The Corporate News Media at Work
Oh dear. It seems that free WordPress blog sites now no longer permit me to put Youtube videos into my blogs.
As I run this website on no funding at all, I will now just have to supply the links to Youtube and other videos.
Jonathan Cook – New Media Talk – Festival of Whistleblowing, Dissent & Accountability – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOfLsj_qh4w&t=107s
JULY 14, 2024, By Jonathan Cook
Large numbers of Palestinians and Ukrainians were killed in missile strikes days apart, writes Jonathan Cook. The differing coverage of these comparable events is the clue to the media’s true function.
When all we have to rely on in understanding our relationship to the news media is the media’s self-proclaimed assessment of its own role, maybe it is no surprise that most of us assume the West’s “free press” is a force for good: the bedrock of democracy, the touchstone of a superior western civilisation.
The more idealistic among us think of the news media as something akin to a public service. The more cynical of us think of it as a competitive marketplace in information and commentary, one in which ugly agendas are often in evidence but truth ultimately prevails.
Both views are fanciful. The reality is far, far darker – and I speak as someone who worked for many years in The Guardian and Observer newsrooms, widely seen as the West’s most progressive newspapers.
As readers, we don’t, as we imagine, “consume” news. Rather, the news consumes us. Or put another way, the media uses the news to groom us, its audience. Properly understood, the relationship is one of abuser and abused.
Sounds like a paranoid conspiracy theory?
In fact, just such an argument was set out many years ago — in more academic fashion — in Noam Chomsky and Ed Herman’s book Manufacturing Consent.
If you have never heard of the book, there may be a reason. The media don’t want you reading it.
When I worked at The Guardian, there was no figure more reviled in the newsroom by senior editors than Noam Chomsky. As young journalists, we were warned off reading him. How might we react were we to start thinking more deeply about the role of the media, or begin testing the limits of what we were allowed to report and say?
Chomsky and Herman’s Propaganda Model explains in detail how Western publics are “brainwashed under freedom” by a media driven by hidden corporate and state interests. Those interests can be concealed only because the media decides what counts as news and frames how we understand events.
Its chief tools are misdirection and omission — and, in extremis, outright deception.
Tribal Camps
The Propaganda Model acknowledges that competition is permitted in the news media. But only of a narrow, superficial kind, meant to divide us more usefully into tribal, ideological camps – defined as the left and the right………………………………………………….
To survive, the Western power establishment has to engineer two related kinds of popular endorsement.
First, we must consent to the idea that the West has an inalienable right to control the Earth’s resources, even at the cost of committing terrible crimes both against the rest of humanity, such as the current genocide in Gaza, and against other species, as we wreck the natural world in our pursuit of impossible, endless economic growth on a finite planet.
And second, we must consent to the idea that the richest and most powerful elites in the West have an inalienable right to cream off most of the profits from this industrialised rape of our only home.
The media rarely identifies this wasteful, greed system, so normalised has it become. But when given a name, it is called capitalism. It emerges from the shadows only when the media need to confront and ridicule a bogeyman caricature of its main ideological rival, socialism.
Immersed in Propaganda
The news media have been fantastically successful at making a system of suicidal resource extraction designed to enrich a tiny number of billionaires seem entirely normal to their audiences.
Which is why those same billionaires are as keen to own the news media as they are to own politicians. In fact, gain ownership of the media, and you own the political class too. It is the ultimate two-for-one offer.
No politician can afford to take on key state-corporate interests, or the media that veils those interests — as Jeremy Corbyn soon found out in the U.K. a few years back……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Different Narratives
But rarely do we have examples of propaganda so flagrant from our “free press” that it is hard for readers not to notice them. The state-corporate media just made my job a little easier.
Earlier this month, it reported on two closely comparable events that it framed in entirely different ways. Ways that all too clearly serve state-corporate interests.
The first such event was an Israeli air strike on July 6 on a school in Gaza, where Palestinian civilians, including children, had been sheltering from months of a rampaging Israeli military that has slaughtered many tens of thousands of Palestinians and destroyed most of the enclave’s homes and infrastructure……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
The pattern to this skewing of news priorities, the constant distorted framing of events is the clue to how we should decipher what the media is trying to achieve, what it is there to do.
BBC news coverage all too often looks like it is exploiting any opportunity to highlight violence by Russia, in strict accordance with British foreign policy objectives. Equally, it all too often looks like the BBC is engineering pretexts to ignore or downplay violence by Israel, again in strict accordance with British foreign policy objectives.
Ukraine is a key battleground for the West in its battle for global “full-spectrum dominance”, Washington’s central foreign policy strategy in which it positions itself so that no other great power, such as Russia and China, can challenge its control over the planet’s resources. The U.S. and its Western allies are ready to risk an entirely unnecessary nuclear war, it seems, to win that battle……………………………………………….
The truth is the BBC, The Guardian and the rest are nothing more than conduits of state-corporate propaganda, masquerading as news outlets.
Until we grasp that, they will continue grooming us. https://consortiumnews.com/2024/07/13/the-corporate-news-media-at-work/
NATO Washington Summit Declaration – a delusional March of Folly
Just reading through this Declaration, it appears to me that NATO is preparing for war against the Russian Federation in the immediate future.
Professor Francis A. Boyle, 13 July 24
The NATO Declaration reminds me of Barbara Tuchman’s book The March of Folly describing the European Geopolitical Machinations leading up to the First World War. Its comments about Ukraine are delusional—detached from reality.
Maybe NATO itself will not becoming involved in hostilities against Russia in Ukraine, but this Statement is paving the way for NATO States to get involved in hostilities against Russia in Ukraine. Ultimately this will prove to be a distinction without a difference.
When implemented this Statement will make Ukraine a de facto NATO Member State with all the existentially dangerous consequences that would ensue from there. Its talking about Ukraine’s “irreversible path” to de jure NATO Membership is deliberately designed to rule out negotiations with Russia since Ukraine’s neutrality from NATO has always been the bottom line of Russia’s position, which is most reasonable.
Its comments about Russia are paranoid and delusional and existentially dangerous and irresponsible. Since the USA IS NATO, the Biden administration did the first draft of this Statement for the other NATO States to sign on to with some minor tweaks and emendations by them.
But still this Statement represents how paranoid, delusional, irresponsible, reckless and existentially dangerous the Biden administration is not only against Russia but also against North Korea, Iran and China, among others.
As this Statement admits the European Union has finally come out of the closet to reveal itself as the Political and Economic Arms of the NATO Military Alliance.
NATO is now moving into the Pacific where it is trying to replace and replicate the failed SEATO Pact. NATO is also moving into the Middle East where it is trying to replace and replicate the failed CENTO Pact. Its Pledge of Long-Term Security Assistance for Ukraine makes it perfectly clear that the United States, NATO, and the NATO States have no interest in a negotiated resolution to the situation in Ukraine with Russia despite the recent overtures by President Putin that he was prepared to negotiate. Although Putin’s demands were maximalist, they can serve as a basis for opening peace negotiations among Russia, the United States, and Ukraine. This Statement definitively rejects those overtures.
– Official text: Washington Summit Declaration issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C. 10 July 2024, 10-Jul.-2024 https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_227678.htm
Radioactive Real Estate: Finding a Forever Home for Nuclear Waste
To this day, WIPP only houses transuranic waste with medium radioactivity from nuclear defense projects — not, for example, waste from nuclear energy, or items with very high or low levels of radioactivity. There is no pilot plant for high-level materials in the U.S. at the moment or in the plans
Undark, 10 July 2024, BY SARAH SCOLES
Castoffs from U.S. nuclear weapons get buried at one site in New Mexico. But what happens when that facility fills up?
THE LAND around Carlsbad, New Mexico is spiked with oil and gas wells. Mines hoist up minerals. Hotel parking lots teem with twinning white work trucks, driven by employees who specialize in pulling material out of the Earth.
Amid these extractors, though, are others putting material into the planet: They work for a facility called the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, located about 40 minutes from downtown Carlsbad. At first glance, WIPP resembles a normal industrial site: A road sign near the entrance sports its inscrutable name, pointing toward tan warehouse-like buildings, evaporation ponds, and headframes for hoisting material.
Superficially, it looks like any other mine in the area. But that sameness belies the strangeness of what lies below ground: A huge subterranean salt deposit that stores nuclear waste from the country’s defense projects.
Once the repository is full, the salt will naturally undo the miners’ work: Tunnels and rooms will collapse, entombing the radioactive material and protecting life aboveground. WIPP has buried more than 14,000 shipments of nuclear waste since its start in 1999.
Twenty-five years after that opening, on a chilly March morning, a charter bus carries a crowd of people — some wearing cowboy attire, others in insulated vests zipped over dress shirts — into the parking lot. They congregate next to a semitruck laden with cylindrical cargo containers that sport radioactive warning labels. The labels, it turns out, are just for show. These containers are empty — staged for a photograph as part of WIPP’s 25th anniversary, and these guests have come to mark the occasion.
