Revealing He Too Had Manning Leaks, Ellsberg Dares Justice Dept to Prosecute Him Like Assange
“Let’s take this to the Supreme Court,” says the Pentagon Papers whistleblower, taking aim at what he argues is an unconstitutional use of the Espionage Act.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/12/07/revealing-he-too-had-manning-leaks-ellsberg-dares-doj-prosecute-him-assange JESSICA CORBETT, December 7, 2022
Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg on Tuesday dared U.S. prosecutors to come after him like they have Julian Assange by revealing in a BBC News interview that the WikiLeaks publisher sent him a backup of leaked materials from former military analyst Chelsea Manning.
“Let me tell you a secret. I had possession of all the Chelsea Manning information before it came out in the press,” Ellsberg said to BBC‘s Stephen Sackur in the on-camera interview. “I’ve never said that publicly.”
Assange had sent him the materials—which include evidence of U.S. war crimes—in case “they caught him and they got everything,” the 91-year-old explained. “He could rely on me to find some way to get it out.”
Australian-born Assange is currently detained in London and fighting in British and European courts against his extradition to the United States, where he could spend the rest of his life in prison if convicted under Espionage Act charges.
Inviting action by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Ellsberg said that “I am now as indictable as Julian Assange and as everyone who put that information out—the papers, everybody who handled it.”
“Yes, I had copies of it and I did not give them to an authorized person. So, if they want to indict me for that, I will be interested to argue that one in the courts—whether that law is constitutional,” he continued, referring to the Espionage Act.
Highlighting that the highest U.S. court has never held that it is constitutional to use the Espionage Act as if it were a British Official Secrets Act, Ellsberg said that “I’d be happy to take that one to the Supreme Court.”
The Espionage Act, “used against whistleblowers, is unconstitutional,” he asserted. “It’s a clear violation of the First Amendment.”
Ellsberg’s public confession comes after editors and publishers at five major media outlets that collaborated with WikiLeaks in 2010 for articles based on diplomatic cables from Manning released a letter late last month arguing that “it is time for the U.S. government to end its prosecution of Julian Assange for publishing secrets.”
“This indictment sets a dangerous precedent, and threatens to undermine America’s First Amendment and the freedom of the press,” the letter states. “Obtaining and disclosing sensitive information when necessary in the public interest is a core part of the daily work of journalists. If that work is criminalized, our public discourse and our democracies are made significantly weaker.”
The new Ellsberg interview also follows the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) confirming earlier this month that 51-year-old Assange has asked the tribunal to block his extradition to the United States.
Assange’s brother Gabriel Shipton told Reuters last week that “I would imagine the U.S. wants to avoid” a case going before the ECHR for “trying to extradite a publisher from Europe for publishing U.S. war revelations when the U.S. is asking Europe to make all sort of sacrifices for the war in Ukraine.”
Pursuing Assange in a US court could cause even more embarrassment than the WikiLeaks’ publications.
It’s possible that pursuing Assange in a US court could cause even more embarrassment than the WikiLeaks’ publications. As the years have passed, we have learned that a Spanish security firm recorded his every move and those of his visitors and legal counsel in the Embassy of Ecuador. This was passed to the CIA, and was used in the US case for his extradition. The trial of Daniel Ellsberg for leaking the Pentagon Papers failed because his psychiatrist’s records were stolen by investigators, and this should set a precedent for Assange.
Enough is enough for Albanese on Assange: our allies may respect us if we say this more. https://johnmenadue.com/enough-is-enough-for-albanese-on-assange-our-allies-may-respect-us-if-we-say-this-more/ By Alison Broinowski, Dec 2, 2022
The Prime Minister’s surprise revelation that he has raised the case against Julian Assange with US officials and urged that charges of espionage and conspiracy be dropped opens up many questions.
Mr Albanese thanked Dr Monique Ryan for her question on Wednesday 31 November, giving what appeared to be a carefully prepared and timed answer. The Independent MP for Kooyong sought to know what political intervention the government would make in the case, observing that public interest journalism is essential in a democracy.
