Crimean Bridge Attack: Ukraine’s Sabotage Teams Take Orders From Washington, Senior Official Reveals

https://sputniknews.com/20221010/crimean-bridge-attack-ukraines-sabotage-teams-take-orders-from-washington-senior-official-reveals-1101698419.html Ilya Tsukanov, 12 Oct 22, The 19-km bridge linking the Crimean Peninsula to the Russian mainland sustained serious damage following the detonation of a truck bomb on one of its road sections on Saturday morning. Ukrainian officials boasted to US media that Kiev was responsible.
Ukrainian officials keep their US counterparts abreast of Kiev’s sabotage ops and other anti-Russian actions, Sergey Pashinsky, the head of the Association of Ukraine’s Defense Enterprises, accidentally revealed.
“We are planning several operations. My position is: we must and are obliged to inform our American partners about them. And those operations which I am conducting right now – I have the opportunity to conduct operations myself, I http://cut channels this is also the CIA http://cut have their own intentions. Because I understand that the US also carries responsibility for them and has the right to veto all of our operations,” Pashinsky said, speaking to infamous Russian pranksters Vladimir ‘Vovan’ Kuznetsov and Alexei ‘Lexus’ Stolyarov, who posed as US officials.
Pashinsky clarified that he has been in charge of some major Ukrainian military actions, including operational planning on Zmeiny (‘Snake’) Island – the small but strategically significant island situated off the western coast of Romania in the Black Sea, and which saw heavy fighting between Ukrainian and Russian forces earlier this year.
“I planned the Zmeiny Island operation, I carried it out personally [using] Ukrainian Bohdan and French Caesar [howitzers]. Yes, this was my operation in its entirely,” the official said.
Pashinsky indicated that operations against a piece of infrastructure like the Crimean Bridge became possible only once the US gives the green light.
“As soon as you tell me that the US approves the sabotage of the Crimean Bridge, the situation can move forward. [Laughs]. A verbal message is enough for me. We don’t want to take responsibility of this scale for ourselves, while Mr. Zelensky – I don’t know, I don’t even want to know about this situation,” Pashinsky said.
“The Crimean Bridge is an important artery, but on the other hand I think you know [Vladimir] Putin better than I do. That is, who can analyze Putin’s actions in the event of sabotage against the Crimean Bridge? Who?” the official asked.
The pranksters did not clarify whether the interview with Pashinsky was conducted before or after Saturday’s sabotage attack.
Two senior Ukrainian officials told the New York Times on Sunday that Ukrainian intelligence were behind the attack on the bridge, one of them grading the success of the attack as “excellent” and saying that the operation “showed the failure of the Russian system to guarantee the security even of the most significant and sacred targets.”
Ukrainian officials also publicly gloated over the act of terror, with presidential advisor Mikhail Podolyak saying the bridge attack was only “the beginning” and that “everything illegal must be destroyed” and “everything stolen must be returned to Ukraine.”
“Today was not a bad day and mostly sunny on our state’s territory. Unfortunately, it was cloudy in Crimea. Although it was also warm,” President Vladimir Zelensky said in a sarcasm-laden address to the nation on Saturday night.
Russia launched a series of missile strikes deep into Ukraine on Monday in the wake of the bridge attack after confirming Ukrainian special forces’ involvement, with the strikes targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure and military command and communications posts across the country. President Putin warned that strikes would be followed up if Ukrainian attacks against Russian infrastructure continue.
Finnish pharmacies run out of iodine pills as Russian nuclear fears increase
SMH 13 Oct22, Helsinki: Many Finnish pharmacies ran out of iodine tablets on Wednesday, a day after the Nordic country’s health ministry recommended that households buy a single dose in a case of a radiation emergency amid increasing fears of a nuclear event due to Russia’s war in Ukraine.
“An accident at a nuclear power plant could release radioactive iodine into the environment, which could build up in the thyroid gland,” the Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health said on Tuesday.
Chemists in many locations in Finland reported on Wednesday they had run out of iodine tablets as citizens rushed to purchase the medicine. Drug wholesalers also said their stockpiles were emptied out.
The ministry said the iodine tablet recommendation is limited to those aged 3-40 because of the potential risks that radiation exposure poses to that age group…………………………
In a case of a radiation emergency, sheltering indoors is the main way for people to protect themselves from hazardous radiation, the Finnish health ministry stressed. https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/finnish-pharmacies-run-out-of-iodine-pills-as-russian-nuclear-fears-increase-20221013-p5bpef.html
France’s Finance Minister : Priority is to restart nuclear reactors a soon as possible
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/frances-le-maire-priority-is-restart-nuclear-reactors-soon-possible-2022-10-11/—PARIS, Oct 11 (Reuters) – French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said on Tuesday the government’s priority was to restart EDF’s (EDF.PA) nuclear reactors – with more than half of them currently offline – as soon as possible.
During a press conference at the headquarters of grid operator RTE, Le Maire also said the goal was still to go back to 50GW of nuclear production capacity for the network at the start of 2023.
