No Joke: US considering nuclear power for Saudi in grand bargain
Surprise — the Trump team’s latest bid for Saudi-Israel normalization goes way too far and appears to be a one-way street.
Ivan Eland, Apr 21, 2025, https://responsiblestatecraft.org/no-joke-us-considering-nuclear-power-for-saudi-in-grand-bargain/
The Trump administration is reportedly pursuing a deal with Saudi Arabia that would be a pathway to developing a commercial nuclear power industry in the desert kingdom and maybe even lead to the enrichment of uranium on Saudi soil.
U.S. pursuit of this deal should be scrapped because the United States would bear all the increased commitments, costs, and risks with very little in return.
In the Abraham Accords of 2020 and early 2021, the first Trump administration brokered bilateral agreements between Israel and the Middle Eastern countries of Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Morocco, and Sudan to normalize diplomatic relations. The administration also attempted to get Saudi Arabia to recognize Israel as a sovereign state and open similar relations, to no avail.
The Biden administration carried the torch in this regard but it became even more difficult to get Riyadh on board after the 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel and ensuing war in Gaza. The rising civilian death toll and humanitarian crisis led to an elevation of the Palestinian cause and engendered region-wide animosity toward Israel. The Saudis demanded at that point that Israel commit to meaningful steps toward the creation of an independent Palestinian state before any normalization would occur.
That continued into this year as the Saudi government denied President Donald Trump’s assertion that it had dropped its demand for a Palestinian state in order to normalize relations with Israel.
Even though efforts aimed at ending the war in Gaza have been unsuccessful, the second Trump administration is seemingly now reviving its efforts toward brokering an Israel-Saudi rapprochement, albeit beginning with a new U.S.-Saudi agreement first, as hinted by U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright.
The problem is that all the countries would benefit from such a grand bargain except the one brokering it — the United States, which would also absorb all of the costs. Israel and Saudi Arabia would gain the most. The Saudis have desperately wanted a nuclear power deal for some time. Meanwhile, if there is eventual normalization, Israel would neutralize what is now a powerful Arab rival and likely even gain a new ally in its quest to counter Iran (but it had better do it fast as Riyadh and Tehran have been approaching some level of detente for some time now).
Saudi Arabia has also sought formal security guarantees, which were reportedly on the table during the Biden administration. This would supplant the long-standing informal agreement between President Franklin Roosevelt and Saudi King Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, which provided security for the desert kingdom in exchange for U.S. access to cheap oil supplies.
Yet, with a $37 trillion national debt, why would the United States take on another ward that doesn’t pay its fair share for security (a common Trump gripe about other U.S. allies)? With fracking, the United States is no longer running out of oil, as FDR assumed would be the case, and is again the world’s largest oil producer. A formal defense pact with Saudi Arabia would incur yet more costs, further entrench the U.S. in the region, and put our own troops in harm’s way if Washington is expected to defend and bail out Riyadh in any military dispute with its neighbors.
In addition, what could go wrong if Saudi Arabia was given a nuclear program? Talks on an Israel-Saudi agreement previously faltered when the Saudis opposed restrictions that would have prevented them from using a commercial nuclear program to build nuclear weapons (to counter any Iranian nuclear capability), or to assist other countries in obtaining them.
The truth is, the Saudis have wanted to be able to enrich uranium — perhaps to bomb-grade levels — on their own soil rather than import uranium already enriched only to a level capable of generating commercial energy, for some time.
Some in the United States insist that the Saudis could get nuclear technology from other nations like Russia or China, but if they resist safeguards to prevent them from getting a weapon, then it wouldn’t matter who gave them the technology that would allow them to do it.
Thus, the Trump administration should desist in reaching any such agreement with the Saudis in its (right now) futile quest for Israel-Saudi grand rapprochement. Normalization of relations between the two countries would be a fine aspiration for the region (if it is not merely to isolate and poke Iran), but the United States meeting the Saudis’ exorbitant demands to achieve it would come at too great a cost.
After all, bilateral normalization should be in the interest of both countries, so they should negotiate it on their own without being coddled by the United States.
Iran-US talks wrap up in Rome with agreement to establish framework for potential nuclear deal
Omani officials stated that the indirect talks are ‘gaining momentum’ after Tehran and Washington agreed to establish technical delegations to draft a potential replacement for the Obama-era JCPOA
The second round of indirect talks between Iranian and US officials concluded in the Italian capital, Rome, on 19 April, with both sides agreeing to establish working groups to draft a “general framework” for a potential new nuclear deal.
“In this round of talks, senior Iranian and US negotiators outlined the general framework for the talks and exchanged views on some important issues in the areas of sanctions relief and the nuclear issue. The two sides agreed to continue the next round of indirect talks next Saturday in Muscat,” the Iranian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
Tehran also stated that talks to limit the country’s uranium enrichment program in exchange for sanctions relief “require more detailed discussion and examination at the expert level.” As such, the two sides agreed to send technical delegations to the Omani capital next Wednesday for detailed discussions.
Following Saturday’s talks, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi described the atmosphere as “positive” and said that officials “made clear how many in Iran believe that the [2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] is no longer good enough for us.”
“For now, optimism may be warranted but only with a great deal of caution,” he told reporters.
The Omani Foreign Ministry said the second round of talks “led to the parties agreeing to move to the next phase of targeted negotiations to achieve a fair, permanent, and binding agreement that ensures Iran is free from nuclear weapons and the full lifting of sanctions while preserving the country’s right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful uses and purposes.”
“Dialogue and clear communication are the only way to achieve a credible and reliable understanding that will benefit all parties in the regional and international context,” Omani officials said.
There was no immediate comment from the US side following the talks.
Nevertheless, soon after Saturday’s talks ended, Israeli TV broadcast a pre-recorded address by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in which he reiterated his commitment to preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
“I am committed to preventing Iran from attaining nuclear weapons. I won’t give on this, I won’t let up on this, and I won’t withdraw from this — not a millimeter,” Netanyahu said.