The news flashed around between Assange supporters in and outside Parliament, and reached the Guardian, the Australian, SBS, and Monthly online. Neither the ABC nor the Sydney Morning Herald carried the story, even the next day. SBS reported that Brazil’s president-elect Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva expressed support for the campaign to free Assange.
But two days earlier, on Monday 29 November, the New York Times and four major European papers had printed an open letter to the US Attorney-General Merrick Garland, deploring the assault on media freedom which the pursuit of Assange represented.
The NYT, the Guardian, Le Monde, Der Spiegel and El Pais were the papers which in 2010 received and published some of the 251,000 classified US documents provided by Assange, many revealing American atrocities in Afghanistan and Iraq.
US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning gave them to Assange, who redacted names of people he considered could be harmed by publication. A senior Pentagon serving officer later confirmed that no-one had died as a result. Manning was imprisoned, and then pardoned by Obama. Assange spent seven years in diplomatic asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador in London before British police removed him and he was imprisoned for breach of bail condition.
Assange has been in Belmarsh high security prison for three years, in poor physical and mental health. Court proceedings against him over extradition to face trial in the US have been farcical, biased, oppressive, and excessively prolonged.
In Opposition, Albanese said ‘Enough is enough’ for Assange, and he has at last done something about it in Government. What exactly, with whom, and why now, we don’t yet know. The PM’s hand may have been forced by the major dailies’ letter to Attorney-General Garland, which made Australian politicians and media appear to be doing nothing. Or he may have raised the Assange case in his recent meetings with Biden, at the G20 for example.
Another possibility is that he was talked into it by Assange’s barrister, Jennifer Robinson, who met with him in mid-November and spoke about the case at the National Press Club. When I asked if she could say if she and Albanese discussed Assange, she smiled and said ‘No’ – meaning she couldn’t, not that they didn’t.
Monique Ryan made the point that this is a political situation, requiring political action. By raising it with US officials, Albanese has moved away from the previous government’s position that Australia couldn’t interfere in British or American legal processes, and that ‘justice must take its course’. That wasn’t the approach Australia took to secure the freedom of Dr Kylie Moore-Gilbert, imprisoned for espionage in Iran, or of Dr Sean Turnell from jail in Myanmar. It isn’t Australia’s approach in China either, where a journalist and an academic remain in detention.
By taking up Assange’s case, Albanese is doing nothing more than the US always does when one of its citizens is detained anywhere, or than the UK and Canada quickly did when their nationals were imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay. Australia allowed Mamdouh Habib and David Hicks to spend much longer in US custody before negotiating their release. We might gain more respect from our allies if we adopted their speedy approach to these cases, than we do by subservience to British and American justice.
It’s possible that pursuing Assange in a US court could cause even more embarrassment than the WikiLeaks’ publications. As the years have passed, we have learned that a Spanish security firm recorded his every move and those of his visitors and legal counsel in the Embassy of Ecuador. This was passed to the CIA, and was used in the US case for his extradition. The trial of Daniel Ellsberg for leaking the Pentagon Papers failed because his psychiatrist’s records were stolen by investigators, and this should set a precedent for Assange.
Even though Biden once called Assange a ‘hi-tech terrorist’, as President he is now an advocate of human rights and democratic freedoms. This might be a good time for him to put them into practice. Doing so would make both Biden and Albanese look better than their predecessors.
European General Court refuses Austria’s appeal against the Commission’s decision to support 2 nuclear reactors for Hungary
Judgment on state aid appeal by Austria regarding aid to build two nuclear
reactors at Hungarian power plant (General Court). On 30 November 2022, the
General Court handed down a judgment on an appeal by Austria against a
Commission decision which approved investment aid for two nuclear reactions
at a power plant (Paks II) owned by the Hungarian state.
Reuters 30th Nov 2022
‘Publishing is not a crime’: media groups urge US to drop Julian Assange charges

First outlets to publish WikiLeaks material, including the Guardian, come together to oppose prosecution
Guardian, Jim Waterson Media editor, 28 Nov 22
The US government must drop its prosecution of the WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange because it is undermining press freedom, according to the media organisations that first helped him publish leaked diplomatic cables.