When the event starts, in a building plunked just before the security gate, Mark Bollinger, head of the Department of Energy’s Environmental Management Carlsbad field office, heads to a lectern.
“This,” he proclaims, “is a celebration.”
Others beg to differ. According to WIPP’s founding documents, the site should be winding down soon: It is a pilot plant — an experiment, a proof-of-concept — these critics argue, not a permanent one. The goal is to show that it is possible to safely store nuclear waste underground, shut the plant down, and seal it off. Initially, the timeline estimated disposal would stop in the middle of this decade, letting earth close around the waste. Over the course of WIPP’s operating life, and drawing on lessons learned here, the United States would identify and open new repositories for America’s nuclear waste.
That’s not exactly what has happened though.
Today, there are no concrete plans for new deep geologic repositories in the U.S. There are no established future sites for the medium-level nuclear waste that WIPP handles, nor for more dangerous radioactive waste, nor for the tens of millions of pounds of spent nuclear fuel from power plants. Indeed, much of the radioactive trash the country has created since the 1940s still lives in temporary storage, spread across the U.S. And officials now expect WIPP could remain open until the 2080s — decades beyond its originally conceived chronology.
The lack of permanent nuclear waste storage in the U.S. isn’t an engineering problem. “It’s not technically difficult,” said Allison Macfarlane, director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia, and former chair of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The solution, she says, is to bury it. The more radioactive, the deeper it goes.
Politically and culturally, however, convincing communities to permanently host nuclear detritus remains difficult, and WIPP is the world’s only operational example of a deep geological repository for nuclear waste — and the only one on the horizon. If officials are to find a post-WIPP solution for the mid-level nuclear waste being stored here — and the other kinds of radioactive discards — they’ll need to study how WIPP came to be, and why Carlsbad residents haven’t put up much of a fuss.
“In any future repository program,” said Matt Bowen, a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University and a former official with the National Nuclear Security Administration, “state and local officials are going to want to understand WIPP.”
THE IDEA that you could store nuclear waste in salt dates to the 1950s, when the National Academy of Sciences published a report about radioactive waste disposal, identifying places where nuclear waste could remain undisturbed. Subterranean salt deposits, the panel of experts concluded, were the best spots, geologically speaking.
“The great advantage here is that no water can pass through salt,” read the report. Cracks in the mineral would heal themselves, theoretically helping halt radioactivity’s flow up or down. Salt deposits are also typically in seismically inactive areas, so nothing should shake the dangerous drums. “Abandoned salt mines or cavities especially mined to hold waste are, in essence, long-enduring tanks,” it continued.
Other geologic options that have been floated include crystalline rock, shale or clay, shale over hard rock, and volcanic rock called tuff, all of which can isolate the waste from the outside environment.
More than a decade passed before officials implemented the academy’s suggestion, with the defense apparatus continuing to produce nuclear waste the whole time. But when they did move forward with preliminary work in the 1970s, they settled on a part of New Mexico underlain by a huge slab of salt from the long-gone Permian Sea. This salt is 2,000 feet thick, starting 850 feet underground. It seemed perfect.
But first they needed to convince the public.
Proponents and politicians navigated this in part by allowing independent oversight and research and giving the state of New Mexico some power over the process. In the 1970s, the state created a radioactive and hazardous waste committee in the legislature, to recommend legislation for WIPP and for the transportation of radioactive material. And in the 1980s Congress allocated money to mine two shafts through the salt and research the site and its safety, access that allowed the state of New Mexico to do its own, independent research.
That was part of a plan that politicians and policymakers in favor of WIPP had in this era, says former Rep. John Heaton, whose district housed the future site. Namely, that they wanted the public to “hang loose.”
“Let’s not go overboard,” Heaton said of the advice to the public at the time. It is no use thinking of only bad-case scenarios or scary what-ifs. Let’s instead, the advice went, wait for the facts to come in.
As those facts arrived, independent researchers learned about how waste containers corroded over time, and how the underground salt behaved at different temperatures. The research pointed to the long-term safety of the site, and waiting on the scientific results had worked: Carlsbad was on board, with opposition coming mostly from larger, more liberal cities like Santa Fe, where Heaton lives now. And while the project did face controversy and opposition from the state, by the time the project was getting started, more people were in favor of WIPP than against it.
By 1992, politicians had drawn up the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act, giving more than 10,000 acres to WIPP and laying out its parameters — including the total amount of waste the Department of Energy could “emplace” — a fancy word used to mean “put underground.” WIPP would house material dubbed “transuranic,” largely objects contaminated with radioactive elements heavier than uranium — in this case, mostly plutonium — soiled during nuclear defense work.
(To this day, WIPP only houses transuranic waste with medium radioactivity from nuclear defense projects — not, for example, waste from nuclear energy, or items with very high or low levels of radioactivity. There is no pilot plant for high-level materials in the U.S. at the moment or in the plans.)
TODAY, WIPP is not just a hole in the ground but a series of tunnels and rooms largely housing barrels filled with pieces of rebar, rags, clothing, empty containers of spray adhesive — remnants of the objects engineers and technicians used while working on nuclear weapons or defense research.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… “legacy waste” — radioactive trash created long ago when records were less detailed and methods less stringent than they are now. Some of it was simply put in containers and buried in shallow trenches, or even above-ground, on the nuclear labs’ property during the Cold War. Legacy material makes up much of WIPP’s contents, and much of what will be in its future deliveries.
…………………………….. CHECKS and balances have been fine-tuned since 2014, when WIPP experienced its greatest setback.
February that year was a bad month for the plant. First, a truck hauling salt caught fire underground, spreading soot on important equipment and smoke throughout the site — and endangering the 86 workers underground. Everyone made it the 2,000 feet to the surface, but several had to be treated for smoke inhalation.
Just over a week later, in a different part of WIPP, a drum of waste exploded, turning itself essentially into a dirty bomb, blasting out transuranic radioactive material in a fiery burst.
Twenty-two workers received doses of radiation, and a small amount of contamination escaped into the outside world — about 3 percent of the amount of radiation from a chest X-ray.
The dangerous drum had originally come from Los Alamos, where workers had mixed in the wrong kind of cat litter — a simple substance that typically helps stabilize nuclear waste. But in this case, instead of combining the hazardous substances with inorganic kitty litter, they had mixed it with “an organic kitty litter,” the instructions having gotten garbled. And organic material can react with nitrates, causing chemical reactions that release heat. The increasing heat bumped up the pressure inside the drum, until it burst.
………………………………………………… The 2014 accidents may have been the most significant in WIPP’s history, but yearly, smaller incidents also occur. “It’s difficult to operate this kind of facility,” said Hancock. “Nobody in the world has ever safely operated a deep geologic repository.”
And that is the difference between the real world and a report from a national academy about what kind of rock or mineral is safe: A place can be perfect in geological theory, but when operated by flawed humans, it will be subject to their mishaps and misjudgments.
………………………………………………………………………Critics, like proponents, want the legacy waste cleaned up, and safely. But they don’t trust WIPP with that last part. While the bigger cities in the region are unlikely to suffer ill effects from a disaster at the plant itself, trucks of nuclear waste pass through on their highways. And some residents are concerned about the safety of those trucks. Any vehicle traveling anywhere, carrying anything, can have an accident.
They are also worried about WIPP’s proximity to oil and gas activity…………………………………………………………………..
WIPP RECENTLY received its latest 10-year operating permit from the state of New Mexico. As part of the final agreement, the DOE agreed to look for a future waste-disposal site, in another state. “I think it will be a consent-based siting program,” said Bowen, of repositories to come. “I don’t think anybody wants to fight states.”
But it will be hard to find a new, permanent place — or other places for the other kinds of nuclear waste out there. “At some point in time, we’re going to have to start this effort of establishing another deep geologic repository,” said Bowen. WIPP, after all, took decades to open, so starting now could mean getting a new space in the 2040s or 2050s, with more waste piling up in the meantime. “We need to get going on that,” he continued. He’s hopeful things may get started in 2025.
And as with WIPP, the hardest part won’t be finding more salt spots, or deciding between volcanic rock and shale: It will be getting the people sitting in Washington and the people living atop those deposits to agree to something. “The affected public has to trust those who are implementing this process and those who are regulating this process,” said Macfarlane.
But the requirement goes the other way, she added: The implementers and regulators have to trust the public. That latter part often falls apart, she said………………………………………………………………
In the 1990s, Sandia National Laboratories convened linguists, scientists, and anthropologists, among others, to figure out how to separate WIPP from the people of the future. They came up with a plan involving signs and symbols: The site will be surrounded by huge earthen berms, metal objects and magnets buried within, meant to reflect radar beams and make this place register as magnetically anomalous. The perimeter will also host 25-foot-tall granite columns, engraved with warnings, and no-go markers will be buried up to six feet deep throughout the site. WIPP’s center, if someone gets that far, will host an information center that includes pictorial messages today’s humans hope will convey “leave this alone” to future ones.
