WILL THE 2024 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION BRING AN END TO THE WAR IN UKRAINE?
In March-April 2022, first in Minsk and later in Istanbul delegates ultimately came close to an agreement. A previsional document was initialled with more work envisioned being done to reach a final comprehensive agreement. At that point a visit to Kiev by Boris Johnson, then prime minister of Britain, ended the entire process.
https://aearnur.substack.com/p/will-the-2024-us-presidential-election, 1 Nov 24
Who wants to see more war? Very few. But when those few occupy the highest political positions… more war is exactly what we get.
The question is no longer whether the Ukrainian regime will win against Russia. The question now is how long the western powers will sustain the regime until it loses. The secondary question related to this is how will the western powers react when their narratives about this conflict begin to collapse, as they are in the process of doing now. ‘Project Ukraine’ is crucial to these powers in their dedication to weakening first Russia, then China. Could it be that the upcoming presidential election in the USA will bring about the end of the Ukrainian war and ultimately, an end to the West’s determination to achieve global hegemony.
The prospects for an eventual global peace via multipolarity rests in the present day upon the conclusion to the Ukrainian war, the West’s ‘Project Ukraine’ and all that goes with it, including the prospective war of the West against China. The upcoming election in the USA is a crucial element regarding the western neocon elite to whom there never was such a thing as a bad war. To defeat and permanently defeat this way of thinking will involve a massive change. The result of the 2024 presidential election in the USA has the potential to be crucial in this respect. The fixed policy of the current western political elite is embedded within its ‘Project Ukraine’. The task involved in terminating it will involve immense effort and dedication due to its importance as seen by the neocons who have achieved ascendancy in the West since 9/11.
The pressure on Russia was unrelenting by the western powers as they sought to drive it into a war with the Ukrainian regime. The preparations were meticulous as we have seen through the length of time the Russian military has taken to break through the 1,000+ km line of Ukrainian fortifications. The West developed the Ukrainian army to NATO standards as the vital complementary component to man them. Along with the sanctions regime against Russia and what they thought would be the entire world on their side, it was believed Russia and its authorities would crumble.
With successive Ukrainian regimes since the US-fomented Maidan coup in 2014, the western nations drove Russia into the only viable course of action left to it if it wished to maintain its security and long term sovereign stability. Every possibility to resolve the Ukraine problem was taken to its full conclusion by Russia in a near decade-long attempt via the Minsk process to find a diplomatic solution whereby peace and reconciliation could be accomplished. As we now know from statements by Angela Merkel and Petro Poroshenko the entire process was merely a sham to give the West time to build the Ukrainian army and the fortifications across the entire line of contact with the Russian-speaking republics of the Donbass.
In addition to Minsk, in a last gasp attempt to persuade the western powers that peace was possible, Russia offered to negotiate a new security architecture for Europe which would safeguard the security of all. Missives on this basis were sent to both NATO and the western powers. These were dismissed out of hand, especially so by NATO whose stance was that they could do whatever they wished in accepting nations into their organisation and Russia had no say in this whatsoever.
Then, after Russia was left with zero good choices having tried everything possible to avoid war, it began its special military operation, a limited strategy designed to bring the Ukrainian regime to its senses and to implement the Minsk agreements that had been ratified at the UN, the two sides held negotiations seeking a way forward. In March-April 2022, first in Minsk and later in Istanbul delegates ultimately came close to an agreement. A previsional document was initialled with more work envisioned being done to reach a final comprehensive agreement. At that point a visit to Kiev by Boris Johnson, then prime minister of Britain, ended the entire process.
The history of western leaders seeking to attack Russia in almost every possible way short of outright military attack is a long one. The verbal abuse had been constant for decades. Then came the economic war against Russia through sanctions that has been the most unrelenting economic attack on a nation ever seen. Yet Russia has stood resiliently determined to see things through and its economy has in fact grown stronger rather than weaker over these years. The second arm of the attack against Russia whereby all nations would cut ties with it, also failed. The third arm, the massively prepared siege line the West built facing the Donbass and the professional army designed to defeat Russia by NATO is now in the process of collapse. The West’s entire plan has backfired in all its parts, leaving the western war powers scrambling for any means to reverse this, including desperately promulgating continuously false narratives.
The most blatant false narrative created by the western powers was that Russia’s entry into Ukraine was “unprovoked”. The hymn sheet instructing every western official of any note to use this word went out very early. Saying Russia made an “unprovoked” attack on and invasion of Ukraine was meant to discourage anyone from looking at the genesis of the conflict. As anyone with an independent frame of mind can easily see, Russia was massively provoked, and over and over again constantly since 2008 when the Bush administration twisted European arms to support Ukraine’s entry into NATO. The provocations against Russia during the entire time leading up to its special military operation begun on February 24th 2022 have been massive and continuous.
The lie that Russia made an unprovoked attack on Ukraine is being exposed now as never before. This is due to the fact that as the war in Ukraine has dragged on it has stimulated ever more people to look deeper than the headlines. Online commentators who have demonstrated their trustworthiness over these years such as Alexander Mercouris of The Duran website have been available to relate in detail the true origins of the Ukraine conflict. Besides Alexander there have been others such as Larry Johnson, Scott Ritter, Ray McGovern, Daniel Davis, Colonel Douglas Macgregor and an increasing number of others. Now we can see more and more politicians both in Europe and in the USA who are refusing to mouth the agreed-upon narratives insisted on by others. Viktor Orban in Hungary, Robert Fico in Slovakia and those around Donald Trump in the USA are no longer willing to support the distortions that have been rife in the West for almost three years of war in Ukraine. They seek peace in Ukraine, not the continuous war, with all its massively tragic consequences, sought by the elite neocon cabal of the West.