Twelve years ago today, the Guardian, the New York Times, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, and El País collaborated to release excerpts from 250,000 documents obtained by Assange in the “Cablegate” leak. The material, leaked to WikiLeaks by the then American soldier Chelsea Manning, exposed the inner workings of US diplomacy around the world.
The editors and publishers of the media organisations that first published those revelations have come together to publicly oppose plans to charge Assange under a law designed to prosecute first world war spies.
“Publishing is not a crime,” they said, saying the prosecution is a direct attack on media freedom.
Assange has been held in Belmarsh prison in south London since his arrest at the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2019. He had spent the previous seven years living inside the diplomatic premises to avoid arrest after failing to surrender to a UK court on matters relating to a separate case.
The then UK home secretary, Priti Patel, approved Assange’s extradition to the US in June but his lawyers are appealing against this decision.
Under Barack Obama’s leadership, the US government indicated it would not prosecute Assange for the leak in 2010 because of the precedent it would set. The media outlets are now appealing to the administration of President Joe Biden – who was vice-president at that time – to drop the charges.
The full letter sent by the media organisations
Publishing is not a crime: The US government should end its prosecution of Julian Assange for publishing secrets.……………………………………………………………….. more https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/nov/28/media-groups-urge-us-drop-julian-assange-charges?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Legal challenge to UK nuclear plan by groups Stop Sizewell C and Together Against Sizewell C (TASC), and others

Campaigners against Sizewell C say they will not give up their fight to stop the nuclear power project and now have a date for a High Court case in London. The next stage of the legal challenge against the plans for the £25billion power station is set to take place with an oral hearing before a judge.
Campaign groups, including Stop Sizewell C and Together Against Sizewell C (TASC), have pledged to fight despite chancellor Jeremy Hunt announcing in his Autumn Budget that the Government would continue to provide £700m towards the cost of the project.
Chris Wilson, legal liaison officer with TASC, said the oral hearing would be held on December 14, during which the campaigners’ barrister will be able to present their arguments against the project before a High Court judge. If the judge deems there’s a case, the next stage will be a formal judicial review hearing
before the High Court, which could result in the development consent for the nuclear power station, granted by the Government in July, being overturned.
Even if the legal challenge is rejected at the oral hearing, the campaigners will still have the option of going to appeal. A first stage review of the legal appeal by the High Court initially recommended refusal, but the next stage, the oral hearing, will determine whether the challenge goes to a formal judicial review hearing.
East Anglian Daily Times 27th Nov 2022
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/23151541.sizewell-campaigners-not-giving-up-despite-budget-decision/
Mayor of Ukraine’s second-largest city fined for speaking Russian
The Kharkov city head has been accused of violating the law by addressing his fellow residents in a “non-state” language.
https://www.rt.com/russia/567137-ukraine-mayor-fined-russian-language/ 24 Nov 22
Kiev has slapped the mayor of Ukraine’s second largest city, Kharkov, with a fine for using what the authorities called a “non-state” language in an official TV address. Mayor Igor Terekhov is known for addressing his fellow residents in Russian.
Terekhov will have to pay a fine of 3,400 hryvnas ($92) for violating Ukrainian law, Taras Kremin, the Ukrainian government’s commissioner for the protection of the state language, said in a statement on Thursday.
The mayor had “used non-state language in his addresses to the residents of the city of Kharkov” during a news telethon, the statement read, calling this an “administrative offense.” The language commissioner’s office also issued an administrative warning to the mayor’s office, telling it to only use Ukrainian on the mayor’s social media pages.
Terekhov has until December 4 to appeal the commissioner’s decision, the statement read. The Ukrainian authorities did not specify what language the mayor had used during the telethon, but the Ukrainian media reported that he was known for regularly addressing his fellow residents in Russian.
According to the language commissioner’s office, Terekhov and some Kharkov city council members have already been found in violation of the state language law. It is unclear if they were sanctioned back then as well.
