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

60 Minutes Australia Keeps Churning Out War-With-China Propaganda

Australians are particularly vulnerable to propaganda because Australia has the most concentrated media ownership in the western world, dominated by a powerful duopoly of Nine Entertainment (who airs 60 Minutes) and the Murdoch-owned News Corp. This vulnerability is being fully exploited as the time comes for the western empire to beat the war drums against China.


60 Minutes Australia has been playing a leading role in saturating Australian airwaves with consent-manufacturing messaging in support of militarising to participate in a US war against China. A segment they ran a year ago is titled “Prepare for Armageddon: China’s warning to the world,” and features an image of Xi Jinping overlaid with war planes and explosions and captioned “POKING THE PANDA”. Another from a year ago is titled “War with China: Are we closer than we think?” Another from ten months ago is titled “China’s new target in the battle to control the Pacific.” Another from six months ago is titled “Inside the battle for Taiwan and China’s looming war threat.” Another from two months ago is titled “Is the Navy ready? How the U.S. is preparing amid a naval buildup in China.” 

All of these segments have millions of views on YouTube alone. Now this past weekend 60 Minutes Australia has aired back-to-back segments titled “The real Top Gun: US military in heated stand-off with China” and “Five countries secretly sharing intelligence say China is the No.1 threat,” both of which are as jaw-droppingly propagandistic as anything I’ve ever seen.

“It might sound like twisted logic, but military forces everywhere argue that the greater the firepower they possess, the greater the chance of maintaining peace,” opens 60 Minutes Australia’s Amelia Adams. “In other words, massive weaponry is the best deterrent to war. Right now the theory is being tested like never before, and much of it is happening in Australia’s backyard, the Indo-Pacific region. The United States wants the world, and more particularly China, to know of its increasing presence there, and to do that it’s putting on a spectacular show.”

What follows is 19 minutes of overproduced footage displaying this “massive weaponry” while Adams oohs and ahhs and gives slobberingly sycophantic interviews to US military officials.

“There’s something utterly mesmerising about the F-35 jet,” Adams moans. “The sound, the heat, and the power put this supersonic stealth fighter in a league of its own.”

“Colonel these are some very impressive machines you’re in charge of!” she gushes to an officer on an aircraft carrier.

“Yes ma’am,” the colonel replies.

Jesus lady, do your orgasming off camera.

Contrast this glowing ecstatic revelry with Adams’ open hostility later in the segment toward a Chinese think tanker named Henry Wang, claiming that he was trying to “rewrite history” for dismissing panic about a Chinese military buildup by pointing out (100 percent correctly) that China is spending a lower percentage of its GDP on its military than western nations.

“Every command, every maneuver, is being fine-tuned on this vast blue stage, where China has proven to be a bad actor, playing a long game of intimidating Pacific nations,” Adams proclaims over helicopter footage of US war ships. “But the US and its allies aren’t having it, bolstering their defenses — and it’s an impressive display.”

I defy you to find me footage more brazenly propagandistic than this, from any point in history. This is supposed to be a news show, run by people who purport to be journalists, yet they’re engaging in propaganda that looks like it came from a Sacha Baron Cohen spoof of a third world dictatorship.

As I never tire of pointing out, the claim that the US has been militarily encircling its number one geopolitical rival defensively is the single dumbest thing the empire asks us to believe these days. The US is surrounding China with war machinery in ways that it would consider an outrageously aggressive provocation if the same thing were done in its neck of the woods, which means the US is plainly the aggressor in this standoff, and China is plainly reacting defensively to those aggressions.

While the first segment unquestioningly regurgitates Pentagon narratives and gives supportive interviews to military officials, the second segment unquestioningly regurgitates talking points from the western intelligence cartel and gives supportive interviews to Five Eyes spooks.

“Showing off deadly weaponry in massive war games is a tactic China and the United States both use to try to avoid full-on combat,” says 60 Minutes Australia’s Nick McKenzie in introduction. “But the truth is the two countries, as well as other nations including Australia, are already battling it out in an invisible war. There are no frontline soldiers but there are significant skirmishes. Until now these conflicts have been kept quiet, but key members of a secretive alliance of top cops from Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand are about to change that.”

“Their group is called the Five Eyes, and tonight they want you to know what they see,” says McKenzie, which is the same as saying “We’re telling you what the Five Eyes intelligence agencies told us to tell you.”

McKenzie literally just assembles a bunch of Five Eyes officials to tell Australians that China is bad and dangerous, and then disguises the western intelligence cartel advancing its own information interests as a real news story.

“There is one threat that alarms our partners more than any other,” McKenzie says over dramatic music, asking “Which state actor is the key threat to democracy in Australia and amongst the Five Eyes partners?” and presenting a montage of western intelligence operatives answering (you guessed it) China.

“The Americans describe a growing menace on our doorstep flowing from China’s increasing influence in the region,” McKenzie says, before asking an American official, “Do you see the Chinese state preying on Pacific island nations?”

“I believe so, yes,” the official responds.

Western journalism, ladies and gents.

Australians are particularly vulnerable to propaganda because Australia has the most concentrated media ownership in the western world, dominated by a powerful duopoly of Nine Entertainment (who airs 60 Minutes) and the Murdoch-owned News Corp. This vulnerability is being fully exploited as the time comes for the western empire to beat the war drums against China.

We keep being hammered by this narrative that “massive weaponry is the best deterrent to war,” when all facts in evidence say the exact opposite is true. It was the military encroachment against Russia and the conversion of Ukraine into a NATO military asset which provoked Putin to invade Ukraine, and all the militarization against China that we are seeing is only inflaming tensions and making war more likely.

And, I mean, of course it is; even a casual glance at the Cuban Missile Crisis reveals that powerful nations don’t take kindly to having menacing forces placed near their borders. So much of the propaganda indoctrination we’re subjected to in the 2020s revolves around convincing people to believe that Russia and China should react completely differently than the way the US would react if foreign proxy forces were being amassed along its borders.