French nuclear power output is at a 30-year low for the year, owing to an unprecedented number of outages at EDF’s fleet of 56 reactors, with more than half offline because of corrosion issues and scheduled maintenance.
EU Taxonomy Labelling Gas and Nuclear as ‘Green’ Faces Legal Challenges
Activists and environmental organisations immediately opposed the decision, saying the new law discredits EU efforts to establish itself as a global leader on climate policy and only risks delaying Europe’s transition to a net-zero economy by further encouraging investments in the fossil fuel industry.
In September, Greenpeace and a separate alliance of environmental groups, including Client Earth and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), requested a legal review of the decision. Austria’s recent lawsuit is now adding to the legal challenges the European Commission is already facing.
https://earth.org/eu-taxonomy-legal-challenges/ MARTINA IGINIE OCT 13TH 2022
Austria has filed a lawsuit against the European Commission’s decision to label nuclear and gas as ‘green’ investments. The controversial EU taxonomy approved by the European Parliament in July is already facing two other legal challenges from environmental groups.
On Friday, Austria submitted a lawsuit to the Court of the European Union, asking for an overturn of the contentious EU taxonomy.
Approved in July, the legal text designated natural gas and nuclear as environmentally sustainable energy sources, encouraging investments in these energy sources. Under the EU taxonomy, new nuclear and gas-fired plants built through 2030 will be recognised as a transitional energy source as long as they are used to replace dirtier fossil fuels such as oil and coal.
The country’s minister for climate action and Green politician, Leonore Gewessler, described the EU’s decision as “irresponsible” and “unreasonable” and said it was “misleading” to consumers and investors to label gas – a fossil fuel responsible for climate change for its greenhouse gas emissions – as “green”.
However, Brussels reassured that gas and nuclear-related activities may be labeled as “green” only if they meet certain criteria. Particularly, the legal text specifies that gas projects should only be financed if direct emissions are kept under a maximum cap and they switch to fully renewable energy by 2035. Similarly, nuclear power may be funded only in compliance with certain standards for the disposal of radioactive waste.
Activists and environmental organisations immediately opposed the decision, saying the new law discredits EU efforts to establish itself as a global leader on climate policy and only risks delaying Europe’s transition to a net-zero economy by further encouraging investments in the fossil fuel industry.
In September, Greenpeace and a separate alliance of environmental groups, including Client Earth and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), requested a legal review of the decision. Austria’s recent lawsuit is now adding to the legal challenges the European Commission is already facing.
Despite not joining the legal action, Germany supported the country’s decision to file a lawsuit, adding that “it is good that the objections to the taxonomy regulation will now be reviewed by the courts.”
Growing the economy – but growth of what?

Michael Jacobs: Liz Truss dreams of growth – but even if she pulls it off, it won’t help Britain. Fifty years ago, the landmark report The Limits to Growth warned that, unless the composition of growth was
radically changed, its environmental impacts would lead to ecological and social collapse within 100 years.
Many of the projections made by The Limits to Growth have proved prescient. Yet it is also true that developed economies have been able to “uncouple” growth from some environmental
impacts. Over the past 20 years, the UK and others have notably seen rising GDP accompanied by falling greenhouse gas emissions.
Economists have described this as “green growth”, and many have argued that this, rather than growth per se, should be governments’ goal. Some environmentalists argue that environmental sustainability does not allow for any economic growth. Only the “degrowth” of western economies, they claim, is compatible with ecological salvation (and indeed, wellbeing). Others claim that GDP could still grow in a radically greener form. But in present circumstances this is a rather arcane dispute.
Both sides agree that some parts of the economy must degrow, notably the fossil fuel sector and fossil-intensive industries, while growth is clearly needed in others, such as renewable energy and the “care economy” of health, education, social care and childcare. The real question is therefore not “growth or
not?”, but “growth of what?”
Guardian 10th Oct 2022
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/10/liz-truss-dreams-growth-income-stall-gdp
France won’t retaliate with nuclear weapons if Russia uses them in Ukraine
French President Emmanuel Macron says he intends to avoid ‘global war’
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/europe/2022/10/13/france-wont-retaliate-with-nuclear-weapons-if-russia-uses-them-in-ukraine/ Soraya Ebrahimi, Oct 13, 2022,
France will not respond with nuclear weapons should Russia use them against Ukraine, French President Emmanuel Macron has said.
“Our doctrine rests on the fundamental interests of the nation,” Mr Macron told public broadcaster France 2 on Wednesday.
“They are defined clearly and wouldn’t be directly affected at all if, for example, there was a ballistic nuclear attack in Ukraine, in the region.”
It was the first time he has discussed France’s nuclear deterrence doctrine regarding Ukraine in detail.
Mr Macron said it was not good to talk about it too much.
So far, despite his threats, there is no sense that Russian President Vladimir Putin is moving nuclear assets.
Mr Macron said Mr Putin must “return to the table” to discuss peace in Ukraine and that he thought Kyiv would have to negotiate with him at some point.