Earlier in the day, Reuters reported that Tel Aviv “has not ruled out” launching an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the near future without US involvement.
Iran to brief China as it accuses Israel of ‘undermining’ US nuclear talks
Tehran official’s Beijing trip comes before third round of talks with the US and follows consultations with Russia.
Iran says it will brief China this week in advance of a third round of talks with the United States on its nuclear programme, as Iranian officials separately accused Israel of seeking to “undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process”.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will visit Beijing on Tuesday to discuss the latest talks with the administration of US President Donald Trump on the country’s nuclear programme, spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said on Monday.
The trip echoes “consultations” Iran held with Russia last week, before the second round of direct US-Iran talks was held over the weekend. A third round of talks between Araghchi and US envoy Steve Witkoff is scheduled to take place in Oman on Saturday.
Araghchi has previously said Tehran always closely consults with its allies, Russia and China, over the nuclear issue.
“It is natural that we will consult and brief China over the latest developments in Iran-US indirect talks,” Baqaei said.
Russia and China, both nuclear-armed powers, were signatories to a now-defunct 2015 deal between Iran, the US and several Western countries intended to defuse tensions around Tehran’s nuclear programme.
The 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), from which Trump withdrew in 2018, saw Tehran curtail its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief.
The US and Israel have accused Iran of seeking to use the programme to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran has staunchly denied the claim, saying the programme is for civilian purposes.
On Monday, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs stressed close ties between Beijing and Tehran, but did not confirm the Iranian minister’s planned visit.
“China and Iran have maintained exchanges and contacts at all levels and in various fields. With regard to the specific visit mentioned, I have no information to offer at the moment,” Guo Jiakun, spokesperson for the ministry, said.
Strengthened alliance
Israel’s war in Gaza has seen Iran pull closer to Russia and China. Recent diplomatic moves surrounding the US-Iran talks have further underscored the strengthened ties.
Araghchi met his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, last week, just before his second round of negotiations with Witkoff.
On Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed off on a 20-year strategic partnership treaty agreed earlier this year with his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian.
Meanwhile, Iran’s already fraught relations with Israel and its “ironclad” ally, the US, have nosedived amid the war. Since taking office, Trump has reinstated a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign against Tehran, while repeatedly threatening military action if a new nuclear deal is not reached.
Speaking on Monday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Baqaei accused Israel of trying to disrupt the nascent negotiations to open the way for military action.
In comments carried by the AFP news agency, he declared that Israel is behind efforts from a “kind of coalition” to “undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process”.
“Alongside it are a series of warmongering currents in the United States and figures from different factions,” the spokesman said.
Last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated that Israel would not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.
His statement came a day after The New York Times reported that Trump had dissuaded Israel from striking Iran’s nuclear sites in the short term, saying Washington wanted to prioritise diplomatic talks.
‘Consultations must continue’
Baqaei added that “consultations must continue” with countries that were party to the JCPOA.
Iran has gradually breached the terms of the treaty since Trump abandoned it, most notably by enriching uranium to levels higher than those laid out in the deal.
The International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran has enriched uranium to 60 percent, close to the 90 percent level needed to manufacture weapons. The JCPOA had restricted it to 3.67 percent, the level of enrichment needed for civilian power.
Speaking last week, Witkoff sent mixed messages on what level Washington is seeking. He initially said in an interview that Tehran needed to reduce its uranium enrichment to the 3.67 percent limit, but later clarified that the US wants Iran to end its enrichment programme.
Why Is The BBC Middle East Desk Run By A Mossad Collaborator?
Dorset Eye, 14th April 2025
A senior figure at the BBC’s Middle East desk, Raffi Berg, has been exposed as a former employee of a CIA propaganda division and a collaborator with Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad, according to a detailed investigation by MintPress News.
Berg, who currently heads the BBC’s Middle East coverage, is facing growing internal criticism. At least thirteen BBC journalists have reportedly accused him of holding an overt bias in favour of Israel. Staff allege that Berg’s influence is so extensive that his role essentially revolves around “watering down” any reporting that might be overly critical of Israel. One source described him as wielding a “wild” degree of power within the newsroom.
A separate investigation published by Drop Site News in December disclosed that an atmosphere of “extreme fear” prevails at the BBC when it comes to covering stories critical of Israel, with Berg allegedly playing a central role in steering the network’s output towards what has been described as “systematic Israeli propaganda”.
Links to U.S. Intelligence
Before joining the BBC in 2001 as a writer and producer on the world news desk, Berg worked for the U.S. State Department’s Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), according to MintPress News, which cited his LinkedIn profile and other corroborating sources.
The FBIS was part of the CIA’s Directorate of Science and Technology, tasked with monitoring, translating, and distributing open-source international news and information for U.S. government consumption. According to its publicly available profile, the FBIS played a key role in U.S. intelligence gathering.
Berg himself confirmed his association with the CIA during a 2020 interview with The Jewish Telegraph. Recounting his time at the FBIS, he revealed, “One day, I was taken to one side and told, ‘You may or may not know that we are part of the CIA, but don’t go telling people.’” I was absolutely thrilled. It wasn’t too much of a surprise because the application process was enormous — it took 10 months. They scrutinised my character and background meticulously, even asking whether I had visited communist countries and, if so, whether I had formed any relationships there.”
Mossad Collaboration
The revelations do not stop with Berg’s past ties to the CIA. The MintPress News investigation uncovered a significant professional entanglement between Berg and Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service. This relationship emerged during his work on Red Sea Spies: The True Story of Mossad’s Fake Diving Resort — a book recounting Mossad’s covert mission to smuggle Ethiopian Jews into Israel.
Berg openly acknowledged that the book was written “in collaboration” with Mossad commander Dani Limor…………………..