The Ukrainian state language law was signed by then-President Pyotr Poroshenko back in 2019, five days before his presidential mandate expired. The legislation requires Ukrainian public officials to use only the Ukrainian language when discharging their duties.
Ukrainians are also required to use the Ukrainian language in the fields of public services, medical care, education and science, as well as in the media, although certain exceptions are allowed. A person found in violation of this law might face a fine of up to 8,500 hryvnas ($230), which can be further doubled for a repeated offense.
In mid-June, the language commissioner was granted the right to impose fines on those found in violation of the law. In October, an assistant professor at the Ukrainian National Aviation University was slapped with a fine of 3,400 hryvnas ($92) for teaching through a “non-state language.”
Nuclear Industry Liability under the Paris Convention
The Paris Convention on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear
Energy and the Brussels Convention supplementary to the Paris Convention
established a special legal regime in relation to the compensation payable
in the event of an accident involving a civil nuclear power installation or
the transportation of nuclear substances to and from that installation.
Unlike general tort law, which is based on fault or negligence, under the
convention, the plant operator or party involved in the transportation is
exclusively liable for damages in the event of an accident and is always
deemed to be liable, regardless of whether fault can be established.
These two conventions were amended by agreement between the contracting powers,
including the United Kingdom, on 17 December 2021. After 1 January 2022,
nuclear plant operators became liable to pay compensation of up to €700
million in the event of an accident.
This level of liability will be increased by €100 million in each of the next five years leading to an
ultimate maximum liability of €1.2 billion towards claims involving
‘personal injury or loss of life, economic loss, the cost of preventive
measures and of measures of reinstatement of impaired environment’.
NFLA 21st Nov 2022
A Father Fights for His Son & What’s Left of Democracy
The film Ithaka, about the quest of Julian Assange’s father to save his son, makes its U.S. premiere on Sunday in New York City. It is reviewed by Joe Lauria.
By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News
To the extent that the media has covered the tragedy of Julian Assange at all, the focus has been on politics and the law.
Consortium News, which has provided perhaps the most comprehensive coverage of the prosecution under the Espionage Act of the WikiLeaks publisher, has also focused more on the case and less on the man.
The great issues involved transcend the individual: war, diplomacy, official deception, high crimes, an assault on press freedom and on the core of what little democracy is left in a militarized and money-corrupted system.
Assange supporters sometimes also overlook the person and concentrate instead on the larger issues at stake. Ironically, it has been Assange’s enemies and detractors who’ve long focused on the person in the worst tradition of ad hominem assaults.
He has been attacked to deflect public attention from what WikiLeaks has revealed, from what the state is doing to him and to hide the impact on freedom in the media and standards in the courtroom.
There has been a steady and organized stream of smears against Assange, from ridiculous stories about him smearing feces on Ecuadoran Embassy walls to the widely reported falsehood that he was charged with rape. That case was dropped three times before any charges were filed, but the “rape” smear persists.
These personal attacks were planned as far back as March 8, 2008 when a secret, 32-page document from the Cyber Counterintelligence Assessment branch of the Pentagon described in detail the importance of destroying the “feeling of trust that is WikiLeaks’ center of gravity.” The leaked document, which was published by WikiLeaks itself, said: “This would be achieved with threats of exposure and criminal prosecution and an unrelenting assault on reputation.”
An answer to these slurs and the missing focus on Assange as a man is Ithaka. The film, which makes its U.S. premiere Sunday night in New York, focuses on the struggle of Assange’s father, John Shipton, and his wife, Stella Assange, to free him.
f you are looking for a film more fully explaining the legal and political complexities of the case and its background, this is not the movie to see. The Spanish film, Hacking Justice, will give you that, as well as the more concise exposition in the brilliant documentary, The War on Journalism, by Juan Passarelli.
Ithaka, directed by Ben Lawrence and produced by Assange’s brother, Gabriel Shipton, humanizes Assange and reveals the impact his ordeal has had on the people closest to him.
