding.
A UN expert warned Sunday that countries defunding the UN agency for Palestinian refugees were breaching a court order to provide effective aid inGazaand could be violating the international genocide convention.
A number of donor countries – including Australia, Britain, Finland, Germany and Italy – on Saturday followed the lead of the United Statesinsuspending additional funding toUNRWA (UN Relief & Works Agency).
That came after Israel alleged that several of the UN agency’s staff members were involved in Hamas’s 7 October attack. The Israeli allegations were based on confessions obtained in interrogations and have not been independently investigated. Israel has killed more than 150 UNRWA staff in Gaza since the start of its latest offensive on Gaza.
Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, warned that the decision topause funding to UNRWA “overtly defies” the order by the International Court of Justice to allow effective humanitarian assistance” to reach Gazans.
“This will entail legal responsibilities – or the demise of the (international) legal system,” she wrote on X, formerly Twitter.
UNRWA reacted to the allegations by firing several staff and promising a thorough investigation into the unspecified claims, but Israel has nonetheless vowed to stop the agency’s work in Gaza after the war.
The row between Israel and UNRWA follows the UN’s International Court of Justice ruling on Friday that Israel must prevent possible acts of genocide in the conflict and allow more aid into Gaza.
Albanese, who is an independent expert appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, but who does not speak on behalf of the United Nations, highlighted the timing of the defunding decisions in a separate post on X:
“The day after ICJ concluded that Israel is plausibly committing genocide in Gaza, some states decided to defund UNRWA. By doing so, countries are collectively punishing millions of Palestinians at the most critical time, and most likely violating their obligations under the Genocide Convention.”
Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel resulted in about 1,140 deaths, according to an AFP tally of official figures. Emerging evidence indicates that both Palestinian militants and Israel were responsible for civilian deaths.
Militants also seized about 250 hostages and Israel says around 132 of them remain in Gaza, including the bodies of at least 28 dead captives.
Israel’s ensuing military offensive has killed at least 26,422 people, most of them women and children, in Gaza, according to the health ministry in the coastal enclave.
Many challenges stand in the way of a ‘nuclear power renaissance’.

COMMENT Isn’t “challenge” a lovely word? Conjures up pictures of a tennis match, or some exciting venture.
It’s the word they use when they mean something more like “overwhelming frightening costs” ” “worrying safety and proliferation risks”, awful unsolved problem of toxic wastes”
Is this nuclear power’s moment? Many challenges stand in the way of a
‘nuclear power renaissance’. The nuclear power industry is receiving a
lot of attention recently thanks in part to new technological advancements.
That’s excited venture capital groups and private investors, such as Bill
Gates and OpenAI’s Sam Altman. But the industry is also known for its
boom-and-bust cycles. The FT’s US energy editor Jamie Smyth explains
there are many challenges that lie ahead for an industry, which has long
been plagued by controversy.
FT 31st Jan 2024
https://www.ft.com/content/5550dd4f-6399-447d-a220-6132dac19697
MP calls for vote on Holderness nuclear site which local petition brands ‘hazardous waste dumping ground’
Graham Stuart has called for a public vote on whether a nuclear waste site
should be built in Holderness amid opposition from some living in the area.
‘Beverley and Holderness ‘ MP said Nuclear Waste Services, the Government
Agency which unveiled the waste site proposals last week, should be forced
to make their case directly to the public. Joanne Turner, whose Change.org
petition calls for the site to be rejected, said the beautiful south
Holderness area should not be turned into a dumping ground for hazardous
waste.
Hull Daily Mail 31st Jan 2024
2
TODAY. What’s the connection between the UK Post Office scandal and Soviet Lt. Col. Stanislav Petrov?

Well, nothing really. But we need to remember what Stanislav Petrov did. On September 26, 1983, Petrov, in charge of the Soviet Union’s nuclear missile system, received the computer screen order to “Launch”. The system reported that a total of five Minuteman ICBMs had been launched by the USA. Soviet nuclear doctrine called for a full nuclear retaliation. Petrov had to make an instant decision. But he feared that it was a false alarm. He disobeyed the order.
The outcome proved that Petrov was correct, and nuclear armageddon was avoided.
So, faulty technology caused a terrible danger – and one man had the integrity to doubt the digital message, and to act on his doubt.