The lying narratives promulgated by the top echelon of the western powers are being exposed as never before. Just as Zelensky’s corrupt and inhuman regime is crashing and burning before us, so too are the utterly false narratives of the warmongering western neocon elites. The politicians who have been telling these lies about Putin, Russia and the genesis of the Ukraine war are being exposed as never before. What will they do in response? Certainly they will attempt to cancel those among them who have chosen to broadcast the truth, to degenerate them, call them traitors and any other pejorative term possible. I suspect their chances of succeeding as the Ukrainian regime goes down are slim. The humiliation awaiting those who chose to lie for war rather than seek peace is approaching fast.
Campaigners slam chancellor Rachel Reeves for £2.7 billion pledge to nuclear power station
Rachel Reeves pledged £2.7 billion to nuclear power station
31st October, By Dominic Bareham, https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/24689882.rachel-reeves-pledged-2-7-billion-nuclear-power-station/
Campaigners opposed to the new Sizewell C nuclear power station have slammed chancellor Rachel Reeves for continuing to back the project in her budget. In her first budget, she pledged a further £2.7 billion of government funding for the new dual reactor power station, which is expected to cost £20 billion.
But campaign groups opposed to the project, including Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) and Stop Sizewell C, were “appalled” at the news.
TASC chair Jenny Kirtley said: “TASC find this decision appalling – Labour promised ‘change’ but there is no change here as they quietly splurge a further £2.7 billion on Sizewell C, a Boris Johnson vanity project, despite the poor state of this country’s finances and the lack of transparency surrounding the full cost of the project.”
And Alison Downes, from Stop Sizewell C, said: “For a government that criticised the opposition for playing fast and loose with the nation’s finances, the Chancellor is surprisingly happy to do the same, allocating another £2.7 billion of taxpayers’ money on risky, expensive Sizewell C, without making any guarantee of a Final Investment Decision being taken.
“Including £2.5 billion already spent, this means £5.2 billion of our money will be spent on a project that cannot even help Labour achieve its energy mission and is looking increasingly toxic to private investors.”
The campaigners are opposed to Sizewell C because they fear the impact the new power station will have on the surrounding environment, particularly nearby Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Sites of Special Scientific Interest.
They also fear for the nature reserve at RSPB Minsmere.
Congress Must Investigate Corruption in Nuclear Energy Industry
Real Clear Energy, By Craig Shirley, April 10, 2024
In their zeal to achieve a carbon-free environment, Democrats have done a big turnaround to promote nuclear energy as a safe, clean energy source. Some states are moving as fast they can to reactivate idle reactors. In 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Relief Act (IRA) to grant $30 billion for nuclear subsidies.
Scandals involving bribery over nuclear energy have toppled high-level state officials and corporate executives in Ohio, Illinois and other places.
In 2020, federal prosecutors brought charges against officials on Commonwealth Edison (ComEd), an Illinois company, for offering jobs and favors to friends of the Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives in exchange for a bill to bailout the company’s nuclear division.
At nearly the same time, Ohio-based FirstEnergy executives were charged with paying $60 million in bribes to state legislators. Former Ohio Speaker of the House Larry Householder is currently serving a 47 year prison sentence.
Floodlight, a non-profit environmental news service, wrote a piece that appeared in the liberal magazine Mother Jones that perfectly encapsulates the corruption in the nuclear industry:
“Utility fraud and corruption—in Florida, Illinois, Mississippi, Ohio, and South Carolina—have cost electricity customers at least $6.6 billion, according to Floodlight’s analysis. Ratepayers have bankrolled nuclear plants that never got built, transmission systems that were over-engineered to beef up profits, and aging coal facilities that couldn’t compete with cheaper plants powered by methane, which the industry calls natural gas.”
Before these scandals erupted, and before Congress passed the Inflation Recovery Act, the nuclear industry had become so unpopular, it was a tempting target for political corruption.
According to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists:
“Changes in the economics of electricity markets are threatening the profitability of nuclear power plants, a shifting reality driving a demand for these financial bailouts. As the New Jersey-based energy company Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG) explained in October 2020, across the nation “nuclear plants continue to struggle economically to survive. Since 2018, three nuclear plants have closed in the eastern US, all for economic reasons, and the impact has had a ripple effect.”
Over the past several years, the Justice Department and the courts have done their jobs in prosecuting and sentencing bad actors in the nuclear industry. It is time for Congress to investigate the root causes of the corruption. Executives and experts alike must be brought before congressional committees to explain why the nuclear industry has been allowed to fall into corruption at the expense of the taxpayer and the consumer……………………………………….
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2024/04/10/congress_must_investigate_corruption_in_nuclear_energy_industry_1024272.html
Lest we forget – Nuclear Power Runs on Dirty Money: The Corporate Scandal of the Proposed National Nuclear Subsidy
August 5, 2021
A few days ago, we published a piece showing the cost of federal nuclear bailout proposals. It’s a big, big number — $50 billion. But all of that money would not create a single new job, nor reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a single pound. In fact, as a new report released last month found, investing that $50 billion in wind, solar, and efficiency instead would accelerate our transition to a zero-emissions electricity system. And, as we showed last week, a national nuclear bailout would prevent the creation of 60,000 new jobs in renewable energy, efficiency, and other clean energy infrastructure.