“Other nuclear waste disposal sites must be marked in a similar manner within the U.S. and preferably world-wide,” read the multidisciplinary report. Its authors likely imagined there would be plans for such sites by now, and that WIPP would soon be getting its warnings. But it got, instead, a birthday party. https://undark.org/2024/07/10/radioactive-real-estate-nuclear-waste-forever-home/?utm_source=Undark%3A+News+%26+Updates&utm_campaign=1b7bb2c675-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5cee408d66-185e4e09de-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D
“Project 2025” is just “Project 1981”
Many sections of Project 2025 could easily have been pilfered from a Democratic think tank
DOD section additionally declares that the US “must regain its role” as the “Arsenal of Democracy” by further ramping up foreign arms sales, ……..despite Biden and Democrats similarly trumpeting the “Arsenal of Democracy” concept as it relates to Ukraine and other conflicts in which “Democracy is on the Line,” just like WW11
MICHAEL TRACEY, JUL 12, 2024,
“……………………………………………………………………………………. What percentage of despondent Dems who have this crippling fear of Project 2025 have actually read the document? I’m not going to claim to have read all 920 pages, but I did read the sections on the Department of Defense, State Department, and “Intelligence Community.” I would love to ask MSNBC anchors if they read these portions, because if they did, they should be celebrating the glorious reaffirmation of “bipartisan consensus” contained therein, rather than fulminating about some despotic nightmare.
Christopher C. Miller, who briefly served as Trump’s “acting” Secretary of Defense, writes in his Project 2025 contribution that the next Conservative Administration must “prevent Beijing’s hegemony over Asia,” including by “modernizing and expanding the US nuclear arsenal.”
……………Miller solemnly declares that in addition to China, “the United States and its allies also face real threats from Russia, as evidenced by Vladimir Putin’s brutal war in Ukraine, as well as from Iran, North Korea, and transnational terrorism.”
Countering these alleged threats, he concludes, “will require more spending on defense, both by the United States and by its allies.” Thus the fearsome Project 2025 envisions a future in which the march of US and “allied” militarization continues apace, just like it has during the Biden Administration.
…………………….Miller says US conventional force planning must be structured in such a manner as to “defeat a Chinese invasion of Taiwan,” so if what you deplore in this document is that bipartisan planning for war with China could accelerate under a second Trump Administration, that may be legitimate — but that does not seem to be what the liberals are whining about. Because the Biden Administration is currently doing the same thing!
Miller amusingly calls for the “acquisition community,” also known as arms manufacturers, to be granted greater flexibility in securing multi-year procurement contracts to spur the “innovation” required for the Defense Industrial Sector to adequately confront all the scary Emerging Threats around the world. Liberals in a state of terror can take solace that this multi-year procurement reform has already been well underway during the Biden Administration, largely to provide armaments for Ukraine (and Taiwan), and these legislative adjustments have been enacted with thoroughly bipartisan support, as usual.
“Replenish and maintain US stockpiles of ammunition and other equipment that have been depleted as a result of US support to Ukraine,” the document advises. Good news: that, again, is already happening, with new artillery factories popping up everywhere from Arkansas to Texas.
Miller’s DOD section additionally declares that the US “must regain its role” as the “Arsenal of Democracy” by further ramping up foreign arms sales, which he says have fallen to unacceptable lows under the Biden Administration — despite Biden and Democrats similarly trumpeting the “Arsenal of Democracy” concept as it relates to Ukraine and other conflicts in which “Democracy is on the Line,” just like WWII.
(Yawn.) Apparently there is firm agreement on this messianic imperative amongst the “Project 2025” crowd. The US has firmly retained its distinction as the world’s number one global arms exporter all throughout the Biden Administration, but this clearly isn’t enough for Project 2025. Weirdly, the MSNBC liberals don’t seem to be particularly troubled by that policy prescription.
Among the “byzantine bureaucracy” that Project 2025 wants to cut is those bureaucratic impediments which prevent the US from exporting arms across the world at an acceptably rapid pace. The Heritage Foundation pinheads also want to eliminate the practice by which the State Department notifies Congress about such arms sales, decrying this already-meager oversight opportunity as a terrible “hinderance” (sp).
As far as the DOD’s “intelligence” assets, Miller advises that they more fulsomely “align collection and analysis with vital national interests (countering China and Russia).” Can someone explain what Democrats find so “existentially” horrifying about this? They support the same exact thing, and in fact often argue that Trump is insufficiently committed to countering Our Big Bad Enemies.
If there’s an “existential threat” contained anywhere in this document, it’s the same one that Democrats are currently promoting at full-blast: a lurch into a hotter-than-Cold War with China and Russia. (Which was just bolstered once again at the Washington NATO Summit this week, having produced an official Declaration that came closer than ever before in designating China an official enemy, by accusing it of providing “material support” to Russia’s war effort in Ukraine.)
Miller wants to “increase the Army budget”; for the Navy, he wants to “build a fleet of more than 355 ships” as well as “produce key munitions at the maximum rate with significant capacity,” because the Navy must be urgently “prepared to expend large quantities of air-launched and sea-launched stealthy, precision, cruise missiles.” If any of this sincerely troubles hysterical Democrats, they would’ve been troubled by the budget-busting Defense expenditures that Biden has ushered in, building on the similarly budget-busting expenditures ushered in by the “dangerous” Trump. But of course they’re not troubled by any of this stuff………………………….
Trump and the mainline GOP seldom ever object to the principle of funding and supplying the Ukrainian war effort. (After all, Trump is the one who started sending Ukraine lethal weaponry in the first place.) They simply call for that funding to be streamlined with a greater emphasis on core military expenditures, rather than the “economic aid” that Democrats are generally more keen to tack on.
…………….Another key prescription in that policy brief was that the US should “descope” its involvement in Ukraine to only that which is necessary for “enabling the killing of Russians on the front lines. That means providing the necessary weapon systems and tactics to win — not to tie.”
If you notice, this proclamation amounts to House Republicans (the group most acutely responsive to Trump’s political influence and dictates) arguing that the Biden Administration has been insufficiently aggressive in supplying Ukraine with weapons. The final War Funding Bill that Trump backed in April thus included a requirement for the Biden Administration to send Ukraine longer-range missile systems, which was then followed by Biden’s authorization for Ukraine to strike territorial Russia with US-provided materiel.
……………..So what exactly are Democrats and liberals blabbering about when they screech that Project 2025 is an “existential threat”? Insofar as it relates to the Ukrainian war effort, which they also fanatically support, the document merely reinforces and solidifies the pro-war bipartisan consensus. (As usual.)
They should therefore be cheering the document, rather than screaming like banshees about it, but of course a rational policy analysis is not what Dems are aiming for with their present bluster. They just want a scary-sounding applause line for revving up anti-Trump voters by making them think Trump is getting ready to barrel into office with some crazed tyrannical plan, while omitting any mention that the “plan” is fully consistent with the foreign policy prescriptions they fervently support.
When it comes to what’s commonly referred to as the “Deep State” in MAGA parlance — aka, the “Intelligence Community” — Project 2025 contains virtually the opposite as what’s being suggested by hysterical libs. (Go figure). Fundamentally, the guidance calls for marginally re-organizing the Intelligence Services so as to empower them……………………………………………………………….
It would also be fascinating to hear exactly what Biden boosters find so objectionable about the document’s exhortation for the next Administration to double down on “ensuring Israel has both the military means and the political support and flexibility to take what it deems to be appropriate measures to defend itself against the Iranian regime and its regional proxies Hamas, Hezbollah, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.” Yeah, nothing like that going on at the moment.
……. Many sections of Project 2025 could easily have been pilfered from a Democratic think tank………………………..
………………………………………………So yes, there’s plenty to be “alarmed” by in “Project 2025,” but none of it is particularly unique to Trump. Instead, it’s part and parcel of longstanding DC Conservatism, sometimes known as Con Inc., which will inevitably shape the personnel and policy framework of a forthcoming Trump Administration — just like it did with the previous Trump Administration. But of course that’s not the fear being stoked by anguished Dems, who are desperate to inspire the 10 millionth Mega Trump Panic in hopes of salvaging their current electoral prospects. …………………. https://www.mtracey.net/p/project-2025-is-just-project-1981—
Biden’s press conference and the war hysteria of American imperialism
Biden declared rhetorically, “Every American must ask for himself or herself: Is the world safer with NATO? Are you safer? Is your family safer?” The answer to these questions is clearly “no.”
The whole electoral process is dominated by the principle of oligarchy. All decisions, including on Biden’s personal fate, are made by a handful of billionaire donors, along with the figures who dominate the military-intelligence-state apparatus. The interests of the vast majority of the population, the working class, are entirely excluded.
Barry Grey @wswsgrey https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/07/13/tbzo-j13.html
The media commentary following US President Joe Biden’s press conference Thursday has been dominated by discussion over whether or not he proved himself capable of maintaining his position as the Democratic Party’s nominee in the 2024 elections.