A Pattern of Pro-Israel Editorial Bias
According to MintPress News, Berg has consistently demonstrated overt sympathies towards Israel since the beginning of his tenure at the BBC. He was elevated to head of the Middle East desk shortly after instructing colleagues during Israel’s 2012 “Operation Cast Lead” to avoid language that could place “undue emphasis” on Israel’s role in the violence.
Operation Cast Lead saw Israel accused of widespread human rights violations, including indiscriminate attacks on civilians, the use of Palestinians as human shields, and the deployment of prohibited munitions such as white phosphorus.
Leaked emails revealed that Berg encouraged reporters to present the military assault as a response to rocket fire from Gaza, thus framing Hamas as the primary aggressor. MintPress noted this editorial slant as a clear effort to deflect blame from Israel.
More recently, during Israel’s ongoing military offensive in Gaza — described by critics as a genocidal campaign — Berg is said to have transformed the BBC’s coverage into “systematic Israeli propaganda”, according to a journalist cited by the Drop Site investigation.
“Almost every correspondent you know has an issue with him,” one journalist revealed. “He has been named in multiple meetings, but [management] just ignore it.”
Berg has also been accused of making extensive editorial changes to reporters’ work before publication, frequently reframing narratives to downplay Israel’s culpability. A stark example involved the killing of Mohammed Bhar, a Palestinian man with Down’s syndrome who was fatally attacked by Israeli military dogs and denied medical assistance as he bled to death.
Under Berg’s direction, the BBC originally ran the headline: “The Lonely Death of Gaza Man with Down’s Syndrome”. Only after significant international backlash did the broadcaster amend the headline to acknowledge the circumstances of Bhar’s death.
Despite repeated internal grievances highlighting Berg’s bias and unprofessional conduct, the BBC has “offered unequivocal support for him and his work,” according to the MintPress report.
Media Whitewashing of Israeli Atrocities
The controversy surrounding Berg comes amid broader criticism of Western media outlets for whitewashing or downplaying Israeli war crimes in Gaza. The BBC is not alone in facing scrutiny; other networks have been accused of propagating misleading narratives supplied by Israeli officials.
An investigation by Al Jazeera in October last year revealed that CNN broadcast false claims that Hamas fighters had hidden captives inside Gaza’s al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital — claims that were based on documents presented by the Israeli military. In reality, the documents turned out to be an ordinary calendar showing the days of the week in Arabic, a fact that CNN’s own Palestinian producer had flagged internally.
Nevertheless, CNN aired the footage, with correspondent Nic Robertson uncritically accepting the Israeli army’s account.
For more info: Raffi Berg: BBC Middle East Editor Exposed as CIA, Mossad Collaborator https://dorseteye.com/why-is-the-bbc-middle-east-desk-run-by-a-mossad-collaborator/
Israel’s escalating West Bank assault is part of a larger plan to split the territory in two
Israel is expanding its “Iron Wall” offensive in the West Bank as it approves plans to separate the northern West Bank from the south. The plan is an accelerated prelude to Israel’s expected annexation of the West Bank.
Mondoweiss, By Qassam Muaddi April 14, 2025
Israeli forces escalated their offensive in the occupied West Bank last week across Palestinian cities and refugee camps, killing three Palestinians. The escalation came amid renewed Israeli plans to expedite annexation plans to solidify the expansion of key new settlement projects in the central West Bank, including connecting one of the largest Israeli settlements, Maale Adumim, to Jerusalem.
Last Monday, April 7, Israeli forces opened fire at three children in the town of Turmusayya, northeast of Ramallah, killing 14-year-old Palestinian-American citizen Omar Saadeh. On Tuesday, April 8, Israeli forces shot and killed a Palestinian woman, Aminah Yaaqoub, 30, at an Israeli checkpoint near Salfit in the northern West Bank.
These killings raised the number of Palestinians killed by Israeli forces or settlers since October 2023 to more than 800, as the Israeli army increased its use of lethal force as part of an ongoing military crackdown on the West Bank’s cities and refugee camps………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
The plan to bifurcate the West Bank
The launching of the “Iron Wall” offensive has been described by the families of Israeli captives held in Gaza as compensation offered to Smotrich in exchange for accepting the signing of the ceasefire and refraining from quitting Netanyahu’s right-wing governing coalition.
In reality, Smotrich’s agenda of crushing Palestinian refugee camps is part of the Israeli government’s broader stated agenda for annexing the West Bank. The escalation of Israel’s military campaign against Palestinian cities came as an echo to developments in Gaza, as Israel announced the expansion of its ground invasion in the strip last week, especially in Rafah. This West Bank escalation was also coupled with the expansion of new settlement projects.
On March 30, the Israeli cabinet approved a new settlement roads project east of Jerusalem. The project includes a road that circumvents the center of the West Bank between Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley, allegedly allowing Palestinians to drive directly from Bethlehem to Jericho and isolating both areas definitively from Jerusalem. The current highway, one of the few Israeli highways on parts of which Palestinians are allowed to drive, will be exclusively reserved for Israelis, connecting Jerusalem with Israeli settlements that expand from the east of Jerusalem to the Jordan Valley. Most central to this annexation project is the second-largest Israeli settlement, Maaale Adumim, which houses 40,000 Israelis.
Linking Jerusalem with settlements to the east would separate the south and the north of the West Bank and create a geographical continuity between Israel’s 1948 boundaries, Jerusalem, and Israeli settlements. Most crucially, the West Bank would be bifurcated. It’s a plan that Israel has had in the works for years but has now gained official approval……………………………………………………………………………….