So with all of these strikes against it, why are members of Congress pushing so hard to give a slate of old, uneconomical nuclear power plants so much money out of a large, but still limited, budget for energy investments needed for a just transition to a carbon-free future?
There’s one tried-and-true way to answer that question: follow the money. We wondered: who would actually receive the money proposed to bail out nuclear reactors? The answer is revealing.
From our analysis, we found that there are 33 reactors at 19 nuclear power plants, located in eight states, which would qualify for the proposed bailouts. Those power plants are owned and operated by only eight large power companies (along with four smaller companies that are minority co-owners of three of the plants). Note: because both proposed bailouts would subsidize the same group of reactors, we combined the amounts for our calculations. As a result, nearly the entire $50 billion–94% of the total–would go to these eight corporations.
However, because ownership of nuclear reactors is highly concentrated, over $35 billion of the bailout (70%) would go to just three of those corporations:
- Exelon $24.5 billion (49%)
- Energy Harbor $5.5 billion (11%)
- PSEG $5.1 billion (10%)
All three of these companies have been lobbying for subsidies for their nuclear reactors for years. As we speak, Exelon is pushing for a nuclear subsidy in Illinois and threatening to close four reactors within the next few months if the state legislature does not convene a special session and enact a new law with at least $700 million in nuclear subsidies within weeks.
In fact, both Exelon and Energy Harbor (a spinoff of FirstEnergy), are the subjects of federal corruption cases over billion-dollar nuclear bailouts for which they lobbied in Illinois and Ohio, respectively. In both cases, prosecutors have indicted former company lobbyists and staff to the Speakers of the House of Representatives in each state. Also in both cases, Exelon and FirstEnergy have signed deferred prosecution agreements with federal prosecutors to pay fines and restitution and to cooperate with the prosecutions. As the investigations proceed, more corporate executives, legislators, and lobbyists could be indicted.
In the case of FirstEnergy and Energy Harbor, there are also multiple state-level investigations of these nuclear bailout scandals. At the heart of that case, FirstEnergy made $61 million in bribes and payments to former House Speaker Larry Householder’s political action committee. Through the scheme, FirstEnergy helped win Householder the speakership after the 2018 election, by also buying the support of Republican legislators and Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine. As a result, FirstEnergy was able to get Ohio to enact a $1 billion nuclear bailout, which was key in winning the support of the corporation’s creditors in a major bankruptcy proceeding. The bankruptcy settlement resulted in FirstEnergy spinning off its power plants into Energy Harbor, a new, unaffiliated corporation that only owns the unprofitable nuclear and coal power plants. As a result of the federal corruption case, Ohio legislators repealed the nuclear bailout earlier this year, leaving Energy Harbor without the subsidies its creditors were assured it would have when they agreed to the bankruptcy settlement.
In addition to the federal corruption case, states where FirstEnergy operates want to know where the $61 million in bribes came from. In April, under pressure in the federal case, FirstEnergy filed a report with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission indicating that “all 14 of its power-providing companies” in five states misappropriated ratepayer monies for a decade. State utility commissions in three of those states–Maryland, New Jersey, and Ohio–are investigating how much money the corporation misappropriated from state residents’ power bills to fund the nuclear bailout corruption scheme.
Back to Exelon
The corruption investigation in Illinois stems from two bills that have cost electricity consumers billions of dollars: a 2011 “smart grid” law, and a 2016 energy law. The latter awarded Exelon a 10-year, $2.35 billion subsidy for three uneconomical reactors that Exelon threatened to close without the bailout. Consumers have already paid out $1 billion over the last four years. Exelon awarded jobs to associates and relatives of former House Speaker Michael Madigan and other legislators, in exchange for lucrative legislative outcomes. Despite the ongoing investigation, Exelon is now pursuing subsidies in Illinois for its other eight reactors in Illinois, which it claims are also under economic pressure.
In the same year as the Illinois bailout, Exelon won a massive 12-year, $7.6 billion subsidy for four reactors in New York, and won final approval of a deal that has made it the largest utility company in the country. In those cases, there were eyebrow-raising reports of backroom lobbying, employment favors, and political contributions. And in 2018, Exelon and PSEG (the other big winner from a federal bailout) got New Jersey to enact a $300 million/year subsidy for three reactors in that state. Exelon pulls in about $85 million/year through its ownership stake in two of the New Jersey reactors.
In total, Exelon is receiving nearly $11 billion in nuclear subsidies at the state level. $24.5 billion in federal subsidies may assist Exelon in winning investors’ support for its plan to spin off its nuclear business, as FirstEnergy did. But how is any of this going to help the country solve the climate crisis?
With $30 billion of a federal nuclear subsidy accruing to two companies that are the subject of federal corruption cases over state-level nuclear subsidy laws, this could become an even larger scandal. President Biden and Congressional leaders should not risk the American Jobs and Families Plan being derailed over corporate corruption cases. And as we’ve shown, the infrastructure bills will do more for climate, jobs, and justice without a nuclear bailout, and by simply investing in the transition to 100% renewable energy.