Contrast this with the actions of Post Office and Fujitsu authorities who covered up and lied about the faulty Horizon IT system. That resulted in 900 false convictions, 4 suicides, and hundreds, perhaps thousands, of lives ruined.
In both cases, it was a failure of digital technology.
Now, as we plunge in to the Age of Artificial Intelligence, there is the frightening potential for more digital failures, – and worse, for human error, or even malevolence, in setting up AI programmes.
We need, as never before, people like Stanislav Petrov – people with the scepticism and the integrity - to not blindly comply with technocratic wizardry. The very recent, and still ongoing British Post Office scandal is a worrying reminder of the prevailing view about “not rocking the boat”. The boat may be sinking.
A Radically Different World Since Assange’s Indictment
Biden would have hell to pay from the DNC and the C.I.A. if he dropped the case.
Still, he’s probably not so foolish to want a shackled journalist showing up on U.S. shores to stand trial in the midst of his re-election campaign.
Leniency towards Assange would win back some respect the United States has lost, which would mean it couldn’t suffer another blow and had finally woken to the new world it inhabits. Crushing him would be yet another step towards its demise.
The Assange case is a centerpiece of an emerging, global challenge to U.S. dominance that did not exist in 2010 when the U.S. began its legal pursuit of the publisher, says Joe Lauria.
By Joe Lauria, Consortium News, 29 Jan 24
The world has changed dramatically since the United States began its legal pursuit of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, bringing new risks to the U.S. if it persists in pursuing him to the end.
The geo-strategic situation and the state of the media are today nearly unrecognizable from 2010, when the U.S. empaneled a grand jury to indict Assange. Conditions have changed significantly since even 2019, when he was dragged from the embassy and the indictment was unveiled.
The United States is in the midst of suffering its third major, strategic defeat since the process against Assange began, bringing potentially significant consequences for the U.S., the world and possibly Assange.
In just the past three years, the United States has experienced humiliating defeats in Afghanistan, Ukraine, and now Gaza.
Afghanistan hurt Americans’ sensitivities about their precious “prestige,” which American elites care so much about. The rest of the world takes it into its geo-strategic calculations.
The U.S. instigation of war in Ukraine, intended to weaken Russia and bring down its government, has instead turned into a debacle for the United States and Europe of world historical proportions.
A new commercial, financial and diplomatic system has emerged in opposition to the U.S.-dominated West. This had been slowly developing but was accelerated by Washington’s provocation in Ukraine. It is a way more serious problem for the United States than the mere loss of “prestige.”
Add to this the worldwide disapproval and condemnation the U.S. is facing for its blatant complicity in Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza during a war the U.S. and Israel are not winning. The result is U.S. legitimacy has significantly weakened around the world. And at home.
Is this the moment to bring a journalist to the United States in chains to stand trial for publishing truthful material that exposed earlier crimes by the United States?
The risks of doing so at this moment — a very different moment from 2010 — are serious for the U.S, at home and abroad. Domestically the Bill of Rights is at risk. Internationally the bully is losing credibility.
This is seen in the forthrightness of some world leaders, particularly in Latin America, who in the spirit of this new, non-U.S. world, have confronted the United States on its treatment of Assange and have demanded his release.
The established media, which by definition runs cover for the U.S. to commit crimes and abuses wherever its interests are challenged, is suffering its own precipitous loss of legitimacy. The spectacular growth of both social and independent media’s influence since 2010 has helped create a worldwide movement in defense of Assange and the basic principle of a free press.
The question is how aware is the Biden administration of this new world and how will it react?
At a certain point U.S. hubris and intransigence would seem to be headed for collapse. But until then, Washington will no doubt double down in denial and in vengeance. It’s not giving up in Ukraine nor in Gaza — the neocon grip on power in Washington over the realists remains. Will the extremists remain ascendant on Assange too?
In December 2010, Vice President Joe Biden told the television news show Meet the Press that the Obama administration could only indict Assange if they caught him red-handed stealing government secrets and not receiving them passively as a journalist. The Obama administration concluded he was acting as a journalist, even if they refused to call him one, and didn’t indict him.
So what changed for Biden? Why does he persist in this prosecution begun by his mortal enemy Donald Trump and Trump’s C.I.A. director, Mike Pompeo?