The title comes from the poem of that name by C.P. Cavafy (read here by Sean Connery) about the pathos of an uncertain journey. It reflects Shipton’s travels throughout Europe and the U.S. in defense of his son, arguably the most consequential journalist of his generation.
The story begins with Shipton arriving in London to see his son for the first time behind bars after the publisher’s rights of asylum were lifted by a new Ecuadoran government leading to him being carried out of the embassy by London police in April 2019.
“The story is that I am attempting in my own … modest way to get Julian out of the shit,” Shipton says. “What does it involve? Traipsing around Europe, building up coalitions of friendship.” He meets with parliamentarians, the media and supporters across the continent. Shipton describes the journey as the “difficulty of destiny over the ease of narrative.”……………………………
We learn that Julian Assange’s frustration with the inability to stop the 2003 Iraq invasion, despite the largest, worldwide anti-war protests in history, motivated him to start WikiLeaks.
The releases he published about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, leaked by Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, were published not only by WikiLeaks but by its partners at The New York Times, Die Spiegel and The Guardian, yet only Assange has been prosecuted.
The main focus of the film is the extradition hearing in Westminster Magistrate’s Court that began in February 2020 and ended in September of that year…………………………
One of several scenes that drives home the personal side of the story is audio of Assange speaking from Belmarsh Prison to Stella about what children’s books to read to their two sons. The toll it is taking on her is seen as she breaks down emotionally during the recording of a BBC interview that has to be paused.
“Extraditions are 99 percent politics and one percent law,” Stella says. “It is entirely the political climate around the case that decides the outcome. And that is shaped by the media. For many years there was a climate that was deliberately created through false stories, smears; through a kind of relentless character attack on Julian to reduce that support and make it more likely to successfully extradite him to the United States.”
“This is the public narrative that has been spread in the media for ten years,’ Nils Melzer, the now former U.N. Special rapporteur on torture, says in the film.
“No one has been able to see how much deception there is. Why is this being done? For ten years all of us were focused only on Julian Assange, when he never wanted it to be about him. It never was about him. It was about the States and their war crimes and their corruption. That’s what he wanted to put a spotlight on – and he did. And that’s what made them angry. So they put the spotlight on him.”
“He just needs to be treated like a human being,” says Stella, “and be allowed to be a human being and not denied his dignity and his humanity, which is what has been done to him.”
Ithaka makes its first theatrical showing in the U.S. at the SVA Cinema, 333 W. 23rd St, New York, N.Y., on Sunday, Nov. 13, at 7:45 pm. There will be a Q&A following the first screening with Ben Lawrence, Gabriel Shipton, Adrian Devant, cinematographer Niels Ladefoged, and John Shipton.
For ticket information: https://docnyc.net/film/ithaka/ https://consortiumnews.com/2022/11/11/a-father-fights-for-his-son-whats-left-of-democracy/
Maryland Nuclear Engineer and Wife Sentenced for Espionage-Related Offenses
A Maryland man and his wife were sentenced today for conspiracy to communicate Restricted Data related to the design of nuclear-powered warships.
USA Department of Justice, 9 Nov 22.
Jonathan Toebbe, 44, of Annapolis, was sentenced today to 232 months, over 19 years, of incarceration. His wife, Diana Toebbe, 46, was sentenced to 262 months, more than 21 years, of incarceration. The Toebbes pleaded guilty to the conspiracy in August 2022.
…………………………………. According to court documents, at the time of his arrest, Jonathan Toebbe was an employee of the Department of the Navy who served as a nuclear engineer and was assigned to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, also known as Naval Reactors. He held an active national security clearance through the Department of Defense, giving him access to “Restricted Data” within the meaning of the Atomic Energy Act. Restricted Data concerns design, manufacture or utilization of atomic weapons, or production of Special Nuclear Material (SNM), or use of SNM in the production of energy – such as naval reactors. Jonathan Toebbe worked with and had access to information concerning naval nuclear propulsion including information related to military sensitive design elements, operating parameters and performance characteristics of the reactors for nuclear powered warships.