So yes, Amelia Adams, claiming that aggression and militarism is the best path toward peace is absolutely “twisted logic”. It is as twisted as it gets. Because it is false. This is obvious to anyone who hasn’t yet been successfully indoctrinated into this omnicidal belief system.

We need to do everything we can to fight against this indoctrination now, because if we wait until the war actually starts it will likely be too late to resist.


May 25, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, media | Leave a comment

Lying is the new black

    by beyondnuclearinternational

And the nuclear industry is going for the fiction prize

By Linda Pentz Gunter

Lying is the new black. It is everywhere. It is in, and cool and entirely acceptable in the circles where judgement and ethics are permanently suspended. Disgraced (and now criminally charged) U.S. congressman, George Santos, is the poster child of this new fashion statement. Make up something outlandish and Santos has probably claimed to have said it or done it. None of it is true. And he is still in Congress.

In this (hopefully permanently) post-Trump era, lying with impunity has become precisely that: unpunishable, even applauded, as Trump was on his CNN debacle, which consigned that network to the dustbin of what once used to be called journalism.

It’s all about entertainment now, and clicks, likes, readership and ratings. And fiction. And the nuclear industry boosters are going for the Pulitzer Prize on that one. We used to say, “you couldn’t make this stuff up,” but the pro-nukers do. All the time.

So nuclear power is “the cheapest, safest, greenest” form of energy ever invented. It is “carbon-free.” No one ever died because of a nuclear accident. Irrational fear-mongering by the anti-nuclear movement killed off nuclear power growth in the United States. Renewables are a pipe-dream of the crunchy granola set and about as boring and superfluous. And so on and so on.

There used to be fact-checkers at media organizations. Not any more. Because all this twaddle appears in print and on the air, unchecked and unchallenged. Not only that, media outlets are no longer impartial and are, in fact, deliberately fanning the flames of deceit. Thus, Bloomberg could trumpet an article about the Vogtle 3 and 4 reactors in Georgia with this headline: Nuclear Power Makes Comeback with Massive Carbon-Free Vogtle Plant in Georgia. 

This is a comeback? From what, exactly? A comeback is usually a triumphant return to greatness by a previously successful but then faded star. Actor Robert Downey Jr made a comeback. Basketball legend, Michael Jordan, made a comeback.

But Vogtle 3 and 4 are a nuclear comeback? The two reactors are more expensive than any previous reactors — far more — and will exceed at least $35 billion when both are finally operational. That’s over $21 billion more than originally planned. 

Massive? That would be the bill paid by Georgia ratepayers. As Stephanie Cooke reported recently in Energy Intelligencer, ratepayers haver already “been charged for the financing portion — but not the actual capital costs — of Georgia Power’s construction bills since 2011.” This has now gone on six years longer than expected, and counting.

And, as Patty Durand, a candidate for the Georgia Public Service Commission, pointed out in a recent column in Utility, Dive, “if all construction costs for Plant Vogtle get moved into the rate base, Georgia Power bills will increase 20% for 60 years.”

Another $2.1 billion of capital costs will be folded into the rate base once Vogtle 3 is fully operational. There will likely be a similar rate hike once Vogtle 4 starts up.

As for carbon-free, do the Bloomberg writers imagine that these plants just magically dropped into place like manna from heaven? Did they really not notice all the cement and steel and other manufactured parts and the trucks delivering it all, and the construction activities on the site? Do they know what fuel these reactors use (uranium) and where it comes from and what kind of carbon footprint uranium mining, milling and enrichment leave behind? Apparently not. Or, maybe calling it “carbon-free” is just, well, a lie.

The Vogtle 3 and 4 project has been beset by numerous delays and technical flaws along with its cost over-runs. It began more than 16 years ago and is still incomplete. If this is a “comeback” then during its previous go-around it must have fallen at the first fence, broken its leg and been shot on the spot. Because it really can’t get much worse than Vogtle.

Unless you are French. Then it can get positively scandaleuse. The French flagship new reactor is called the Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR), but unless time is running backwards it’s not evolutionary. Like its American AP1000 counterpart, it has suffered years of delays at construction sites in France, Finland and the UK, and run up enormous cost over-runs. 

Cost estimates for France’s twin reactor EPR project, Hinkley Point C in the UK, are now predicted to reach at least $40 billion, making it second only to the Great Mosque of Mecca as the most expensive building in the world.

Undeterred, voilà, along comes the French small modular reactor (SMR) known as the “Nuward”. (Notice how a version of “new” has to creep into the branding here — like the “NuScale” counterpart in the United States.)

When asked about the timeline for Nuward’s first concrete pour, the company’s president and CEO, Renaud Crassous, stated blandly: “The constant timeline has been to focus on 2030 as the best compromise between the expectation of the potential market and our ability to grow quickly to deliver this new product.”

2030? Quickly? Hello? So seven years from now, if we continue along our current path of doing too few renewables too late, by which time we will be in grave climate chaos (arguably in some parts of the world we are already there), the nuclear industry will proudly point to, drumroll, a concrete pad. But no actual reactor. 

Reality check anyone? Why aren’t the editors at Bloomberg and the New York Times asking questions about time at the very least? And cost? The carbon-free part — that dominated the Bloomberg headline and which isn’t even true — is entirely irrelevant if nuclear power is too slow and too expensive. Which it is.

No matter. The nuclear industry will instead try to distract us with what they call “science”. (In their Thesaurus, ‘science’ is a synonym for ‘alchemy’.) One such example of their “science” is a claim that new reactors will consume their own waste as fresh fuel! No need for uranium mining, they crow!

Except that the claim that a nuclear reactor could “burn” or “consume” nuclear waste is misleading. Reactors can only use a fraction of irradiated fuel as new fuel, and separating that fraction — which requires carbon-intensive and radioactively polluting reprocessing — increases proliferation and terrorism risks. 

Undeterred by, heaven forfend, actual facts, those who claim that reactors can eat their own waste won’t eat their own words. Because that would be uncool. And ethical. And these days, embracing integrity and the truth is just so last year. 

Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and curates Beyond Nuclear International. 

May 22, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, media, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Washington Post censors its own report of interview that showed President Vladimir Zelensky in a poor light 15 May 23 Washington Post deletes ‘treason’ quotes from Zelensky interview

The Ukrainian president reacted angrily when confronted about his own intelligence agents’ supposed “dealings” with Russia’s Wagner Group

The Washington Post has cut a large segment from an interview with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, in which he pushed the newspaper to reveal alleged traitors in his ranks and angrily accused its reporters of aiding Russia by publishing information from leaked documents.

The Post published a transcript of a lengthy interview with Zelensky on Saturday. After a discussion of a Ukrainian counteroffensive against Russian forces, the newspaper asked whether his military intelligence agency – the GUR – had “back-channel contact” with Yevgeny Prigozhin, head of the Russian private military company Wagner Group.

Citing recently leaked Pentagon documents, the Post explained to Zelensky that American spies noted a meeting between the president and GUR chief Kirill Budanov in February in which Budanov told him that he had learned of a Wagner plan to “destabilize Moldova,” but could counter this alleged plan by exposing his own “dealings” with Prigozhin, thus portraying the Wagner boss as “a traitor who has been working with Ukraine.”

Zelensky responded angrily, first asking who within his government had handed this document to the Post. Whoever it was, he said, was committing “treason,” which “is the most severe felony in our country.”

Despite being told that the document did not come from Kiev, but from Washington, Zelensky asked his interviewer to reveal “with which Ukrainian official did you talk?”

The Post has not yet published a story based on the document, and when informed that he was the first Ukrainian official the newspaper had spoken to, Zelensky urged his interviewer not to run the story, arguing that doing so would “demotivate Ukraine,” and accusing them of “playing games with me.”

“You are right now playing with, I think, things that aren’t good for our people,” he warned, asking the Post’s reporter “is your goal to help Russia?” When the reporter said that it was not, Zelensky countered “well, it looks different.”

By Sunday, however, the explosive exchange – during which Zelensky did not dispute that the meeting with Budanov had happened – was missing from the Post’s transcript. The entire 1,400-word back-and-forth about the document was removed, with no explanation given.

The Post’s edit is not the first incident in which Western governments or media outlets have scrubbed information potentially embarrassing or damaging to Kiev. Back in December, the European Commission deleted a video and its associated transcript in which Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that the Ukrainian military had suffered 100,000 fatalities since Russia’s military operation began ten months earlier. 

Kiev keeps its losses a closely guarded secret, and when asked by the Washington Post to comment on this policy, Zelensky sniped “if you have the relevant documents, maybe you can tell us how many people have died…and what their names were.”

May 17, 2023 Posted by | media, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

The Women of Three Mile Island

CounterPunch BY KARL GROSSMAN 12 May 23

Radioactive: The Women of Three Mile Island is the title of a newly-released documentary feature film directed, written and produced by award-winning filmmaker Heidi Hutner, a professor of environmental humanities at Stony Brook University, a “flagship” school of the State University of New York.

With greatly compelling facts and interviews, she and her also highly talented production team have put together a masterpiece of a documentary film.

It connects the proverbial dots of the 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear plant disaster—doing so brilliantly.

The documentary has already received many film awards and has had a screening in recent months in New York City—winning the “Audience Award for Best Documentary” at the Dances With Films Festival—and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; Sarasota, Florida; Dubuque, Iowa; Long Island, New York; First Frame International Film Festival in New York City; the Environmental Film Festival in Washington D.C., and is soon the featured film at Kat Kramer’s #SHEROESForChange Film Festival in Los Angeles and the Cinequest Film Festival in San Jose, California, as well as the Uranium Film Festival in Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. And there will be tours across the U.S.

Resident after resident of the area around Three Mile Island is interviewed and tells of widespread cancer that has ensued in the years that have followed the accident—a cancer rate far beyond what would be normal. Accounts shared in the documentary are heartbreaking.

A whistleblower who had worked at the nuclear plant tells Hutner of the deliberate and comprehensive attempt by General Public Utilities, which owned TMI, to cover up the gravity of the accident and its radioactive releases, especially of cancer-causing Iodine-131 and Xenon 133.

An attorney, Lynne Bernabei, involved in litigation in the wake of the accident, says the Three Mile Island “cover-up was one of the biggest cover-ups in history.” Meanwhile, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission which is “supposed to protect the public” has then and since been just “interested in is promoting the [nuclear] industry. This is corrupt,” says attorney Joanne Doroshow, now a professor at New York Law School and director of the Center for Justice & Democracy. Many examples of this are presented.

The documentary’s focus on women includes women being far more at risk to the effects of radioactivity than men. Mary Olson, a biologist, founder, and director of the Gender & Radiation Impact Project, says in the film that those setting radiation standards in the U.S. from the onset of nuclear technology in 1942, based impacts on a “25 to 30 years-old” male “defined as Caucasian.” She said, “It has come to be known as the ‘Reference Man.” However, Olson cites research findings that “radiation is 10 times more harmful to young females” and “50 percent more harmful to a “comparable female” than it is to “Reference Man” who is “more resistant” to radioactivity than a woman.

There’s the scientist Dr. Aaron Datesman, who is now pursuing a major chromosomal study regarding the impact of the disaster on the health of people in the area, and how people have been harmed despite the denials of the nuclear industry. This study is based on his recent ground-breaking work, “Radiological Shot Noise,” in Nature.

And more and more.

………………………………… Hutner, in speaking about the focus on women in Radioactivity: The Women of Three Mile Island, explains: “Following health and safety disasters, it is often women on the ground fighting back, and over and over throughout nuclear history, these women are gaslighted, silenced, called hysterical and ‘radiophobic.’ The result of such silencing: we lose significant information about nuclear history, science, and health.”