Far more significant than the semi-senility of Biden, however, is the political madness expressed in his policies and his statements. But this is a madness shared by the entire ruling class political establishment, along with the corporate media.
Biden began the news conference with an eight-minute war-mongering rant, beneath the banner of NATO, the military alliance that is the spearhead of American imperialism’s global war. He declared the NATO summit in Washington a great success and credited himself with leading it.
The summit effectively ended the pretense that NATO is not directly at war with Russia by establishing a NATO Command based in Germany, placing NATO officers in Kiev, and agreeing to deploy long-range missiles in Germany capable of hitting major cities deep in Russia, including Moscow.
Referring to Putin, Biden declared, “Once again a murderous madman was on the march.” The only solution to countering this “monster,” Biden declared, is massive military escalation. In fact, the Russian invasion of Ukraine was provoked through the relentless expansion of NATO. It has been utilized, as Biden himself boasted, to increase the membership of the military alliance and bring it even further to Russia’s doorstep.
At one point, Biden declared in response to Ukraine’s use of weapons to attack Russian territory, that “we’ve allowed Zelensky to use American weapons in the near term,” but that it wouldn’t make “sense” for Ukraine to strike the Kremlin with them.
Not that a decision to use long-range weapons to attack Moscow would trigger nuclear war and the death of millions, if not billions, but that it does not, at present, make “sense,” that it “wouldn’t be the best use of the weapons he has.” No one in the media bothered to follow up by asking what Biden was doing to prevent the escalation of the war into a nuclear apocalypse.
In fact, the entire policy of the United States, endorsed by the other NATO powers at the summit, seems intended at provoking a response from the Putin government that would be used to justify a further escalation—including the direct deployment of NATO troops into the conflict.
At another point, Biden declared rhetorically, “Every American must ask for himself or herself: Is the world safer with NATO? Are you safer? Is your family safer?” The answer to these questions is clearly “no.” The entire policy of the Biden administration and the NATO powers is driving mankind to the brink. But no one in the press questioned the assertion that escalating global war is in the interests of the “American people.”
While Biden may be senile, his questioners at the conference are blighted by the disease of ignorance and stupidity. They were more concerned about the latest pronouncements of millionaire actor George Clooney and the Democratic Party’s donors than the consequences of the escalation of the war against Russia.
Virtually nothing was said either by Biden or the press about the ongoing genocide in Gaza. There was no mention of the recent article by The Lancet calculating the death toll of Gazans in the US/Israeli war at 186,000 or higher, i.e., at least 8 percent of the pre-war population. However, in response to the question that was asked, Biden reiterated his full support for Israel and made the lying statement, “I’m not building 2,000 pound bombs” for Israel. “They cannot be used in Gaza or any populated area without causing great human damage.”
But just two weeks ago Reuters published an article reporting that Biden has sent Israel more than 10,000 of the city block-destroying 2,000 pound bombs since October.
The press, what used to be called the “Fourth Estate,” is thoroughly integrated into the intelligence apparatus. There was no challenge to Biden’s presentation of the war in Ukraine and the need to “win” it.
Instead, David Sanger, the chief foreign affairs commentator for the New York Times, cited bellicose language directed against China in the NATO communiqué and demanded to know what NATO was doing to “disrupt” the relations between China and Russia and whether a reelected President Biden, three years on, would be able to “hold his own” in a meeting with President Xi.
The press conference had been described as a “make or break” moment for Biden following his debate debacle against Trump two weeks ago. Shortly after it concluded, five more House Democrats issued statements calling on Biden to end his candidacy in order to replace him with a Democrat who could defeat Trump in November. That brought the number as of Friday morning to 18, plus one sitting senator, Peter Welch of Vermont.
Socialist Equality Party presidential candidate Joseph Kishore noted in a statement published on X yesterday, “What is most striking in the discussions over Biden’s fate as the candidate of the Democratic Party in the 2024 elections is the absence of any actual policy differences. All factions support the massive escalation of imperialist war, which threatens catastrophe for all mankind.”
Kishore added:
Particular note should be made of the position of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other members of the Democratic Socialists of America, who have taken the most aggressive position in defense of Biden. Whatever their insincere and hypocritical criticisms of the genocide in Gaza, the DSA is fully behind the policy of American imperialism. It is nothing more than a faction of the Democratic Party.
If the Democratic Party does end up changing its candidate, it will not be to implement a change in policy, but to ensure that the extreme recklessness on display at Biden’s press conference is carried out in a more effective manner.
It is not a matter of glorifying the Democratic Party of the past, but it is worth recalling that in run-up to the 1968 elections, the intense conflict and crisis within the Democratic Party was bound up with conflicts over the course of the Vietnam War. No such differences exist today.
The whole electoral process is dominated by the principle of oligarchy. All decisions, including on Biden’s personal fate, are made by a handful of billionaire donors, along with the figures who dominate the military-intelligence-state apparatus. The interests of the vast majority of the population, the working class, are entirely excluded.
Within this political situation, the essential task for the working class is to articulate its independent interests, in opposition to the Democrats and the Republicans and the entire capitalist system.
The World Socialist Web Site and the Socialist Equality Party are sponsoring a rally and meeting on July 24 in Washington D.C. on the occasion of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a joint session of Congress. The purpose of this rally is to set forward the political orientation and strategy for a mass movement against the Gaza genocide and US imperialism.
We urge all workers and youth to make plans to attend by filling out the form below [0n original]
Russian Officials Vow Response to US Missile Deployment to Germany
There’s no indication yet that the missiles will be armed with nuclear weapons, but the statement leaves open the possibility. The US already has nuclear bombs stationed in Germany as part of NATO’s nuclear sharing, but they are B61 gravity bombs that need to be dropped from aircraft.
Officials across the government reacted strongly to the news that the US is deploying previously banned missiles that could hit Russian territory
by Dave DeCamp July 11, 2024 , https://news.antiwar.com/2024/07/11/russian-officials-vow-response-to-us-missile-deployment-to-germany/
On Thursday, Russian officials reacted strongly and vowed to respond to the US announcing that it will deploy missile systems to Germany starting in 2026 that were previously banned by the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty.
“Without nerves, without emotions, we will develop a military response, first of all, to this new game,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov. He called the US decision “destructive to regional safety and strategic stability.”
Anatoly Antonov, Russia’s ambassador in Washington, said the deployment could lead to confrontation. “The Americans are increasing the risk of a missile arms race. Here, they forget that going the way of confrontation may set off an uncontrollable escalation amid the dangerous aggravation of tensions along the Russia-NATO track,” he said.
Valentina Matviyenko, speaker of the Federation Council, Russia’s upper house of parliament, warned of a strong response if the US goes through with the deployment. “I hope that it will not happen, because Russia’s response will be harsh and adequate. This is simply unacceptable,” she said.
The INF prohibited land-based missile systems with a range between 310 and 3,400 miles. The US and Germany said in a joint statement that the planned deployment includes a land-based version of nuclear-capable Tomahawk missiles, which have a range of about 1,000 miles and are primarily used by US Navy ships and submarines.
The US and Germany also said that the deployment will include SM-6 missiles, which have a range of about 290 miles, and “developmental hypersonic weapons.” The statement said the missiles have “significantly longer range than current land-based fires in Europe.”
There’s no indication yet that the missiles will be armed with nuclear weapons, but the statement leaves open the possibility. The US already has nuclear bombs stationed in Germany as part of NATO’s nuclear sharing, but they are B61 gravity bombs that need to be dropped from aircraft.
Before the INF was signed in 1987, the Soviet Union had land-based nuclear-armed missiles deployed in its western territory that could hit western Europe, and the US had similar systems deployed that could hit Soviet territory.
When the US withdrew from the INF treaty, it claimed Russia was violating the agreement by developing the ground-launched 9M729 cruise missile. Russian officials denied the missile was a violation, saying it had a maximum range of 298 miles.
Russia also said the US was violating the INF by establishing Aegis Ashore missile defense systems in Romania and Poland. The systems use Mk-41 vertical launchers, which can fit Tomahawk missiles. During the NATO summit, the US also announced that its Aegis system in Poland is now operational.
The US refused to negotiate with Russia on the INF issues, and the Trump administration tore up the treaty in August 2019 and began testing previously banned missile systems almost immediately after. It was clear the US exited the treaty so it could deploy intermediate-range missiles near China, leading Russia to propose a moratorium on the deployment of INF missiles in Europe. But the US never accepted the offer.
Water leaks reported at Germany’s Asse II radwaste facility
Staff Writer May 28, 2024, https://www.neimagazine.com/news/decommissioning-waste-management/water-leaks-reported-at-germanys-asse-ii-radwaste-facility/?cf-view&cf-closed
The ageing nuclear waste facility in the Asse II salt mine near Wolfenbüttel in Lower Saxony is facing a growing problem of water penetration. The mine, which holds some 126,000 barrels of low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste, is operated by Germany’s Federal Association for Final Storage (BGE – Bundesgesellschaft für Endlagerung), a federally owned company within the remit of the Federal Environment Ministry. In April 2017, BGE took over responsibility as operator of the Asse II mine and the Konrad and Morsleben repositories from the Federal Office for Radiation Protection. Salt water has been entering the facility for decades, increasing concern about the stability of the 13 chambers filled with waste.
