In October, hexavalent chromium contamination was found beneath Pueblo de San Ildefonso while LANL was drilling a new well on the Pueblo, called San Ildefonso Regional Monitoring Well 3, or SIMR-3, in Mortandad Canyon. The Pueblo and LANL share borders in the area of Mortandad Canyon.
In Friday’s letter, the Environment Department wrote to LANL that “[S]ince 2021, DOE has neither complied with [the Environment Department’s] regulatory directives nor made substantial progress towards ensuring the protection of the regional aquifer. The latest sampling results from SIMR-3 prove that DOE’s refusal to take appropriate steps to ensure that contamiantion does not migrate further in the regional aquifer or offsite has created the harm to the environment that [the Environment Department] sought to prevent.”
hite House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed on Monday that “all orders” by President Donald Trump should be “presumed” legal by the military, as she defended comments he made last week threatening Democratic lawmakers with “DEATH.”
Speaking to reporters outside of the White House on Monday, Leavitt claimed that Democrats were trying to create “chaos” within the military by reminding service members of their right to refuse to carry out illegal orders.
“All orders, lawful orders are presumed to be legal by our service members. You can’t have a functioning military if there is disorder and chaos within the ranks,” Leavitt said.
“And that’s what these Democrat members were encouraging. It’s very clear,” she went on, saying that none of them “can point to a single illegal order that this administration has given down, because it does not exist.”
Leavitt said that the White House backs the Department of Defense’s probe into Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) over a video he put out with fellow lawmakers reminding military members of their oath to “defend this Constitution.” A former Naval aviator, Sen. Kelly remains subject to military law despite retiring from the Navy in 2011.
“You can refuse illegal orders,” Kelly said in the video, alongside other ex-military and intelligence Democrats. “We need you to stand up for our laws. Our Constitution. And who we are as Americans.”
The lawmakers were referencing rights afforded to service members under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which says that individuals in the military are not obligated to carry out orders that are illegal under U.S. law and known to be so by the service member. This summer, Truthout reported that a GI Rights Hotline saw an uptick in calls from members of the military seeking support for defying potentially illegal orders by Trump, like orders to carry out his immigration raids.
Leavitt’s assertion that all orders must be presumed to be legal is absurd on its face, regardless of who is handing down the orders. However, it echoes the twisted logic of a secretive Justice Department legal memo on the administration’s Latin American boat strike campaign, which reportedly suggests that Trump and his administration’s word alone is enough to establish legality for strikes. It also follows with the Trump administration’s relentless attempts to concentrate power within the executive branch, without oversight from Congress or other bodies.
The press secretary’s claim that there isn’t a “single illegal order” that has been passed down by the Trump administration is also patently false, experts have repeatedly said; as legal scholar Marjorie Cohn has noted for Truthout, the use of military force to detain and deport immigrants could be considered illegal, as well as Trump’s boat strikes.
Meanwhile, even officials within the military reportedly disagree. Last week, NBC reported that a senior judge advocate general, known as a JAG, raised concerns in August that the operations were unlawful. The man, a top military lawyer for the command that oversees the strikes, said that they could expose service members to legal action due to the illegality of the strikes, but his concerns were dismissed by more senior officials, sources said.
he vast majority of Americans say that the Trump administration hasn’t given proper explanation for potential military action in Venezuela and oppose the idea of strikes in the country, new polling finds as the U.S. builds up its military presence in the region.
New CBS/YouGov polling conducted late last week shows that 70 percent of Americans say that they would oppose the U.S. taking military action in Venezuela, with only 30 percent saying they support such an action.
Yahoo News, Catherine Lévesque, Wed, November 26, 2025
OTTAWA — Pressed on a Crown corporation’s decision to award a contract to a U.S.-based joint venture for the management of the country’s nuclear laboratories, Energy Minister Tim Hodgson suggested his government’s promise of “elbows up” can mean “lots of things.”
The National Post first revealed in June that critics were sounding the alarm on the recent decision by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) to award a contract to sole bidder Nuclear Laboratory Partners of Canada Inc. (NLPC) — a joint venture led by U.S.-based BWXT — for the management and operation of Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL).
CNL includes mainly Chalk River Laboratories, the birthplace of the CANDU reactor.
Critics raised national security concerns about giving access to Canada’s homegrown nuclear technology to companies involved with the U.S. Department of Defence at a time when Canada’s sovereignty was seemingly under attack by the Trump administration.
It appeared to be also contrary to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s “elbows up” campaign promise, even though AECL awarded the contract independently from the government.
NLPC is spearheaded by Virginia-based BWXT — an important supplier to the U.S. Defence Department. The other partners are Amentum — also based in Virginia — and Kinectrics Inc. — a company based in Toronto but bought by BWXT earlier this year.
Its key subcontractor, Ohio-based Batelle Memorial Institute, is the world’s largest research and development organization and manages national laboratories, including for the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Are you against any American company operating in Canada?” the minister asked Tochor, adding that he does not think that view is “consistent” with Conservative thinking.
Tochor shot back: “I think it’s consistent with the ‘elbows up’ campaign you just ran.”