Both Katz and Smotrich belong to the Israeli far right, whose voting base comes largely from the settler movement. Smotrich has been leading calls to annex the West Bank since 2015 and has labeled his plan “the definitive solution.” This plan, according to Smotrich, would “end the conflict” by imposing Israeli control over the West Bank and annexing it to Israel’s 1948 boundaries, killing any chances for establishing a Palestinian state. This vision aligns with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s longtime effort to undermine a two-state solution and prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state…………………………………
Settler violence in the West Bank has displaced no less than 20 Bedouin communities in the West Bank since October 2023, while the Israeli army and settler attacks have killed more than 800 Palestinians in the same time period. According to UNRWA, Israel’s “Iron Wall” offensive has so far displaced well over 40,000 Palestinians and completely depopulated the Jenin and Tulkarem refugee camps, with Israel’s Defense Minister saying that its residents would not be allowed to return for at least a year. https://mondoweiss.net/2025/04/israels-escalating-west-bank-assault-is-part-of-a-larger-plan-to-split-the-territory-in-two/
Iranian minister says nuclear deal possible if US does not make ‘unrealistic demands’
Guardian, 19 Apr 25
Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araqchi, and US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff will resume talks in Rome on Saturday
Iran’s top negotiator believes reaching an agreement on its nuclear programme with the US is possible as long as Washington is realistic, as the two sides prepare to resume talks in Rome on Saturday.
Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araqchi, and the US Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, will begin indirect negotiations through mediators from Oman, after their first round in Muscat, which both sides described as constructive.
“If they demonstrate seriousness of intent and do not make unrealistic demands, reaching agreements is possible,” Araqchi told a news conference in Moscow on Friday after talks with Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov.
Tehran has, however, sought to tamp down expectations of a quick deal. The supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said this week he was “neither overly optimistic nor pessimistic”.
The talks take place under the shadow of Donald Trump’s threat to attack Iran if it does not reach a deal with the US over its nuclear programme.
The US president told reporters on Friday: “I’m for stopping Iran, very simply, from having a nuclear weapon. They can’t have a nuclear weapon. I want Iran to be great and prosperous and terrific.”
Trump, who ditched a 2015 nuclear pact between Iran and six powers during his first term in 2018 and reimposed crippling sanctions on Tehran, has revived his “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran since returning to the White House in January.
Washington wants Iran to halt production of highly enriched uranium, which it believes is aimed at building an atomic bomb.
Tehran, which has always said its nuclear programme is peaceful, says it is willing to negotiate some curbs in return for the lifting of sanctions, but wants watertight guarantees that Washington will not renege again as Trump did in 2018.
Araghchi said Iran’s right to enrich uranium was “non-negotiable”, after Witkoff called for its complete halt…………………………..https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/19/irans-minister-says-nuclear-deal-possible-if-us-does-not-make-unrealistic-demands
What Would Jesus Do?
George D. O’Neill. The American Conservative, Sat, 19 Apr 2025
And is there anything particularly Christian about Christian Zionism?
When did Jesus say it was acceptable to starve the poor, slaughter women and children while turning a blind eye to the suffering of the weak? The answer, of course, is never. Yet for years, a vocal strain of American Christian Zionist leaders have supported policies that do precisely that — enabling the starvation and slaughter of Palestinians while underwriting broader wars that have decimated ancient Christian communities across the Middle East. How did we arrive at a place where those who claim to follow the Prince of Peace justify such unchristian horrors.
The Biblical call for compassion is clear: Leviticus 23:22 commands, “When you harvest the crops of your land, do not harvest the grain along the edges of your fields, and do not pick up what the harvesters drop. Leave it for the poor and the foreigners living among you.” This is a divine directive to care for the vulnerable, not an optional gesture. James, the brother of Jesus, is yet more emphatic: “Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you” (James 1:27). What kind of religious leaders cheer the bombing of Gaza’s widows and orphans, left destitute by policies supported by American and Israeli leaders? Decades of war propaganda have numbed many Americans to the atrocities committed in their name. Yet a growing awareness is stirring both here and abroad.
American Christian Zionist leaders often frame their support for Israel as a divine mandate, dismissing Palestinian suffering as collateral damage in a prophetic plan. Pastor Robert Jeffress declares, “The Bible says this land belongs to the Jewish people — period… God has pronounced judgment after judgment in the Old Testament to those who would ‘divide the land,’ and hand it over to non-Jews.” Likewise, Pastor John Hagee insists, “You’re either for the Jewish people or you’re not.” But where in the Gospels do we find Jesus exalting land rights or ethnic loyalty over human lives? Why did Jesus tell his fellow Jews to be like the Good Samaritan if not to call all people out of their tribalism? The only time He spoke of snakes was to call the Pharisees a “brood of vipers” (Matthew 23:33), condemning their ethnonationalism that blinded them to His message of nonviolence and forgiveness of enemies. He urged, “I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matthew 9:13), a rebuke to those who prized vengeance and power over compassion. Did He not say, “Blessed are the peacemakers,” and instruct us to “turn the other cheek”? How do religious leaders who celebrate military might over mercy square with the Messiah who dined with sinners and healed the outcast?
The fruits of this ideology are death and destruction. For decades, some American Christian Zionist leaders have backed Israel’s destructive actions, often at the expense of the very people Jesus called us to protect. They support the decades-long blockade of Gaza, where malnutrition haunts the population, and the wider wars in Iraq and Syria, which have all but erased Christian communities dating back millennia. In Syria, America’s decade-long support for “moderate insurgents” — coupled with the theft of Syrian oil, much of it shipped to Israel — helped topple the government. Now, Al Qaeda affiliates hold sway in parts of that land. Who benefited? Not the Syrian Christians and other religious minorities who are being killed, displaced, and fleeing for their lives.