From 1967 to 1978, around 47,000 cubic metres of low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste were emplaced in the mine according to information from former operator, the Association for Radiation Research (now known as Helmholtz Zentrum München, HMGU). Some 67% of the waste originated from NPPs. Typical waste included: filters, scrap metal, paper, laboratory waste, building rubble, wood, slurries and mixed waste. Other waste was delivered by research institutes, the nuclear industry and other waste producers such as the medical industry.
Records show how many drums are stored in the Asse mine, but there is some uncertainty as the radionuclide and substance inventory as the waste declaration at the time does not meet current standards. The radioactive waste was emplaced in 13 former mining chambers Two chambers are located in the central section and 10 in the southern flank of the mine at depths of 725 and 750 metres. A further chamber is located at the 511-metre level.
At the start of emplacement, the waste containers were stacked in an upright position. In order to make better use of the space, the former operator subsequently began stacking them on their sides. From 1971 onwards, the waste was primarily dumped using a wheel loader. The simultaneous handling of multiple drums led to lower costs and lower radiation exposure for staff. There were no plans for retrieval, and possible damage to the waste containers was disregarded. The surrounding rock salt was intended to provide long-term protection.
According to current laws and state of the art of science and technology, the final disposal of radioactive waste in the manner employed at the Asse II mine would not be eligible for a licence although no laws were broken based on the legislation in force at the time. If the waste were to remain in the mine, it would not be possible to demonstrate that the legal safety objectives would be met and the intention is for the waste to be retrieved. So far, none of the barrels have been removed and is not expected to start before 2033 as scientific methods to do it safely are still being investigated. It’s estimated it will cost at least €4.7bn ($5.1bn).
So far, the water penetrating the salt dome from the outside – some 12 cubic metres a day – has been mostly absorbed and pumped to the surface. However, the infiltration patter has changed, BGE head Iris Graffunder recently told the environmental committee of the Bundestag. Graffunder earlier pointed out the deteriorating situation. “Due to this strong change in water access, we are alarmed” she tolkd Braunschweig newspaper. According to the BGE, the amount of water at the main collection point has been decreasing for several months. “This means that the water is collecting somewhere else. That worries us,” she said.
Experts warn that is the partly torn and rusted barrels mix with the water this could eventually contaminates groundwater. The inventory reportedly consists of 104 tonnes of uranium, 81 tonnes of thorium and 29 kilograms of plutonium. There are also toxins such as arsenic, mercury and banned pesticides, which were also disposed of in the mine.
The BGE has applied for the complete renovation of the main collection point, which is located at the 658-metre level in the mine. Experts are currently trying to find and repair possible damaged areas. According to the BGE, the water infiltration has increased from 0.8 to three cubic metres on the lower 725-metre level. At the even lower collection points directly in front of the nuclear waste chambers at the 750-metre level no increase in the salt water level has so far been observed.
Federal Environment Minister Steffi Lemke (Greens) has expressed concern about the situation “I take the situation in the Asse II nuclear waste warehouse in Lower Saxony very seriously,” she said. She added that, in her view, the recovery of the waste was the safest option and “should remain our top priority”.
Joe Biden Just Signed a Popular, Bipartisan Nuclear Power Bill. Advocates Say It’s a Sign of Things to Come.
National Review 12th July 2024
With Congress gridlocked and President Joe Biden’s political career hanging by a thread, Republicans and Democrats came together to pass legislation promoting the development of nuclear power, providing a rare example of bipartisan unity and government action on an issue that lawmakers and policy wonks across the political spectrum agree on — but for different reasons.
President Biden signed the legislation on Tuesday with very little fanfare ………………………………………………
Senators Moore Capito (R., W.Va.) and Carper (D., Del.), and Representatives Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R., Wash.) and Pallone (D., N.J.) were among the ADVANCE Act’s champions.
……………………..The ADVANCE Act requires the NRC to speed up its review process for building nuclear reactors on existing nuclear sites, award a cash prize for successfully building next-generation nuclear technology, and create a plan for faster nuclear construction on abandoned or under-utilized properties known as brownfield sites.
…………………………….. Moving forward, Senators Tim Scott (R., S.C.) and Coons (D., Del.) proposed a measure earlier this year to remove the NRC’s mandatory-hearing requirement for uncontested nuclear-license applications.
Like the ADVANCE Act, the bill shows how the bipartisan enthusiasm for nuclear power, and the old-school dealmaking it brings, has only just begun.
July 12, 2024
US-made missile suddenly ‘transformed’ into a ‘Russian’ one and killed 40 civilians
One video clearly shows a SLAMRAAM (Surface Launched AMRAAM) missile falling and hitting a civilian building. This US-made weapon is based on an AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) and is used by the much-touted NASAMS (Norwegian/National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System). However, the Neo-Nazi junta is insisting that the weapon in question is a Russian Kh-101 long-range air-launched cruise missile.
Drago Bosnic, InfoBrics, Tue, 09 Jul 2024, https://www.sott.net/article/493060-US-made-missile-suddenly-transformed-into-a-Russian-one-and-killed-40-civilians
On July 8, the Russian military launched large-scale strikes on various targets across Ukraine. According to the mainstream propaganda machine, one strike was “particularly deadly”, as it allegedly “killed 41 civilians” and “destroyed a children’s hospital”. Reuters says:
“Russia blasted the main children’s hospital in Kyiv with a missile in broad daylight on Monday and rained missiles down on other cities across Ukraine, killing at least 41 civilians in the deadliest wave of air strikes for months.”
The report tried playing into the emotional aspects with the graphic descriptions of parents and children affected by these “evil Russian strikes”. Reuters says that “parents holding babies walked in the street outside the hospital, dazed and sobbing after the rare daylight aerial attack”, while “windows had been smashed and panels ripped off, and hundreds of Kyiv residents were helping to clear debris”.
While on his way to the NATO summit in Washington DC, the Neo-Nazi junta frontman Volodymyr Zelensky claimed more than 170 people were injured, while around 100 buildings were damaged, including the aforementioned children’s hospital and a maternity center in Kiev, as well as children’s nurseries, a business center and homes. He also stated that “Russian terrorists must answer for this” and that “being concerned does not stop terror, condolences are not a weapon”. The Kiev regime announced a day of mourning for today, calling the strikes “one of the worst air attacks of the war”, insisting it “demonstrated that Ukraine urgently needed an upgrade of its air defenses from its Western allies”. Interestingly, they also claim that their air defenses allegedly “shot down 30 of 38 missiles”. Quite peculiar that the Neo-Nazi junta forces are “so successful” in shooting down Russian missiles.
At the same time, they still “urgently need” NATO-sourced SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems. The question is, which is it? Either the current air defenses are not enough, meaning that the reports about shootdowns are a blatant lie, or the reports are “true”, meaning that the Kiev regime forces don’t really need “better air defenses“. After all, they “regularly shoot down” two out of six 9-S-7760 “Kinzhal” air-launched hypersonic missiles. However, in all seriousness, this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the sheer ridiculousness of propaganda in the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. For instance, Reuters reports that it obtained “an online video showing a missile falling towards the children’s hospital followed by a large explosion” and insists that “the location of the video was verified from visible landmarks”. And indeed, there’s horrifying footage of children injured by the shrapnel and falling debris.
The political West is now also using the UN to spread the narrative about the “brutal Russian attack”. The United Kingdom called for a UN Security Council meeting, which will take place today to “discuss a Russian missile attack on Kyiv’s Okhmatdyt Children’s Hospital that was part of a massive attack on July 8 that hit several cities across the country, killing at least 41 people and injuring at least 140”, according to the CIA front Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). So, once again, we’re seeing the UN being used for the political West’s “soft power” projection purposes. It should be noted that the reports about injuries to civilians are true, as the footage is certainly undeniable. However, there’s a “slight problem” with the narrative. Namely, the video that Reuters referenced is also indisputable evidence that Russia didn’t conduct the aforementioned strike on the children’s hospital in Kiev.
One video clearly shows a SLAMRAAM (Surface Launched AMRAAM) missile falling and hitting a civilian building. This US-made weapon is based on an AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) and is used by the much-touted NASAMS (Norwegian/National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System). However, the Neo-Nazi junta is insisting that the weapon in question is a Russian Kh-101 long-range air-launched cruise missile. The mainstream propaganda machine is also pushing the same narrative, despite the fact that the Russian missile has a massive warhead weighing 400 kg, meaning that the explosion would’ve completely leveled any building, which was simply not the case with the one damaged by the SAM fired by the Kiev regime forces. What’s more, it’s highly likely that the Russian cruise missile has an upgraded warhead weighing 800 kg, meaning that the discrepancy is far worse.