“Today, first of all, Vladimir Putin must stop this war, respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and come back to the table for talks,” he said.
Asked if he would back a Ukrainian offensive to recapture Crimea, which was annexed by Russia in 2014 in a move not recognised internationally, Mr Macron said that “at some point as the conflict develops”, Russia and Ukraine “will have to come back to the table”.
“The question is whether the objectives of the war will only be reached by military means,” he said, although “it’s up to the Ukrainians to decide” what those aims should be.
When reminded that Ukraine no longer wanted to negotiate with Mr Putin, Mr Macron replied: “I tell you that at some point … it will be necessary. That’s why I have always refused maximalist positions.”
He said France would supply air defence systems to Ukraine after Russia’s wave of air strikes this week, which was aimed at “breaking Ukrainian resistance”.
“We’re going to deliver … radars, systems and missiles to protect them from these attacks,” Mr Macron said.
He said France was also negotiating to send another six Caesar mobile artillery units.
Putin vows continued ‘tough’ attacks against Ukraine – video
He said the war had entered “an unprecedented stage” since the weekend because “for the first time all over Ukraine civilians have been killed … and electricity and heating facilities have been destroyed”.
“The aim of the Russians these last few days has been to break, to shatter Ukrainian resistance,” Mr Macron said.
He acknowledged that France was “unable to deliver as much as the Ukrainians ask for. I’m obliged to keep some for us to protect ourselves and our eastern flank (of Nato)”. The extra Caesar guns were made for Denmark, but talks are under way to redirect them to Ukraine.
Ukraine held talks with Britain for destruction of Crimean bridge

https://apa.az/en/europe/ukraine-held-talks-with-britain-for-destruction-of-crimean-bridge-382809—15 August 2022,
Deputy of the Rada Goncharenko announced negotiations with Wallace on the destruction of the Crimean bridge, APA reports.
Ukraine held talks with British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace on a plan to destroy the Crimean Bridge at the NATO summit in June, Verkhovna Rada deputy Oleksiy Goncharenko said.
The parliamentarian drew attention to the statement of expert Igor Korotchenko, who said on the air of the Rossiya 1 TV channel that, according to some information, the plan for striking the bridge was allegedly being developed under the personal supervision of the head of the British military department.
“Ben Wallace and I discussed the plan to destroy the Crimean bridge back in June,” Goncharenko wrote, posting a photo from the talks, which, in addition to him and the head of the British Ministry of Defense, shows British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
In July, Aleksey Arestovich, an adviser to the head of Vladimir Zelensky’s office, said that Ukraine could attack the Crimean Bridge as soon as the first technical opportunity appeared.
Maintenance on eight French nuclear reactors delayed by strike
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/maintenance-five-french-nuclear-reactors-delayed-over-strike-2022-10-12/ By Forrest Crellin, 12 Oct 22,
PARIS, (Reuters) – France’s FNME trade union said on Wednesday that some workers at EDF’s (EDF.PA) nuclear plants resumed their strike over salaries, delaying maintenance work on eight reactors as the union sent a message of support to striking refinery workers.
Reporting by Forrest Crellin; Editing by Tomasz Janowski and Elaine Hardcastle
Three of the Cruas nuclear plant’s reactors are affected by the strike, while two reactors at the Cattenom and Tricastin plants and one Bugey reactor have had their maintenance delayed by the strike, FNME said.
EDF nears cut-price deal for GE nuclear turbine unit with Russian contracts
French energy group renegotiates terms for business that also supplies Rosatom
Sarah White in Paris YESTERDAY 6 Print this page French power operator EDF has renegotiated a deal to buy a nuclear turbine maker from General Electric, cutting its offer price for a business seen as strategic for France’s atomic industry but that is exposed to the risk of sanctions because of orders from Russia’s Rosatom. State-controlled EDF, which is on the cusp of being fully renationalised, was encouraged into making a move on the turbine company by the French government in a deal announced by President Emmanuel Macron at the start of the year.
The acquisition was touted as a way of recovering French control of the technology as EDF gears up to build new reactors, while also securing the future of a large factory in eastern France at a time when GE was exploring asset sales and looking to cut jobs. But the business has since been caught up in the fallout from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, even though its dealings with state-owned Rosatom, one of the world’s biggest nuclear plant developers, have not faced sanctions so far………………………. more https://www.ft.com/content/4e3f8a9e-e89c-47c9-9caa-b84825db1e70—
Julian Assange tests positive for COVID-19
WSWS, Thomas Scripps 10 Oct 22,
Julian Assange has contracted COVID-19. He received the test result Saturday, on the day several thousand people formed a human chain around Parliament in London to protest his persecution.
His wife, Stella, told the press, “I am obviously worried about him and the next few days will be crucial for his general health. He is now locked in his cell for 24 hours a day.” She said Assange had been feeling ill throughout the week and developed a fever and cough on Friday.
