Nuclear plant ‘will decimate fish stocks’
How many fish does a nuclear power station kill? It sounds grisly, but for
the engineers on the Somerset coast building Britain’s first nuclear
power station in a generation, it’s an urgent question.
And for conservationists and local villagers on the banks of the River Severn in
Gloucestershire, it has become such an urgent question they filled a
village hall to debate it.
Proposals for the sea-water cooling system at
Hinkley Point C will see 44 tonnes of fish ingested and killed every year,
according to EDF, the company building it.
“This scheme will decimate
fish stocks,” said Dave Seal, a wildlife campaigner. “We already have
lost 80% of our salmon, and half of the salmon that get into Hinkley’s
cooling system will be destroyed.” But Andrew Cockroft, from Hinkley
Point C, insisted there will be a “very very small impact on fish
populations”.
BBC 9th Oct 2024
Could small modular reactors be used to create nuclear warheads?
The global pursuit of small modular reactor (SMR) technology could feed
into the development of nuclear warheads. SMRs are near the top of the
agenda in the nuclear industry in the UK. At least four companies –
GE-Hitachi, Holtec Britain, Rolls-Royce SMR and Westinghouse Electric Co. –
are competing to have their designs adopted by Great British Nuclear, and
at the same time, the UK’s nuclear weapons stockpile is due to increase.
NCE asked the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) under the
Freedom of Information (FoI) Act if it had made any assessment of the
potential for SMRs to produce material for nuclear weapons. In its
response, DESNZ said that the deployment of SMRs in the UK “will comply
with UK civil nuclear safety and security regulations and international
conventions to ensure that nuclear material intended for use in civil
nuclear deployments is used for that purpose only, and cannot be diverted
or manipulated for use in nuclear weapons”.
However, this statement does
not mean that SMRs cannot be used to create materials for nuclear warheads.
The fissile material that could potentially be used in nuclear weapons is
what is produced by the reactor, not what is used within it. DESNZ went on
to say that it “neither confirms nor denies that it holds information”
on whether assessments have been made on whether material from SMRs could
be used in nuclear weapons. “This is a qualified exemption, and we have
considered the public interest arguments in confirming or denying whether
we hold the requested information,” it continued.
“We acknowledge that
confirming or denying if information is held would provide assurance that
the Department takes the safe and secure deployment of nuclear energy
seriously. “However, confirming or denying that the information relevant
to your request is held may itself disclose the presence of sensitive
nuclear information. Such information could assist in potential criminal
activity if the information was used by malicious parties.
New Civil Engineer 9th Oct 2024
Revealed: EDF’s hidden plans for two huge 30 feet high flood barriers in the heart of East Suffolk’s Heritage Coast 04.10.24
As part of the much-criticised justification for issuing a nuclear site
licence for the controversial Sizewell C nuclear development, the UK’s
chief nuclear regulator, the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), has
divulged hitherto hidden plans for two sea walls to be constructed in the
heart of East Suffolk’s Heritage Coast and the Suffolk & Essex Coast &
Heaths National Landscape, designed to provide additional flood protection.
Both walls are proposed to be up to 30 feet high. To the south of the
Sizewell C site, the wall will span the ‘Sizewell Gap’ joining Sizewell
A’s Sea defences to the cliffs south of Sizewell village. The northern
one will span the river in the Sizewell Marshes SSSI, joining Sizewell
C’s northern sea defences with higher ground inland at Goose Hill and
will be at least 100 metres in length but potentially much longer.
The ONR claims that Sizewell C Ltd, the site’s developer, is ‘committed’ to
installing these structures ‘should climate change be worse than is
reasonably foreseeable’, despite there being no mention of them in
EDF’s application for the Development Consent Order (DCO) for Sizewell C.
Therefore, they were absent from the plans approved by the Secretary of
State in July 2022 after he had overturned the Planning Inspectors’
recommendation for refusal.
TASC 4th Oct 2024
Rolls-Royce suffers £78m loss on mini-nukes amid UK rollout delays
Company moves ahead with Czech-backed project as Britain’s selection process for
SMR technologies drags on. Rolls-Royce’s mini nuclear reactor business has
posted a £78m loss as it awaits the outcome of a delayed UK tender
competition.
The company, which is developing a small modular reactor (SMR)
design that it hopes to export globally, saw losses in 2023 grow from £61m
the previous year, new accounts show. It came as the company ramped up
spending on research and development from £78m to £115m.
It made no revenue
and employed some 590 staff. Losses also grew as Rolls – along with three
rivals – continued to wait for a decision by the UK Government on which SMR
technologies it would back following a series of delays. The competition
was first announced by George Osborne, the former Conservative chancellor,
in 2015 but is still yet to reach a conclusion. Tufan Erginbilgiç, chief
executive of the Rolls-Royce group, has urged ministers to press ahead as
quickly as possible, saying he expects orders from around the world to
begin flowing in if Rolls emerges as a winner.
Telegraph 9th Oct 2024
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/09/rolls-royces-mini-nukes-arm-suffers-loss-amid-delay/
EDF bosses grilled over River Severn salt marsh plans at ‘prickly’ meeting
Arlingham peninsula salt marsh proposal questioned at parish council meeting with one person turning up dressed as a hedgehog
News. Will Luker, Community Reporter, 8 Oct 24,
https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/gloucester-news/edf-bosses-grilled-over-river-9615208
Plans for salt marshes along the River Severn in Gloucestershire linked to a new nuclear power station were met with disbelief at a packed meeting last night (Monday October 7). EDF bosses were quizzed at Arlingham Parish Council about their environmental improvement plans which are linked to the new Hinkley C site in Somerset.
Prior to the meeting, the energy firm has been in touch with landowners about the idea of creating salt marshes along the river. EDF made a presentation which outlined how important the nuclear power plant is and they identified four sites for saltmarshes.
They outlined Kingston Seymour in Somerset, Littleton Upon Severn in South Gloucestershire, Rodley near Westbury-on-Severn and Arlingham as the four areas they are interested in.
Biden Officials Say Ceasefire Talks Are Suspended as Harris Names Iran Top Enemy
The U.S. has reportedly all but given up on a ceasefire proposal it put forth just two weeks ago.