And then there’s the inconvenient truth about Hamas. For years, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu facilitated funding to Hamas through channels like Qatar, a policy aimed at keeping Palestinians divided and weakening the Palestinian Authority. The State of Israel, with American Christian Zionist leaders’ applause and U.S. support, has trained, equipped, and empowered Hamas to serve its own strategic ends. Decades of this cynical game have propped up a terrorist group that Israel and its allies now use as a pretext to justify slaughtering Gazan children by the thousands. How can Christians reconcile killing innocents for the actions of a monster they helped enable? Worse still, many believe Netanyahu’s government may have had foreknowledge of Hamas’s October 7 attack plan yet allowed it to proceed, amplifying the tragedy to justify further escalation of the abuse of Gazans.
God made a covenant with Abraham, promising his descendants a legacy (Genesis 12:2-3). But the Apostle Paul clarifies this promise in Galatians 3:16: the covenant finds its fulfillment in Jesus. Many well-meaning Christians, however, were misled into believing otherwise by the questionable biblical interpretations of Cyrus Scofield. In certain circles, his 1917 edition of the Scofield Reference Bible was very influential.
What would Jesus do if asked to condone the terrorist actions involved in Israel’s founding? The 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel by the Irgun, killing 91 people under the guise of a “liberation” struggle, or the 1948 Deir Yassin massacre, where Zionist militias slaughtered over 100 Palestinian villagers to terrorize others into flight — would He bless such bloodshed? And what of the Nakba, the catastrophic expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians from their homes that same year, leaving them refugees in their own land? Israel’s first prime minister David Ben-Gurion himself acknowledged in 1918, “We have no reason to assume that the inhabitants of the country who remained after the destruction of the Second Temple were uprooted. On the contrary, the Jewish farmer, like his neighbors, clung to the soil and continued to live in the land, eventually adopting Christianity and later Islam.” If even Israel’s founding father recognized the deep roots of Palestine’s people, how can Christians justify their dispossession? Jesus, who wept over Jerusalem and called for mercy, would surely mourn the dispossessed, not celebrate their displacement.
With countless lives lost and trillions of dollars spent since, can anyone claim this is a policy God has blessed? America’s veterans from our Christian Zionist-supported Middle East wars face high suicide rates, their families shattered by the toll of endless conflict. Our witness to the region lies in ruins, as America plays Israel’s enforcer — destroying Israel’s enemies while partnering with Al Qaeda in Syria and enabling ISIS in Libya and Iraq. Would God bless us and Israel for intentionally putting radicals like Hamas in power over Gaza, sidelining moderate voices from other Palestinian groups? How does any of this reflect faithfulness to Christ? As we approach Easter 2025 — the celebration of Christ’s sacrifice and triumph over death — shouldn’t we reflect on whether our actions honor the One who died for all, not just a favored few?
Jesus Himself opposed violent religious zeal for Israel’s sake. When the Zealots pressed for rebellion, He chose nonviolence. Even Peter, His disciple, was rebuked for cutting off Malchus’ ear in the Garden of Gethsemane. “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus told him, “for all who live by the sword will die by the sword” (Matthew 26:52). Where is that spirit being promoted by leading Christian Zionists?
The American political class enables this madness, funneling billions in aid to Israel each year — more than to any other nation — often bypassing Congress entirely. Much of the non-Israel foreign aid is used to bribe neighboring countries into compliance or to destabilize regimes deemed insufficiently pro-Israel. You know them by their fruits, and these fruits are war and suffering.
What would Jesus do? He would likely overturn the tables of this unholy alliance, as He did the money-changers in the temple. He would call us back to the edges of the field, where the poor and the foreigner await the compassion we’ve withheld. He would remind us that true faith is measured not in bombs dropped or wars waged, but in the love we show to the least of these. So I ask: If caring for orphans and widows is the mark of pure religion, what does it say of Christian leaders who justify their death and destruction?
About the author
George D. O’Neill, Jr., is a member of the board of directors of the American Ideas Institute, which publishes The American Conservative, and an artist who lives in rural Florida.
‘Only Hellfire’: Israel Says Lifesaving Aid, Troop Withdrawal Off the Table for Gaza
“Israel’s defense ministers can’t stop publicly confessing to war crimes,” said one U.S. journalist.
Brett Wilkins. Apr 16, 2025, https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-to-remain-in-gaza
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said Wednesday that the U.S.-backed genocidal policy of blocking lifesaving humanitarian aid from entering the Gaza Strip will continue, and that Israel Defense Forces troops will remain in the embattled Palestinian enclave indefinitely.
“Israel’s policy is clear: No humanitarian aid will enter Gaza, and blocking this aid is one of the main pressure levers preventing Hamas from using it as a tool with the population,” Katz said. “No one is currently planning to allow any humanitarian aid into Gaza, and there are no preparations to enable such aid.”
Katz had initially said that Israel would eventually allow the resumption of humanitarian aid into Gaza, but later clarified his remarks following outrage from far-right members of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel’s national security minister, warned against repeating what he called the “historic mistake” of letting any aid into Gaza, where a “complete siege” declared in response to the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023 has fueled widespread starvation, sickness, and other crises.
“It’s a shame we don’t learn from our mistakes. As long as our hostages are dying in the tunnels, there is no reason for a gram of food or aid to enter Gaza,” Ben-Gvir said on social media.
Israeli Culture Minister Miki Zohar also discussed the policy Wednesday, asserting that “the despicable murderers in Gaza deserve no humanitarian assistance from any civilian or military mechanism.”
“Only hellfire should be poured on the makers of terrorism until the last hostage returns from Gaza,” Zohar added.
Israeli media reported Wednesday that senior government security officials believe Gaza will run out of humanitarian supplies and food in about a month.
Legal experts say the siege is a war crime, and United Nations experts and human rights groups have called Israel’s blockade and use of starvation as a weapon of war acts of genocide.
The International Court of Justice—which is weighing a genocide case against Israel—last March issued a provisional order to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza. Many critics say Israel has ignored the directive.
Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who ordered the siege, are also fugitives from the International Criminal Court, which last year issued warrants to arrest the pair for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the siege.