Assange’s infection confirms the repeated warnings of medical professionals and his legal team that his health and life are endangered by his wrongful imprisonment. It must lend renewed urgency to the demand for his immediate release.
Just months before the pandemic, over 100 doctors signed an open letter to the British government warning that Assange’s life was at risk while he was kept in HMP Belmarsh—the UK’s top-security prison. When COVID-19 began to spread rapidly throughout Britain, one of the lead signatories, Dr Stephen Frost, told the World Socialist Web Site, “Given what we know about this case, Mrs Assange is right to be concerned. Julian Assange, because he is immuno-compromised, following years of arbitrary detention first in the Ecuadorian Embassy and latterly in Belmarsh prison, is necessarily at higher risk of contracting any viral or bacterial infection, including infection by coronavirus.
“He should be released on bail immediately, so that he can access the health care which he urgently requires. The UK government is effectively playing Russian roulette with Julian Assange’s life.”
Another doctor, Lissa Johnson, explained, “As long ago as 2015 medical and human rights experts warned that anything more than a trivial illness could prove fatal for Julian Assange. His health is even more fragile now, and the coronavirus only renders those warnings more urgent and more dire.”
She added, “If Julian Assange does succumb to coronavirus or any other catastrophic illness in prison, it will not be an accident. It will be a foreseeable result of prolonged psychological torture and wilful medical neglect.”
…………………………. By the end of October 2020, Ministry of Justice figures showed that 1,529 inmates had been infected, 600 in the previous month alone. At least 32 prisoners had been killed by the virus.
In November, a wave of infections hit Belmarsh prison. Stella Assange revealed, “I’ve been told the number of people infected with COVID on Julian’s house block is 56, including staff.” This was on a block with fewer than 200 inmates.
Assange and the other inmates were placed under an indefinite lockdown, kept in their cells 24 hours a day. His lawyer Edward Fitzgerald had warned at his bail application of the “risk to his mental health and his human contact” posed by lockdown procedures. At Assange’s extradition hearing that autumn, his defence team presented extensive medical evidence of the damage done to his mental health and of the risk of suicide.
……………………………. Nils Melzer, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, examined Assange with a medical team inside Belmarsh Prison in May 2019 and concluded that he showed symptoms of psychological torture. He commented on his illness, “Assange’s stroke is no surprise. As we warned after examining him, unless relieved of the constant pressure of isolation, arbitrariness and persecution, his health would enter a downward spiral endangering his life. [The] UK is literally torturing him to death
Melzer added, “As Assange clearly was not medically fit to attend his own trial through videolink, how can they even discuss whether he is fit to be exposed to a show trial in the US, a country that refuses to prosecute its torturers and war criminals but persecutes whistleblowers and journalists?”
Saturday’s protest was the largest yet organised in defence of Assange, attracting a broader range of ages and social backgrounds. It indicated the potential that exists for a mass, global campaign to secure the WikiLeaks founder’s freedom and safety. ………… https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/10/10/picp-o10.html
Austria Sues EU Executive Over Green Label for Gas, Nuclear

https://www.voanews.com/a/austria-sues-eu-executive-over-green-label-for-gas-nuclear-/6784510.html BERLIN — 10 Oct 22,
The Austrian government said Monday it has filed a legal complaint with the European Union’s top court over plans by the bloc’s executive branch to label natural gas and nuclear power generation as sustainable energies.
Austria’s environment minister, Leonore Gewessler, warned that the measure could “greenwash” nuclear power and gas despite the environmental damage they cause.
Another EU member, Luxembourg, announced later that it would stand by Austria in the legal case, adding more political weight to the move.
The EU’s executive Commission plans to add certain nuclear and gas plants next year to a list that helps investors determine which projects are sustainable.
Gewessler said the disasters in Chernobyl in Ukraine and Fukushima in Japan have showed that nuclear power plants come with “incalculable risks.” Meanwhile, the burning of natural gas, a fossil fuel, adds greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere, stoking climate change.
A dozen environmental groups have already launched legal challenges to the Commission’s plans, backed by the bloc’s lawmakers in July.
Austria’s environment minister, Leonore Gewessler, warned that the measure could “greenwash” nuclear power and gas despite the environmental damage they cause.
Another EU member, Luxembourg, announced later that it would stand by Austria in the legal case, adding more political weight to the move.
Ukraine is preparing a law on full control over the media, as the last vestiges of press freedom disappear in Kiev
Rt.com By Olga Sukharevskaya, ex-Ukrainian diplomat, 8 Oct 22,
A bill approved by the Verkhovna Rada will finally finish off freedom of speech in Ukraine.
While fierce battles continue to rage between the Ukrainian and Russian armies in Donbass, Kherson Region, and Zaporozhye, the Kiev regime is busy eradicating the last vestiges of freedom of speech in the country.
On August 30, Ukraine’s rubber-stamp parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, passed a bill on the media at the first reading. Despite the numerous changes that the 300-page document has undergone since President Vladimir Zelensky’s team developed and submitted it a few years ago, its essence remains unchanged. If it becomes law, the authorities’ power over virtually all outlets will be essentially limitless.