Hodgson replied that “‘elbows up’ means lots of things.”
“Elbows up means negotiating with all of the countries in the world, doubling our exports, creating alternatives to Americans. That’s what we’re doing,” he said.
The resolution incorporates Donald Trump’s “peace plan.” It grants control over Gaza to the U.S.-led “Board of Peace” and it orders the deployment of a U.S.-led occupation force called “International Stabilization Force (ISF).” Trump will oversee both colonial bodies, in collaboration with Israel. Palestinians will not be allowed to participate in their own governance.
“It is a brazen attempt to impose, by threat of continued force against a virtually defenseless population, U.S. and Israeli interests, plain and simple.”
A UN Special Rapporteur has decried the resolution as a violation of Palestinian people’s right to self-determination.
In 1947, the United Nations General Assembly committed the UN’s original sin when it partitioned Palestine to create Israel. This launched the Nakba, the ethnic cleansing of the Indigenous people, and the establishment of a settler colonial state.
Now, 78 years later, the UN Security Council has committed the UN’s second cardinal sin. It enshrined Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian lands, put its imprimatur on Israel’s genocide, and granted colonial control over the lives of the Palestinians to the United States, which has aided and abetted the genocide.
On November 17, 2025, the Council adopted Resolution 2803, by a vote of 13-0. Russia and China, both permanent members of the Security Council, could have vetoed it. But shamefully they abstained, ostensibly influenced by support for the resolution from several Arab and Muslim states, including Egypt, Qatar, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as Turkey, Indonesia, and Pakistan.
The resolution incorporates Donald Trump’s “peace plan.” It grants control over Gaza to the U.S.-led “Board of Peace” and it orders the deployment of a U.S.-led occupation force called “International Stabilization Force (ISF).” Trump will oversee both colonial bodies, in collaboration with Israel. Palestinians will not be allowed to participate in their own governance.
The Board of Peace is designed to function as a transitional administrator of Gaza. It will control all services and humanitarian aid, all ingress and egress into and out of Gaza, and will supervise the financing and reconstruction of Gaza. The resolution “underscores the importance” of humanitarian assistance but does not require the unimpeded provision of aid.
The ISF will not be a peacekeeping force. Since the Council authorized it “to use all necessary measures to carry out its mandate,” the ISF will have the power to disarm Palestinian groups, as Israel insists. There is no provision in the resolution for disarming the Israel Occupation Forces, the body that has been conducting the genocide.
“A military force answering to a so-called ‘Board of Peace’ chaired by the President of the United States, an active party to this conflict that has continually provided military, economic and diplomatic support to the illegal occupying Power, is not legal,” said Francesca Albanese, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967. “It is a brazen attempt to impose, by threat of continued force against a virtually defenseless population, U.S. and Israeli interests, plain and simple.”
“Essentially, it will leave Palestine in the hands of a puppet administration, assigning the United States, which shares complicity in the genocide, as the new manager of the open-air prison that Israel has already established,” Albanese added.
Since October 2023, Israel has killed nearly 70,000 Palestinians and wounded more than 170,000. Nearly everyone in Gaza has been displaced by Israel multiple times and Gaza has largely been reduced to rubble. Israel has violated the latest ceasefire at least 393 times and killed at least 312 Palestinians since it went into effect on October 10, 2025.
In three recent cases, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) found a plausible case of genocide by Israel, that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory is unlawful, and that Israel has illegally used starvation of civilians as a weapon of war. The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The Resolution Violates the Palestinian People’s Right to Self-Determination
The Security Council resolution violates fundamental tenets of international law including the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. “The ICJ was clear: self-determination is an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and the UN and all States have an obligation to assist in its realization,” Albanese said…………………………………………………..
Resolution 2803 “rewards the U.S., a co-perpetrator of genocide, with control over Gaza and its potentially lucrative reconstruction process, while simultaneously relieving the Israeli regime of all of its responsibilities as an illegally occupying force,” Yara Hawari wrote in Al-Shabaka, a Palestinian-led think tank. “Palestinian participation is expected to be tightly limited and heavily conditioned. Trump’s plan confines it to ‘technocratic’ and ‘apolitical’ roles, subject to continuous external supervision and effectively excluding any representatives with democratic legitimacy or political agency.”
Hamas and other Palestinian factions rejected the resolution. They wrote in a joint statement that ISF “will turn into a type of imposed guardianship or administration — reproducing a reality that restricts the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and to managing their own affairs.”
“Assigning the international force with tasks and roles inside the Gaza Strip, including disarming the resistance, strips it of its neutrality, and turns it into a party to the conflict in favor of the occupation,” Hamas said…………………………………………………………………………
it won’t prevent Israel from carrying out its military operations or aerial bombardments of Gaza. It may even help Israel achieve its goals.”
Uniting for Peace
……………………………………………..In adopting Resolution 2803, the Security Council did not discharge its responsibilities under the Charter to act on behalf of Palestine, a permanent observer state, which is undergoing the first live-streamed genocide in history. Nor is the Council discharging its responsibility to maintain international peace and security by memorializing an illegal occupation and an ongoing genocide.