There are many reasons why we cannot afford to sacrifice the climate to a nuclear bailout. Our economic future, justice for all communities impacted by climate chaos and the nuclear fuel chain, and our environment all depend on real action and true investment in clean energy, good jobs, and a just transition. Short-sighted corporate interests–once again–block the path towards the liveable, just, and equitable future. We cannot allow the pockets of nuclear corporations and their shareholders to grow as our window for climate action shrinks.
[Tables of subsidies etc included here on original]
Take Action!
We can’t let our leaders sacrifice the economy and environment to a corporate nuclear bailout scandal! Tell President Biden, Vice-President Harris, and your representatives in Congress: “No Corrupt Nuclear Bailouts in the American Jobs and Families Plan – Invest in American Jobs and a Just Transition to 100% Renewable Energy by 2035”
IEA: Global clean tech market set to be worth $2tr a year by 2035.
Business Green 30th Oct 2024
The global market for clean technologies such as solar panels, wind
turbines, and electric vehicles (EVs) is set to triple to more than $2tr a
year over the next decade, eclipsing the value of the oil and gas markets
in the process, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
In a “first of its kind” analysis today, the IEA estimates the global market for
six leading mass-manufactured clean technologies – solar PV, wind turbines,
EVs, batteries, heat pumps, and green hydrogen electrolysers – is set to
surge in the coming years.
The report estimates that based on today’s
policy settings the global market for these technologies is set to rise
from $700bn in 2023 to more than $2tr by 2035, which would put it on a
similar level to the value of the global crude oil market in recent years.
https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4374453/iea-global-clean-tech-market-set-worth-usd2tr-2035
Czech watchdog prohibits nuclear power contract signing amid appeals
PRAGUE, Oct 30 (Reuters) – The Czech anti-monopoly office UOHS put a temporary block on the conclusion of a contract with South Korea’s KHNP for the construction of a new nuclear power unit following challenges by Westinghouse and EDF.
UOHS said that the preliminary measure to prohibit the conclusion of the contract was not indicative of how the case will be decided and was standard procedure in such a case.
The measure comes after the office started official proceedings work in September on appeals from U.S. group Westinghouse and France’s EDF against the country’s choice in July of Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Company (KHNP) as preferred bidder to build new nuclear reactors.
The Czech government and majority state-owned utility CEZ (CEZP.PR), opens new tab aim to conclude negotiations with KHNP and sign contracts by next March, and complete the first reactor by 2036.
CEZ said it believed the preliminary measure would not impact the tender’s schedule. “(The company) is convinced it acted in accordance with the applicable laws from the first moment in the selection of the preferred bidder,” it said.
Legal disputes are a potential sticking point in the country’s largest-ever energy procurement deal, expected to be worth up to $18 billion at current prices.
The Czechs plan to use the new nuclear power units, together with small modular reactors and renewable sources, to replace a fleet of coal-fired plants as well as some older nuclear reactors that are nearing the end of their lifespan.
($1 = 23.4270 Czech crowns) Reporting by Jason Hovet; editing by Philippa Fletcher
TODAY. Canadians are waking up to the nuclear scam. Why are the media and other nations pretending that nuclear is just dandy?
I do read quite a few criticisms of the nuclear industry, from various non-profit groups. But lately, there’s a whole heap of them from Canada. And the unnerving thing is that these pesky Canadians are giving “chapter and verse” – facts and figures on how bad things really are, for the nuclear industry.
Of course, the Canadian, and indeed, the global nuclear lobby too, are pretending not to notice this. (But they must be a tad worried, lest too many intelligent people in other countries catch on to this annoying attention to detail)
Susan O’Donnell writes about New Brunswick’s nuclear fantasies – the history of successive governments pouring tax-payers’ money into “advanced” reactor designs that are known by reputable scientists to be commercially unviable. -The Higgs government passing legislation forcing NB Power to buy electricity, at any price, from SMRs if they are ever built and actually work.
The companies involved have been unable to entice private investors, and are unlikely to get federal funding. NB Power’s $5.4-billion debt is mainly due to the poor performance of its Point Lepreau nuclear reactor. New Brunswickers are facing a 19.4 per cent increase in electricity rates. “Keeping the Point Lepreau and SMR fantasies alive will require considerable effort from the new government. “
Another recent example – from the Seniors for Climate Action Now! (SCAN):
They point out :
- the scandal-ridden nuclear history.
- the revolving door between government officials and nuclear industry well-paid jobs.
- the government/industry nuclear pitch to NATO- “Ontario is selling itself as the nuclear North Star to guide the direction of American power”.
- the failure of theNuScale SMR project.
- OPG’s lengthy submission on small nuclear reactors is full of the things that could go wrong.
- the over $40billion cost of refurbishing old end-of-life reactors.
- New nuclear reactors at over $60billion
They raise such awkward questions about “Ontario’s journey to becoming an energy superpower”
But then, I forgot that this comes from Seniors. And I’ve just remembered that the nuclear industry is all about the young cool and trendy.
There are so many views from Canadians exploding the nuclear propaganda. And they’re not all old fogeys.
Despite History of Fabrication, Press Uncritically Covers IDF-Provided Documents on Hamas
a pattern of Israel engineering misleading narratives to shape public opinion, and fabricating the evidence needed to do so.
Bryce Greene, FAIR, 1 Nov 24
Earlier this month, the New York Times (10/12/24), Washington Post (10/12/24) and Wall Street Journal (10/12/24) each published front-page articles based on different sets of documents handed to them by the Israeli military.