According to court documents, Jonathan Toebbe sent a package to a foreign government, listing a return address in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, containing a sample of Restricted Data and instructions for establishing a covert relationship to purchase additional Restricted Data. Jonathan Toebbe began corresponding via encrypted email with an individual whom he believed to be a representative of the foreign government. The individual was really an undercover FBI agent. Jonathan Toebbe continued this correspondence for several months, which led to an agreement to sell Restricted Data in exchange for thousands of dollars in cryptocurrency.
On June 8, 2021, the undercover agent sent $10,000 in cryptocurrency to Jonathan Toebbe as “good faith” payment. Shortly afterwards, on June 26, Jonathan Toebbe serviced a dead drop by placing an SD card, which was concealed within half a peanut butter sandwich and contained military sensitive design elements relating to submarine nuclear reactors, at a pre-arranged location. After retrieving the SD card, the undercover agent sent Jonathan Toebbe a $20,000 cryptocurrency payment. In return, Jonathan Toebbe emailed the undercover agent a decryption key for the SD Card. A review of the SD card revealed that it contained Restricted Data related to submarine nuclear reactors. On Aug. 28, 2021, Jonathan Toebbe made another “dead drop” of an SD card in eastern Virginia, this time concealing the card in a chewing gum package. After making a payment to Jonathan Toebbe of $70,000 in cryptocurrency, the FBI received a decryption key for the card. It, too, contained Restricted Data related to submarine nuclear reactors. The FBI arrested Jonathan Toebbe and his wife on Oct. 9, 2021 after he placed yet another SD card at a pre-arranged “dead drop” at a second location in West Virginia.
The FBI and NCIS are investigating the case……. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/maryland-nuclear-engineer-and-wife-sentenced-espionage-related-offenses
Together Against Sizewell and other groups to fight on, despite legal setback

Campaigners have pledged to fight on after the High Court rejected their
appeal against the Government’s decision to approve the new Sizewell C
nuclear power station. Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) and other
campaign groups are seeking an oral hearing through the judicial review
process after an initial assessment by the legal authority deemed the
appeal should be rejected.
The review of the approval had been sought on
the grounds that the decision was unlawful amid concerns about the
maintenance of a water supply to the new £20bn station and the resilience
of the coastline. The provision of fresh water to the site was one of the
key issues raised by the Planning Inspectorate when considering the plans.
TASC chair Pete Wilkinson described the rejection verdict as ‘predictable
and wholly unreasonable,’ adding there appeared to be a ‘presumption’
that judicial reviews should be dismissed rather than used as a forum for
democracy.
East Anglian Daily Times 28th Oct 2022
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/23082932.high-court-rejects-sizewell-legal-challenge/
Meetings scheduled on compensation for Utah’s ‘downwinders’ affected by nuclear testing
https://www.thespectrum.com/story/news/2022/10/24/meetings-scheduled-compensation-utahs-nuclear-downwinders/10588294002/ David DeMille, St. George Spectrum & Daily News,
Southern Utah’s thousands of “downwinders” — people whose families suffered high rates of cancer attributed to U.S. nuclear weapons testing in the Nevada desert in the 1950s and ’60s — could be eligible for federal compensation.
An estimated 60,000 people were exposed to radioactive fallout in southern Utah during the testing programs that took place at the Nevada Test Site, where nuclear weapons were tested and much of the radiation was sent “downwind” to the east via the prevailing winds.
For years, the federal government has issued money to those affected via the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, which was set to expire this summer but was extended by Congress for another two years.
Qualifying downwinders, or spouses and/or children of deceased loved ones, may apply for up to $50,000 in compensation.
To help residents learn more about the program and whether they may be eligible for some of the compensation funds, St. George area medical officials are set to host a series of meetings this week in rural communities. Representatives from Intermountain Healthcare are also taking questions via phone from anyone interested.
The act allows qualifying downwinders to receive a one-time payout of $50,000, said Becky Barlow, project director and nurse practitioner at the Radiation Exposure Screening and Education Program (RESEP) Clinic at Intermountain St. George Regional Hospital. Test site workers can apply for $75,000, and certain uranium workers can apply for $100,000.