Colombian President Gustavo Petro has declared that he will introduce a Uniting for Peace resolution in the UN General Assembly to establish a multinational protection force for Palestinians and levy sanctions and an arms blockade to end the genocide and liberate Palestine from the unlawful Israeli occupation.
In retaliation, the U.S. government has revoked Petro’s visa, imposed sanctions against him, raised punitive tariffs on Colombia, and threatened the use of military force against Colombia.
People opposed to the U.S.’s colonial takeover of Palestine can join the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement, lobby for arms embargoes, and support accountability for Israeli and U.S. leaders responsible for perpetrating the genocide.
the escalation that Trump claims is the latest battle in the “War on Drugs” comes two years after he explicitly announced his desire to take control of Venezuela’s oil,
War would deliver “not security but a torrent of bloodshed,” said a letter signed by dozens of political leaders.
ith thousands of US troops patrolling the Caribbean, at least eight warships deployed in the region, and the BBCreporting that it tracked four US military planes that flew near Venezuela Thursday night, lawmakers and other leaders from across Europe on Friday issued a unified demand for the Trump administration to deescalate the tensions it has ratcheted up in recent weeks.
The administration’s “show of force has already proved lethal,” said the leaders, with more than 80 people — including fishermen and an out-of-work bus driver — having been killed in the US military’s strikes on more than 20 boats, which the administration has insisted were trafficking drugs to the US. The White House has publicized no evidence of the claims.
President Donald Trump has not taken further military action against Venezuela since he was presented with “options” for potential strikes last week by officials including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, nor has he followed through with threats he’s made against Mexico and Colombia.
But the European leaders — including British Members of Parliament Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn, former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, and Spanish Member of European Parliament Irene Montero Gil — noted that Trump “severed diplomatic channels with Caracas and approved covert [Central Intelligence Agency] operations in Venezuela” as the military buildup continues in the region.
The Trump administration has insisted it is engaged in a legal “armed conflict” with drug cartels in Venezuela, which it has accused of trafficking fentanyl to the US — though experts say drug boats originating in Venezuela are “are mainly moving cocaine from South America to Europe,” and analysis by both the United Nations and US intelligence agencies have shown the South American country plays virtually no role in the production or transit of fentanyl.
The US Congress has not authorized any military action against drug cartels or Venezuela’s government, and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have attempted to pass war powers resolutions blocking the US from striking more boats or targets on land in Venezuela, only to have the resolutions voted down.
In his second term, Trump has sought to tie Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to drug cartels — despite a declassified US intelligence memo showing officials rejected the claim — and designated Cartel de los Soles a foreign terrorist organization last week, giving the White House what Hegseth called “new options” to go after the group.
But the escalation that Trump claims is the latest battle in the “War on Drugs” comes two years after he explicitly announced his desire to take control of Venezuela’s oil, and following years of condemnation of Maduro’s socialist government from Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The European leaders said the administration’s narrative about the threat Venezuela poses to the US and the escalation is simply the “latest attempt to threaten and undermine the sovereignty of Latin America and the Caribbean nations.”
“Declassified documents have confirmed the CIA’s hand in overthrowing democratically elected governments in Latin America, such as Salvador Allende’s Chile in 1973, João Goulart’s Brazil in 1964, and Jacobo Árbenz’s Guatemala in 1954. The human cost of these regime change operations was catastrophic, and their political legacy endures,” reads the letter, which was organized by Progressive International.
A military intervention by the US in Venezuela “would mark the first interstate war by the United States in South America,” the leaders said, yet “the pretext for intervention is as tired as it is familiar.”
“Under the banner of combating the ‘narco-terrorists,’ Trump celebrates lethal strikes against peaceful fishermen arbitrarily labeled as carrying drugs,” the leaders said.
As in the past, they added, moving the War on Drugs to Venezuela would deliver “not security but a torrent of bloodshed, dispossession, and destabilization.”
Therefore, we condemn in the strongest terms the military escalation against Venezuela,” they said. “Our demand is clear and our resolve is firm: No war on Venezuela.”
As Peoples Dispatchreported Thursday, many European leaders have “subordinated” themselves to Trump and have avoided speaking out against the US escalation with Venezuela, but left-wing political parties have led the way in denouncing the US deployment of soldiers and warships to the region.
The Workers’ Party of Belgium said recently that the world is “witnessing an unprecedented military escalation in 20 years, a multifaceted aggression that threatens not only Venezuela, but any project of sovereignty and social justice in Latin America.”
A Washington Post story headlined the “White House Blew Past Legal Concerns in Deadly Strikes on Drug Boats,” reported that “There is no actual threat justifying self defense — there are not organized armed groups seeking to kill Americans.” The Post quoted a former senior official saying, “The question is, is it legal just to kill the guy if he’s not threatening to kill you … There are people who are simply uncomfortable with the president just declaring we’re at war with drug traffickers.”