The Hostages and Missing Families Forum, which advocates for people kidnapped by Hamas during the October 7 attack, on Wednesday accused the Netanyahu government of “choosing to seize territory over hostages.”
“The time has come to stop the false promises and slogans. It is impossible to continue the war and at the same time release all the hostages,” the group added, echoing the growing anti-war sentiment among Israeli troops and the general public.
Human rights groups around the world have condemned Israel’s blockade of Gaza. On Wednesday, Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières called on the Israeli government to “immediately lift the inhumane and deadly siege on Gaza, protect the lives of Palestinians and humanitarian and medical personnel, and for all parties to restore and sustain the cease-fire” that Israel unilaterally broke last month.
Amande Bazerolle, the medical group’s emergency coordinator in Gaza, said in a statement that “Gaza has been turned into a mass grave of Palestinians and those coming to their assistance.”
“We are witnessing in real time the destruction and forced displacement of the entire population in Gaza,” Bazerolle added. “With nowhere safe for Palestinians or those trying to help them, the humanitarian response is severely struggling under the weight of insecurity and critical supply shortages, leaving people with few, if any, options for accessing care.”
Katz also said Wednesday that Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops would remain in so-called security zones in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria for an indefinite period.
“Unlike in the past, the IDF is not evacuating areas that have been cleared and seized,” and “will remain in the security zones as a buffer between the enemy and [Israeli] communities in any temporary or permanent situation in Gaza—as in Lebanon and Syria,” Katz said.
Earlier this month, Katz said Israel will be “seizing large areas that will be added to the security zones of the state of Israel for the protection of fighting forces and the settlements,” a reference to plans by far-right members of Netanyahu’s government for the ethnic cleansing and Israeli recolonization of Gaza.
Israeli soldiers have blown the whistle on alleged war crimes committed by IDF troops in what some call the “kill zone” along the border with Israel, including indiscriminate killing and wholesale deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure.
Recent reporting has also revealed the IDF is planning to take as much as 20% of Gaza, including the entire depopulated city of Rafah. U.S. President Donald Trump has also proposed an American takeover of Gaza, the expulsion of its Palestinians, and the development of the “Riviera of the Middle East” in the coastal strip.
Almost all of Gaza’s more than 2 million people have been forcibly displaced by Israel’s onslaught, some of them multiple times. The 558-day assault has left more than 180,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing in Gaza, according officials there.
Would military strikes kill Iran’s nuclear programme? Probably not.
Reuters By Francois Murphy and John Irish, April 16, 2025, Editing by William Maclean
- Summary
- Israel, US have threatened to take out nuclear sites
- Most hardened ones require firepower Israel seems to lack
- Can’t destroy enrichment know-how Iran already has
- Attack could drive programme underground, end inspections
VIENNA, April 15 (Reuters) – The recent U.S. deployment of B-2 bombers, the only planes able to launch the most powerful bunker-busting bombs, to within range of Iran is a potent signal to Tehran of what could happen to its nuclear programme if no deal is reached to rein it in.
But military and nuclear experts say that even with such massive firepower, U.S.-Israeli military action would probably only temporarily set back a programme the West fears is already aimed at producing atom bombs one day, although Iran denies it.
Worse, an attack could prompt Iran to kick out United Nations nuclear inspectors, drive the already partly buried programme fully underground and race towards becoming a nuclear-armed state, both ensuring and hastening that feared outcome.
“Ultimately, short of regime change or occupation, it’s pretty difficult to see how military strikes could destroy Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon,” said Justin Bronk, senior research fellow for airpower and technology at the Royal United Services Institute, a British defence think-tank.
“It would be a case of essentially trying to reimpose a measure of military deterrence, impose cost and push back breakout times back to where we were a few years ago.”
Breakout time refers to how long it would take to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear bomb, currently days or weeks for Iran. Actually making a bomb, should Iran decide to, would take longer.
The landmark 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and major powers placed tough restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities that increased its breakout time to at least a year. After President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the deal in 2018 it then unravelled, and Iran pushed far beyond its limits.
Now Trump wants to negotiate new nuclear restrictions in talks that began last weekend. He also said two weeks ago: “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing.”
Israel has made similar threats. Its Defence Minister Israel Katz said after taking office in November: “Iran is more exposed than ever to strikes on its nuclear facilities. We have the opportunity to achieve our most important goal – to thwart and eliminate the existential threat to the State of Israel.”
BIG, RISKY
Iran’s nuclear programme is spread over many sites, and an attack would likely have to hit most or all of them. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, does not know where Iran keeps some vital equipment, like parts for centrifuges, the machines that enrich uranium.
Israel could take out most of those sites by itself, military experts say, but it would be a risky operation involving repeated attacks and would have to deal with Russian-supplied anti-aircraft systems – although it managed to do so in far more limited strikes on Iran last year.
Uranium enrichment is at the heart of Iran’s nuclear programme, and its two biggest enrichment sites are the Fuel Enrichment Plant at Natanz, located about three floors underground, apparently to protect it from bombardment, and Fordow, dug far deeper into a mountain………………………………………………………………… https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/would-military-strikes-kill-irans-nuclear-programme-probably-not-2025-04-15/
Iran has ‘doubts’ about US intentions ahead of nuclear talks
Iran’s FM expresses concern about US motivations but says second round of negotiations will take place in Rome this weekend.
18 Apr 2025, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/18/iran-has-doubts-about-us-intentions-ahead-of-nuclear-talks
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has cast doubt over the intentions of the United States a day before a second round of nuclear talks is set to take place with Washington.
The new round will come a week after the two countries held their highest-level negotiations since US President Donald Trump unilaterally abandoned a 2015 landmark nuclear deal three years later. Iran has since abandoned all limits on its nuclear programme, and enriches uranium to up to 60 percent purity – near weapons-grade levels of 90 percent.