“We are pleased that the president and Congress would continue to support downwinders and uranium workers that were unknowingly exposed because of nuclear testing or jobs in uranium mining and refinement,” Barlow said.
Applications and information are available by calling 435-251-4760.
The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act was first passed in 1990 as an alternative to costly litigation to ensure the federal government met its financial responsibilities to workers who became sick as a result of the radiation hazards of their jobs. Coverage was broadened a decade later.
There was some question about whether the program might end this year, but the two-year extension takes it through summer 2024. It also covers some different cancers and includes different stipulations, so people who were denied in past attempts might be eligible under the new rules.
If possible, the Department of Justice prefers to award the money directly to the person impacted by the testing. However, if that person is already deceased, their legal spouse can apply for the money, and in some cases the person’s children or grandchildren can also apply.
“If you had a family member impacted and you don’t know if they filed, you can contact us to check,” Barlow said.
Anyone with questions regarding the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or in need of screenings, should call 435-251-4670.
David DeMille writes about southwestern Utah for The Spectrum & Daily News, a USA TODAY Network newsroom based in St. George. Follow him at @SpectrumDeMille or contact him at ddemille@thespectrum.com.
‘Whistleblower’ says legal battle with nuclear site owners ‘almost broke me’
A consultant who claims she was dismissed by Sellafield for exposing failures to address a “toxic” working culture has been granted an appeal against her employment tribunal loss.
Yorkshire Post, By Nathan Hyde, 23 Oct 22,
Equality and diversity consultant Alison McDermott said her contract at the nuclear processing plant ended after she wrote a damning “whistleblowing” report about the human resources (HR) leadership team, claiming they had failed to address complaints about bullying and harassment.
After refusing a £160,000 settlement, she took her case to an employment tribunal. But Employment Judge Philip Lancaster dismissed her claim and ruled she was not a whistleblower, following a hearing in Leeds.
She was then ordered to pay £40,000 to help cover the legal costs of Sellafield Ltd and its parent company – the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.
Ms McDermott, from Burley in Wharfedale, has been granted an appeal and she is now raising money to cover her legal costs, ahead of the next hearing in January.
Her legal team have challenged the ruling, but also criticised the judge for refusing to look at the alleged “toxic culture” at Sellafield and alleged failure of the HR team. They said this provides vital context, as it explains Ms McDermott’s decision to become a whistleblower.
“I am doing everything I can because I’m really concerned about what’s going on at Sellafield,” she said………………………………
Ms McDermott signed a two-day-a-week contract with Sellafield Ltd to work as a consultant in equality and diversity at the nuclear fuel reprocessing and decommissioning site in September 2018.
After taking on the role, looked into allegations of sexual harrasment and homophobic abuse.
She also recieved an anonymous letter claiming “serious problems” about sexual harassment “are being ignored”.
The following month, she compiled a report on the HR leadership team, saying they were viewed as “broken and dysfunctional”
by some staff and failing to effectively deal with allegations of harassment and bullying.
Shortly after filing the report, she was told her £1,500-a-day contract would be terminated due to “funding constraints”.
But during the tribunal, Sellafield’s lawyers said it was because the report, which had cost around £12,000, was “questionable and insubstantial” and “lacked any meaningful analysis”.
According to the ruling, the judge accepted the funding constraints excuse was used to allow Ms McDermott to leave “with her head held high”.
He ruled she was not a whistleblower, because she could not make any “disclosures” which are protected under UK employment law.
Sellafield Ltd, which has previously stated it is committed to eradicating bullying and harassment, has been approached for comment. https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/people/whistleblower-says-legal-battle-with-nuclear-site-owners-almost-broke-me-3889870
EU Taxonomy Labelling Gas and Nuclear as ‘Green’ Faces Legal Challenges
Activists and environmental organisations immediately opposed the decision, saying the new law discredits EU efforts to establish itself as a global leader on climate policy and only risks delaying Europe’s transition to a net-zero economy by further encouraging investments in the fossil fuel industry.