For a more critical perspective on Venezuela, we turn to Venezuelanalysis.com and their conversation with Atilio Borón (Borón is an Argentine sociologist, political scientist, professor, and essayist, he holds a doctorate in Political Science from Harvard University), Their conversation examines the administration’s military expansion in the country. Some key takeaways include:
“Venezuela remains a strategic target … global oil markets are more strategic than ever, and geological surveys confirm that Venezuela holds the largest proven oil reserves in the world … greater even than those of Saudi Arabia!”
“Latin America has long been described as a continent in dispute, and today that dispute is sharper than ever. … What we are witnessing now, however, is an open display of brute military force.”
“This is the largest imperialist air–naval military buildup in our region since the October 1962 Missile Crisis.”
“New actors have emerged with decisive weight, fundamentally reshaping geopolitics … China is here to stay.”
I also recommend checking out this graphic also from Venezuelanalysis.com — it details the scale of weaponry in the region:
Here’s the reporting from CNN on the situation, including Trump’s discussion about attacking Mexico, with a chilling interview at the end between Jake Tapper and GOP House member Carlos Gimenez.
From yesterday, former ambassador James Story discussed the situation. I’ll add that it still doesn’t pass the smell test. It feels like we’re being pushed toward a conflict — framed through what the former ambassador called Venezuela’s relationship with our “strategic competitors.” At this point in world history, can’t we find a way to get along? Naive or not, I don’t want the world to melt down.
Of course I’m posting this video from a mainstream source, but where are the questions for our leaders and former leaders that push back — even slightly — against the status quo narrative? Honestly, it brings me back to an old classroom discussion about nuclear war: If a nation is treated as an enemy, or labeled a “strategic competitor,” and you make it clear you want them weakened or destroyed, why wouldn’t they stockpile weapons? Or, more simply put: if your neighbor hates you and has an axe, maybe you go get an axe too.
I guess I’m still wishful enough to hope that the United States could be the bigger person and put the axe down — especially when, in our case, we have the Fifth Fleet. Here is former Ambassador Story:
President Donald Trump shamefully welcomed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to the White House today. He brushed aside questions about Prince Mohammed’s role in the gruesome murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, commenting that “things happen” and “You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that.”
Freedom of the Press Foundation Director of Advocacy Seth Stern said:
“Somehow calling a female reporter ‘piggy’ was only the second-most offensive anti-press utterance to come out of the president’s mouth in recent days. And somehow Biden’s infamous fist bump is now only the second-most disgusting public display of flattery by a U.S. president to journalist-murderer Mohammed bin Salman.
“Scolding a U.S. reporter for asking questions about MBS ordering a fellow journalist to be bonesawed signals to dictators everywhere that they can murder journalists with impunity — as if Trump hadn’t already sent that message clearly enough by bankrolling and arming Israel while it does just that in Gaza.
“Today’s fiasco felt like the nail in the coffin for whatever was left of the U.S.’s global standing as a leader on press freedom. The next president is going to have their work cut out for them in rebuilding that credibility. In the meantime, judges, lawmakers, and everyone else in a position to slow the backslide need to step up and rise to the moment before more journalists get killed.”
Santa Fe, NM – An internal Department of Energy (DOE) memorandum eliminates worker and public radiation protection rules known “As Low As Reasonably Achievable” (ALARA). This fundamental departure from decades of accepted health physics practices is being promoted by senior DOE political appointees with little background in health or radiation control. It is marked as “URGENCY: High” under the auspices of the DOE Deputy Secretary, the Under Secretary for Science, and the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration. The memorandum awaits the final signature of DOE Secretary Chris Wright.
The memo’s stated goal is to:
“…remove the ALARA principle from all DOE directives and regulations, including DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, NE [Office of Nuclear Energy] Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public, and, upon completion of the rulemaking process, 10 CFR [Code of Federal Regulations] 835, Occupational Radiation Protection.” [1]
It follows the playbook of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which called for:
“Set[ting] clear radiation exposure and protection standards by eliminating ALARA (“as low as reasonably achievable”) as a regulatory principle and setting clear standards according to radiological risk and dose rather than arbitrary objectives.”[2]
Contrary to Project 2025’s assertion that ALARA is just “arbitrary objectives,” the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration declares it to be:
“…the cornerstone principle of radiation safety, emphasizing that radiation exposure should be minimized to the lowest possible levels while still allowing essential tasks to be performed. This principle applies everywhere radiation is present, including medical, industrial, nuclear, and research settings… ALARA is not just a recommendation—it is a legal and ethical requirement in radiation-related industries.”[3]
The elimination of ALARA protections is likely to increase radiation exposures to workers and weaken cleanup standards at contaminated sites where DOE has binding legal requirements with the impacted states (e.g., Los Alamos Lab, NM; Hanford Nuclear Reservation, WA and West Valley Demonstration Project, NY), as well as DOE Legacy Management sites where residual contamination remains after completion of claimed “cleanup” (e.g., Rocky Flats, CO and Weldon Spring, MO).
DOE’s memo purports to remove red tape constraining construction of new nuclear power plants, which inevitably experience huge cost overruns at ratepayers’ expense because of the inherent economic problems with nuclear power. However, because DOE’s primary mission is expanding nuclear weapons production, the elimination of ALARA protections will hit workers and nearby communities by allowing higher worker and public doses.