Hutner goes on: “What I have dug up after over 20 years of ecofeminist research is shocking—Dr. Alice Stewart’s research on the danger of X-rays to fetuses in the womb; Rachel Carson’s writing about radiation and bioaccumulation; Dr. Helen Caldicott’s warnings about the dangers of nuclear weapons and her peace and vital medical health advocacy as a physician (she has been attacked mercilessly and unfairly by male critics on sexist grounds); Mary Olson’s study of the alarming danger of radiation to girls and women, Leona Morgan’s decolonization activism to protect indigenous communities from uranium extraction and poisoning, and the dumping radioactive waste on native lands; poet activist Kathy Jetnil-Kijner’s story-telling about the suffering of women miscarrying in the Marshall Islands after the 67 nuclear test-bombing by the U.S. There are endless stories such as these.”

“By erasing such women’s voices, by gaslighting these women, men have erased significant human stories, science, research,” says Hutner. “This is a classic sexist maneuver. Call women and those who speak up about the dangers of nuclear technology as radiophobic, hysterical, and incapable of understanding science. As the women in Radioactivity explain, when they spoke at the Nuclear Regulatory Hearings and meetings, asking intelligent questions about the verity of the nuclear company’s and NRC’s claims, and armed with detailed information regarding their corruption and cover-ups—what really happened—the women were laughed at, mocked, told to ‘go home and bake cookies.’”

“That’s why we made Radioactive. The public needs to know and understand how they are being lied to, how key aspects of nuclear disasters and radiation impacts have been swept under the rug. And at what cost. This is life and death. An so we focus on buried women stories, and in subsequent film projects we hope to make as part of a series, we will bring in the silenced voices of black, brown, and women’s indigenous groups impacted unequally by nuclear disasters.”

She adds: “The film could not come at a more important time for a number of reasons. With nuclear power being discussed in some circles as an ‘answer’ to our climate crisis, we believe anyone seeing this film will walk away with the unmistakable conclusion that nuclear power must be off the table. TMI is one of a long list of environmental disasters and cover-ups that have caused serious harm to surrounding communities, which will last decades. It was and continues to be the lesson of what happens when a corporation and industry lacking integrity, regulated by an agency completely captured by that industry, is put in charge of people’s lives. TMI happened 44 years ago. But when it comes to systems meant to protect the public’s health and safety from nuclear hazards, nothing has changed and in fact, has only gotten worse.”

Comments about the documentary include:………………………………………………………………………………………..

The documentary website is: There you will find listings for upcoming screenings.

Hutner says: “We made Radioactive: The Women of Three Mile Island because the issue of nuclear dangers has ‘died’ as an important cause. It was once a global movement. Front page news. One million people marched in Central Park and so did millions around the world. The big screen popped with blockbusters on the topic. Today: few know or care about nuclear dangers—historical or in the present.”

“Sadly,” Hutner continues, “younger folks are taught nothing in school about nuclear history except a brief lesson (if they are taught anything) on how great nuclear energy is. My students are shocked and aghast at what they learn in my classes (in-depth history and present information). They’ve heard a little bit about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and they have heard of Chernobyl (barely). They haven’t a clue about anything else. They don’t know what nuclear power is or how it functions. They don’t think about nuclear weapons and the potential for nuclear obliteration.”

“The nuclear industry has won its plan to silence this history and science. They’ve invested heavily in painting a pretty picture, erasing facts, and denigrating concerned citizens, particularly women, as I have explained. There’s no recognition of the great harm done to fetuses, babies, children—especially girl children. There’s a complete disregard for the poisoning of communities of color. Dr. Robert Bullard, the father of the environmental justice movement, and Winona LaDuke, a leading indigenous ecofeminist activist, call this environmental racism.”

“Pronuclear films by Bill Gates, Oliver Stone, Robert Stone, leave out essential information — real experiences of real people who live next to reactors, live with and in disaster zones and highly toxic areas,” Hutner notes. “From what I can see—these guys (note their gender and color) have not spoken with or met the people who live with high rates of cancer and multigenerational cancers in disaster locations. They don’t visit and spend time in these communities. Childhood cancers. Heart disease. Infertility. Deformed babies. Miscarriages. Infertility. On and on.”

“These pro-nuke guys,” Hutner continues, “do not address the science that shows the dangers of radiation exposures or the future of inevitable meltdowns. They blackball this science. They don’t discuss radioactive waste—where and how it’s maintained (poorly—putting all life at risk for thousands of years). And the location of the waste? Mostly indigenous lands and always poorly stored. Waste right on-site at the nuclear facilities, leaving communities located next to and near power plants at risk for thousands of years. They dump nuclear waste in waterways.”…………………………………………………………………………… more

May 17, 2023 Posted by | media, Resources -audiovicual, USA, Women | Leave a comment

Threats to journalism posed by UK National Security Bill brushed aside by Parliament

Mohamed Elmaazi, Truth Defence, 14 May 23

While the imprisonment of Julian Assange at London’s Belmarsh high-security prison — for the fourth consecutive World Press Freedom Day — was being raised by media outlets, civil liberty groups and press freedom organisations the world over, 3 May 2023 saw the UK House of Commons debate the latest iteration of the increasingly draconian National Security Bill 2023 (National Security Bill).

The National Security Bill creates a raft of new offences, including two which mandate either a fine or life imprisonment and multiple other offences prescribing a maximum of either 10 or 14 years imprisonment.

In March, a number of Peers in the House of Lords raised strongly worded concerns and proposed some level of restrictions but were ultimately unsuccessful. The House of Commons has not taken up these concerns either.

Number 10 and the Home Office, along with a majority of parliamentarians in both houses, are justifying this bill as necessary to protect national security and defend the country from “espionage”, “sabotage” and “foreign interference.”

A  detailed analysis of the earlier version of the National Security Bill from June 2022, which I drafted for Consortium News and which remains valid, should be consulted by readers seeking more information.

The National Security Bill 2023 is over 200 pages long and the most recent version as amended on 7 March 2023 can be found here with proposed Lords amendments as of 15 March found here and the subsequent amendments, disagreements and reasons made on 3 May 2023 found here.