By Sharon Zhang , Truthout, October 8, 2024, https://truthout.org/articles/biden-officials-say-ceasefire-talks-are-suspended-as-harris-names-iran-top-enemy/
iden officials have reportedly admitted that ceasefire negotiations amid Israel’s war on Lebanon and genocide in Gaza have been suspended, despite public insistence by high-powered figures within the administration that they are working around the clock for a ceasefire.
The Biden administration has given up on ceasefire talks after first proposing a deal for a 21-day ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel just two weeks ago, CNN reports, citing U.S. officials. The U.S. is “not actively trying to revive the deal,” the outlet wrote.
Two weeks ago, CNN reported that senior U.S. officials have also suspended efforts for ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas amid Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Officials said the effort isn’t totally canceled but admitted there is no political will for a ceasefire to happen; though officials blamed Hamas and Israel, Israeli officials have been openly sabotaging ceasefire negotiations, while Hamas officials have voiced support for numerous ceasefire proposals.
Though officials are admitting to the suspension of ceasefire talks in private, however, in public, officials are still claiming that the administration is pushing for a ceasefire. Just on Monday, in a statement recognizing the anniversary of the October 7, 2023, attack, President Joe Biden insinuated that talks are ongoing.
“We will not stop working to achieve a ceasefire deal in Gaza that brings the hostages home,” the president said. “We also continue to believe that a diplomatic solution across the Israel-Lebanon border region is the only path to restore lasting calm and allow residents on both sides to return safely to their homes.”
Vice President Kamala Harris also gestured toward the ceasefire talks in a statement Monday, saying, “It is far past time for a hostage and ceasefire deal to end the suffering of innocent people.”
However, as many experts have said, it has long been clear that the priority for the administration is not to secure a ceasefire, but rather to give Israel all of the tools it needs to carry out its genocide and, potentially, escalate tensions into a wider war in the Middle East. Indeed, in the same statement, Harris said: “I will always ensure Israel has what it needs to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorists like Hamas.”
Just last week, State Department Spokesperson Matthew Miller seemed to openly admit that the goal of ceasefire negotiations has never been to actually achieve a ceasefire.
“We’ve never wanted to see a diplomatic resolution with Hamas,” Miller said in a press briefing, despite the administration having blamed Hamas officials for negotiation failures even as Israel has assassinated multiple top officials in Hamas and Hezbollah responsible for ceasefire negotiations.
Meanwhile, as Israel escalated tensions across the Middle East, including threatening to bomb key sites in Iran, Harris has named Iran as the U.S.’s current top enemy — rather than a country like Russia, a country that the U.S. is actively helping to fight amid its invasion of Ukraine.
When asked in her interview with “60 Minutes” that aired Sunday about the U.S.’s “greatest adversary” on the world stage, Harris said: “I think there’s an obvious one in mind which is Iran. Iran has American blood on their hands.” She raised Iran’s recent missile attack on Israel, and said one of her “highest priorities” is to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear capabilities.
This statement appears aimed at stoking tensions with Iran, gesturing toward a war with the country — a seeming goal of Israeli leaders, some analysts have said. It also ignores that, while it’s unclear what Harris is referring to when she suggests that Iran has killed Americans, Israel has killed many Americans just amid the genocide. Just last week, in fact, Israeli forces killed an American citizen, Hajj Kamel Ahmad Jawad, in a bombing on Lebanon.
Israeli Snipers Routinely, Deliberately Shoot Palestinian Kids In The Head
Caitlin Johnstone, Oct 10, 2024, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/israeli-snipers-routinely-deliberately?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=150036170&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
There’s yet another doctors’ testimony about Israeli forces constantly shooting Palestinian children in the head, this one published in The New York Times.
The report, titled “65 Doctors, Nurses and Paramedics: What We Saw in Gaza,” begins as follows:
“I worked as a trauma surgeon in Gaza from March 25 to April 8. I’ve volunteered in Ukraine and Haiti, and I grew up in Flint, Mich. I’ve seen violence and worked in conflict zones. But of the many things that stood out about working in a hospital in Gaza, one got to me: Nearly every day I was there, I saw a new young child who had been shot in the head or the chest, virtually all of whom went on to die. Thirteen in total.
“At the time, I assumed this had to be the work of a particularly sadistic soldier located nearby. But after returning home, I met an emergency medicine physician who had worked in a different hospital in Gaza two months before me. ‘I couldn’t believe the number of kids I saw shot in the head,’ I told him. To my surprise, he responded: ‘Yeah, me, too. Every single day.’”
Numerous named medical staff who worked in Gaza then testify in the report about routine encounters with children who’d been shot in the head and chest by Israeli forces, as well as children and infants suffering from severe malnutrition and easily preventable infections.
Such reports have been coming out all year. Because Israel has not been allowing foreign press into Gaza, medical staff have in many ways become the de facto western journalists on the ground in the enclave — and they are all saying the same thing.
Back in July a group of 45 doctors and nurses who’d been working in Gaza signed an open letter to President Biden testifying that “every single signatory to this letter treated children in Gaza who suffered violence that must have been deliberately directed at them.”
“Specifically, every one of us on a daily basis treated pre-teen children who were shot in the head and chest,” the letter continues.
Also in July, Politico published an article by two American surgeons named Mark Perlmutter and Feroze Sidhwa titled “‘Nothing Prepared Us for What We Saw’: Two Weeks Inside a Gaza Hospital,” which contains the following passage:
“We started seeing a series of children, preteens mostly, who’d been shot in the head. They’d go on to slowly die, only to be replaced by new victims who’d also been shot in the head, and who would also go on to slowly die. Their families told us one of two stories: the children were playing inside when they were shot by Israeli forces, or they were playing in the street when they were shot by Israeli forces.”
by Israeli snipers in Gaza” was published in The Guardian, citing nine doctors who’d worked in Gaza after October 7 who “reported treating a steady stream of children, elderly people and others who were clearly not combatants with single bullet wounds to the head or chest.”