Two pertinent examples are the expanding production of plutonium “pit” bomb cores at the Los Alamos Lab and future pit production at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. At the same time, the independent Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board’s role of nuclear safety oversight is being crippled by the Trump Administration’s refusal to nominate candidates to the Board. Moreover, DOE’s termination of ALARA rules can even downgrade international radiation protection standards because the Department provides staff and training for the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency.
DOE’s high-level memorandum relies heavily upon a recent study by its Idaho National Laboratory.[4] According to the memo, the INL Report concluded:
“The balance of available scientific evidence indicates that annual dose rates of 5,000 mrem or less have not been shown to result in detectable increases in adverse health outcomes across diverse human populations and exposure scenarios. Furthermore, substantial evidence suggests that even 10,000 mrem/year may maintain a reasonable safety margin based on available epidemiological and radiobiological data.”
This is highly debatable (see comments by an independent epidemiologist below). By way of comparison, a standard chest X-ray is around 10 millirem (mrem) and an average annual radiation dose from all sources (including natural) to any one individual in the United States is around 600 mrem.[5] The INL report begins to rationalize public radioactive doses that are up to 16 times higher.
The Idaho National Laboratory is where DOE extracted weapons grade uranium from spent reactor fuel for warhead production, resulting in significant ground water contamination and “temporary” storage of liquid high-level waste now estimated to cost billions of dollars to stabilize. Nevertheless, according to INL Director John Wagner, the Idaho National Laboratory Report specifically recommends:
Eliminating all ALARA requirements and limits below the 5,000 mrem occupational dose limit in order to reduce “unnecessary economic burdens.”
Multiplying five-fold the allowed public radioactive dose limit from 100 mrem per year to 500 mrem per year.
Supporting ongoing research on low-dose radiation effects to “further refine scientific understanding and regulatory approaches.”
Ongoing research on low-dose radiation effects” is aimed at the Linear No-Threshold principle, which maintains that no dose of radiation is safe. Related, ALARA is considered to be the global bedrock of radiation protection for nuclear workers and the public and is widely accepted as best practices by health physics professionals. Historically, more than 10,000 DOE workers have filed compensation claims for their occupational illnesses, which argues for strengthening, not weakening, occupational protection standards.
In parallel with DOE under Trump Executive Orders, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (which oversees the nuclear energy industry) is questioning the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) principle. In recent written comment to the NRC, epidemiologist Joseph Mangano summarized decades of studies supporting LNT. His cited evidence includes:
Studies of low-dose pelvic X-rays to pregnant women in the mid-1950s that concluded that a single X-ray would nearly double the risk of the child dying of cancer or leukemia by age ten.
A 1990 study by the Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) that concluded that cancers and genetic damage increase with low-level radiation as a linear, non-threshold function of the dose. It included over 900 references that support LNT.
A second BEIR study in 2005 that reiterated the risks of low-dose radiation exposures.
A 2020 systematic review of 26 studies involving 91,000 individuals with solid cancers and 13,000 with leukemia that documented excess risks caused by low dose radiation.
A 2023 study of 309,932 workers at nuclear plants in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States that found 28,089 had died of solid cancers with occupational doses well below Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb survivors. This suggests that the Linear No-Threshold model may actually underestimate the harmful effects of prolonged low radiation doses.[6]
Jay Coghlan, Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, concluded: “The Trump Administration is pumping taxpayers’ money into the much hyped “nuclear renaissance,” now in its third or fourth failed attempt, while cutting Medicaid for the poor and cutting taxes for the rich. But this time the corporate nuclear titans are being given a leg up by cutting nuclear safety protections for workers and the public, inevitably causing more illnesses. The good news is that fundamental market economics will eventually collapse the nuclear industry. However, one has to ask, at what safety costs to other sectors, such as the expanding production of nuclear weapons for the new arms race?”
Last month, the Trump administration announced a deal to spend at least $80 billion to build at least 10 new large-scale Westinghouse reactors, a move that seemed to anoint a “national champion” in nuclear power. On its face, the agreement appeared to offer these new U.S. AP1000s — the type of reactor built at Southern Company’s Plant Vogtle in Georgia — with a guarantee of financing akin to direct funding from the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office.
But exactly how the $80 billion will be spent and when remains an open question.
The details are unusual. Rather than coming from the Energy Department, the Department of Commerce brokered the deal in what one Republican source described as an example of the administration’s internal “chaos.” Rather than coming from the federal budget, the $80 billion appears to be contingent upon Japan fulfilling its $550 billion investment in the U.S. that President Donald Trump negotiated in Tokyo last month. Rather than funneling the money through an entity such as the LPO, the disbursement process remains unclear.
“Without a sense of how this $80 billion is going to be used for nuclear in the U.S., it’s not going to give actual developers or owner-operators a chance to structure their own finances in response,” Advait Arun, a former Treasury Department analyst who now researches capital markets and energy finance at the Center for Public Enterprise think tank, told Latitude Media. “Is $80 billion going to go through LPO? Will it go through the White House? Are there other costs? There [are] all these different ways to imagine how the $80 billion will flow.”