For simplicity’s sake, “Clauses” in the Bill are referred to here as “Sections”, because that is what they become known as once a bill becomes law.

Despite government assurances, the National Security Bill would, if enacted, radically curb whistleblowing, public interest and adversarial journalism, and stifle direct action activism, all to levels unseen in the UK for multiple generations, if not in its entire history.

Life in Prison for Receiving Restricted Material…………………………………………………………..

“A Powerful Chilling Effect” on Investigative Journalism

These offences “would cover a wide range of reporting, whether about sexual assaults on board a nuclear submarine, Chinese influence in the UK, bullying by intelligence officers, an innocent photograph of a nuclear power station or huge investigations such as the Panama Papers,” Lord Black of Brentwood said during the Lords debate on 1 March 2023.

“The problem is that, when journalists start investigating a story, they cannot possibly know where it will lead and whether their reports might,” Lord Black said.

This creates a “powerful chilling effect on investigative reporting by responsible journalists,” he added. …………………………………………………….

Passing off “National Interest” for “National Security”

“[W]ithout a narrower definition of the interests of the UK, the Bill contains a worrying restriction on investigative journalism and campaigning where conduct that could be taken to breach Clauses 1 to 5 might be contrary to government policy,” Lord Marks noted………………………………………………………………….

A Convoluted and Draconian Law With No Real Protections

The House of Commons, on 3 May 2023, did not revive the matter of the need for protection for journalists and whistleblowers within this bill nor did they seek to restrict the application of the offences against journalists and activists………………………………..

It is noteworthy that the public can also be excluded — on national security grounds — from legal proceedings resulting from charges in this bill.

The National Security Bill appears fairly close to being finalised within the next month or two, and without any major organised opposition from the public and press, seems likely to pass without any journalistic or public interest protections whatsoever.

Truth Defence will publish at least two more posts on the National Security Bill. One will outline some of the new powers designed to authorise government officials to demand information, including journalistic materials from individuals. A further post will address the incredibly nebulous defined offences of “Foreign Interference”.

We will continue to update its subscribers in relation to this bill and other laws and policies which seek to curb and control the right to dissent, seek out information and hold the powerful to account.

May 16, 2023 Posted by | civil liberties, media | Leave a comment

Christopher Nolan’s New ‘Oppenheimer’ Trailer Sees U.S. On the Brink of Nuclear War

Cillian Murphy stars as the father of the atomic bomb in the film, hitting theaters in July.

Stacey Ritzen, May 8, 2023

“This is a national emergency,” says Cillian Murphy in the latest trailer for Christopher Nolan’s upcoming epic Oppenheimer, which dropped today. “We’re in a race against the Nazis. And I know what it means if the Nazis have a bomb.”

Murphy stars as the titular J. Robert Oppenheimer, the theoretical physicist credited with the invention of the atomic bomb during World War II. Although the real Oppenheimer would later go on to regret his role and spent the rest of his life advocating against his creation, the film is set during the Manhattan Project, the research and development program that was ultimately responsible for producing the first nuclear weapons.

In addition to Murphy, the star-studded cast features Emily Blunt, Matt Damon, Robert Downey Jr., Florence Pugh, Rami Malek, Benny Safdie, Michael Angarano, Josh Hartnett, and Kenneth Branagh.

“Are we saying there’s a chance that when we push that button, we destroy the world?” Damon’s skeptical Lieutenant General Leslie Groves, the director of the Manhattan Project, asks Murphy’s Oppenheimer midway through the trailer. “Near zero,” the physicist guesses, to which Damon’s character responds: “Zero would be nice.”

In other words, not exactly your typical breezy summer movie fare, as Oppenheimer hits theaters on July 21, 2023. The film, which clocks in at two hours and 30 minutes, has been named one of the most highly anticipated movies of the year. It remains to be seen how its box office returns will fare against the upcoming Barbie movie from director Greta Gerwig, which opens on the same day.

May 9, 2023 Posted by | media | Leave a comment



On this episode of Horns of a Dilemma, Jonathan Hunt talks about his book, The Nuclear Club: How America and the World Policed the Atom from Hiroshima to Vietnam. Hunt starts out with an anecdote about the origins of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty under U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson and his Special Assistant for National Security Affairs Walt Whitman Rostow. He then outlines the core argument of his book: that parallel to the nuclear revolution was a “counter-revolution” to prevent the universalization of nuclear weapons, therefore maintaining the dominance of the “nuclear club” of nuclear-armed states. He then discusses the sequence of events that led to the implementation of nuclear laws, including the Limited Test Ban Treaty and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Finally, he touches on the lessons of this narrative and how the politics of nuclear diplomacy during the Cold War led to the rise of a “paternal” U.S. presidency. This was recorded at the Clements Center for National Security at the University of Texas at Austin.

May 9, 2023 Posted by | media | Leave a comment

Hypocritical Commemorations: World Press Freedom Day

It gave US Secretary of State Antony Blinken an opportunity to do the usual cartwheel. “Far too many governments use repression to silence free expression, including through reprisals against journalists for simply doing their jobs,” goes his May 3 press statement. “We again call on Russian authorities to immediately release Wall Street reporter Gershkovich and all other journalists held for exercising freedom of expression.” What, then, of the Australian publisher and founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange?

Australian Independent Media, May 6, 2023, Dr Binoy Kampmark

Selected days for commemoration serve one fundamental purpose. Centrally, they acknowledge the forgotten or neglected, while proposing to do nothing about it. It’s the priest’s confession, the chance for absolution before the next round of soiling.

These occasions are often money-making exercises for canny businesses: the days put aside to remember mothers and fathers, for instance. But there is no money to be made in saving writers, publishers, whistleblowers, and journalists from the avenging police state.

World Press Freedom Day, having limped on for three decades, is particularly fraught in this regard. It remains particularly loathsome, not least for giving politicians an opportunity to leave flimsy offerings at its shrine. These often come from the powerful, the very same figures responsible for demeaning and attacking those brave scribblers who do, every so often, show how the game is played.