Israel claims it seized all the documents—in the form of meeting minutes, letters and planning documents—in its ground invasion of Gaza, and that they reveal insights into Hamas’s operations prior to the October 7 attacks. The documents include alleged evidence of Hamas’s pre-10/7 coordination with Iran, plans to blow up Israeli skyscrapers, and even a scheme to use horse-drawn chariots in an attack from Gaza.
Documents received directly from intelligence agencies should always be treated with skepticism, and that’s especially true when their government has a well-documented history of blatant lying. Yet leading newspapers took these Israeli document dumps largely at face value, advancing the agenda of a genocidal rogue state.
A history of lying
Israel’s use of fabrications to shape public perception is well known, and was put on display early in the assault on Gaza that began last October. After an explosion at Al Ahli hospital killed and injured hundreds (misreporting of which caused a great deal of confusion), the media naturally pointed the finger at Israel. The Israeli government, concerned about the public backlash, denied responsibility, claiming that the explosion was caused by a misfired rocket from Palestinian Islamic Jihad. (See FAIR.org, 11/3/23.)
To back up their claims, Israel released a recording allegedly capturing two Palestinian militants discussing Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s responsibility for the strike. However, an analysis by the firm Earshot found that the audio was the result of two separate channels being edited together (Channel 4, 10/19/23). In other words, Israel engineered a phony audio clip in an attempt to clear itself of war crimes in the public mind.
Investigations based on open sources have since come to various conclusions about the attack (Guardian, 10/18/23; Bellingcat, 10/18/23; Human Rights Watch, 11/26/23; AP, 11/22/23; Michael Kobs, 2023; New Arab, 2/19/24), but Israel’s fraudulent attempt to manipulate evidence certainly suggests that they had something to hide, and demonstrates their lack of reliability as a media source. Recently, the UN released a report accusing Israel of systematically targeting healthcare infrastructure in Gaza, making their denials of this earlier attack far less credible.
In another instance, Israel presented 3D renderings of a supposed Hamas “command center” beneath Al Shifa hospital, claiming it was based on intelligence. However, no such command center was ever found (FAIR.org, 12/1/23). Upon storming the hospital, Israel staged scenes in order to bolster claims that the facility was used by militant groups. The deception was so blatant that mainstream outlets were openly calling it out.
Recently Israel was caught actually providing fabricated documents to the press with the aim of manipulating public opinion. Earlier this year, the Israeli government provided documents to both the Jewish Chronicle (9/5/24) and the German paper Bild (9/6/24) that purportedly showed that Hamas had no interest in a ceasefire, and had a plan to sneak the late Hamas chief Yahya Sinwar out of Gaza to Iran, along with some of the remaining hostages. The reports were then uncritically repeated in outlets like the Times of Israel (9/6/24).
Shortly after these documents were published, the Israeli paper Yedioth Ahronoth (9/8/24) reported on an internal IDF investigation that found that they had been leaked to foreign media as part of a campaign to “shape public opinion on Israel.” The documents were determined to be forgeries, after a comprehensive search of all databases containing documents found in the wake of Israel’s operations. The IDF told the paper that an investigation was underway to determine the origin of the leak.
This non-exhaustive list of examples demonstrates a pattern of Israel engineering misleading narratives to shape public opinion, and fabricating the evidence needed to do so.
Questionable authenticity
Whether they are authentic or not, it is clear that the documents leaked to the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post serve the same purpose of propagandizing on behalf of Israel. In an attempt to preserve some journalistic integrity, the Post and Times both gave separate justifications for why they believed the respective documents leaked to them were authentic.
The Post was quick to note that “the documents’ authenticity could not be definitively established,” but gave readers the impression there was reason to believe they were real. First, it claimed that the contents of the documents it received were
“broadly consistent” with US and allies’ post–October 7 intelligence assessments about Hamas’s long-range planning and complex relationship with Iran.
…………………………………………..While Haaretz made no note of the leaked documents provided to the Wall Street Journal, the article ironically acknowledged that
having them published by Fox News or even the Wall Street Journal would have looked like an Israeli public diplomacy operation rather than a legitimate journalistic investigative report.
Haaretz noted that the documents promote narratives that “Israel would be happy to burn into the world’s consciousness,” namely the well-known propaganda effort to equate Hamas with organizations that are universally reviled by Americans. The Post documents purportedly outlined a Hamas plan to blow up a skyscraper in Tel Aviv, evoking the September 11 attacks against the World Trade Center:
The Hamas documents are supposed to bolster Netanyahu’s claim that Israel isn’t fighting against a liberation movement seeking to free the occupied Palestinian people, or even against a paramilitary organization that is poorly funded and trained and lacks planes, the Iron Dome anti-missile system, tanks and artillery….
Rather, it is fighting a terrifying “axis of evil” led by Iran that threatens to destroy Western culture as a whole.
Haaretz also argued that this kind of propaganda campaign was designed to ensure that the violence continues to escalate:………………………………………………………….
………………….Israel’s campaign of genocide in Gaza and greater war in the Middle East has been successful in part because the Israeli government can count on Western press to present and contextualize facts in a way that advances their narrative. Despite Israel’s long history of fabrications, the corporate media will dutifully republish documents, statements and explanations with complete credulity. https://fair.org/home/despite-history-of-fabrication-press-uncritically-covers-idf-provided-documents-on-hamas/
Report: US Sitting on Nearly 500 Reports of US Weapons Killing Civilians in Gaza
Officials are reportedly ignoring the Biden administration’s own weapons guidance to continue fueling Israel’s genocide.