The main danger this bill presents is that it grants government agencies the authority to block internet resources without any court proceedings, and revoke licenses from broadcast and print media solely on the basis of complaints. This huge power would be vested in the National Council for Television and Radio Broadcasting.
No room in the EU
Ukrainian journalists have been criticizing this bill since the first version appeared in 2018, asserting that it abolishes both freedom of speech and freedom of the press. OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Harlem Desir called that version of the law “a blatant violation of freedom of speech,” stating that its adoption “could jeopardize pluralism in the media market, impose additional costs on the media, and negatively affect the reflection of a diversity of ideas and opinions.”
Criticism of the bill from both the OSCE and Ukrainian journalists had an effect. In 2020, it was sent for revision, but the changes only include some clarifications concerning gender equality and coverage of sexual orientations.
At the same time, it still contains a ban on publishing any messages contradicting the official government line on military issues. It is likewise forbidden to cover speeches made by officials of the ‘aggressor country’ [meaning Russia] or cast former USSR party functionaries in a positive light. For example, including Ukraine’s own Leonid Brezhnev.
The law would also hold foreign media responsible for any of its audiovisual content available in Ukraine. Moreover, social networks, including foreign ones, will be obliged to remove any material the National Council deems undesirable. The deadlines for removing ‘incorrect’ content or replacing it with ‘correct’ material have also been tightened. Among the ‘offenses’ that can get a media outlet banned is distributing programs in which any participant is on the ‘list of persons who pose a threat to the national media space of Ukraine.’ This is compiled by the National Council itself and does not require anyone’s consent.
Otherwise, the essence and spirit of the bill is preserved, including severe censorship of “objectionable” media. The American Committee for the Protection of Journalists (CPJ) didn’t call on the Verkhovna Rada to reject Bill No. 2693-D ‘On Media’ for nothing.
Maya Sever, president of the European Federation of Journalists, has bluntly stated that it means compulsory media regulation “fully controlled by the government worthy of the worst authoritarian regimes.” She is convinced that “a state that would apply such provisions simply has no place in the European Union.
From Gongadze to Shariy
Kiev’s war on journalists did not begin today. In 2000, there was the abduction and death of Georgiy Gongadze, the creator of the ‘Ukrainian Truth’ website, who harshly criticized corruption in the country’s highest echelons of power. A number of high-ranking officials were accused of being involved in the murder of the journalist, who then-President Leonid Kuchma viewed as objectionable, but the investigation revealed the involvement of only four perpetrators. One of these was the head of the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs’ main Criminal Investigation Department, General Pukach, who allegedly gave the order to liquidate Gongadze.
Nevertheless, there are many grey areas in the case. It was highly politicized and used as one of the pretenses for demanding a change of power during the days of the Orange Revolution.
Anatoly Shariy, who was engaged in high-profile investigative journalism for a number of Ukrainian publications from 2008 to 2011, almost shared Gongadze’s fate……………………………..
It is noteworthy that Shariy’s name has also been brought up in current discussions of the scandalous media bill. In justifying her support for the legislation, the head of the Board of the National Association of Ukrainian Media, Tatiana Kotyuzhinskaya, mentioned the authorities’ desire to limit the influence of Shariy and other bloggers in Ukraine’s infosphere.
It’s possible that, among other things, the reason the blogger’s activities have met with such disapproval was his publication of screenshots from messages sent by the Consul of Ukraine in Hamburg, Vasily Marushchinets, which contained calls for “death to anti-fascists,” comments like “it’s honorable to be a fascist,” and statements in the spirit of “Jews declared war on Germany back in March of 1934.” It was only after this that Nazi views in Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry became widely known to the public.
Threats, sanctions, arrests, attacks, and murders
Although the Ukrainian media has always had to fight the authorities’ attempts to restrict its activities, it was the Western-backed 2014 Euromaidan that triggered systematic persecution of press freedom in general, and individual journalists in particular.
Less than a month after the coup the new government tried to close down one of the two most widely read Ukrainian weeklies specializing in news analysis, ‘2000’, which took a negative view of the political forces that had violently seized power. The newspaper’s editorial offices were ransacked, and many left-wing outlets were shuttered. In particular, these included Borotba, as well as Rabochaya Gazeta, whose editor-in-chief ended up in the dungeons of Ukraine’s secret police, the SBU.
In the same year, Konstantin Dolgov, the editor-in-chief of ‘Glagol’, an online publication based in Kharkov, and Andrey Borodavka, a journalist, were arrested and persecuted by the new authorities. Olga Kievskaya, editor-in-chief of the ‘Anti-Orange’ website, was forced to emigrate due to threats ………………….
The vast majority of these cases were not covered in the Ukrainian media because these people were immediately declared “subversive elements” based on the so-called “moratorium on criticism of the authorities,” which the authorities announced themselves back in March of 2014, long before the start of hostilities in Donbass.