In case such a missile hit any residential area, the death toll would’ve been in the hundreds, if not thousands. However, the mainstream propaganda machine doesn’t really care about such inconsistencies. All it cares about is its vaunted narrative. That’s precisely why they quote Zelensky’s statements about “Russian terrorists” while also openly talking about NATO’s and Neo-Nazi junta’s terrorist attacks against Russian schoolchildren as if it were a “completely normal thing”.
However, apart from the video evidence showing that Russia didn’t conduct the aforementioned strike, there’s also the history of other blatant lies by the Neo-Nazi junta. Namely, it regularly uses SAM systems without any consideration for civilians, such as in the case of Przewodow, a Polish village that was hit by 5V55K SAMs fired by the Kiev regime forces back in mid-November 2022. Two civilians were killed.
The Neo-Nazi junta was adamant that Russia “deliberately” attacked Poland. At the time, I argued that the location of the incident was nowhere near the engagement range of any Russian SAM system that uses the 5V55K missiles. All evidence suggested that the weapon was fired from an older iteration of the Soviet-era S-300 SAM system. At the time, the Kiev regime forces still operated several versions, with the vast majority belonging to the S-300P/PS/PT series. The missile in question has a maximum engagement range of approximately 45 km.
Updated versions of the post-Soviet era were never deployed in Ukraine, while the closest Russian air defense units are at least 150-200 km away, in Belarus, and operate much more advanced systems such as the S-400. Poland itself later confirmed that the Neo-Nazi junta lied, even leading to strained relations between the two. The latest incident is in no way different.
Comment: This attack is not in Russia’s playbook, but evidently a page out of Kiev’s.
The false equivalency of nuclear disarmament and nuclear abolition
The Bulletin, By Jasmine Owens | July 11, 2024
Jasmine Owens is a nuclear weapons abolitionist, writer, educator, and organizer. She has a master’s in Nonproliferation and Terrorism Studies from the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, and has worked for Win Without War, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Outrider Foundation, Council on Strategic Risks, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, and ReThink Media. Her work and her passions focus on centering humanity in the fight for a more just and equitable world, starting with the abolition of nuclear weapons.
Since the horrific bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, advocates for reducing the nuclear threat have fallen into three general categories: arms control, disarmament, and abolition. Over time, the boundaries between these very different approaches have become blurred. Even people within the nuclear community often use “nuclear disarmament” and “nuclear abolition” interchangeably. In some instances, arms control has also been lumped in with disarmament and abolition, because even it is deemed too radical for war hawks.
Nuclear abolitionists suffer disproportionately from this collapsing of categories. Nuclear abolition, in my view, is rooted in the traditions of slavery abolition. It is the most radical of the anti-nuclear paradigms, and the one most closely associated with other forms of abolitionist and social justice organizing. When abolition is lumped in with the narrower—but still crucial—paradigms of arms control and disarmament, it loses some of its power to connect across movements and hinders efforts by activists like Ray Acheson and Emma Pike, and organizations like the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), for example, to expand the reach of anti-nuclear weapons activism. Clear distinctions between disarmament and abolition are needed to better define abolitionists’ work and to allow for more visionary organizing.
Beyond disarmament. A nuclear disarmament framework seeks to eliminate all types of nuclear weapons and to establish monitoring and verification safeguards to ensure no state is secretly trying to (re)build a nuclear arsenal. A nuclear abolition framework goes beyond the audacious but narrow goal of eliminating nuclear weapons; it strives to upend the systems of oppression that support and are supported by nuclear weapons. Nuclear abolitionists understand nuclear weapons to be related to other oppressive systems—such as white supremacy, capitalism, and patriarchy—that reinforce each other at the expense of life on Earth, and that are all products of collective individual actions. Nuclear abolition calls for both self-transformation and the systemic transformation of society.
Abolition frameworks seek to address the roots of problems, not just the symptoms. The end of slavery, for example, happened because abolitionists fought tirelessly to show the world that a more equitable future was possible. The root of the problem was not just that enslaving people was bad, but that people did not value Black lives as humans, but rather as capital……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..more https://thebulletin.org/2024/07/the-false-equivalency-of-nuclear-disarmament-and-nuclear-abolition/
Ukraine won’t get NATO invite – Norwegian PM
https://www.rt.com/news/600822-ukraine-no-nato-membership/ 12 July 24
The bloc will reportedly pledge more money for Kiev and support for EU integration instead
NATO will once again stop short of inviting Ukraine to become a member, but will acknowledge the country’s desire to eventually join the US-led military bloc, according to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store.
Speaking to reporters at the NATO summit in Washington, in Washington, Store addressed speculation about the contents of a final communique.
“I don’t think there will be any invitation as a result of this year’s summit, but everything else will speak of such a future,” he said.
A leaked draft of the communique speaks of Ukraine’s “irreversible path” to NATO membership and demands that China stop supporting Russia, Reuters reported on Wednesday.
NATO also intends to give Kiev at least €40 billion ($43.3 billion) over the next year, set up a mechanism to coordinate deliveries of military aid and training of Ukrainian troops, and support Ukraine on its path to “full Euro-Atlantic integration.”
An invitation to join the bloc will be extended “when allies agree and conditions are met,” according to the draft seen by Reuters.
The exact same language was used at last year’s summit in Vilnius. Back then, the government in Kiev was furious at the lack of a formal invitation, with Vladimir Zelensky firing off a series of angry social media posts accusing NATO of weakness and cowardice.
Store also confirmed reports that Norway will donate six F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, suggesting they would arrive sometime this year. He had first promised the jets last August, but had not specified the number or a delivery schedule.
Russia has repeatedly warned the US-led bloc that its financial and military support for Ukraine will only prolong the conflict but not change its outcome, while risking a direct confrontation. NATO has insisted that its military, political, and economic support of Kiev does not make it a party to the hostilitie
NATO SUMMIT: Collectively Losing Their Minds.
Russia’s boldest red line is Ukraine joining NATO. As former C.I.A. analyst Ray McGovern wrote last week in a piece for Consortium News, Ukrainian negotiators understood this when they reached the outlines of a settlement of the war in April 2022, just weeks after it started. It was scuttled by the U.S. to keep the war going. Despite this, the NATO communicate vows to make Ukraine a member.
That is like challenging Moscow to a nuclear duel.
Soon after Russia entered Ukraine, the Pentagon corrected Antony Blinken for saying Kiev would get NATO fighter jets. Blinken was applauded at the NATO summit yesterday for saying F-16s would soon arrive in Ukraine. What changed? asks Joe Lauria.
By Joe Lauria, Consortium News, July 11, 2024 https://consortiumnews.com/2024/07/11/nato-summit-collectively-losing-their-minds/
On March 7, 2022, two weeks after Moscow entered the civil war in Ukraine, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told CBS News from Moldova that the U.S. would give NATO-member Poland a “green light” to send Mig-29 fighter jets to Ukraine.
Within days the Pentagon shot down the idea. Then U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also supported the Polish planes scheme, but the Pentagon rejected it because it “could result in significant Russian reaction that might increase the prospects of a military escalation with NATO,” according to then Pentagon spokesman John Kirby.
But yesterday Blinken was applauded when he told a public policy forum at the NATO summit in Washington: “As we speak the transfer of F-16 jets is underway coming from Denmark, coming from the Netherlands and those jets will be flying in the skies of Ukraine this summer to make sure that Ukraine can continue to effectively defend itself against the Russian aggression.”
It is not quite NATO declaring a no-fly zone over Ukraine, which was dismissed by President Joe Biden in March 2022 because “that’s called World War III, okay? Let’s get it straight here, guys. We will not fight the third world war in Ukraine.”
“President Biden’s been clear that … if you establish a no-fly zone, certainly in order to enforce that no-fly zone, you’ll have to engage Russian aircraft. And again, that would put us at war with Russia,” added Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin at the time.
Though not declaring a no-fly zone, these are still NATO fighter jets leaving from NATO countries to operate with Ukrainian pilots against Russian aircraft in Ukrainian airspace. More dangerously, NATO is permitting Ukraine to fly the F-16s to attack inside Russian territory.
Russia says it reserves the right to hit the airfield from which the planes take off, even if it’s in a NATO country, which risks escalation to direct conflict.
So what changed since March 2022 to allow the U.S. and NATO to risk, in the previous words of Biden, “World War III?”
What’s changed is that back then the White House and the Pentagon still thought the strategy of economic and information warfare plus a proxy ground war would defeat Russia in Ukraine, and ultimately bring down Vladimir Putin in Moscow.
But for more than a year now it’s been evident that the U.S. — and NATO — have lost the economic and information war, as well as the proxy fighting on the ground in Ukraine. One year into the war, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at a dinner in February 2023 that he had to face facts: Ukraine would lose the war and should negotiate a settlement with Moscow.
The Wall Street Journal quoted Macron as telling Zelensky that “even mortal enemies like France and Germany had to make peace after World War II.” Macron told Zelensky “he had been a great war leader, but that he would eventually have to shift into political statesmanship and make difficult decisions,” the newspaper reported.