By Sharon Zhang , Truthout, October 30, 2024, https://truthout.org/articles/report-us-sitting-on-nearly-500-reports-of-us-weapons-killing-civilians-in-gaza/
iden administration officials are sweeping aside hundreds of reports of Israeli forces using U.S.-provided weapons to slaughter civilians in Gaza, new reporting finds, flouting the administration’s own policies regarding weapons to give Israel a pass.
According to a new report by The Washington Post published Wednesday, the State Department has received nearly 500 reports of U.S. weapons being used in attacks that caused “unnecessary harm” to civilians amid Israel’s genocide. But, despite policies requiring these reports to be urgently investigated, hundreds of the cases are still unresolved, former and current officials cited by the Post said.
In August of last year, the Biden administration established a process for responding to incidents of U.S.-made weapons killing civilians. Under the system, known as the Civilian Harm Incident Response Guidance, officials must recommend actions like a suspension of arms transfers if U.S. weapons are found to have been used to kill civilians by U.S. allies. At the time, the initiative was lauded as a step toward reducing civilian harm and boosting the U.S. commitment to human rights.
The State Department receives the reports from within the government, as well as humanitarian aid groups, media reports and eyewitness accounts. As media reports have demonstrated numerous times over the past year of the genocide, many reports are accompanied by photographic evidence of fragments of U.S. weapons at sites of attacks.
However, as the U.S. has done countless times over the last year of the genocide (and in the decades of Israeli apartheid preceding it), officials are ignoring their own regulations in order to continue fueling Israel’s atrocities in Gaza, the occupied West Bank, Lebanon, and beyond.
Even though the guidance requires investigations to be done within two months, over two-thirds of the cases are unresolved, “with many pending response from the Israeli government, which the State Department consults to verify each case’s circumstances,” the Post writes.
Officials have not taken a single case to the final stage, where action is recommended, officials said, despite the deadlines.
One of the cases reportedly concerns the Israeli military’s killing of 6-year-old Hind Rajab and the paramedics who came to save her — despite U.S officials’ public insistence that they are relying only on Israel’s own investigation into the killing. Another regards a horrific Israeli strike in July on the Gaza “humanitarian safe zone” in al-Mawasi, in which Israeli forces dropped eight 2,000-pound bombs on civilian areas and killed at least 90 Palestinians.
Humanitarian groups, Gaza officials and weapons experts — including ones within the State Department — have repeatedly said that Israel is making extensive use of U.S. weapons to commit war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza. In fact, experts have said that it would be impossible for Israel to carry out the level of destruction it has in Gaza without U.S. help.
The Washington Post report is the latest evidence that the Biden administration is purposefully sidestepping domestic law in its support of Israel.
In a bombshell finding last month, ProPublica found that, this spring, two U.S. agencies had recommended a suspension of weapons transfers to Israel, citing Israel’s humanitarian aid blockade and attacks on aid efforts.
But Secretary of State Antony Blinken lied to Congress about the findings, saying that the government did not assess that Israel has been blocking humanitarian aid just as Israel embarked on its Rafah invasion that would mark the beginning of an even harsher Israeli aid blockade. Now, months later, aid entry into Gaza has hit record lows, as disease and famine plague the population.
Gravelines nuclear power plant: EDF refuses to respond on flood risks and tries to silence whistleblowers
Greenpeace France reminds that Monday morning’s action in the perimeter of the Gravelines power plant carries a message of public interest on the risks of marine submersion and flooding on the Gravelines power plant, an area combining climatic, industrial and nuclear vulnerabilities. For Greenpeace France, in light of the forecasts of scientists and the large uncertainties of the different climate scenarios, it is too dangerous to build two new nuclear reactors on this site, as EDF aims to do.
Greenpeace France 30th Oct 2024, https://www.greenpeace.fr/espace-presse/gravelines-edf-refuse-de-repondre-sur-les-risques-dinondations-et-tente-de-faire-taire-les-lanceurs-dalerte/
After more than 48 hours of deprivation of liberty, 10 of the 12 activists arrested have just been released. This arrest follows the action of Greenpeace France in the perimeter of the Gravelines power plant . Since 9 a.m. this morning, a gathering has been taking place in front of the Dunkirk Judicial Court, at the initiative of several local organizations that came to support the activists. The court informed the activists that a trial would be held on March 3, 2025 at 1:30 p.m. for intrusion into a civil facility housing nuclear materials in assembly. EDF has filed a complaint [1].
After spending two nights in police custody, the activists were brought before the Dunkirk Judicial Court in the early morning, at the request of the public prosecutor. The first activist to be released was deprived of his liberty for a total of 52 hours.
Greenpeace France reminds that Monday morning’s action in the perimeter of the Gravelines power plant carries a message of public interest on the risks of marine submersion and flooding on the Gravelines power plant, an area combining climatic, industrial and nuclear vulnerabilities. For Greenpeace France, in light of the forecasts of scientists and the large uncertainties of the different climate scenarios, it is too dangerous to build two new nuclear reactors on this site, as EDF aims to do.