The indictment until today still only deals with events in 2010. Nothing has changed legally. But everything changed politically for President Biden, the head of the Democratic Party, with the 2016 DNC leaks, and the C.I.A. Vault 7 releases the following year.
Biden would have hell to pay from the DNC and the C.I.A. if he dropped the case.
Still, he’s probably not so foolish to want a shackled journalist showing up on U.S. shores to stand trial in the midst of his re-election campaign. The High Court here in London has been good at dragging things out and could easily do so until after November.
The Assange case is a centerpiece of this global challenge to U.S. dominance that did not exist in 2010.
To the extent that U.S. leaders are aware of what is happening to U.S. standing in the world, their propensity is to lash out with the only argument they have left – lethal force. In Assange’s case it is legal force, with lethal consequences.
Leniency towards Assange would win back some respect the United States has lost, which would mean it couldn’t suffer another blow and had finally woken to the new world it inhabits. Crushing him would be yet another step towards its demise.
The U.S. does not really need him. It has enough blood on its hands.
This is the text of an address Joe Lauria made by video on Monday to a conference in Sydney, Australia.
Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette, the London Daily Mail and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London, a financial reporter for Bloomberg News and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times. He is the author of two books, A Political Odyssey, with Sen. Mike Gravel, foreword by Daniel Ellsberg; and How I Lost By Hillary Clinton, foreword by Julian Assange. He can be reached at joelauria@consortiumnews.com and followed on Twitter @unjoe
Military-Intelligence Corruption Information Center.

WANT TO KNOW INFO, 31 Jan 24
Over the last 20+ years, WantToKnow.info has summarized over a thousand news articles on deep corruption within our military and intelligence systems. Going deeper, we have gathered a comprehensive collection of verifiable resources, videos, books, and declassified government documents. In this information center, we’ll present a sobering investigation into the US war machine: what it is, who benefits, and who pays the price. The true impacts of US military-intelligence activities in countries all over the world are examined, from World War II to our present moment in time.
Conflict, war, and perceived national security threats provide a common focus for military and CIA partnership. Military activity is heavily informed by CIA intelligence, and public support for this activity is secured by pro-war narratives and voices flooding our media system. What is really going on behind closed doors and on the battlefields is rarely covered in the news, if only for a brief glimpse.
The mainstream press often downplays how ineffective, harmful, and wasteful our current national security strategy is. Over the past century, the CIA’s covert actions have led to countless deaths, human rights abuses, and the undemocratic toppling of numerous foreign governments. While entrenched bureaucracy may be responsible for some of these government agency failings, deeper covert actions within our government have led to chaos and suffering in America and all over the world. Major cover-ups and horrific crimes within the military-intelligence complex continue to remain largely hidden from public awareness.
What is presented in this information center will likely be challenging, sad, and shocking for those who want to know. Yet real information can be empowering. It helps us understand the root causes of human and environmental suffering: the money, players, and belief systems that drive the machine. It invites us to question authority in healthy ways, across political differences. Yet most importantly, challenging information can paradoxically remind us of the greater good. It is the courage of the people and the love for the common good that bring these injustices to light—fueling open dialogue and constructive action.
Unaccountable Military Spending
The military keeps a lot of little things secret. Most people know the phrase “follow the money.” Unfortunately, following the money is impossible when it comes to keeping track of the flow of US taxpayer dollars at the Pentagon. The US military has consistently failed to keep track of the money it spends. As the defense budget speeds towards $1 trillion, the Pentagon failed an independent audit of its accounting systems for the sixth consecutive year in 2023.
In 2022, the Pentagon couldn’t properly account for 61% of its $3.5 trillion in assets. That figure increased in 2023, with the department insufficiently documenting 63% of its now $3.8 trillion in assets. We’ve covered the shocking extent of military waste and trillions missing from US DoD accounts since 2003, as documented here.
In 2021, President Joe Biden declared that the United States was “not at war” for the first time in 20 years. However, this is far from the case. Even members of Congress are uninformed about the presence of US military forces in countries all over the world. This is partly due to the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force enacted in 2001, which allows for secret operations primarily conducted by the CIA. Investigations have indicated that the United States has pumped millions into fighting more than a dozen “secret wars” over the last two decades. Since 2008, the US has supported at least nine coups in African countries, with a vast network of military bases scattered across the continent.