Adding to the uncertainty, a top Energy Department official said this week the federal government may take ownership of the new reactors outright.
“The role of having the government involved in private markets is sacrosanct; you just don’t do it,” Carl Coe, the Energy Department’s chief of staff, said at a conference hosted by the Tennessee Advanced Energy Business Council. “But this is a national emergency.”
In a statement, Cameco, the Canadian uranium giant that owns a 49% stake in Westinghouse, said the initial agreement with the Trump administration set the stage to “negotiate and enter into definitive” contracts. Brookfield Asset Management, the private equity firm that owns the 51% share of the nuclear giant, told Latitude Media it expected to broker a binding contract by early next year. ……………………………………………………………………….
The big investor-owned utilities — Exelon, Duke, or Southern Company, for example — are arguably the ones with the resources to pursue a new nuclear deal. But so far, they have resisted building the plants themselves.
“I wouldn’t build a nuclear plant,” Calvin Butler, CEO of utility giant Exelon, told CNBC last week. “What I could do is lean in on combined-cycle gas turbines. What I could do is build community solar. What I could do is own battery storage.”
In an earnings call earlier this month, Duke CEO Harry Sideris said North Carolina’s biggest utility would need to sort out some insurance policy to manage cost overruns before embarking on its loose plans to build more than a gigawatt of new nuclear power by 2037.
“We still need to figure out what we’re going to do with cost overrun protection and how we’re going to protect our investors and our customers from overruns,” Sideris told investors on the call. “Nothing going forward until we have those other items resolved.”
Westinghouse is pursuing alternative ways to bring down the cost of new reactors. Earlier this week, the company debuted new artificial intelligence software it’s developing with Google to streamline construction and reduce the enormous cost of interest payments on loans from slow buildouts.
‘A shiny toy’
That the landmark Westinghouse agreement came through the Commerce Department rather than the Energy Department is a sign of the lack of coordination between agencies under the Trump administration, a Republican source with direct knowledge of the White House’s nuclear plans told Latitude Media.
“Everyone is running around the globe trying to make deals to bring a shiny toy back to the president,” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The source said it was a situation of “the left hand not knowing what the right is doing,” and expressed doubt that the Japanese would direct that much funding toward a non-Japanese company in the U.S.
But that might be about to change. In late October, hard-right stalwart Sanae Takaichi took office as prime minister, pushing her plans to rebuild her country’s nuclear sector. More than half of Japan’s operable reactors are still offline as part of a nationwide shutdown that occurred after the 2011 Fukushima-Daiichi accident, but the new Takaichi administration is aiming to restart those reactors and build new ones………………. https://www.latitudemedia.com/news/trumps-westinghouse-nuclear-deal-comes-with-unresolved-questions/
JERUSALEM — Israel will accelerate production of Iron Dome components with “billions of dollars” of U.S. aid money, the Israeli Defense Ministry said Nov. 20.
The announcement comes amid a tense ceasefire in Gaza and Lebanon, as Hezbollah continues to arm and strengthen itself in Lebanon and Hamas declares that it has no intention of giving up weapons. Israel used Iron Dome interceptors to intercept thousands of rockets fired from these two fronts during the two-year “Iron Swords” war.
Government officials here did not specify the exact amount of the purchase, but its Defense Ministry noted that the it will be made from the special U.S. aid package approved by Congress in April 2024 under the Biden administration, totaling at $8.7 billion.
This is the second purchase of interceptors from Rafael by the Israeli Defense Ministry in the past year that from that pot of money.
Israeli officials have said Iron Dome interceptors caught thousands of rockets fired from Gaza and Lebanon.
Iron Dome is an air defense system that intercepts short- and medium-range rockets and missiles, mortars, drones, helicopters and more. The Israeli Air Force claims that since the defense system began its operational service in 2011 it has shown a 95% interception success rate.
Rafael Advanced Defense Systems is the prime contractor for the Iron Dome defense system, collaborating with ELTA Systems – a division in Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), and mPrest Systems.
When a President Demands the Death Penalty for His Opponents, Democracy Is Already on Life Support
There are moments in political life so shocking, so fundamentally corrosive, that they should stop a nation in its tracks. President Trump calling for the death penalty for six political opponents is one of those moments – not because it’s surprising, but because it isn’t anymore.
A president of the United States, the supposed leader of the free world, now speaks about hanging adversaries with the ease of ordering a cheeseburger. No evidence, no process, no pretence of legality – just the authoritarian impulse spoken out loud: eliminate them.
And the true horror is not just in the words themselves, but in the silence that follows.
The Republican Party, once fond of quoting the Constitution like scripture, now treats Trump’s threats as if they’re merely colourful commentary instead of the political equivalent of arson. Speaker Mike Johnson nods along. Karoline Leavitt repeats the talking points with the fervour of someone auditioning for a ministry of propaganda. The party’s enablers treat this behaviour as normal, even patriotic – as though the Founding Fathers intended freedom of speech to include calling for the state-sanctioned killing of critics.
This is not strength. It’s not law and order. It’s a chilling preview of what happens when democratic norms collapse under the weight of one man’s ego and a movement’s cowardice.