Forensic pathologists were able to identify bullets used by the Israeli military in these attacks on children:
“The Guardian shared descriptions and images of gunshot wounds suffered by eight children with military experts and forensic pathologists. They said it was difficult to conclusively determine the circumstances of the shootings based on the descriptions and photos alone, although in some of the cases they were able to identify ammunition used by the Israeli military.”
In February the Los Angeles Times published an article titled “I’m an American doctor who went to Gaza. What I saw wasn’t war — it was annihilation”. The author, a reconstructive surgeon named Irfan Galaria, writes as follows:
“On one occasion, a handful of children, all about ages 5 to 8, were carried to the emergency room by their parents. All had single sniper shots to the head. These families were returning to their homes in Khan Yunis, about 2.5 miles away from the hospital, after Israeli tanks had withdrawn. But the snipers apparently stayed behind. None of these children survived.”
So this is happening. The evidence is undeniable, and the sourcing is as solid as it gets. There are mountains upon mountains of rock solid proof that Israeli forces routinely, deliberately shoot Palestinian children in the head in Gaza.
The only reason this isn’t being treated as an established fact by the western political-media class is because the Israeli military denies it, telling The Guardian in response to the aforementioned report that “The IDF only targets terrorists and military targets. In stark contrast to Hamas’s deliberate attacks on Israeli civilians, including men, women and children, the IDF follows international law and takes feasible precautions to mitigate civilian harm.”
“Doctors say otherwise,” The Guardian wrote.
Indeed, there is no longer any fact-based reason to deny that Israel is deliberately targeting children with sniper fire. The facts are in and the case is closed. The only basis anyone can have for denying this established fact is their own personal loyalty to the state of Israel and its military, and/or their own personal disdain for Palestinian lives.
This fact punches holes in so many of the narratives used to defend Israel over the past year. That Israel is conducting itself in a more ethical way than Hamas. That Israel is waging a war against Hamas and not the Palestinian people. That the IDF are “the most moral army in the world” and are taking extraordinary measures to avoid civilian casualties. That civilians are being killed in Gaza because Hamas uses them as “human shields”. That this is a war fought for Israel’s self-defense, and not a campaign of extermination driven by racism and hate.
There is simply no way to believe any of these things are true when you acknowledge the extensively-documented fact that Israeli forces are routinely shooting children in the head throughout the Gaza Strip.
Blinken approved Israeli attacks on Gaza aid convoys: Report
Since the start of Israel’s ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza, the US-backed army has become the leading cause of death for humanitarian workers worldwide
News Desk, OCT 8, 2024, https://thecradle.co/articles/blinken-approved-israeli-attacks-on-gaza-aid-convoys-report
US State Secretary Anthony Blinken gave the green light for Israel to launch attacks against humanitarian aid convoys inside the Gaza Strip in the early days of Israel’s genocide of Palestinians, according to a report by Drop Site News (DSN) citing Israeli journalists and media outlets.
Tel Aviv’s decision was made during a marathon session of the Security Cabinet between 16 and 17 October that Blinken took part in.
“From within the Kirya, the Israeli military’s main headquarters in Tel Aviv, Blinken participated in the frantic discussions of the Israeli War Cabinet … that were occurring in parallel to conversations in the broader Security Cabinet,” DSN reports.
Citing Channel 12 reporter Yaron Avraham, the report states that these sessions saw Israeli officials “[deliberate] for hours over the precise wording of the decision, with each draft being passed between the Cabinet room and Blinken’s room, a distance of a few meters away, inside the Kirya … Eventually, around 3 am, they arrive at an agreed upon text that is read in the Cabinet room in English.”
Channel 13 independently corroborated Avraham’s reporting, detailing: “The discussion with Blinken is conducted as follows: he is sitting in a room in the Kirya with his advisors and security team, while Security Cabinet holds the discussion; [Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron] Dermer goes back and forth and interfaces with him.”
A day later, following additional Cabinet sessions “helmed by both Blinken and [US President Joe] Biden,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office publicly announced its final decision.
“In light of President Biden’s demand, Israel will not thwart humanitarian supplies from Egypt as long as it is only food, water, and medicine for the civilian population located in the southern Gaza Strip or moving there, and as long as these supplies do not reach Hamas. Any supplies that reach Hamas will be thwarted,” the statement, issued in Hebrew, reads.
However, DSN highlights that “the Hebrew word לסכל, ‘to thwart,’ is frequently used by Israel to describe targeted killings and assassinations. The previous policy of ‘thwarting’ all humanitarian supplies from entering Gaza was conveyed to Egypt as an explicit threat to ‘bomb’ aid trucks.”
“We in the cabinet were promised at the outset that there would be monitoring, and that aid trucks hijacked by Hamas and its organizations [sic] would be bombed from the air, and the aid would be halted,” Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said a few days after the Security Cabinet’s decision was announced.
When pressed for comment by DSN, State Department spokesperson Vedant Patel called the report “absurd.”
Nevertheless, the State Department did not clarify whether Blinken approved attacks on alleged Hamas fighters “who secure aid convoys or seize their contents.”
Over the past year, intentional Israeli attacks have become the leading cause of death for humanitarian workers across the world, as the Israeli army is now responsible for more than 75 percent of aid workers’ deaths recorded since October 2023.
In the last three months of 2023, following the Security Cabinet session that Blinken took part in, Israeli attacks targeting humanitarian workers across the occupied Palestinian territories were responsible for more deaths “than the deadliest full year ever recorded.”
Last month, ProPublica revealed that two US government offices on humanitarian assistance recommended earlier this year that Washington suspend some or all weapons shipments to Israel because its forces were restricting the delivery of aid inside Gaza. However, their recommendations were sidelined by Blinken, who went on to lie to Congress about the findings.
“Escalation dominance” and the new nuclear threat: We face more than 1,000 Holocausts
Nuclear arsenals are vastly more powerful today than during the Cold War — and the risk of apocalypse keeps growing
By Norman Solomon, 6 Oct 24, https://www.salon.com/2024/10/06/escalation-dominance-and-the-new-nuclear-threat-we-face-more-than-1000-holocausts/?fbclid=IwY2xjawFxjVhleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHYLvOjzWp_vKRXdaiTZlKovXxdlnIxjKp_6EBAU3dN7rFD8OsR-o1Kd2eQ_aem_pgdCaz3-fGi_NP8MdUsIfw
Everything is at stake. Everything is at stake with nuclear weapons.