In 2018, Igor Guzhva, the head of the ‘strana.ua’ website, was forced to flee to Austria, where he received political asylum. The authorities’ efforts to prosecute him began after his investigations into Pyotr Poroshenko’s scandalous commercial activities. Later, under Zelensky, Ukraine imposed personal sanctions on Guzhva, and his website was blocked extrajudicially, while he himself, along with one of his journalists, Svetlana Kryukova, were entered into the ‘Register of State Traitors’. According to the head of Ukraine’s Union of Journalists, Sergey Tomilenko, these sanctions are political, and the European Federation of Journalists issued a statement condemning these actions as “a threat to the press, freedom, and media pluralism in the country.”
But not all Ukrainian journalists managed to emigrate, even after surviving prison. In April of 2015, the famous Ukrainian writer-historian and journalist Oles Buzina died at the hands of ‘Patriots of Ukraine’ after receiving threats and attacks due to his views. Despite appeals from the UN, the authorities have hampered the investigation in every possible way, and the murder suspects are still at large, evidence notwithstanding. In July of 2016, another journalist, Pavel Sheremet, was killed by participants in Kiev’s ‘Anti-Terrorist Operation’ (ATO) and supporters of the “purity of the white race.”
“Government critics, journalists, and non-profit organizations have come under increasing pressure from the authorities and far-right groups, which have embarked on the path of infringing freedom of speech and freedom of association under the pretext of countering Russian aggression,” Amnesty International said in a 2017 report.
No room for foreigners
Since the first half of 2014, even calling for a peaceful settlement of the conflict in the east of the country has been considered a crime in Ukraine. In particular, Ruslan Kotsaba, a journalist who refused to be drafted due to the consequences of a stroke, was imprisoned for this reason. In fairness, it should be noted that he was acquitted by an Appeals Court after a year and a half of imprisonment.
A few years before the start of Russia’s military operation, journalists whose material was published in the Russian media were subject to criminal prosecution…………………………………………….
The OSCE is aware, but Ukraine’s authorities don’t care
In 2018, a report was published by OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Harlem Desir in which he asserts that he had handed the Ukrainian authorities more than 20 statements and appeals collected from July 6 to November 21, 2018, concerning freedom of speech and the rights of journalists in Ukraine. ………………………………………
No room for freedom of speech in Ukraine
We have specifically chosen the report of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, which was published quite some time ago, to demonstrate that the attitude of the Ukrainian authorities towards freedom of speech and the right of journalists to freely express their own opinions have long-standing roots, and their persecution is systemic. Any similar report covering any period from 2014 to the present would contain no fewer instances of violations of these rights and freedoms. The whole list would require a decent-sized book to document………………………………………………………………………….
The fact that the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine supported the bill ‘On Media’ gives reason to fear that the situation for the country’s journalists will become even worse. Once again, the Zelensky regime has confirmed that it’s not building a democratic, but an authoritarian or even totalitarian state, which has no room for such concepts as freedom of speech and the press. https://www.rt.com/russia/564217-ukraine-vs-freedom-of-speech/
Belarus has no intention to go to war with neighbors, but it will defend itself — defense minister
TASS, Mon, 10 Oct 2022
Belarus will not go to war with neighboring states provided there are no wrong steps on their part, Defense Minister Viktor Khrenin said on Monday.
“We don’t want to be at war with Lithuanians or Poles, let alone Ukrainians. If you don’t want to and don’t take wrong steps, then there will be no war,” the Defense Ministry’s press-service quotes Khrenin as saying.
He urged Ukraine not to provoke the Belarusian side and to refrain from spreading fake news about an allegedly impending attack by Minsk……………….
7,000 form human chain in London to protest treatment of Assange

WSWS 9 Oct 22, Around 7,000 people formed a human chain around the Houses of Parliament in the UK Saturday, protesting the British government’s persecution of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
The chain ran continuously from Parliament Square along the Palace of Westminster, across Lambeth Bridge, along South Bank to Westminster bridge, then back over the Thames river to Parliament Square—roughly two miles. The event was organised by the Don’t Extradite Assange campaign.
Assange is currently held in Belmarsh maximum security prison in London. The United States government is seeking his extradition under the Espionage Act for exposing the war crimes and human rights abuses of US imperialism and its allies. It has plotted his assassination and levelled charges which carry a life sentence in solitary confinement. The WikiLeaks founder is seeking to overturn orders by the British judiciary and the home secretary approving his extradition. His legal team filed an appeal with the High Court in August.
Stella Assange, the WikiLeaks publisher’s wife, told protestors on Saturday, “Julian is suffering and part of the point of making this human chain was to show that what is happening here is not a legal process, it’s not a legitimate process. It is the instrumentalisation of the law in order to persecute a person, a journalist, in order to keep him in prison indefinitely.
“People around the world are witnessing this atrocity and that is what compels them to come here to show their solidarity, to show that they care about Julian. That they believe in justice, that they see what is happening here is a state that has committed crimes against innocent, that is now committing crimes against a journalist who exposed those crimes they committed.