Going deeper, military black budgets are even more challenging to calculate. Military black budgets fund classified government programs, psychological operations, special forces operations, occult shoulder patches created for top secret programs, and other clandestine military activities. Former intelligence contractor and NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed a vast network of over a dozen spy agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community, funded by a $52.6 billion “black budget” for fiscal 2013. When the US Space Force was created in 2019, an investigation by Forbes revealed how much of the US Air Force budget was shrouded in secrecy, where “literally hundreds of line items in the proposed budget” were classified.
Arms Industry Corruption
Once weapons were manufactured to fight wars. Now wars are manufactured to sell weapons.
— Arundhati Roy
The US dominates the global arms sales industry. Data released in 2023 indicates that the U.S. sold weapons to nearly 60 percent of the world’s authoritarian nations in 2022. Year after year, half of the Pentagon budget doesn’t go to those fighting on the battlegrounds. It goes to corporate weapons contractors who profit lavishly from war. As one defense executive flat-out told Reuters at Europe’s biggest arms fair, “war is good for business.”
From the Middle East, Ukraine, China, Saudi Arabia, and to Nigeria, US arms sales have done little to promote stability and democracy in geopolitically impacted regions. Read an incredibly comprehensive report by The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, which illustrates how US arms sales have only fueled unnecessary conflict and war.
Powerful banks like JP Morgan Chase and asset management firms like Blackrock and Vanguard have emerged as major players in the business of war. Some of the world’s biggest banks fund the deadly cluster bomb trade, even as more than 100 countries have banned the unethical use of cluster bombs.
These powerful financial entities are top shareholders of weapons manufacturers like Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Together, the arms industry and the elite financial sector receive more federal money than most federal agencies. In 2022, Lockheed Martin received $106 from the average taxpayer, which is four times more than what taxpayers spent on primary and secondary education. Few Americans would support these war profiteers if they knew where their tax money was going.
Roughly two-thirds of current conflicts — 34 out of 46 — involve one or more parties armed by the United States. In some cases U.S. arms sales to combatants in these wars are modest, while in others they play a major role in fueling and sustaining the conflict. Of the U.S.-supplied nations at war, 15 received $50 million or more worth of U.S. arms between 2017 and 2021. This contradicts the longstanding argument that U.S. arms routinely promote stability and deter conflict. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..more https://www.wanttoknow.info/military-intelligence-corruption-information
Nuclear Waste: Changing Conditions May Affect Future Management of Contamination Deposited Abroad During U.S. Cold War Activities

GAO-24-104082 U.S. Government Accountability Office Jan 31, 2024.
U.S. Cold War activities caused radioactive contamination in three other countries.
The contamination in Greenland—from a closed nuclear reactor—and in Spain—from an aircraft accident—is being monitored. But changing climate and economic conditions have raised concerns about future effects on local areas.
In the Marshall Islands—where the U.S. tested nuclear weapons—local officials are worried that rising sea levels may impact contaminated sites. The Department of Energy believes the health risk is low but has struggled to explain this to the community. We recommended DOE develop a communication strategy on the contamination for the islands.
The U.S. built Runit Dome in the 1970s to contain radioactive debris in the Marshall Islands.
Highlights
What GAO Found
U.S. Cold War activities resulted in radioactive contamination in three locations: Greenland (part of the Kingdom of Denmark), Spain, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) (see fig.). In Greenland, radioactive liquid—generated by a small nuclear reactor that powered the U.S. Camp Century base—remains entombed under ice. In Spain, a mid-air collision resulted in radioactive contamination around Palomares. The United States and Spain cleaned up much of the radioactive material and have monitored the remaining material since. In RMI, contamination from nuclear weapons tests and the resulting fallout remains measurable on several atolls, some of which are still uninhabitable.
Conditions have changed in all three locations since the original contamination. Most affected are the environment and inhabitants of RMI, where the Department of Energy (DOE) has ongoing responsibilities. Specifically:
- Greenland. At Camp Century, Denmark instituted permanent ice sheet monitoring to address concerns that climate change could release contamination. However, a 2021 study reported that contamination likely would remain immobile through 2100.