While working as a nuclear war planner for the Kennedy administration, Daniel Ellsberg was shown a document calculating that a U.S. nuclear attack on Communist countries would result in 600 million dead. As he put it later: “A hundred Holocausts.”
That was in 1961.
Today, with nuclear arsenals vastly larger and more powerful, scientists know that a nuclear exchange would cause “nuclear winter.” And the nearly complete end of agriculture on the planet. Some estimates put the survival rate of humans on Earth at 1 or 2 percent.
No longer 100 Holocausts.
More than 1,000 Holocausts.
If such a nuclear war happens, of course we won’t be around for any retrospective analysis. Or regrets. So candid introspection is in a category of now or never.
What if we did have the opportunity for hindsight? What if we could somehow hover over this planet? And see what had become a global crematorium and an unspeakable ordeal of human agony? Where, in words attributed to both Nikita Khrushchev and Winston Churchill, “the living would envy the dead.”
What might we Americans say about the actions and inaction of our leaders?
In 2023, the nine nuclear-armed countries spent $91 billion on their nuclear weapons. Most of that amount, $51 billion, was the U.S. share. And our country accounted for 80 percent of the increase in nuclear weapons spending.
The United States is leading the way in the nuclear arms race. And we’re encouraged to see that as a good thing: “escalation dominance.”
But escalation doesn’t remain unipolar. As time goes on, “Do as we say, not as we do” isn’t convincing to other nations.
China is now expanding its nuclear arsenal. That escalation does not exist in a vacuum. Official Washington pretends that Chinese policies are shifting without regard to the U.S. pursuit of “escalation dominance.” But that’s a disingenuous pretense. What the great critic of Vietnam War escalation during the 1960s, Sen. William Fulbright, called “the arrogance of power.”
Of course there’s plenty to deplore about Russia’s approach to nuclear weapons. Irresponsible threats about using “tactical” nukes in Ukraine have come from Moscow. There’s now public discussion — by Russian military and political elites — of putting nuclear weapons in space.
We should face the realities of the U.S. government’s role in fueling such ominous trends, in part by dismantling key arms control agreements. Among crucial steps, it’s long past time to restore three treaties that the United States abrogated — ABM, Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces and Open Skies.
On the non-proliferation front, opportunities are being spurned by Washington. For instance, as former CIA analyst Melvin Goodman wrote in September: “Iran’s Ayatollah has indicated a readiness to open discussions with the United States on nuclear matters, but the Biden administration has turned a deaf ear to such a possibility.”
That deaf ear greatly pleases Israel, the only nuclear-weapons state in the Middle East. On Sept. 22, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said unequivocally that Israel’s pager attack in Lebanon was “a form of terrorism.” The U.S. keeps arming Israel, but won’t negotiate with Iran.
The U.S. government has a responsibility to follow up on every lead, and respond to every overture. Without communication, we vastly increase the risk of devastation.
We can too easily forget what’s truly at stake.
Despite diametrical differences in ideologies, in values, in ideals and systems, programs for extermination are in place at a magnitude dwarfing what occurred during the first half of the 1940s.
Today, Congress and the White House are in the grip of what Martin Luther King Jr. called “the madness of militarism.” In a toxic mix with the arrogance of power. Propelling a new and more dangerous Cold War.
And so, at the State Department, the leadership talks about a “rules-based order,” which all too often actually means: “We make the rules, we break the rules.”
Meanwhile, the Doomsday Clock set by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is now just 90 seconds away from apocalyptic midnight.
Six decades ago, the Doomsday Clock was a full 12 minutes away. And President Lyndon Johnson was willing to approach Moscow with the kind of wisdom that is now absent at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Here’s what Johnson said at the end of his extensive summit meeting with Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin in June 1967 in Glassboro, New Jersey: “We have made further progress in an effort to improve our understanding of each other’s thinking on a number of questions.”
Two decades later, President Ronald Reagan — formerly a supreme Cold Warrior — stood next to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and said: “We decided to talk to each other instead of about each other.”
But such attitudes would be heresy today.
As each day brings escalation toward a global nuclear inferno, standard-issue legislators on both sides of the aisle keep boosting the Pentagon budget. Huge new appropriations for nuclear weapons are voted under the euphemism of “modernization.”
And here’s a sad irony: The few members of Congress willing to issue urgent warnings about the danger of nuclear war often stoke that danger with calls for “victory” in the Ukraine war. Instead, what’s urgently needed is a sober push for actual diplomacy to end it.
The U.S. should not use the Ukraine war as a rationale for pursuing a mutually destructive set of policies toward Russia. It’s an approach that maintains and worsens the daily reality on the knife-edge of nuclear war.
We don’t know how far negotiations with Russia could get on an array of pivotal issues. But refusing to negotiate is a catastrophic path.
Continuation of the war in Ukraine markedly increases the likelihood of spinning out from a regional to a Europe-wide to a nuclear war. Yet calls for vigorously pursuing diplomacy to end the Ukraine war are dismissed out of hand as serving Vladimir Putin’s interests.
That’s a zero-sum view of the world. A one-way ticket to omnicide.
The world has gotten even closer to the precipice of a military clash between the nuclear superpowers, with a push to green-light NATO-backed Ukrainian attacks heading deeper into Russia.
Consider what John F. Kennedy had to say, eight months after the Cuban missile crisis, in his historic speech at American University: “Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy, or of a collective death wish for the world.”
That crucial insight from Kennedy is currently in the dumpsters at the White House and on Capitol Hill.
And where is this all headed?
Daniel Ellsberg tried to alert members of Congress. Five years ago, in a letter that was hand-delivered to the offices of every senator and House member, he wrote: “I am concerned that the public, most members of Congress, and possibly even high members of the Executive branch have remained in the dark, or in a state of denial, about the implications of rigorous studies by environmental scientists over the last dozen years.” Those studies “confirm that using even a large fraction of the existing U.S. or Russian nuclear weapons that are on high alert would bring about nuclear winter, leading to global famine and near extinction of humanity.”