U.S.-led NATO could not launch its economic, information and proxy war against Russia without cause. That cause would be Russia invading Ukraine to defend ethnic Russians in a civil war that had raged since 2014, sparked when the U.S. helped to overthrow the democratically-elected government that year.
The economic war, intended to spur Russians to overthrow their government, has failed spectacularly. The ruble did not collapse despite sanctions on the Russian central bank. Nor has the economy.
Instead an alternative economic, commercial and financial system that excludes the West has arisen with China, India and Russia in the lead, and most of Asia, Africa and Latin America taking part in what appears to be the final chapter of Western colonialism. The sanctions instead backfired on the West, especially in Europe.
The information war has failed across the world. Only the United States and Europe, which consider itself “the world,” believe their own “information.”
The proxy war is being lost on the ground, though more than $100 billion in U.S. aid to Ukraine has created a bloodbath. There will either be a negotiated settlement in which Ukraine loses territory; a total Russian victory; or potentially the final war.
The U.S. pushed Russia to the brink to provoke its intervention. It began with a 30-year NATO expansion eastward with NATO exercises on Russia’s borders while calling for Ukraine to become a member, a call reiterated at the summit yesterday.
In December 2021 the West rejected Russian treaty proposals to roll back NATO troop deployments and missile installations in Eastern Europe, creating a new security architecture in Europe.
NATO’s aim is to regain control of Russian resources and finances as the West enjoyed in the 1990s, when it asset-stripped formerly state-owned industries, enriching themselves and a new class of oligarchs while impoverishing the Russian people. Putin is now standing in their way.
Realizing it is losing, NATO has permitted Ukraine to attack Russian territory with its long-range missiles, which it had previously refused to do, and is now delivering the F-16s, which the Netherlands recklessly will allow Ukraine to fly inside Russia to strike targets there.
Accompanying these dangerous moves, putting the entire world at risk, NATO is ramping up the fantasy that Putin, like Hitler before him, is bent on conquering all of Europe, a continuation of the decades-long exaggerated Soviet threat that justified NATO’s existence to begin with.
Still desperate for direct NATO intervention, Zelensky’s hallucination at the summit was that the line of defense against Russia attacking the West lies in Ukraine. Macron has changed his tune from his dinner with Zelensky, now advocating sending French troops to the battlefield. And Biden, striving to appear lucid, made it a central theme of his address.
Faking Defense for Offense
In his speech to the summit, Biden on Tuesday couched NATO’s aggressive designs as defensive moves to counter a non-existent Russian threat to the rest of Europe. It’s similar to dressing up Israel’s genocide as “self-defence.” He said:
“In Europe, Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine continues. And Putin wants nothing less — nothing less than Ukraine’s total subjugation; to end Ukraine’s democracy; to destroy Uraine’s cul- — Uraine — Ukraine’s culture; and to wipe Ukraine off the map.
And we know Putin won’t stop at Ukraine. But make no mistake, Ukraine can and will stop Putin — (applause) — especially with our full, collective support. And they have our full support.
Even before Russian bombs were falling on Ukraine, the Alliance acted. Or- — I ordered the U.S. reinforcements at NATO’s eastern flank — more troops, more aircraft, more capabilities. And now the United States has more than 100,000 troops on the continent of Europe.
NATO moved swiftly as well, not only reinforcing the four existing battle groups of the east but also adding four more in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia, essentially doubling NATO’s strength on the eastern flank.”
Biden ridiculed Putin recently, saying he couldn’t even take the Ukrainian province of Kharkiv and now we are supposed to believe Putin has the absurd desire and capability to take Paris and beyond.
Somebody Tell Washington the WWII Era Is Over
Until the U.S. and its Western allies accept that the World War II era is ended they will continue to lead the world towards a Third World War.
At the end of the second one, the U.S. was the only major combatant undamaged at home and left with military bases flung around the world. The U.S. stood astride a devastated globe. It was faced with a choice: make good on its rhetoric of international social progress, or fortify those bases into the nodes of a global military and economic empire. Over the decades since, the U.S. has sought to control world resources by installing the governments they need, through electoral interference, coups or invasions.
World War II was the last just American war. That is why Washington brings it up every time the U.S. is gearing for a fight. It whitewashes its true intent — which is not to spread democracy.
Before the 1989 war on Panama, Gen. Manuel Noriega was called Hitler; before the 1999 attack on Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic was compared to Hitler; as was Saddam Hussein before the 2003 invasion of Iraq. As tensions rose with Russia during her presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton called Putin Hitler, leaving the impression she too was itching for war.
World War II imagery and rhetoric has been so crucial to American imperial leaders since 1945 that they can’t let go. They have little else to sell themselves with.
[See: Misusing the Sacrifices of WW II – Consortium News]
They have also ritually inflated the role the U.S. played in defeating Nazi Germany. The Soviet Union’s outsized contribution to destroying the Nazis has been airbrushed out of history and U.S. allies are relegated to a supporting cast, fitting for the vassals they’ve since 1945 become.
But that era is ending. The U.S. can no longer use the Second World War to justify its aggression and demonize its enemies. Until the U.S. acknowledges it is no longer the preeminent power of the world and instead becomes a responsible international player, it will risk nuclear devastation to preserve its hubris.
NATO’s Dangerous Declaration
The joint communique of the 32 NATO members reads:
“We stand in unity and solidarity in the face of a brutal war of aggression on the European continent and at a critical time for our security. We reaffirm the enduring transatlantic bond between our nations. NATO remains the unique, essential, and indispensable transatlantic forum to consult, coordinate, and act on all matters related to our individual and collective security. NATO is a defensive Alliance. […]
The People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) stated ambitions and coercive policies continue to challenge our interests, security and values. The deepening strategic partnership between Russia and the PRC and their mutually reinforcing attempts to undercut and reshape the rules-based international order, are a cause for profound concern. We are confronted by hybrid, cyber, space, and other threats and malicious activities from state and non-state actors.
Russia’s boldest red line is Ukraine joining NATO. As former C.I.A. analyst Ray McGovern wrote last week in a piece for Consortium News, Ukrainian negotiators understood this when they reached the outlines of a settlement of the war in April 2022, just weeks after it started. It was scuttled by the U.S. to keep the war going. Despite this, the NATO communicate vows to make Ukraine a member.
That is like challenging Moscow to a nuclear duel.
We fully support Ukraine’s right to choose its own security arrangements and decide its own future, free from outside interference. Ukraine’s future is in NATO. Ukraine has become increasingly interoperable and politically integrated with the Alliance. We welcome the concrete progress Ukraine has made since the Vilnius Summit on its required democratic, economic, and security reforms.
As Ukraine continues this vital work, we will continue to support it on its irreversible path to full Euro-Atlantic integration, including NATO membership. We reaffirm that we will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met. The Summit decisions by NATO and the NATO-Ukraine Council, combined with Allies’ ongoing work, constitute a bridge to Ukraine’s membership in NATO.”
The Mad Path to Annihilation
All this adds up to a collective madness. After innumerable wars since history began, the world is being led to perhaps its final confrontation.
At the core is NATO’s apparent belief that Putin is bluffing about using nuclear weapons to defend Russia’s sovereignty. It is simply a bluff that cannot be tested.
The only solution is the two treaties Russia offered in December 2021 and a neutral Ukraine as it was under President Viktor Yanukovych, whom the U.S. helped overthrow in 2014 in part because of it.
NATO leaders haven’t demonstrated a willingness to give up any of their collective or individual power, which is devolving rapidly into collective and individual madness.
They don’t want to lose their role in Biden “running the world.”
Even if realists in Washington prevailed over the neocons in arguing that Ukraine can’t win this war, NATO leaders proclaim they can’t afford to lose it. Not because Putin will be at the Eiffel Tower by Christmas, but because so many political careers in the West would be ruined.From Keir Starmer to Olaf Scholz, to Giorgia Meloni, Emmanuel Macron and Joe Biden, a defeat in Ukraine would signify that they gambled their personal ambition — as well as their nations’ treasure and the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian men — and lost it all.
Instead of settling, they’re willing to drag us all into the existential crisis that could end it all.
NATO: From Cold War Defensive Coalition to Global Military Behemoth
SCHEEPOST, By Editor, JULY 12, 2024
he 75th anniversary celebrating the creation of NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, creates an opportunity for those in the war machine to double down their commitment to war and for peace advocates to amplify their calls for non-violence. David Swanson, co-founder and executive director of World BEYOND War and long-time peace advocate, joins host Robert Scheer on this episode of Scheer Intelligence. Swanson talks about his new book with Medea Benjamin, “NATO: What You Need To Know,” and how it analyzes what NATO means today as a worldwide enforcer of U.S. led military power, having grown from a 12-member organization to 32 members and “partnerships” with more than 40 non-member countries and international organizations.
According to Swanson, NATO’s original function as a defensive alliance against the Soviet Union has outlived the fall of the communist state and transformed the organization into a rapidly expanding extension of the U.S. war machine. “You don’t have to ask informed historians or intelligent peace activists. The Secretary General of NATO says it; they now wage wars, not just in defense or what they call deterrence.”