In September, Greenpeace and a separate alliance of environmental groups, including Client Earth and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), requested a legal review of the decision. Austria’s recent lawsuit is now adding to the legal challenges the European Commission is already facing.
https://earth.org/eu-taxonomy-legal-challenges/ MARTINA IGINIE OCT 13TH 2022
Austria has filed a lawsuit against the European Commission’s decision to label nuclear and gas as ‘green’ investments. The controversial EU taxonomy approved by the European Parliament in July is already facing two other legal challenges from environmental groups.
On Friday, Austria submitted a lawsuit to the Court of the European Union, asking for an overturn of the contentious EU taxonomy.
Approved in July, the legal text designated natural gas and nuclear as environmentally sustainable energy sources, encouraging investments in these energy sources. Under the EU taxonomy, new nuclear and gas-fired plants built through 2030 will be recognised as a transitional energy source as long as they are used to replace dirtier fossil fuels such as oil and coal.
The country’s minister for climate action and Green politician, Leonore Gewessler, described the EU’s decision as “irresponsible” and “unreasonable” and said it was “misleading” to consumers and investors to label gas – a fossil fuel responsible for climate change for its greenhouse gas emissions – as “green”.
However, Brussels reassured that gas and nuclear-related activities may be labeled as “green” only if they meet certain criteria. Particularly, the legal text specifies that gas projects should only be financed if direct emissions are kept under a maximum cap and they switch to fully renewable energy by 2035. Similarly, nuclear power may be funded only in compliance with certain standards for the disposal of radioactive waste.
Activists and environmental organisations immediately opposed the decision, saying the new law discredits EU efforts to establish itself as a global leader on climate policy and only risks delaying Europe’s transition to a net-zero economy by further encouraging investments in the fossil fuel industry.
In September, Greenpeace and a separate alliance of environmental groups, including Client Earth and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), requested a legal review of the decision. Austria’s recent lawsuit is now adding to the legal challenges the European Commission is already facing.
Despite not joining the legal action, Germany supported the country’s decision to file a lawsuit, adding that “it is good that the objections to the taxonomy regulation will now be reviewed by the courts.”
Austria Sues EU Executive Over Green Label for Gas, Nuclear

https://www.voanews.com/a/austria-sues-eu-executive-over-green-label-for-gas-nuclear-/6784510.html BERLIN — 10 Oct 22,
The Austrian government said Monday it has filed a legal complaint with the European Union’s top court over plans by the bloc’s executive branch to label natural gas and nuclear power generation as sustainable energies.
Austria’s environment minister, Leonore Gewessler, warned that the measure could “greenwash” nuclear power and gas despite the environmental damage they cause.
Another EU member, Luxembourg, announced later that it would stand by Austria in the legal case, adding more political weight to the move.
The EU’s executive Commission plans to add certain nuclear and gas plants next year to a list that helps investors determine which projects are sustainable.
Gewessler said the disasters in Chernobyl in Ukraine and Fukushima in Japan have showed that nuclear power plants come with “incalculable risks.” Meanwhile, the burning of natural gas, a fossil fuel, adds greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere, stoking climate change.
A dozen environmental groups have already launched legal challenges to the Commission’s plans, backed by the bloc’s lawmakers in July.
Austria’s environment minister, Leonore Gewessler, warned that the measure could “greenwash” nuclear power and gas despite the environmental damage they cause.
Another EU member, Luxembourg, announced later that it would stand by Austria in the legal case, adding more political weight to the move.
Austria has filed a legal case against European Union’s inclusion of nuclear and gas as “clean” in the EU “taxonomy”

Staunchly anti-nuclear Austria said on Friday it had followed through on a
pledge to file a legal challenge to the European Union’s inclusion of
natural gas and nuclear energy in a list of “green” investments. At issue
is the European Union’s so-called taxonomy, a rulebook defining which
investments can be labelled climate friendly and designed to guide
investors toward green projects that will help deliver the bloc’s
emissions-cutting targets.
Reuters 7th Oct 2022
-
Archives
- April 2026 (231)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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