In the quest for sanity and survival, isn’t it time for reconstruction of the nuclear arms control infrastructure? Yes, the Russian war against Ukraine violates international law and “norms,” as did U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But real diplomacy with Russia is in the interests of global security.
And some great options don’t depend on what happens at the negotiation table.
Many experts say that the most important initial step our country could take to reduce the chances of nuclear war would be a shutdown of all ICBMs.
The word “deterrence” is often heard. But the land-based part of the triad is actually the opposite of deterrence — it’s an invitation to be attacked. That’s the reality of the 400 intercontinental ballistic missiles that are on hair-trigger alert in five Western states.
Uniquely, ICBMs invite a counterforce attack. And they allow a president just minutes to determine whether what’s incoming is actually a set of missiles — or, as in the past, a flock of geese or a drill message that’s mistaken for the real thing.
Former Secretary of Defense William Perry wrote that ICBMs are “some of the most dangerous weapons in the world” and “they could even trigger an accidental nuclear war.”
And yet, so far, we can’t get anywhere with Congress in order to shut down ICBMs. “Oh no,” we’re told, “that would be unilateral disarmament.”
Imagine that you’re standing in a pool of gasoline, with your adversary. You’re lighting matches, and your adversary is lighting matches. If you stop lighting matches, that could be condemned as “unilateral disarmament.” It would also be a sane step to reduce the danger — whether or not the other side follows suit.
Mistaking a false alarm for a nuclear-missile attack becomes more likely amid the stresses, fatigue and paranoia that come with the protracted war in Ukraine and extending war into Russia.
The ongoing refusal to shut down the ICBMs is akin to insisting that our side must keep lighting matches while standing in gasoline.
The chances of ICBMs starting a nuclear conflagration have increased with sky-high tensions between the world’s two nuclear superpowers. Mistaking a false alarm for a nuclear-missile attack becomes more likely amid the stresses, fatigue and paranoia that come with the protracted war in Ukraine and extending war into Russia.
Their unique vulnerability as land-based strategic weapons puts ICBMs in the unique category of “use them or lose them.” So, as Secretary Perry explained, “If our sensors indicate that enemy missiles are en route to the United States, the president would have to consider launching ICBMs before the enemy missiles could destroy them. Once they are launched, they cannot be recalled. The president would have less than 30 minutes to make that terrible decision.”
The U.S. should dismantle its entire ICBM force. Former ICBM launch officer Bruce Blair and Gen. James Cartwright, former vice chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote: “By scrapping the vulnerable land-based missile force, any need for launching on warning disappears.”
In July, the Union of Concerned Scientists released a letter signed by more than 700 scientists. They not only called for cancellation of the Sentinel program for a new version of ICBMs, they also called for getting rid of the entire land-based leg of the triad.
Meanwhile, the current dispute in Congress about ICBMs has focused on whether it would be cheaper to build the cost-overrunning Sentinel system or upgrade the existing Minuteman III missiles. But either way, the matches keep being lit for a global holocaust.
During his Nobel Peace Prize speech, Martin Luther King Jr. declared: “I refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear destruction.”
I want to close with some words from Daniel Ellsberg’s book “The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner,” summing up the preparations for nuclear war. He wrote:
No policies in human history have more deserved to be recognized as immoral, or insane. The story of how this calamitous predicament came about, and how and why it has persisted for over half a century is a chronicle of human madness. Whether Americans, Russians and other humans can rise to the challenge of reversing these policies and eliminating the danger of near-term extinction caused by their own inventions and proclivities remains to be seen. I choose to join with others in acting as if that is still possible.
Updated findings provide insights into radiation exposure’s impact on cancer risk
by University of California, Irvine, 7 Oct 24, https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-10-insights-exposure-impact-cancer.html
A major update was made to the International Nuclear Workers Study (INWORKS), an international epidemiological study of workers in the nuclear sector to assess their risks of cancer and non-cancerous diseases.
David Richardson, Ph.D., professor of environmental and occupational health at UC Irvine Joe C. Wen School of Population & Public Health, was the principal investigator for this study and senior author of a publication in The Lancet Haematology that outlines the new findings.
With the study update, Richardson and colleagues sought to understand the associations between low-dose exposure to penetrating forms of ionizing radiation and its effect on risk of leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma.
The researchers assembled a cohort of more than 300,000 radiation-monitored workers from France, the United Kingdom and the United States, employed at nuclear facilities between 1944 and 2016. Using Poisson regression methods, researchers measured the amount of radiation that got absorbed into bone marrow.
Since radiation exposure is a known risk factor for leukemia, excluding chronic lymphocytic leukemia, the study primarily focused on measuring incidence of leukemia and other cancer subtypes such as myelodysplastic syndromes, Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas, and multiple myeloma.
The study revealed a positive association between prolonged low-dose exposure to ionizing radiation and mortality from these hematological cancers. The study concluded that health risk remains low at low exposure levels. Nevertheless, the evidence of associations between total radiation exposure and multiple myeloma and myelodysplastic syndromes signals the necessity for future radiation studies to expand the discussion on radiation protection and occupational safety measures on a global scale.
“Our studies of people exposed to low doses of radiation add to our understanding of radiation risks at the exposure levels encountered in many contemporary settings,” said Richardson who is the associate dean for research at Wen Public Health. “Our results can inform radiation protection standards and will provide input for discussions on protections from radiation.”
More information: Klervi Leuraud et al, Leukaemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma mortality after low-level exposure to ionising radiation in nuclear workers (INWORKS): updated findings from an international cohort study, The Lancet Haematology (2024). DOI: 10.1016/S2352-3026(24)00240-0
Journal information: The Lancet Haematology
Israel Planning Major Attack on Iran
The US is coordinating with Israel on its plans.
by Dave DeCamp, October 2, 2024, https://news.antiwar.com/2024/10/02/israel-planning-major-attack-on-iran/#gsc.tab=0
Israel is planning to launch a “significant retaliation” attack against Iran over the Iranian missile barrage that targeted Israel on Tuesday, which was a response to several Israeli escalations in the region. Israeli officials acknowledged to Axios that the situation could lead to a full-blown regional war, which would involve the US.