- Spain. In Palomares, Spanish officials reevaluated the radioactive contamination in the 1990s and found it exceeded European Union standards. In 2015, U.S. and Spanish authorities signed a statement of intent to further remediate Palomares but have not reached a final agreement.
- RMI. In RMI, people are concerned that climate change could mobilize radiological contamination, posing risks to fresh water and food sources. DOE assesses human radiation exposure and monitors environmental contamination in RMI. DOE considers human health risk to be low, but RMI officials believe DOE has downplayed the risk. This and other disagreements fuel distrust of DOE’s information. By implementing a sustainable communication strategy in RMI, DOE could improve the Marshallese people’s access to, and trust in, information on contamination as environmental conditions change.
Why GAO Did This Study
The United States conducted defense activities in many countries during the Cold War. These activities resulted in radioactive contamination in three countries: Greenland, Spain, and RMI. During the 1960s, the United States buried radioactive liquid in Greenland’s ice while operating the experimental Camp Century base to study the feasibility of installing nuclear missiles there. In 1966, in Spain, two U.S. defense aircraft collided, dispersing radioactive debris over the town of Palomares. From 1946 to 1958, the United States conducted 67 nuclear weapons tests in RMI, and the resulting radioactive fallout contaminated several atolls.
This report examines (1) the amount and type of radioactive contamination in Greenland, Spain, and RMI; and (2) how conditions have changed at these sites, and the extent to which the environment and inhabitants have been affected by these changed conditions. GAO reviewed key literature on the contamination and interviewed U.S. and foreign government officials.
Recommendations
The Secretary of Energy, as a part of the agency’s ongoing efforts to address the legacy of U.S. nuclear testing in RMI, should develop and document a strategy for communications on radioactive contamination that is sustained, understandable, transparent, engages the RMI government, and builds on lessons learned. DOE concurred with GAO’s recommendation.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Agency Affected RecommendationStatus Department of Energy
The Secretary of Energy, as a part of the agency’s ongoing efforts to address the legacy of U.S. nuclear testing in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, should develop and document a strategy for communications on radioactive contamination that is sustained, understandable, and transparent; engages the RMI government; and builds on lessons learned. (Recommendation 1)
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Full Report…………………………………………………………….. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-104082
What Happens Now That the ICJ Has Ordered Israel Not to Engage in Genocide?

The ICJ ruling was a victory for Palestinians and for international law. Here are possible avenues for enforcement.
By Marjorie Cohn , TRUTHOUT, January 29, 2024
What comes next, now that the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, has handed down its near unanimous ruling that South Africa presented a “plausible” case that Israel was violating the Genocide Convention?
The January 26 provisional ruling – which was a landmark victory for the Palestinian people, and indeed, for international law itself — now goes to the United Nations Security Council for enforcement. It would be within the Security Council’s purview to order economic or trade sanctions, arms embargoes, travel bans or even military force.
But in the likely event that the United States vetoes enforcement measures from the Security Council, the UN General Assembly can still act independently in materially significant ways.
The ICJ’s final decision in this case could take several years. But given the urgency of the mass death and humanitarian crisis currently unfolding, the court has in the meantime ordered six “provisional measures” to protect the Palestinians in Gaza from genocidal acts while the court finishes considering the merits of the case.
In its ruling, the court said it is “acutely aware of the extent of the human tragedy that is unfolding in the region and is deeply concerned about the continuing loss of life and human suffering.” It described the civilian population in Gaza as “extremely vulnerable,” noting “tens of thousands of deaths and injuries and the destruction of homes, schools, medical facilities and other vital infrastructure, as well as displacement on a massive scale.” The court added that the “operation is ongoing” and that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had stated it “will take many more long months.” The court noted, “At present, many Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have no access to the most basic foodstuffs, potable water, electricity, essential medicines or heating.”
Provisional Measures the ICJ Has Ordered Israel to Immediately Implement
The ICJ ordered Israel not to commit genocidal acts against Palestinians in Gaza immediately, even as the ICJ continues its slow process of officially considering the merits of the genocide case.
The court concluded that “the catastrophic humanitarian situation” in Gaza “is at serious risk of deteriorating further before the Court renders its final judgment.” Moreover, the court said that the right of the Palestinians to be protected against genocidal acts and South Africa’s right (as a party to the Genocide Convention) to ensure Israel’s compliance with the convention could be safeguarded by provisional measures.