Because authoritarianism isn’t built overnight. It creeps. It numbs. It desensitises.
First, the president jokes about locking up opponents.
Then he insists it wasn’t a joke.
Then he escalates.
And the people around him – out of loyalty, fear, or ambition – normalise it.
By the time a president demands executions for political rivals, the real danger is already well underway: a nation where threats replace arguments, silence replaces dissent, and loyalty replaces truth.
America has weathered dangerous leaders before. What’s new is the echo chamber that institutionalises the danger – politicians who imitate Trump’s rhetoric, media outlets that launder it into legitimacy, and supporters who cheer it as strength.
A democracy dies long before the first political prisoner does.
It dies when its citizens shrug.
It dies when its leaders cower.
It dies when a president crosses a moral line and nothing – absolutely nothing – happens in response.
If Trump’s calls for death penalties don’t spark a bipartisan alarm, then the alarm system itself is broken. And once that happens, the fall isn’t sudden. It’s already begun.
The absence of a 123 Agreement — designed to prevent countries from manufacturing fuel which could be diverted to weapons — has implications across the region. Should Saudi Arabia win access to the full nuclear fuel cycle, other Middle Eastern countries including Iran and the United Arab Emirates may demand the same conditions.
US negotiations with Saudi Arabia on a nuclear technology-sharing deal have been completed, potentially allowing American companies to build reactors in the kingdom.
A formal 123 Atomic Energy Act agreement, which includes non-proliferation requirements, has yet to be signed, according to a US Energy Department spokesman.
The prospect of a deal has alarmed non-proliferation experts and some members of Congress who have raised concerns over weapons-grade material and the potential for Saudi Arabia to gain access to the full nuclear fuel cycle.
US negotiations with Saudi Arabia on a long-sought nuclear technology-sharing deal have been completed, potentially opening the door for American companies to build reactors in the kingdom.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright and his Saudi Arabian counterpart signed a joint declaration signifying the talks were finished, the Trump administration said Tuesday following a White House visit by the kingdom’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. A formal 123 Atomic Energy Act agreement, which customarily includes non-proliferation requirements, has yet to be signed, a US Energy Department spokesman confirmed.
If finalized, such an agreement between the two nations could inject new life into America’s atomic energy sector and provide a boost to Westinghouse Electric Co. and other US companies that want to construct plants or sell reactor technology to Saudi Arabia. Still, the prospect has alarmed non-proliferation experts and some members of Congress who have raised concerns over weapons-grade material.
The absence of a 123 Agreement — designed to prevent countries from manufacturing fuel which could be diverted to weapons — has implications across the region. Should Saudi Arabia win access to the full nuclear fuel cycle, other Middle Eastern countries including Iran and the United Arab Emirates may demand the same conditions.
“It does include fuel cycle activities,” International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi told journalists after speaking by phone with Saudi Arabia’s Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman early Wednesday. The IAEA hasn’t been notified about whether or not there will be a 123 Agreement attached to the deal, Grossi said.
Both the Energy Department and the White House didn’t immediately respond to questions seeking clarity over whether the deal would include the so-called “gold standard,” barring the enrichment and reprocessing of spent uranium that Saudi Arabia has been reluctant to agree to in the past
………………..The declaration signed Tuesday “builds the legal foundation for a decades-long, multi-billion-dollar nuclear energy partnership with the Kingdom; confirms that the United States and American companies will be the Kingdom’s civil nuclear cooperation partners of choice; and ensures that all cooperation will be conducted in a manner consistent with strong nonproliferation standards,” the White House said in a fact sheet.
On Nov. 17, ahead of the Saudi crown prince’s visit to the White House, Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen told Channel 14 TV that he’s skeptical of an agreement.
“I think Israel should be opposed, because it would bring about a situation where there will constantly have to be monitoring and oversight, to check whether the nuclear civilian project is sliding toward the military side,” Cohen said “This will constantly have to be checked.”
On November 19, 2025, Bloomberg news reported that the United States government will “buy and own” as many as ten new, large (1000 MWe and bigger) commercial nuclear reactors. The new nuclear power deal emerged out of President Trump’s October meeting with Japan’s first woman and ultra-conservative Prime Minister, Sanae Takaichi. According to the Trump White House, Japan pledged to invest a total of $550 billion in US infrastructure of which $332 billion will go into developing domestic energy projects. The Japan/US domestic energy infrastructure plan includes the licensing and construction of new large nuclear reactors (Westinghouse AP1000 pressurized water reactors as well as a new breed of small modular reactors [SMR]), new natural gas power plants, electric transmission projects and pipelines.
On November 13, 2025, Beyond Nuclear spotlighted “Make Atoms Great Again?” on the White House announcement of an agreement with Westinghouse Electric where the US Department of Energy (DOE) plans to buy an $80 billion government equity share for 20% of Westinghouse corporation’s future nuclear profits from its fleet expansion of the controversial AP1000 “advanced” pressurized water reactor. The AP1000 pressurized water reactor was to only new reactor design to launched construction projects in 2007 and only two of the new Westinghouse units are operable today in the US.