Every year, we see reactions often uneven, and almost always hypocritical. The treatment of US journalist Evan Gershkovich is the stellar example for 2023. Here was the caged victim-hero scribbler, held in the remorseless clutches of the Russian Bear.

It gave US Secretary of State Antony Blinken an opportunity to do the usual cartwheel. “Far too many governments use repression to silence free expression, including through reprisals against journalists for simply doing their jobs,” goes his May 3 press statement. “We again call on Russian authorities to immediately release Wall Street reporter Gershkovich and all other journalists held for exercising freedom of expression.” What, then, of the Australian publisher and founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange?

With unintended, bleak irony, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) also thought it fitting to rope in the Secretary at a World Press Freedom Day event organised in conjunction with the Washington Post. Talking to his interlocutor, the Post’s David Ignatius, Blinken spoke of efforts to “fight back and push back around the world to help journalists, who – in one way or another, are facing intimidation, coercion, persecution, prosecution, surveillance.” This seemed grimly comical, given that the United States, through its agencies, has engaged in intimidation, coercion, persecution, prosecution and surveillance against Assange, whose scalp they continue to seek with salivating expectation.

In the course of the event, Ignatius and Blinken encountered Code Pink activists Medea Benjamin and Tinghe Barry. Both were keen to test the Secretary’s lofty assessments about Washington’s stance on free expression and journalistic practice. “Excuse me, we can’t use this day without calling for the freedom of Julian Assange,” exclaimed Benjamin, storming the stage where the two men were engaged in bland conversation. A bemused Ignatius duly approved of Benjamin’s eviction by three burly minders, seeing it all as part of “free expression”.

Barry’s own assessment of the whole show summed matters up. “Two hours and not one word about journalist Shireen Abu-Akleh, who was murdered by Israeli occupation forces in Palestine, not one word about Julian Assange.”

Others from the US State Department were also found wanting. A department press briefing from Vedant Patel, principal deputy spokesperson, opened with comments about World Press Freedom Day. He echoed the belief in “the importance of a free press. It’s a – we believe a bedrock of democracy.”

Then came a question from Matt Lee of Associated Press: Did the State Department regard Assange “as a journalist who is – who should be covered by the ideas embodied in World Press Freedom Day?”

Patel’s response did not deviate from the views of his superiors. “The State Department thinks that Mr Assange has been charged with serious criminal conduct in the United States, in connection with his alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in our nation’s history.”

With dutiful adherence to a narrative worn and extensively disproved in Assange’s extradition trial proceedings, Patel spoke of actions that “risked serious harm to US national security to the benefit of our adversaries” (there was none) and subjected “human sources to grave and imminent risk of serious physical harm and arbitrary detention” (no evidence has ever been adduced by the Department of Justice on this point)…………………………………………………………….. more

May 8, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, media | Leave a comment

Multiple US Officials Confronted About US Assange Hypocrisy On World Press Freedom Day


Wednesday was World Press Freedom Day, and it saw US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, and Deputy State Department Spokesman Vedant Patel confronted about the glaring hypocrisy of the Biden administration’s persecution of Julian Assange for the crime of good journalism.

During an appearance at a World Press Freedom event hosted by The Washington Post’s David Ignatius on Wednesday morning, Blinken was confronted by Code Pink activists Medea Benjamin and Tighe Barry demanding justice for Assange before being swiftly dragged off stage.

“Excuse us, we can’t use this day without calling for the freedom of Julian Assange,” said Benjamin, holding a sign saying “FREE JULIAN ASSANGE”.

The two were immediately rushed by many security staffers, and the audio from the stage was temporarily cut.

“Stop the extradition request of Julian Assange,” Benjamin can be heard saying.

“Two hours and not one word about journalist Shireen Abu-Akleh, who was murdered by the Israeli occupation forces in Palestine, not one word about Julian Assange,” said Barry. 

“We’re here to celebrate freedom of expression, and we just experienced it,” said Ignatius without a trace of irony once the dissent had been silenced. He then returned to the subject of how bad and awful the Russian government is for imprisoning American journalist Evan Gershkovich. 

Then during a White House press briefing on Wednesday afternoon, Karine Jean-Pierre was asked a question by CBS News’ Steven Portnoy that was so inconvenient the press secretary flat-out said she wouldn’t answer it.

“Advocates on Twitter today have been talking a great deal about how the United States has engaged in hypocrisy by talking about how Evan Gershkovich is held in Russia on espionage charges but the United States has Espionage Act charges pending against Julian Assange.  Can you respond to that criticism?” asked Portnoy.

“What is the criticism?” asked Jean-Pierre. 

“Well, the criticism is that — the argument is that Julian Assange is a journalist who engaged in the publication of government documents,” Portnoy replied. “The United States is accusing him of a crime under the Espionage Act, and that, therefore, the United States is losing the moral high ground when it comes to the question of whether a reporter engages in espionage as a function of his work. So can you respond to that?”

“Look, I’m not going to speak to Julian Assange and that case from here,” said Jean-Pierre.

And then she didn’t. She just dismissed Portnoy’s question without explanation, then babbled for a while about things Biden has said that are supportive of press freedoms, then again said “I’m not going to weigh in on comments about Julian Assange.”

This type of “I’m not answering that, screw you” dodge is a rare move for a White House press secretary. They don’t normally just come right out and say they refuse to answer the highly relevant and easily answerable question a reporter just asked; typically when the question is too inconvenient they’ll either word-salad a bewildering non-response, say the answer is the jurisdiction of another department, or say they’ll get back to them when they have more information. It’s not the norm for them to just wave away the question without even pretending to provide a reason for doing so.