The ICJ found “a real and imminent risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused to the rights found by the Court to be plausible.” The court wrote, “It is therefore necessary, pending its final decision, for the Court to indicate certain measures in order to protect the rights claimed by South Africa that the Court has found to be plausible.” They are:
- Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all genocidal acts, particularly (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.
- Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above.
- Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide.
- Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in Gaza.
- Israel shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence.
- Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within one month from the date of this Order.
The court affirmed that “all parties to the conflict in the Gaza Strip are bound by international humanitarian law.” It said it is “gravely concerned about the fate of the hostages abducted during the attack in Israel on 7 October 2023 and held since then by Hamas and other armed groups” and called for “their immediate and unconditional release.”
Votes on the provisional measures were 15-2 or 16-1. Ugandan Judge Julia Sebutinde dissented from all of them. Israeli ad hoc Judge Aharon Barak dissented from all except the measures requiring Israel to prevent and punish incitement to commit genocide and to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza.
Now that the ICJ has ordered provisional measures, how will its order be enforced?
Actions the UN General Assembly Can Take If US Vetoes Enforcement by Security Council
If the U.S. vetoes enforcement actions via the Security Council, the General Assembly can convene under Uniting for Peace, a resolution passed by the General Assembly to bypass the Soviet Union’s veto during the Korean War. The General Assembly can recommend that its member states impose arms and trade embargoes on Israel and organize a military force to intervene in Gaza. The General Assembly could also suspend Israel from its ranks. These decisions would require a vote of two-thirds of the 193 member states of the General Assembly…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………more https://truthout.org/articles/what-happens-now-that-the-icj-has-ordered-israel-not-to-engage-in-genocide/#:~:text=The%20General%20Assembly%20can%20recommend,states%20of%20the%20General%20Assembly.
UK’s Nuclear “money pit” tops $59 billion.

What a turkey! by beyondnuclearinternational, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/01/31/what-a-turkey/
Hinkley Point C costs hit a new high but nuclear plant still isn’t roasting Christmas turkeys
By Linda Pentz Gunter
The Great Mosque of Mecca is considered the most expensive building in the world at $115.2 billion. Right behind it comes….a nuclear power plant! The two-reactor 3,260MW Hinkley Point C nuclear site still under construction in the UK will now cost at least £46 billion ($59 billion) according to the latest figures released by its developer, the French energy giant, EDF.
As such, Hinkley Point C has now earned the dubious honor of becoming the second most expensive building in the world. And it’s not even finished. The price could soar still higher.
EDF originally bragged that Britons would be baking their Christmas turkeys powered by Hinkley Point C by 2017. The completion date has now been pushed to “after 2029”.
The nuclear power industry is very good at tripling things. Perhaps not global nuclear installations by 2050 as it bragged would happen during an announcement at the COP28 climate summit last December. But the price tag for a new reactor? Timelines for new reactor construction? Straight A grades all around!
That’s almost what’s happening at Hinkley Point C where the new price is more than double the original estimated cost of £18 billion ($23 billion). Getting to triple the cost still seems eminently achievable given the new completion date.
This not-so-shocking news, given nuclear power’s track record, comes after the recent, overblown announcement by Rishi Sunak’s Conservative government that Britain would launch its “biggest expansion of nuclear power for 70 years to create jobs, reduce bills and strengthen Britain’s energy security.” The plan will of course achieve none of these things.
Far from reducing electricity bills for British consumers, the Hinkley nuclear project will in fact increase them “far above the market electricity price,” predicted Dr Norbert Allnoch, CEO of the International Economic Forum for Renewable Energies (IWR), based in Münster, Germany.
According to estimates by IWR, the cost of the electricity generated by Hinkley Point C will be “significantly higher than the 15 cents/kWh mark” and will continue to rise. This is because the UK government agreed a “state-guaranteed price for nuclear power being paid to EDF, which is linked to the inflation rate,” says IWR.
All of this came after the recent announcement that UK authorities had granted a Development Consent Order (DCO) to EDF’s identical twin EPR reactor project on the Suffolk Coast at Sizewell, while committing £1.3 billion ($1.6 billion) in funding for the project. The French company has already been tearing up pristine countryside there, destroying habitat and disturbing wildlife at the adjacent Minsmere Nature Reserve.