“Although we have serious doubts about the intentions and motivations of the American side, in any case, we will participate in tomorrow’s negotiations,” Araghchi said on Friday during a news conference in Moscow with his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov.
Araghchi will set off on Saturday for Rome for a new round of Omani-mediated talks with US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.
“We are fully prepared to pursue a peaceful resolution for Iran’s peaceful nuclear programme,” Araghchi said.
Lavrov said Moscow was ready “to play any role that will be useful from Iran’s point of view and that will be acceptable to the United States”.
Russia, which commands the world’s largest confirmed arsenal of nuclear weapons, has deepened its military ties with Iran since it launched its offensive on Ukraine in February 2022, and has played a role in Iran’s nuclear negotiations in the past as a veto-wielding United Nations Security Council member.
Western countries, including the US, have long accused Iran of seeking to acquire nuclear weapons – an allegation Tehran has consistently denied, insisting that its programme is for peaceful civilian purposes.
Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, reporting from Tehran, said there is “a cloud of mistrust in the air” despite statements made by Araghchi.
“With the talks ahead, there is a perception among Iranians that there is this mistrust that exists pertaining to the United States, but going back to the statement that were heard today … we saw a mix of doubt and hope at the same time,” Asadi said.
“Iran is saying it is not interested in putting other issues … [such as] defence capabilities … on the table of negotiations,” he added.
‘Unrealistic demands’
US President Donald Trump has threatened to attack Iran if it does not agree to a deal with the US.
On Tuesday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said the country’s military capabilities were off limits in the discussions.
The official IRNA news agency reported Iran’s regional influence and its missile capabilities, long criticised by Western governments, were among its “red lines” in the talks.
On Wednesday, the Iranian foreign minister said Iran’s enrichment of uranium was not up for discussion, after Witkoff called for it to end.
“If there is similar willingness on the other side, and they refrain from making unreasonable and unrealistic demands, I believe reaching an agreement is likely,” Araghchi said during Friday’s news conference.
Lavrov emphasised that any potential agreement should only pertain to the nuclear issue.
“This is a fundamental point that must be taken into account by those who try to burden the negotiations with non-nuclear issues and thus create a very risky situation,” he said.
Iran told the US during last week’s talks it was ready to accept some limits on its uranium enrichment, but needed watertight guarantees Trump would not again ditch the pact, an Iranian official told the Reuters news agency on Friday, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The official said Tehran’s red lines “mandated by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei” could not be compromised in the talks, adding that those red lines meant Iran would never agree to dismantle its centrifuges for enriching uranium, halt enrichment altogether, or reduce the amount of enriched uranium it stores to a level below the level it agreed in the 2015 deal.
It would also not negotiate over its missile programme, which Tehran views as outside the scope of any nuclear deal, Reuters reported.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said earlier on Friday that the US administration is looking for a peaceful solution with Iran but will never tolerate the country developing a nuclear weapon.
Rubio met with British, French and German officials in Paris and pressed them to maintain sanctions against Iran instead of allowing them to run out.
Israel also reiterated its unwavering commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, saying it had a “clear course of action” to prevent this.
“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and I, along with all relevant bodies, are committed to leading a clear course of action that will prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons,” Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Friday.
Hopes for Iran nuclear talks tempered by threats and mixed messages
Parham Ghobadi, BBC Persian, BBC, 18 Apr 25
As Iran and the United States prepare to hold a second round of high-stakes nuclear talks in Rome, hopes for de-escalation are being tempered by mounting military threats and mixed messages.
US President Donald Trump reminds Tehran nearly every day of its options: a deal or war.
He has previously said Israel would lead a military response if the talks failed.
On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that Trump had “waved off” an Israeli plan to strike Iranian nuclear sites as early as next month.
“I wouldn’t say waved off. I’m not in a rush to do it,” Trump told reporters in response to the article on Thursday, adding that he preferred to give diplomacy a chance.
“I think that Iran has a chance to have a great country and to live happily without death… That’s my first option. If there’s a second option, I think it would be very bad for Iran.”
After both sides described the first round of talks in Oman last weekend as constructive, Trump had said he would be “making a decision on Iran very quickly”………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Atmosphere of distrust
Since Trump returned to office this year, Ayatollah Khamenei has consistently denounced negotiations with Washington.
“Negotiating with this administration is not logical, not wise, nor honourable,” he said in a February speech, just two months before agreeing to the current round of talks.
The supreme leader’s distrust stems from Trump’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal, the “maximum pressure” campaign that followed, and the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani in a US strike in Iraq in 2020.
Ayatollah Khamenei expressed satisfaction with the first round of talks, saying it was “implemented well”.
But he cautioned that he was “neither overly optimistic nor overly pessimistic”……………………………………………………. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy7n905jqdo
Israel still eyeing a limited attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
AFR, Erin Banco, Apr 19, 2025
New York | Israel has not ruled out an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the coming months despite President Donald Trump telling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the US was, for now, unwilling to support such a move, according to an Israeli official and two other people familiar with the matter.
Israeli officials have vowed to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and Netanyahu has insisted that any negotiation with Iran must lead to the complete dismantling of its nuclear program.
US and Iranian negotiators are set for a second round of preliminary nuclear talks in Rome on Saturday.
Over the past months, Israel has proposed to the Trump administration a series of options to attack Iran’s facilities, including some with late spring and summer timelines, the sources said. The plans include a mix of airstrikes and commando operations that vary in severity and could set back Tehran’s ability to weaponise its nuclear program by just months or a year or more, the sources said.
The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Trump told Netanyahu in a White House meeting earlier this month that Washington wanted to prioritise diplomatic talks with Tehran and that he was unwilling to support a strike on the country’s nuclear facilities in the short term.
But Israeli officials now believe that their military could instead launch a limited strike on Iran that would require less US support. Such an attack would be significantly smaller than those Israel initially proposed.