According to the Axios report, Israel could target oil production facilities inside Iran or other strategic sites. Israeli officials say that if Iran hits back, then all options will be on the table, including strikes on Iran’s civilian nuclear facilities.
“We have a big question mark about how the Iranians are going to respond to an attack, but we take into consideration the possibility that they would go all in, which will be a whole different ball game,” an Israeli official told Axios.
Other options being considered are attacks on Iran’s air defenses or targeted assassinations. Israel has a history of killing people inside Iran, including the July 31 assassination of Hamas’s political chief, Ismail Haniyeh.
Israel would likely need US military support to launch significant strikes on Iranian territory, and the Israeli officials speaking to Axios say they are coordinating with the Biden administration. Israel wants more US support if it provokes another Iranian attack.
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said Tuesday that the US would work with Israel to ensure Iran faces “severe consequences.” President Biden has also said he is working with Israel on a response but said Wednesday that he wouldn’t support strikes on Iran’s nuclear facility.
“All seven of us agree that they have a right to respond, but they have to respond proportionally,” he said, referring to the Group of Seven nations. He said G7 leaders agreed to impose new sanctions on Iran, which will have little impact since Iran is already under so many.
Israel acknowledged on Wednesday that Iranian missiles made an impact on several military bases but claimed there was no significant damage. Israel is also claiming there were no major casualties, with only two Israelis suffering minor injuries. One Palestinian was killed in the Israeli-occupied West Bank when shrapnel from an intercepted missile hit him.
Iran fired about 180 ballistic missiles at Israel in response to the Israeli assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran and the Israeli killing of Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah and Abbas Nilforoushan, an IRGC commander who was killed alongside Nasrallah.
Blinken Approved Policy to Bomb Aid Trucks, Israeli Cabinet Members Suggest
Drop Site News Yaniv Cogan, Oct 06, 2024
From the very beginning of Israel’s assault on the Gaza Strip, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken had his hands on the steering wheel. After October 7, Blinken was the first senior U.S. official to arrive in Israel, on October 11. “I’m going with a very simple and clear message… that the United States has Israel’s back,” Blinken reportedly said before boarding the plane.
He returned again days later. This time, Blinken was there to demand that Israel rethink its decision to bomb any humanitarian aid entering Gaza and impose a “total siege” on the Strip. In exchange, U.S. President Joe Biden offered to visit Israel himself. Reportedly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained to Blinken upon his arrival on October 16, 2023: “I have got people in the cabinet who don’t want an aspirin to get into Gaza because of what’s happened.”
From within the Kirya, the Israeli military’s main headquarters in Tel Aviv, Blinken participated in the frantic discussions of the Israeli War Cabinet—the decision-making forum guiding the genocidal campaign—that were occuring in parallel to conversations in the broader Security Cabinet.
According to Channel 12 reporter Yaron Avraham, on October 16 and 17, “the [Security] Cabinet deliberated for hours over the precise wording of the decision, with each draft being passed between the Cabinet room and Blinken’s room, a distance of a few meters away, inside the Kirya…. Eventually, around 3 a.m., they arrive at an agreed upon text that is read in the Cabinet room in English.”
Avraham’s account of the process was independently corroborated by a reporter for the competing Channel 13, who wrote: “The discussion with Blinken is conducted as follows: he is sitting in a room in the Kirya with his advisors and security team, while Security Cabinet holds the discussion; [Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron] Dermer goes back and forth and interfaces with him.”
Blinken, for his part, concluded the day with a triumphant speech taking responsibility for the restarting of humanitarian aid to Gaza:
To that end, today, and at our request, the United States and Israel have agreed to develop a plan that will enable humanitarian aid from donor nations and multilateral organizations to reach civilians in Gaza – and them alone – including the possibility of creating areas to help keep civilians our of harm’s way. It is critical that aid begin flowing into Gaza as soon as possible.
We share Israel’s concern that Hamas may seize or destroy aid entering Gaza or otherwise preventing it from reaching the people who need it. If Hamas in any way blocks humanitarian assistance from reaching civilians, including by seizing the aid itself, we’ll be the first to condemn it and we will work to prevent it from happening again.
The following day, after an additional round of Cabinet meetings, this time helmed by both Blinken and Biden, an outline of the decision was publicly announced by Prime Minster’s Netanyahu’s office: “We will not allow humanitarian assistance in the form of food and medicines from our territory to the Gaza Strip” and, in a separate Hebrew version, “In light of President Biden’s demand, Israel will not thwart humanitarian supplies from Egypt as long as it is only food, water and medicine for the civilian population located in the southern Gaza Strip or moving there, and as long as these supplies do not reach Hamas. Any supplies that reach Hamas will be thwarted.” The Hebrew word לסכל, “to thwart,” is frequently used by Israel to describe targeted killings and assassinations. The previous policy of “thwarting” all humanitarian supplies from entering Gaza was conveyed to Egypt as an explicit threat to “bomb” aid trucks.
The substance of the Blinken-approved policy was starkly conveyed by Security Cabinet member Bezalel Smotrich, who later told the Israeli media: “We in the cabinet were promised at the outset that there would be monitoring, and that aid trucks hijacked by Hamas and its organizations [sic] would be bombed from the air, and the aid would be halted.”
“Minimal Aid Should Be Allowed”
For Smotrich and other Israeli policymakers, the U.S.’s approval of the policy presented an opportunity to realize aspirations they had harbored long before October 7th. Already in 2018, as Palestinians in Gaza resisted the Israeli blockade—jokingly referred to by the Israeli government as “an appointment with a dietician”—through mass protests, Smotrich stated: “As far as I’m concerned, Gaza should be hermetically sealed. We shouldn’t provide them anything. Let them die of hunger, thirst, and malaria. I don’t care, they are not my citizens, I owe them nothing”.