“Let’s not forget that the US planned to assassinate Julian in the UK, while he was in the embassy and now they’ve put him in the harshest prison in the UK for almost four years.”
WikiLeaks editor Kristinn Hrafnsson said proceedings against Assange were “not a legal case,” because of the way the legal system has “bent itself to the demands and requests of the government… it’s appalling.”
He continued, “Julian is a political prisoner. He’s being politically persecuted. The chain around Parliament is sending a message to those inside. They are there to serve the people on the outside. And those are Julian’s supporters. Thousands of them here today, and millions around the world who know that this is a travesty.”
Labour MP and former shadow chancellor John McDonnell had the brass neck to announce, “As we go into the 18 months up to a general election, this will become a general election issue. Every MP will be asked: do you stand up for journalism, do you stand up for the rights of journalist to report freely, do you stand up for his basic human rights, do you stand up for justice?”……………………..
Reporters from the World Socialist Web Site spoke with some of the protestors……………………………………………
A number of those protesting travelled to London from other countries to do so. Mantas, who traveled from Lithuania that day to support Assange as part of the chain, told our reporters, “Assange told the truth about war crimes, and he fought for human rights and freedom of the press.”
The US and UK governments “want to make a clear and obvious example of Assange so that no-one attempts what he did. The powers that be are trying to impose their own world view, control how people think, to seduce them into thinking nothing can be done or that the world is as it’s supposed to be, when we are actually entering into wholesale madness in the world.”
He said of the war in Ukraine that the weapons manufacturers and businesses “want to promote a new war, and they don’t care about the consequences for the Ukrainian people or the Russian people. I don’t agree with Putin’s actions, but I think there was another option, but Zelensky was encouraged to take a hard line and oppose any deals from the Russian Federation.”
Listing the crimes exposed by WikiLeaks he said, “Where do you start? You can look at the video of an Apache helicopter shooting civilians. The Afghan and Iraq war logs and so on. People should look into it. There’s too much to go into herethat many crimes have been uncovered. People should look into what WikiLeaks has done what its expose and be objective about the matter.”
Assange’s case “shows that if anyone finds out something like this and tries to tell the public then they can be prosecuted for it. So obviously that can threaten everyone.” https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/10/08/chai-o08.html?fbclid=IwAR0oU-kS9VcRD34qsOcy2SC2BTcKB2CmeY6IwAoPfyc-MniCzPt3xsgXEu4
The great ratepayer robbery: how UK new nuclear rips off its customers

the taxpayer will be liable for the inevitable cost overruns and the RAB scheme itself makes it even less likely that developers will keep within the bounds of their agreements, thereby further increasing costs.
decision on Sizewell C as a stitched up deal behind closed doors, bringing extra cost to the consumer, producing unmanageable waste and squandering our capital on a white elephant scheme.
it is criminal that our time and money is wasted and all our futures thrown away on the back of this scam.
How new nuclear rips off its customers
By Linda Clare Rogers
A recent BBC documentary called Big Oil versus the World exposed the excellent job by oil companies in fending off what could have been an existential threat to their future, at the cost of one for the rest of us. The program revealed how the oil industry brought us near to catastrophe while knowingly lying about the role of fossil fuels in creating global warming.
There are vital lessons to be learned from this about the nuclear power industry. As with the oil industry, the nuclear industry continues to mislead us about the need for nuclear power to save the planet, in order to preserve itself. And, like the oil industry, it contributes to the catastrophe of global warming.
Nuclear power stations take too long to build to help mitigate the effects of global warming, and divert money from renewable power and other more immediate means of doing so.
To add insult to injury, we, as taxpayers, are now being asked to contribute to this catastrophe by paying for the building of yet more destructive nuclear power stations. The astronomical cost of nuclear power means that the industry itself can’t and won’t take on the economic risk.
Instead, money taken from our earnings and our benefits (in the U.K, low-income people on Universal Credit are not to be exempted), to set up new nuclear build, is meant to encourage other investors to take the risk in the future. This is before the plants are actually built.
The name of the UK government scheme , or, more accurately, scam, is the Regulated Asset Base model, known as RAB. (Editor’s note: In the U.S., a similar fleecing of ratepayers exists in some states, known as Construction Work In Progress or CWIP.)
In the introduction to RAB — the Ministerial Foreword to the Statement on Procedure and Criteria for Designation — we are told that the government will be taking one nuclear project to Final Investment Decision this parliament and two projects to Final investment Decision in the next parliament, including small modular reactors. The push for this scenario is undermining safety, fleecing the taxpayers at a time of economic crisis, and disregarding the real problems increasingly associated with nuclear power.
The Nuclear Energy Financing Act 2022 implements the nuclear RAB model and is meant to facilitate investment in the design, construction, commissioning and operation of new nuclear energy generation projects.