While EDF refused to respond to Greenpeace France’s questions sent during the summer concerning the consideration of the impacts of climate change on the choice of the Gravelines site and the construction of new nuclear reactors, Greenpeace France dug into the subject and examined EDF’s project file, which resulted in the publication of a report on October 3 demonstrating the underestimation of the seriousness of climate change and the risks inherent in this project to build new reactors.
Greenpeace France also got involved in the consultation areas, particularly the ongoing public debate in Gravelines, and repeated its questions to obtain information on flood risks and the protective measures planned for the new reactors, ahead of the meetings on nuclear safety (theme of 19 November) and climate change (theme of 10 December). After Monday’s action, media reported that EDF did not wish to comment.
For Pauline Boyer, Energy Transition campaign manager at Greenpeace France: ” EDF is ignoring our questions about the risks that the construction of the two EPR2 reactors in Gravelines would create for the population, the workers at the plant and for the environment. In line with its behavior during the public debate for its similar project in Penly, it is clearly sending a signal of contempt for questions from the public, whether NGOs or residents. EDF is operating a diversion strategy by taking activists to court over the form of their action, in order to better evade the substantive issues. EDF is losing more points of trust. EDF will not succeed in gagging the whistleblowers. “
For Marie Dosé, the activists’ lawyer: ” The custody measures are unjustified and have only one purpose: to dissuade activists from alerting the population on a subject of general interest. All of them could have been the subject of a free hearing but, once again, the prosecuting authority preferred to make them sleep two nights in cells and bring them hastily before the court. “
Two activists remain in court at the time of writing this press release.
ExoAnalytic observes 500 pieces of debris from Intelsat 33e breakup
It is too early to say whether parts of Intelsat 33e could hit another object in orbit after the satellite broke up Oct. 19, which could create more potentially hazardous debris.
Jason Rainbow, October 28, 202
TAMPA, Fla. — U.S.-based space-tracking company ExoAnalytic Solutions has identified about 500 pieces of debris from Intelsat 33e’s recent breakup in geostationary orbit (GEO).
“The size of the debris we are tracking ranges from small fragments roughly the size of a softball to larger pieces up to the size of a car door,” ExoAnalytic chief technology officer Bill Therien told SpaceNews in an Oct. 28 email.
“The majority of the tracked objects are on the smaller end of that spectrum, which contributes to the difficulty of consistently observing all the debris pieces.”
ExoAnalytic has observed 108 of these pieces in the last 24 hours, Therien said, adding that the company does not expect to observe every piece of debris each night because size, velocity, and position relative to ground sensors can influence whether the debris is visible during a particular observation window.
In addition, it is possible some of them are no longer present, such as solid fuel fragments that are evaporating.
“The debris field from an incident like this can be complex, and new pieces can be more reliably tracked over time,” Therien said………
It is too early to say whether parts of Intelsat 33e could hit another object in orbit after the satellite broke up Oct. 19, which could create more potentially hazardous debris……………………………………………………………………. https://spacenews.com/exoanalytic-observes-500-pieces-of-debris-from-intelsat-33e-breakup/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=%F0%9F%A4%9DLockheed%20Martin%20buys%20Terran%20Orbital%20-%20SpaceNews%20This%20Week&utm_campaign=SNTW%20Nov%201%202024
Department of Defense Releases Fiscal Year 2024 Military Intelligence Program Budget – just the bare $29.8 billion
Today, the Department of Defense released the Military Intelligence Program (MIP) appropriated top line budget for FY2024. The total was $29.8 billion and is aligned to support the National Defense Strategy.
The Department determined that releasing this top line figure does not jeopardize any classified activities within the MIP. No other MIP budget figures or program details will be released, as they remain classified for national security reasons.
NextEra No Longer Bullish on Nuclear SMRs
By Alex Kimani – Oil Price , Oct 31, 2024,
NextEra Energy is exploring the reopening of the Duane Arnold nuclear plant amid rising data center interest but remains cautious on the viability of small modular reactors.
SMRs, though promising in terms of smaller size, lower fuel needs, and modular design, face significant challenges.
High production costs for HALEU, estimated to reach up to $25,725/kg, pose a substantial financial hurdle.
……………………..CEO John Ketchum said he was “not bullish” on small modular reactors (SMRs), adding that the company’s in-house SMR research unit has so far not drawn favorable conclusions about the technology.
“A lot of [SMR equipment manufacturers] are very strained financially,” he said. “There are only a handful that really have capitalization that could actually carry them through the next several years.”
Ketchum might have a valid point. …………………………………………….
The U.S. Department of Energy has so far spent $1.2B on SMR R&D and is projected to spend nearly $6B over the next decade. Last year, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) certified NuScale Power Corp.(NYSE:SMR) VOYGR 77 MW SMR in Poland, the first ever SMR to be approved in the country.
But there’s a big problem here because the fuel required to power these novel nuclear plants might be really expensive.
Three years ago, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved Centrus Energy Corp.’s (NYSE:LEU) request to make High Assay Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU) at its enrichment facility in Piketon, Ohio, becoming the first company in the western world outside Russia to do so. A year later, the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) announced a ~$150 million cost-shared award to American Centrifuge Operating, LLC, a subsidiary of Centrus Energy. HALEU is a nuclear fuel material enriched to a higher degree (between 5% and 20%) in the fissile isotope U-235. According to the World Nuclear Association, applications for HALEU are currently limited to research reactors and medical isotope production; however, HALEU will be needed for more than half of the SMRs currently in development. HALEU is only currently available from TENEX, a Rosatom subsidiary.