The first part of the humanitarian aid policy approved by Blinken—the barring of entry of aid from within Israeli territory—was short-lived. By December 2023, aid had begun entering directly through Israel, and from the very first moment Israel’s monitoring mechanism, implemented shortly after the meetings on October 16 and 17, required all aid, regardless of origin, to go through checks within Israel before reaching Gaza, resulting in major delays. But the second policy—the “thwarting” of aid shipments within Gaza if they “reach Hamas”—also proved to be an effective tool in Israel’s arsenal when it came to starving the Gazan population.
The Hebrew word לסכל, “to thwart,” is frequently used by Israel to describe targeted killings and assassinations.
As 2023 came to an end, the UN Security Council voted on a resolution to facilitate the entry of aid into Gaza, which had been significantly watered down under U.S. pressure. UN Secretary General António Guterres explained: “Many people are measuring the effectiveness of the humanitarian operation in Gaza based on the number of trucks from the Egyptian Red Crescent, the UN, and our partners that are allowed to unload aid across the border. This is a mistake. The real problem is that the way Israel is conducting this offensive is creating massive obstacles to the distribution of humanitarian aid inside Gaza.”
Aid that had made it through into Gaza without rotting, despite delays caused by the military and by Israeli protesters egged on by the government to block aid trucks, had to then be distributed within Gaza using a handful of trucks Israel allowed to operate in The Strip, running on barely available fuel, driven under fire over destroyed roads filled with unexploded munitions, and delivered without real time communications due to blackouts imposed by the Israeli government. For over a million refugees confined to the south of The Strip, whatever food they had received had to then be stored in tents, using increasingly scarce containers. Meanwhile, the domestic food production capacity of Gaza has been decimated through the deliberate and gleeful destruction of agriculture by the IDF and bakeries.
Guterres’s remarks were quoted in the application made by the South African government to the International Court of Justice one week later, alongside comments from a senior official from UNRWA, which has coordinated most of the humanitarian efforts in Gaza, characterizing the resolution as “a greenlight for continued genocide.”
On January 26, a panel of 17 judges found “a real and imminent risk” to the rights of Palestinians under the Genocide Convention. On the very same day, the U.S. cut funding for UNRWA after a narrative aggressively promoted by Israel Knesset members that the agency—which employed tens of thousands in the Gaza Strip—was also employing an untold number of members of Hamas and that “terrorists” had been students in UNRWA-run schools. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………….. Netanyahu repeatedly emphasized in public speeches that the amount of aid Israel is allowing into Gaza is “minimal.” Former Brigadier General Effi Eitam, who reportedly became one of Netanyahu’s close confidants and advisors in the wake of October 7th, shed light on the meaning of the phrase: “Regarding the humanitarian aid, minimal aid should be allowed, and when I say minimal this means—not to shy away from a humanitarian crisis in Gaza. There are no innocents in Gaza.”
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… By February 9th, UNRWA’s director, Philippe Lazzarini, told the press that the Israeli military had assassinated eight Palestinian police officers who were providing escorts to humanitarian aid convoys………………………………………
On March 28, the International Court of Justice noted “unprecedented levels of food insecurity experienced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip over recent weeks,” and ordered Israel to “take all necessary and effective measures to ensure, without delay… the unhindered provision… of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance, including food, water, electricity, fuel, shelter, clothing, hygiene and sanitation requirements, as well as medical supplies and medical care.”
Less than 24 hours later, Israel reportedly targeted and killed several local policemen who were securing aid deliveries in two separate attacks, along with some of their family members and unrelated bystander. And on the next day, the Israeli military killed 12 people, among them officials representing tribal committees, who were coordinating aid distribution efforts.
Two days later, Israel’s favored aid provider, World Central Kitchen, fell victim to the same policy: over the course of several minutes an IDF drone pursued a 7-member WCK team driving along a designated route, and, in three different airstrikes several kilometers apart, targeted and killed every single one of them. The vehicles, marked with a WCK logo which the IDF claimed was not visible through the drone’s thermal camera, were driving along a preapproved route, escorting an aid convoy on a mission coordinated with the Israeli military.
World Central Kitchen subsequently decided to halt their aid operations in Gaza, though they later resumed it.
The Israeli military ended up putting the blame on Colonel Nochi Mendel, who ordered the strike, and has previously expressed support for halting aid provision to Gaza. Mendel’s punishment amounted to being let go from his military service, and going back to his prestigious day job as director of the Settlement Department at the Israeli Ministry of Defense.
But the right wing Makor Rishon newspaper concluded, on the basis of conversations with drone operators involved in the assassination of the aid workers, that Mendel was only implementing the official policy jointly set by Blinken and the Israeli cabinet back in October: “The mission order made it clear that the IDF is instructed to thwart an attempt by Hamas terrorists to take over the aid trucks that entered Gaza. The IDF received this instruction from the Security Cabinet at the beginning of the war, sometime around October 18, 2023, following heavy pressure from the United States.”
Concerns raised by the drone operators about hitting aid workers were dismissed by their commanders, who insisted on strict adherence to the order, “no matter what.”
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken reacted to the killing of the WCK aid workers by stating: “Humanitarian workers are heroes. They show the best of what humanity has to offer. I extend my deepest condolences to those who lost their lives in the strike on WCK in Gaza. There must be a swift, thorough, and impartial investigation into this incident.”
But follow-ups by U.S. press in the next few months revealed the State Department was happy to have the investigation conducted by the president and CEO of one of Israel’s largest arms manufacturers. The ultimate culprit for the killings—the policy that Blinken had brokered—was not amended………………………………………………….
On August 29th, the Israeli military assassinated four Palestinian aid delivery workers who accompanied a convoy organized by the U.S.-based NGO Anera. Again, the Israeli government cited the operational policy of targeting armed forces who assume control of the aid as justification for the strike.
Devastating Effects
The results of the starvation policies in Gaza are no longer a matter of speculation…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
As the U.S. was busy formulating the policies that brought about this outcome, it has simultaneously sought to help Israel construct a narrative that would help it carry on starving the population of Gaza unimpeded. “The images [seen] in America are brutal. There are enemies of Israel that are actively telling the story in a very negative way, and there are a lot of things that can be pointed to if that’s the view you’re taking,” U.S. ambassador to Israel, Jack Lew, told a crowd of Israeli academics in July. “Israel needs to tell the story that it is making sure that people are getting what they need for there not to be a famine.”