Meanwhile, France is pushing the UK to pay for the cost-overruns at Hinkley and the expected ballooning bills at Sizewell once work begins. France reportedly blames Britain for prompting the Chinese firm CGN to withdraw its 33.5% share from the Hinkley plant after Britain booted China out of the Sizewell C nuclear project.
Chinese investment in UK nuclear projects has been a hot political potato for some time, and came to be viewed as “an unacceptable national security risk.” A proposed new reactor project at Bradwell in Essex, a joint project between China and France, looks unlikely to go forward, at least in part due to security concerns about Chinese involvement.
These challenges prompted the UK government to seek alternative sources of funding, inevitably settling on ratepayers using something called a Regulated Asset Base (RAB). RAB effectively funds future nuclear projects by charging ratepayers up front in their electricity bills for the anticipated costs of nuclear plant design, construction, commissioning, and operation.
“Hinkley Point C has been a shambolic money pit,” said a spokesperson from Together Against Sizewell C on X (formerly Twitter). “It’s been hit by delay after delay and the costs are escalating at an alarming rate. Nobody can say with any confidence when it will go live or how much money will have been wasted on it.”
The story of Hinkley C illustrates that the nuclear sector is “out of control economically,” said Paul Gunter, director of the Reactor Oversight Project at Beyond Nuclear. The cost of EDF’s EPR reactor being built in France at Flamanville and still incomplete, has more than quadrupled to close to $15 billion. Another EPR, at Olkiluoto in Finland, went from $3.2 billion to more than $12 billion and launched 12 years late.
On U.S. soil, two AP1000 reactors at the Vogtle nuclear power plant site in Georgia, will likely come in at a total price tag of at least $35 billion, $20 billion more than originally estimated, with the second of the two reactors still not on line.
Man suffered most painful death imaginable after horror accident made him ‘cry blood’ and ‘skin melted’

Joshua Nair 30 Jan 24, https://www.ladbible.com/news/world-news/tokaimura-nuclear-disaster-japan-366945-20240130
A man died in excruciating pain, ‘crying blood’ as his ‘skin melted’, reportedly begging doctors to stop treating him.
Hisashi Ouchi was a technician at the Tokaimura Nuclear Power Plant, about 90 miles northwest of Tokyo.
Disaster struck in 1999 when three workers attempted to pour uranium into a huge metal vat.
Ouchi was helping a colleague with the dangerous task, but due to a miscalculation, the harmful liquid reached ‘critical point’, releasing dangerous neutron radiation and gamma rays into the building.
Unfortunately, none of the men involved in the delicate process were trained to carry it out, as it was later discovered that it involved 16kg of uranium, 13.6kg over the limit.
Reports state that, due to the fact that workers were manually carrying out the procedure, there was no way of measuring how much was being transferred.
Ouchi got exposed to more radiation than the other workers, suffering burns, becoming dizzy, and violently vomiting.
The 35-year-old’s nightmare was only getting started though.
It was discovered that Ouchi had absorbed 17 Sieverts (sv) of radiation, which is still the highest amount of radiation taken on by a single living person, around twice the amount that should kill someone.
For comparison, emergency responders at Chernobyl were exposed to just 0.25 sv.
After he was rushed to the University of Tokyo Hospital, the area surrounding the plant was put into lockdown.
Doctors discovered that there were no white blood cells in Ouchi’s body, and that he was in desperate need of extensive skin grafts and multiple blood transfusions.
Exposure to the dangerous substance reportedly left him ‘crying blood’, bleeding from his eyeballs.
Doctors desperately tried to keep him alive, but Ouchi begged them to stop just a week into treatment.
Ouchi reportedly yelled: “I can’t take it any more! I am not a guinea pig!”
However, at the request of his family, doctors were able to get it started again.
But on 21 December that year, Ouchi’s body eventually gave out and he died as a result of multiple organ failure.
The technicians’ supervisor, Yutaka Yokokawa, also received treatment, but was released after three months with minor radiation sickness, before going on to face charges of negligence in October 2000.
Nuclear fuel company JCO later paid $121 million to settle 6,875 compensation claims from people and businesses who had suffered from or been exposed to radiation from the accident.
-
Archives
- October 2026 (289)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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