There are two criteria that government say have to be met in order that a new nuclear power project should receive RAB funding. But both of these criteria are largely meaningless:
Criterion one: the Secretary of State is of the opinion that the development of the relevant nuclear project is sufficiently advanced to justify the designation of the nuclear company in relation to the project, for instance, that the project has received a Development Consent Order (DCO).
Criterion two: the Secretary of State is of the opinion that designating the nuclear company in relation to the project is likely to result in value for money.
The government draft designation document for the two-reactor EDF project at Sizewell C in Suffolk, emphasizes these criteria. To fulfill the first, it is necessary that a DCO is approved, amongst other markers. The DCO contains evidence about the suitability of the proposed site for the project as well as the impact on the local community and its environment.
The Planning Inspectorate have advised that the DCO for Sizewell C be rejected. This in itself is really important news. Those of us who have been fighting against the building of Wylfa B, or Wylfa Newydd, are familiar with this scenario.
The Planning Inspectorate also advised the Secretary of State to reject the DCO application for Wylfa B. Many of the reasons were on similar grounds as those given for the rejection of the application for Sizewell C. The scheme broke habitat regulations and had detrimental impacts on biodiversity and the environment.
Notably, one of the main reasons for the advised rejection of the DCO for Sizewell C was the impact on the local water supply. We need only see what happened in France this past summer, with the shutdown of nuclear power stations due to the overheating of the rivers necessary for the cooling of the plants, to see that issues over water supply will only get worse as climate change gets worse.
So, for RAB funding to be designated, the DCO has to be granted. The Planning Inspectorate recommended it be rejected, and the government went ahead and passed it anyway. This is a profoundly dangerous decision and needs to be fought.
Hard on issuing the DCO will come the designation of RAB funding. The second criterion to allow for this will also be sure to pass: value for money for the taxpayer. The government explains that RAB will be eliminating significant compound interest on capital invested, thus saving us money. It makes the hopeful statement that, “the RAB model has the potential to reduce the financial cost for new nuclear projects, thereby reducing consumer bills while still preserving incentives for the private sector to complete nuclear projects to time and budget”.
Commentators have made it clear that the taxpayer will be liable for the inevitable cost overruns and the RAB scheme itself makes it even less likely that developers will keep within the bounds of their agreements, thereby further increasing costs.
The model has been criticized by two advisory bodies, the Climate Change Committee and the National Infrastructure Commission.
The draft document for the designation of RAB for Sizewell C would be laughable if it were not so serious in its implications and its precedent for further nuclear developments.
Under the heading —Results: Value for Money for Consumers — we are told, “this has been calculated by comparing the cost of the electricity system with and without Sizewell C….. The modelling compares the cost of an electricity system with a RAB funded Sizewell C against two different net zero compliant counterfactuals.” (These latter are the use of renewables and carbon capture and storage.)
It then provides a chart showing the costings and savings for the taxpayer. All that can be seen in each and every box are a row of the letter x. No figures at all.
When the chief executive of the Nuclear Industry Association, Tom Greatrex, was asked what he knew about the lack of figures available for the Sizewell C agreement on Radio 4, he could give no answer, but offered that RAB was a “different finance mechanism” that would allow for a very predictable price for electricity for a very long time.
This is another example of the nuclear industry and government getting together to present a false narrative: this one uses the present scandal of the cost of energy to persuade us that nuclear power can give us future security and control over future energy supplies.
It should be noted that Hitachi withdrew its application to build Wylfa Newydd for cost reasons, prior to the advised rejection of the DCO. The £5 billion offered by UK government to subsidize building that project was not enough for the Japanese company. This underlines how little risk developers are willing to take and how much risk government is happy to heap on us.
Another major issue with the RAB funding scheme is that, as government documents delicately put it, “the Secretary of State is aware that there could be a perception of a conflict of interest between his role in determining the DCO application for the Sizewell C project and his role in determining whether or not to designate the nuclear company. To avoid any perceived conflict of interest the Secretary of State will delegate the final decision on the DCO to another BEIS minister.”
Well that sorts that problem out then. Of course, while the taxpayer is paying for a nuclear project, it is unlikely to be halted by government. The overriding of the Planning Inspectorate findings against Sizewell C bears this out. How will the government not grant a Final Investment Decision, due next year?
Greenpeace has described the decision on Sizewell C as a stitched up deal behind closed doors, bringing extra cost to the consumer, producing unmanageable waste and squandering our capital on a white elephant scheme.
We say no to nuclear, no to RAB and will be looking to other allies and partners to fight this scheme. Maybe, like the Peace Tax 7, we can find ways to withhold our payments. Perhaps there are legal ways to stop the self -serving deceptions and corruption.
We need to keep calling out the UK government and the Welsh government on these deceptions. When so many people are in fuel poverty and it is so important that the best is made of our precious resources, it is criminal that our time and money is wasted and all our futures thrown away on the back of this scam.
Linda Clare Rogers is a member of People Against Wylfa B and CND Cymru.
-
Archives
- May 2026 (102)
- 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