………..A 2023 survey by the Nuclear Energy Institute on U.S. advanced reactor developers estimated that the total market for HALEU could reach $1.6 billion by 2030 and $5.3 billion by 2035.
Last year, the Nuclear Innovation Alliance (NIA) published a report wherein they discussed production costs for HALEU. Here’s an excerpt from the report:
‘‘Calculated HALEU production cost for uranium enriched to 19.75% is $23,725/kgU for HALEU in an oxide form and $25,725 for HALEU in a metallic form under baseline economic assumptions but could be higher.’’
The report claims that a SWU (Separative Work Unit) is going to cost a lot more in a HALEU enrichment cascade compared to a standard LEU (Low-Enriched Uranium) enrichment cascade.
……………….NIA reckons it might cost ~$2000/kgU to make HALEUF6 into HALEUO2, and as much as $4000/kgU to make HALEUF6 into HALEU-metal. At the end of the day, you’d end up with HALEU with 28 times the fissile content of natural uranium at over 100 times the price.
https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/NextEra-No-Longer-Bullish-on-Nuclear-SMRs.html
UK urged to break with France, North Korea and Russia on UN nuclear war resolution
Julian Borger Guardian 31st Oct 2024
Non-proliferation groups call on government not to oppose creation of a study into effects of nuclear conflict
Non-proliferation groups are urging the UK government to make a late about-turn on plans to vote alongside France, Russia and North Korea against a UN resolution to study the effects of nuclear war.
In a debate on Friday, a UN general assembly committee will discuss a resolution to create an international panel of scientific experts to examine the global impact of different nuclear conflict scenarios.
The resolution, drafted by Ireland and New Zealand, is expected to be overwhelmingly approved by the committee and then later by the full assembly. Diplomats involved in preparations for the vote say the US and China are expected to abstain but that the UK, France, Russia and North Korea had indicated they were likely to vote against.
London and Paris joining forces with Moscow and Pyongyang would not stop the resolution but could have an impact on their reputations when it comes to other nuclear proliferation issues.
The UK and French missions to the UN did not respond to requests for comment and diplomats in New York said final decisions could be left until the last hours before the vote.
Arms control advocates expressed disappointment on Thursday that, with just 24 hours to go before the debate, the UK’s new Labour government had shown no signs of changing course.
“People naively thought that, with a Labour government, you would see a shift away from this kind of weird line that the UK has taken on this particular type of thing,” said Patricia Lewis, the head of the international security programme at the Chatham House thinktank. “Maybe this is the Labour party trying to be more Catholic than the pope when it comes to nuclear weapons, but why not vote with the US, and abstain?”
The panel proposed in Friday’s resolution would be the first such UN-mandated study since 1988 and experts say a lot has changed since then, in science and the nuclear threats around the world. For example, Russia and North Korea, countries which have made aggressive nuclear threats, have entered a deepening partnership.
Lewis argued that a no vote by the UK and France would undermine their credibility with other UN member states, especially when London and Paris are trying to rally global support for criticism of Moscow.
“The UK has been struggling to get countries like South Africa and Brazil onboard over the whole issue of Russia’s behaviour, so this is an opportunity for the UK to say: ‘Yes, we hear you,’” Lewis said.
Observers believe the UK position could be the result of a pact with France to fend off criticism of their nuclear arsenals………………………………………………………………………………………
In April, the UK Royal Society was part of a joint statement by the national academies of science of the G7 member states, which said: “Among the roles of the scientific community are to continue to develop and communicate the scientific evidence base that shows the catastrophic effects of nuclear warfare on human populations and on the other species with which we share our planet.”
While some governments and national scientific institutions have done their own research, supporters of the resolution said a UN panel could establish a global consensus and a scientific “gold standard”, emulating the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and have an impact on policy.
“Studying the results of nuclear war will flesh out how bad it would be to have one, and maybe add pressure on countries who would otherwise think about using nuclear weapons,” said Andrey Baklitskiy, a senior researcher at the UN Institute for Disarmament Research. “Their leaders, their elites would maybe study or read it, or their populations, or partners or allies, who would maybe say we really don’t want this to happen.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/31/uk-urged-break-france-north-korea-russia-un-nuclear-war-resolution
Race to build Britain’s first mini-nukes delayed again in Budget
‘Tortuously slow’ decision-making blamed for decision to push back development of small modular reactors.
Matt Oliver, Telegraph 31st Oct 2024 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/31/race-to-build-britains-first-mini-nukes-delayed-again-reeve/
Ministers have delayed the competition to build Britain’s first
mini-nuclear power plants, amid “tortuously slow” decision-making in
Whitehall. The contest to develop small modular reactors (SMRs) was
whittled down to four contenders last month, with two winners originally
expected to be chosen by late this year or early 2025.
That already represented a significant delay on timelines originally set out when six
vendors were shortlisted a year ago. However, the Government has now pushed
back the selection of winners even further, with a decision not expected
until the spring.
The two-sentence update was snuck out in Budget documents
published alongside a speech by Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, on
Wednesday. On Thursday, Great British Nuclear (GBN) confirmed the new
timetable and said it would provide further updates “in due course”. It
is understood the delay is largely down to a slower-than-expected pace of
decision-making in Whitehall, as well as fears that the process risks being
challenged by judicial review if it is not robust enough.
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (81)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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 