The State Department, meanwhile, continuously offered lip service to the suffering of Palestinians. When asked about the U.S.’s responsibility for the spread of starvation in Gaza, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller responded: “It is the United States that has secured all of the major agreements to get more humanitarian assistance into Gaza going back to the very early days, the first week after October 7th, when the Secretary traveled to the region and the President traveled to Israel, and together convinced Israel to open Rafah crossing to allow humanitarian assistance in.”
In fact, Blinken and Biden’s visit resulted in the formulation of the Israeli policy of starvation as it stands today. “The United States, including Blinken and others, have legitimized this tactic,” said Asi. “Starvation as a weapon of war is okay as long as we agree with your aims.” That U.S.-approved policy was then implemented using U.S.-manufactured weapons, with the backing of U.S.-imposed sanctions, under the veil of a U.S.-constructed narrative. https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/blinken-approved-policy-bomb-aid-trucks
‘Russia doesn’t want to use nuclear weapons’: The view from wartime Moscow
Putin is revising Russia’s nuclear doctrine at a critical juncture in Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Aljazeera, By Niko Vorobyov, 7 Oct 2024
Russia, which holds the world’s largest stockpile of nuclear warheads, has unveiled its new nuclear doctrine, lowering its threshold for nuclear engagement while continuing its invasion of Ukraine.
The revised rules, outlined by President Vladimir Putin, say that an attack on Russia with “participation or support of a nuclear power” will be seen as their “joint attack on the Russian Federation”, seemingly responding to the possibility that Ukraine could strike targets deep within Russian territory using long-range weapons supplied by Western allies.
The United States, Ukraine’s most important ally, is the world’s second-largest nuclear power, with 5,224 warheads compared to Russia’s 5,889.
Alexey Malinin, the Moscow-based founder of the Center for International Interaction and Cooperation, told Al Jazeera that from the Russian perspective, a reassessment of nuclear capabilities was necessary in the face of encirclement by hostile powers.
But as panic sets in across some Western nations, Russian experts say Moscow does not want to tap into its arsenal.
“Russia does not want to use nuclear weapons, understanding the seriousness of the consequences of a conflict with the use of such weapons,” he said.
“However, at present, our country is forced to respond to the growing threats directed against us. The West continues to pump Ukraine with weapons, including F-16 fighters and long-range missiles like [US-made] ATACMS. Moreover, NATO is developing its infrastructure around the borders of Russia: new units are being created in Finland.”
He claimed that although Russia is trying to avoid the use of nuclear weapons, Moscow is “forced to demonstrate” that it is ready to defend “integrity and sovereignty” by any possible means”.
However, Kremlin critics worry that Putin is pushing closer towards, if not a nuclear apocalypse, then at least a regional humanitarian disaster.
“The USSR said that it would never strike first … Now Putin says that he will strike whenever he wants,” exiled politician Leonid Gozman wrote in the Novaya Gazeta newspaper…………………………..
During the Cold War, both Washington and Moscow operated on the principle of mutually assured destruction, the understanding that a nuclear strike from one side would prompt a response in kind, leading to an all-out atomic altercation and mass devastation on a global scale.
However, Putin is warning that Russia would use nuclear weapons in response to a “critical threat to our sovereignty” – referring to not necessarily a nuclear assault, but also a conventional one.
Alexandra, an everyday Russian in Moscow who works as an architect, told Al Jazeera: “I’m scared, but I don’t understand much of what’s going on.”
The Russian government and its supporters believe they are sending a strong signal to Ukraine’s Western allies, warning against interfering in the conflict.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has warned the UN that should the West allow Ukraine to strike further into Russia, it will be dragging itself into a “suicidal escapade”.
“Whether or not they will provide the permission for Ukraine for long-range weapons, then we will see what their understanding was of what they heard,” he said recently.
Washington has recently greenlit additional aid for Ukraine, but permission to use US-supplied weapons does not yet go beyond what was previously agreed.
Writing on Telegram, the hawkish former President Dmitry Medvedev stated the new doctrine “could cool the passions of those opponents who have not yet lost their sense of self-preservation.”…………
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/10/7/russia-doesnt-want-to-use-nuclear-weapons-the-view-from-wartime-moscow
Let’s remember the 365 days of genocide as well as October 7 attack.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coaliton, Glen Ellyn IL, 7 Oct 24
The Chicago Tribune editorial ‘Remember October 7, 2023’ was right to mourn the Israeli dead, injured and those taken hostage from the Hamas attack a year earlier.
But it’s unfortunate there was no mention of the of Israel’s genocidal ethnic cleansing that followed which has inflicted near total destruction on Gaza’s 139 square miles in the following 365 days. The Tribune ignores the over 40,000 officially dead (likely upwards of 100,000), nearly all schools universities, hospitals, homes destroyed and most food, water and medicine kept from reaching the most devastated people on earth.
It’s unfortunate that there is no mention that the year long genocide in Gaza could not be occurring without tens of billions in US weaponry flowing into Israel for their ‘defense.’ Genocide is not defense…it is genocide.
It is unfortunate there was no mention of the people Israeli genocide is designed to remove from Gaza and eventually the West Bank. Say the word Chicago Tribune Editorial Board…they are Palestinians.
For the Tribune to state that the horrors unleased over the past year “can no longer be contained” is an abrogation of the media’s role to provide a solution to the most grotesque destruction of a people in this century. To state “we suspect it (the anniversary) will not be seen as a day to discuss politics or even the ongoing conflict now raging on another front” is being blind to evil that must be confronted relentlessly.
This is precisely the day for the Chicago Tribune to engage its readership, regardless of ethnicity or religion, over the ongoing conflict. Had the Trib, along with the rest of mainstream media been doing just that for the past 365 days, this genocide might be over and negotiations for a Palestinian state underway.
1 This Month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com/
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- February 2026 (11)
- January 2026 (307)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 