But really, what choice did she have? As Wall Street Journal White House correspondent Sabrina Siddiqi recently acknowledged on MSNBC, the job of the White House press secretary is not to tell the truth, but to “stay on message and control the narrative.” There is nothing about the Assange case that is on-message with the White House narrative; just the other day Biden said at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner that “journalism is not a crime,” yet his persecution of Assange is deliberately designed to criminalize journalism

There’s simply no way to reconcile the US government’s story about itself with its efforts to normalize the extradition and persecution of journalists around the world under the Espionage Act. If your job is to make the White House look good, the only way to respond to questions of US hypocrisy regarding the Assange case is not to respond at all.

Later in the press conference, Jean-Pierre responded to another reporter’s questions about press freedoms in China with an assurance that the Biden administration will “hold accountable the autocrats and their enablers who continue to repress a free, independent media.”

Also on Wednesday afternoon, AP’s Matt Lee cited the aforementioned Code Pink protest earlier that day to question Deputy State Department Spokesman Vedant Patel about Assange, and was met with a similar amount of evasiveness.

“So then can I ask you, as was raised perhaps a bit abruptly at the very beginning of his comments this morning, whether or not the State Department regards Julian Assange as a journalist who would be covered by the ideas embodied in World Press Freedom Day?” asked Lee.

“The State Department thinks that Mr. Assange has been charged with serious criminal conduct in the United States, in connection with his alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in our nation’s history,” Patel replied. “His actions risked serious harm to US national security to the benefit of our adversaries. It put named human sources to grave and imminent risk and risk of serious physical harm and arbitrary detention. So, it does not matter how we categorize any person, but this is – we view this as a – as something he’s been charged with serious criminal conduct.”

“Well, but it does matter actually, and that’s my question. Do you believe that he is a journalist or not?” asked Lee.

“Our view on Mr. Assange is that he’s been charged with serious criminal conduct in the United States,” said Patel………………………………………………..

Okay. So, basically, the bottom line is that you don’t have an answer. You won’t say whether you think he is a journalist or not,” Lee replied.

Again, Patel was left with no safe answers to Lee’s questions, because of course Assange is indisputably a journalist. Publishing information and reporting that is in the public interest is precisely the thing that journalism is; that’s why Assange has won so many awards for journalism. Trying to contend that Assange is not a journalist is an unwinnable argument.

Later in that same press conference Patel was challenged on his claim that Assange damaged US national security by journalist Sam Husseini. 

“You refer to WikiLeaks allegedly damaging US national security,” said Husseini. “People might remember that WikiLeaks came to prominence because they released the Collateral Murder video. And what that showed was US military mowing down Reuters reporters – workers in Iraq. Reuters repeatedly asked the US Government to disclose such information about those killings, and the US government repeatedly refused to do so. Only then did we know what happened, that the US helicopter gunship mowed down these Reuters workers, through the Collateral Murder video? Are you saying that disclosure of such criminality by the US government impinges US national security?”

“I’m not going to parse or get into specifics,” Patel said, before again repeating his line that Assange stands accused of serious crimes in a way that harmed US national security.

Journalist Max Blumenthal tweeted about Patel’s remarks, “According to this State Dept flack, Julian Assange’s jailing is justified because he ‘harmed US national security.’ But Assange is not an American citizen. By this logic, the US can kidnap and indefinitely detain any foreign journalist who offends the US national security state.”

It is good that activists and journalists have been doing so much to highlight the US empire’s hypocrisy as it crows self-righteously about its love of press freedoms while persecuting the world’s most famous journalist for doing great journalism. Highlighting this hypocrisy shows that the US empire does not in fact care about press freedoms at all, save only to the extent that it can pretend to care about them to wag its finger at governments it doesn’t like.

Assange exposed many things about our rulers during his work with WikiLeaks, but none of those revelations have been as significant as what he’s forced them to reveal about themselves in the lengths that they will go to to silence a journalist who tells inconvenient truths.

May 6, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, media | Leave a comment

The Antidote to Oliver Stone is Philippe Carillo’s Film “Fukushima Disaster: The Hidden Side of the Story”

This Week’s Featured Interview:

Libbe HaLevy, Host of Nuclear Hotseat, 3 May 23

  • Philippe Carillo has made a 52-minute film that busts the myths of nuclear reactor safety that is clear, easily understood, and devastatingly powerful. Philippe is a French citizen currently living in the Vanuatu archipelago. While living in Paris, he worked on several major documentary projects for the BBC, 20th Century Fox, French National TV, and independent film productions. He moved to Hollywood in 2003 and made his first feature documentary in Hollywood in 2013, Inside the Garbage of the World. The film won 3 awards, was distributed worldwide, and inspired a wave of change regarding plastic pollution.

Philippe moved to Vanuatu in 2017 and has since made more than100 short films in that country. In 2022, he decided to finish his feature documentary about Fukushima which was started in 2016. That film, FUKUSHIMA Disaster – The Hidden Side of the Story, was the topic of our conversation.

I spoke with Philippe Carillo on Friday, April 14, 2023.

May 5, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, media | 2 Comments

ACTION ALERT: False NYT Spy Claim on Iran Nukes Needs Correction


The New York Times (5/1/23), reporting on Iran’s execution of British spy Alireza Akbari, reported:

The spy had provided valuable information — and would continue to do so for years — intelligence that would prove critical in eliminating any doubt in Western capitals that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons.

This is not correct; as FAIR has often pointed out (FAIR.org10/17/179/9/159/24/131/31/13Extra!3–4/08), the position of US intelligence is that it has no proof Iran has decided to build a nuclear weapon. As the US State Department reiterated in April 2022:

The United States continues to assess that Iran is not currently undertaking the key nuclear weapons–development activities it judge necessary to produce a nuclear device.

This is a serious error that deserves prompt correction.


Please tell the New York Times to correct its false claim that there is no doubt that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.



May 3, 2023 Posted by | media, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

How The FBI Helps Ukrainian Intelligence Hunt ‘Disinformation’ On Social Media

In an interview, a senior Ukrainian official defined “disinformation” as any news that contradicts his government’s message.