What was once envisioned as an adjunct to the United Nations addressing war and peace has now evolved, with NATO extending its reach far beyond the Atlantic to forge partnerships with Asian countries in a militarized response to China’s rise.
Swanson does not make light of what this will mean for the future: “It’s the end of everything. It’s the end of all life on earth. There’s no small nuclear war. There’s no tactical nuclear war, and yet this is where we’re headed.”
Transcript …………………………………………………………………………………………………… https://scheerpost.com/2024/07/12/nato-from-cold-war-defensive-coalition-to-global-military-behemoth/
U.S. Solar and Wind Power Generation Tops Nuclear for First Time
By Charles Kennedy – Jul 11, 2024, https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/US-Solar-and-Wind-Power-Generation-Tops-Nuclear-for-First-Time.html?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR36aY_qZHusiBuonQ8wnoYKA4biHRxGFjpdJPHNpgny-jFyIN5ZFM3NUL8_aem_2gvOQUW4tXrqTe8rUaH-xw
For the first time ever, U.S. electricity generation from utility-scale solar and wind exceeded nuclear power plants’ power output in the first half of 2024, according to data from energy think tank Ember quoted by Reuters columnist Gavin Maguire.
Electricity generation from solar and wind hit a record-high of 401.4 terawatt hours (TWh) between January and June 2024, surpassing the 390.5 TWh of power generated from nuclear power plants, Ember’s data showed.
Solar power generation jumped by 30% and electricity output from wind power rose by 10% in the first half of 2024, compared to the same period of last year.
In 2023, nuclear power accounted for 18.6% of U.S. electricity generation, while wind power output had a 10.2% share and solar accounted for 3.9% of total U.S. electricity output, according to data for 2023 from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
Ember has estimated that the share of wind and solar grew to 16% in 2023, when nuclear was still the largest source of low-carbon electricity in the U.S.
However, expanding renewable energy capacity and record solar and wind power generation helped solar and wind combined to top nuclear as the biggest low-carbon electricity source during the first half of this year.
Early in 2024, the EIA said that wind and solar energy would lead growth in U.S. power generation for the next two years.
As a result of new solar projects coming on line this year, the administration forecast that U.S. solar power generation will surge by 75%, from 163 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) in 2023 to 286 billion kWh in 2025. The EIA also expects that wind power generation will grow by 11% from 430 billion kWh in 2023 to 476 billion kWh in 2025.
In 2023, all renewable sources—wind, solar, hydro, biomass, and geothermal—accounted for 22% of total U.S. power generation.
First Nation challenges nuclear waste decision in federal court
By Natasha Bulowski & Matteo Cimellaro | News, Urban Indigenous Communities in Ottawa | July 12th 2024Observer
A First Nation concerned about approval of a nuclear waste disposal facility near the Ottawa River was before federal court this week to challenge the decision.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission greenlit the project on Jan. 9 and less than one month later, Kebaowek First Nation filed for a judicial review.
Kebaowek’s legal challenge is centred on the United Nations Declaration Act (UNDA), which enshrined the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) into Canadian law. The declaration specifically references the need for free, prior and informed consent when hazardous waste will be stored in a nation’s territory.
Kebaowek argued in court that Canadian Nuclear Laboratories — the private consortium responsible for managing the Chalk River nuclear site — did not secure the First Nation’s free, prior and informed consent during the licensing process, as mandated under Canadian law, when it was looking to store the waste at a site about a kilometre from the Ottawa River. The Ottawa River (known as the Kichi Sibi in Algonquin) holds immense spiritual and cultural importance for the Algonquin people and is a source of drinking water for millions.
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories wants to permanently dispose of one million cubic metres of radioactive waste in a shallow mound as a solution to waste accumulated over the last seven decades of operations and into the future. The company said the containment mound will only hold low-level waste.
A former employee at Chalk River told Canada’s National Observer a portion of the waste destined for the mound is a “mishmash” of intermediate- and low-level radioactivity because prior to 2000 there were inadequate systems to properly label, characterize, store and track what was produced at Chalk River or shipped there from other labs. Intermediate-level waste remains radioactive for longer than low-level waste and requires disposal deeper underground.
“It’s such a huge project that I don’t think most people are aware of just how big this is,” Coun. Justin Roy of Kebaowek First Nation told Canada’s National Observer in an interview after a press conference in Ottawa on July 10.
“We’re not talking about a pipeline that might not be there in a couple dozen years, or a mine that’s going to be up and running and close in 20 years, or a bridge that might be torn down one of these days. We’re talking about a huge mound that has a life expectancy, expectancy upwards of 500 years,” Roy said.
The First Nation is asking the Federal Court of Appeals to reject the nuclear safety commission’s decision to greenlight the facility and declare that the commission breached its duty to consult Kebaowek.
Kebaowek was in federal court July 10 and 11 to make its case that the project approval should be set aside or reconsidered. The First Nation argued two main points: First, that the nuclear safety commission refused to take the Canadian UNDRIP act into consideration, and that means the consultation process was flawed from the outset.
Second, the nation argues the project will rely largely on a forest management plan that has yet to be created to mitigate environmental impacts, Coun. Justin Roy of Kebaowek First Nation told Canada’s National Observer in an interview.
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ lawyers argued the commitment to create a forest management plan and have it approved by the nuclear safety commission is appropriate, and disagreed with Kebawoek’s description of it as a “blank piece of paper,” saying it is intended to be a “living document” and respond to different situations yet to arise. The company’s testimony on July 11 also highlighted different instances — letters, phone calls, in-person meetings — where it engaged with Kebaowek First Nation.
Justice Julie Blackhawk will issue a decision at a later date.
A ‘litmus test’
When Parliament was in its consultation process regarding the United Nations Declaration Act, First Nation leadership across Canada spoke up because chiefs thought the legislation “needed to have teeth,” Lance Haymond, Chief of Kebaowek First Nation said in an interview. However, the legislation was never re-written to give it weight, leading to a “failure of implementation from the beginning,” he explained.
“Here we are stuck with a piece of legislation that could be stronger,” Haymond said of testing the United Nations Declaration Act (UNDA) in court over the nuclear waste facility. The success or failure of the judicial review will serve as a litmus test of how much sway the new Canadian law holds in the courts, Haymond said.
“Our case will hopefully demonstrate how it can be applied in a real world situation,” he added.
This judicial review is one of three legal challenges against the near surface disposal facility.
At a July 10 press conference, Sébastien Lemire, Bloc Québécois MP for Abitibi-Témiscamingue, emphasized his party’s support for the legal challenge. Lemire also promised continued support at future press conferences, in Question Period and in work at committees like the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories is run by a consortium of private companies (including AtkinsRéalis, formerly known as SNC-Lavalin) and is contracted by the federal government to operate its laboratories and deal with waste.
Over 75 years, Chalk River Laboratories developed CANDU reactors, did nuclear weapons research, supplied the United States’ nuclear weapons program with plutonium and uranium, and at one time was the world’s largest supplier of medical isotopes used to diagnose and treat cancers.
About 60 people attended a public rally in front of the Supreme Court on July 10 to support the First Nation, according to Vi Bui with the Council of Canadians.
It’s not the first time the public has given their support.
Kebaowek’s legal fund has been largely crowdfunded and supported by Raven Trust, a charity that raises legal funds for Indigenous nations, Haymond said.
If Kebaowek loses, it’s still unclear if they will appeal the decision, he added.
“Our ancestors would probably roll over in their graves if they were to hear that we would just allow a nuclear waste dump that’s going to hold one million cubic metres of waste adjacent to the Ottawa River,” Roy said. “We are people who have been here since time immemorial; this mound, if it proceeds, it can maybe outlast all of us here.”
1 This Month
of the week – THE ONENESS of HUMANITY
25 June- THE PUKE ON NUKES
Thursday, June 25, 2026
7pm Central Time (8pm ET, 6pm MT, 5pm PT) UTC – 5
From NRC & DOE Deregulation to Techno-Fascist Billionaires Going Nuclear, Plus a Few Songs from Atomic Cabaret REGISTER
26 June – Radiation Trainwreck at the NRC / Join the Protect Better Campaign – https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/4ZlZ5_qLSHGiLSCg8FF6Bg#/registration
1st July – Webinar Waste of Space: The Environmental Harm of Military and Civil Space Activity st July, 7 pm
Report Launch Online: We are seeing an increasing exploitation of space for military and commercial purposes. This must change.
Protect Sazan Island from the Trump family! https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/protect_sazan_island_from_the_trump_family_loc/?bqFCVab&v=174511&cl=22707147157&_checksum=5e9dde668860e8231c33699735e16a1fbf22ab2cb01da50c999fe8732b9775ef&utm_source=email&utm_medium=blast_email&utm_campaign=174511
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- June 2026 (251)
- May 2026 (306)
- 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)
-
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 