It is unclear if or when Israel would move forward with such a strike, especially with talks on a nuclear deal getting started. Such a move would likely alienate Trump and could risk broader US support for Israel.
Parts of the plans were previously presented last year to the Biden administration, two former senior Biden administration officials told Reuters. Almost all required significant US support via direct military intervention or intelligence sharing. Israel has also requested that Washington help Israel defend itself should Iran retaliate.
In response to a request for comment, the US National Security Council referred Reuters to comments Trump made on Thursday, when he told reporters he has not waved Israel off an attack but that he was not “in a rush” to support military action against Tehran…………………………………………..
While the more limited military strike Israel is considering would require less direct assistance – particularly in the form of US bombers dropping bunker-busting munitions that can reach deeply buried facilities – Israel would still need a promise from Washington that it would help Israel defend itself if attacked by Tehran in the aftermath, the sources said.
Any attack would carry risks. Military and nuclear experts say that even with massive firepower, a strike would probably only temporarily set back a program the West says aims to eventually produce a nuclear bomb, although Iran denies it.
Israeli officials have told Washington in recent weeks that they do not believe US talks with Iran should move forward to the deal-making stage without a guarantee that Tehran will not have the ability to create a nuclear weapon.
“This can be done by agreement, but only if this agreement is Libyan style: They go in, blow up the installations, dismantle all of the equipment, under American supervision,” Netanyahu said following his talks with Trump. “The second possibility is … that they [Iran] drag out the talks and then there is the military option.”
From Israel’s perspective, this may be a good moment for a strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Iran allies Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon have been hammered by Israel since the Gaza war began, while the Houthi movement in Yemen has been targeted by US airstrikes. Israel also severely damaged Iran’s air defence systems in an exchange of fire in October 2024.
A top Israeli official, speaking with reporters earlier this month, recognised there was some urgency if the goal was to launch a strike before Iran rebuilds its air defences. But the senior official refused to state any timeline for possible Israeli action and said discussing this would be “pointless”. https://www.afr.com/world/middle-east/israel-still-eyeing-a-limited-attack-on-iran-s-nuclear-facilities-20250419-p5lswv
Unprecedented number of B-2 bombers amassed for Iran strike
Ken Klippenstein, Apr 08, 2025
In the largest single deployment of stealth bombers in U.S. history, the Pentagon has sent six B-2 “Spirit” aircraft to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean.
The long-range bombers, which are uniquely suited to evade Iranian air defenses and can carry America’s most potent bunker busting weapons, flew in from Missouri last week in a little noticed operation.
The B-2s carry not just bombs, but a message for Iran: “do you see our sword?,” as one retired general told Newsmax this week.
President Donald Trump hasn’t been shy in threatening Iran, saying that if Tehran doesn’t close the door on a nuclear capability they will experience “bombing the likes of which they haven’t seen.”
“Hell” will “rain down” on the country, Trump has also said. Just today, amidst the stock market meltdown Trump again reiterated his threat, saying that “doing a deal would be preferable to doing the obvious” — which to the president is undertaking a massive strike.
Blatant as the threat is, the U.S. government has not otherwise publicly acknowledged the bomber buildup. Though B-2 bombers were used to carry out strikes on underground Houthi facilities in Yemen (both under the Biden and Trump administration), the forward deployment of the bombers to the island of Diego Garcia was only reported when commercial satellite images of the airbase there revealed the six on the runway.
“To my knowledge, this is the largest B-2 deployment to a forward location,” Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists told me. Kristensen is the world’s leading tracker of nuclear comings and goings.
“All the bombers, they’re not in hangers, they’re underneath satellites where they can be photographed and seen; and the idea is, do you see our sword?” retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Blaine Holt, who served as Deputy U.S. Military Representative to NATO, said in an interview with Newsmax last week. Holt also said that the B-2 deployment “gives the president a military option that he can actually use these weapons against Iran if needed.”
This is a highly visible threat to Tehran, but at least one party isn’t supposed to notice: the American people.
The Pentagon refuses to acknowledge that the deployment is even happening. Trump’s new Pentagon Press Secretary Sean Parnell has only vaguely alluded to “other air assets” being deployed it has announced that two aircraft carriers will stay in the region, the result of a delay in sending one home after its current deployment.
According to Google Trends, searches for terms like “B-2” and “war with Iran” have only modestly increased, indicating that public curiosity has been suppressed despite Donald Trump’s many threats to attack his enemies.
Why B-2s?
The B-2 was first designed during the Cold War to penetrate deep into Russian territory for a nuclear attack. The aircraft’s stealth features (making it all but “invisible” to conventional radar) allow it to evade even the most sophisticated air defenses. Subsequent to its deployment, the bomber was modified so that it could take on unique conventional roles as well, especially in attacking underground facilities.
Though the U.S. has a variety of long-range fighters in the region — F-16s, F/A-18s, F-15Es, and F-35s — deployed on aircraft carriers and based in countries like Jordan and the UAE, the B-2s also allow the Trump administration to carry out unilateral strikes. That is, without the permission or involvement of any other Middle East countries. (Diego Garcia continues to be militarily controlled by the U.K.)……………………………………………………………………………………………https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/pentagon-prepares-for-trump-to-go?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=7677&post_id=160827397&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=191n6&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
US envoy calls for Iran to ‘eliminate’ nuclear programme
US envoy Steve Witkoff said on Tuesday that Iran “must stop and
eliminate” its nuclear enrichment programme to secure a deal with Donald
Trump after previously hinting that Washington might be willing to soften
its stance. “A deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump
deal,” Witkoff said on social media platform X as he appeared to
backtrack on his previous comments. “It is imperative for the world that
we create a tough, fair deal that will endure.”
FT 15th April 2025, https://www.ft.com/content/5fa3707d-7952-464f-a67c-37ddfc061ed5
1 This Month.
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (313)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
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 