LEE FANG, APR 29, 2023

The Federal Bureau of Investigation pressures Facebook to take down alleged Russian “disinformation” at the behest of Ukrainian intelligence, according to a senior Ukrainian official who corresponds regularly with the FBI. The same official said that Ukrainian authorities define “disinformation” broadly, flagging many social media accounts and posts that he suggested may simply contradict the Ukrainian government’s narrative.

“Once we have a trace or evidence of disinformation campaigns via Facebook or other resources that are from the U.S., we pass this information to the FBI, along with writing directly to Facebook,” said llia Vitiuk, head of the Department of Cyber Information Security in the Security Service of Ukraine………………….

“When people ask me, ‘How do you differentiate whether it is fake or true?’ Indeed it is very difficult in such an informational flow,” said Vitiuk. “I say, ‘Everything that is against our country, consider it a fake, even if it’s not.’ Right now, for our victory, it is important to have that kind of understanding, not to be fooled.”……………………………….

The FBI has elicited scrutiny of late for the influence it exercises over at Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms. A series of reports and congressional hearings delved into the agency’s role in shaping content moderation decisions related to the 2020 election. 

Evidence of FBI pressure on social media companies comes at a time when those companies are already taking proactive steps to hunt down alleged foreign propaganda and fabricated materials. Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began in Feb. 2022, social media companies have been on the alert for hack and leak operations, fake personas, and other online tricks that might be used by Moscow to sway public opinion around the conflict. But critics charge that in the drive to label and remove content planted by the Russian government, Facebook and other tech firms suppress independent reporting and dissenting views about the war. 

Last week, for instance, Facebook applied limited sharing penalties and a “false information” label to links containing journalist Seymour Hersh’s Substack story alleging NATO involvement in the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, according to Michael Shellenberger, a writer who extensively covers social media censorship. After public outcry, Facebook modified the label to “partially false.”

It is unclear how much of social media companies’ heavy-handed approach to content moderation is a direct response to government goading. 

But there is enough of a pattern of the FBI and other national security agencies leaning on tech companies to suggest that these tech firms may preemptively adopt censorious practices to avoid the disapproval of the federal government. In October, based on leaked documents from the Department of Homeland Security, I reported on government plans to lean more heavily on social media platforms to take down “disinformation” related to “the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine.”…………………………..


May 1, 2023 Posted by | media, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Free Julian Assange, member of our organisations – European Federation of Journalists Our Italian FNSI affiliates were visited today in Rome by Julian Assange‘s wife, Stella Morris. The Italian journalists’ union, at the initiative of its Campania branch, presented Julian Assange with an FNSI membership card. The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) passed on the initiative to its affiliates in Europe: 18 of them decided to follow the Italian example and grant Julian Assange membership (or honorary membership) of their organisations. The EFJ and its affiliates once again call on the UK authorities to release Julian Assange.

Here is the joint appeal delivered to Stella Morris in Rome this morning:

We, the undersigned European unions and associations of journalists, join the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) in calling on the US government to drop all charges against Julian Assange and allow him to return home to his wife and children.

We are gravely concerned about the impact of Assange’s continued detention on media freedom and the rights of all journalists globally. We urge European governments to actively work to secure Julian Assange’s release.

To show our solidarity, we declare Julian Assange a full member, an honorary member or a free member of our organisations.


  • Maja Sever, EFJ President and TUCJ President, Croatia
  • Fabrizio Cappella, SUGC-FNSI Secretary, Italy
  • Satik Seyranyan, UJA President, Armenia
  • Borka Rudić, BHJA General Secretary, Bosnia & Herzegovina
  • Hrvoje Zovko, HND President, Croatia
  • Emmanuel Poupard, SNJ First General Secretary, France
  • Emmanuel Vire, General secretary SNJ-CGT, France
  • Tina Groll, dju in ver.di President, Germany
  • Maria Antoniadou, JUADN President, Greece
  • Laszlo M. Lengyel, HPU Executive President, Hungary
  • Pavle Belovski, SSNM President, North Macedonia
  • Luís Filipe Simões, SJ President, Portugal
  • Darko Šper, GS Kum President, Serbia
  • Dragana Čabarkapa, Sinos President, Serbia
  • Zeljko Bodrozic, IJAS President, Serbia
  • Petra Lesjak Tušek, DNS President, Slovenia
  • Miguel Angel Noceda, FAPE President, Spain
  • Urs Thalmann, impressum Director, Switzerland
  • Tim Dawson, NUJ, United Kingdom

April 30, 2023 Posted by | civil liberties, EUROPE, media | Leave a comment

BBC launches 7 part series on Fukushima nuclear disaster

BBC World Service has launched a new seven-part drama series exploring the
2011 nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in

Radio Today 25th April 2023

April 28, 2023 Posted by | media, UK | Leave a comment

Fukushima nuclear disaster – new Netflix series

Over the course of eight episodes, this multi-layered drama faithfully captures a disastrous incident from three different perspectives based on careful research. “What happened there on that day?” This story seeks to answer this question based on the true events of seven intense days from the perspectives of government, corporate organizations, and the people on site risking their lives.

This series is developed and produced by Jun Masumoto, who crafted massive hits such as the “Code Blue” series while also delivering powerful social drama series such as “Shiroi Kyoto” series and “Hadashi no Gen.” The two directors of this series are Masaki Nishiura, who has worked alongside Masumoto for many years as the director of the “Code Blue” series, and Hideo Nakata of the “Ring” series.

At 2:46 p.m. on 11 March, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake with a maximum seismic intensity of 7 (recorded at Kurihara-cho, Miyagi prefecture) struck approximately 130 kilometers off the Sanriku coast. One hour after this earthquake shook the islands of Japan, a 15-meter-tall tsunami swallowed up the Fukushima nuclear power plant in an instant. But that was only the start of the nightmare. With its cooling function lost, the power plant fell into a dangerous and uncontrollable state. The Netflix Series “The Days” starts streaming in 2023, only on Netflix

April 27, 2023 Posted by | Japan, media | Leave a comment