Vogtle Units 3 & 4 were stricken with extreme cost overruns and as a result have indefinitely stuck Georgia ratepayers and manufacturers with electric rate shock. Two additional AP1000 units (V.C. Summer 2 & 3) financially collapsed mid-construction in South Carolina and were abandoned with nearly $10 billion in sunk costs. The President and CEO of Santee Cooper at the time of project’s cancellation was quoted to observe in July 2017, “When you find yourself riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.” An effort to resuscitate the failed construction project is presently underway by the utility. The cost overruns, recurring delays and cancellations however resulted in the 2017 Westinghouse bankruptcy that shifted the corporation to new Canadian ownership.
The White House issued an October 28, 2025 “Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Drives Forward Billions in Investments from Japan,” identifying,
“Critical Energy Infrastructure Investments: Up to $332 billion to support critical energy infrastructure in the United States, including the construction of AP1000 and small modular reactors (SMRs), in partnership with Westinghouse; construction of SMRs in collaboration with GE Vernova and Hitachi.”
Official advises DEP to uphold its earlier decision based on Ocean Sanctuaries Act
Christine Legere, the Provincetown Examiner, November 19 2025,
PLYMOUTH — Holtec International, the company that owns and is decommissioning the Pilgrim nuclear power station, has likely lost its appeal of a state environmental ruling that has prevented it from releasing nearly one million gallons of the power plant’s wastewater, which contains radionuclides and other contaminants, into Cape Cod Bay.
Salvatore Giorlandino, the Dept. of Environmental Protection’s chief presiding officer for the appeal, issued his 60-page recommendation on Nov. 6. It advises DEP Commissioner Bonnie Heiple to uphold her agency’s 2024 decision to deny Holtec’s request for an amendment to its discharge permit that would allow releasing the wastewater
The DEP’s 2024 decision was based on the state’s Ocean Sanctuaries Act, which prohibits the discharge of industrial waste into designated ocean sanctuaries. Cape Cod Bay carries that designation.
Giorlandino’s recommendation finds that Holtec does not qualify for any of the exemptions listed in the Ocean Sanctuaries Act, including an exemption for discharges related to the generation of electric power, since Pilgrim has not generated electricity since its shutdown in 2019.
The recommendation also discussed why preemption by federal law does not apply. Holtec had argued that the federal Atomic Energy Act would preempt the state law. But Giorlandino wrote that because the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved three methods of nuclear wastewater disposal investigated by Holtec in connection with the Pilgrim plant — discharge, shipment for disposal, and evaporation — Holtec has options beyond a discharge into the bay that would comply with both federal and state laws.
“If all three methods of disposal approved by the NRC were prohibited by state law, this case may have a different outcome,” Giorlandino noted.
The recommendation awaits Heiple’s final determination.
Making It a Federal Case
A dismissal of the appeal by Heiple likely won’t mark the end of the wastewater debate.
In an email on Nov. 14, spokesman Patrick O’Brien said Holtec is currently refraining from comment until the state decision is finalized. “But based on a recent federal court ruling, it is likely that we may go that route as well,” O’Brien said.
O’Brien was referring to a federal judge’s September ruling in favor of Holtec in a New York case related to Holtec’s plan to discharge 1.5 million gallons of wastewater into the Hudson River from the Indian Point nuclear power plant, which it also owns and is dismantling.
New York passed a state law, the “Save the Hudson Act,” in 2023, which prohibited the discharge of radioactive substances into the Hudson River in connection with the decommissioning of a nuclear power plant. But according to a report on the website of the clean water advocacy group Riverkeeper, the judge in the appeal ruled that federal laws relating to the regulation of nuclear waste discharges supersede state laws. The site noted that New York Attorney General Letitia James had notified the court that the state would appeal the ruling.
James Lampert, an attorney and member of the Nuclear Decommissioning Citizens Advisory Panel for Pilgrim, said that Giorlandino had considered the New York case in this ruling on Pilgrim. “I am pleased that he correctly found that a New York court decision that a New York statute prohibiting the discharge of radioactive waste into the Hudson River was preempted did not affect his decision here because, among other things, the facts in New York and Massachusetts are very different,” said Lampert in an email.
The difference, he wrote, is that the Ocean Sanctuaries Act has been in place since the early 1970s and prohibits all industrial waste discharges, not just discharges containing radioactive waste. New York’s law, only a few years old, limits its application to radioactive waste discharges.
Mary Lampert, who is also an NDCAP member and leads the community advocacy group called Pilgrim Watch and who is James Lampert’s wife, said she was not surprised that Holtec plans to continue its legal battle.
“Why would Holtec not appeal?” Lampert said by email. “Its legal fees all come out of the decommissioning trust fund, paid by ratepayers; not one dime comes out of Holtec’s pocket.”
Local Opposition Continues
Holtec first announced plans to discharge 1.1 million gallons of wastewater from Pilgrim into Cape Cod Bay in late 2021, triggering vigorous pushback from state, federal, and local officials, the fishing and tourist industries, and the public. At the time, Holtec said it had investigated alternatives to discharging the wastewater into the bay, including evaporating it, shipping it off site at a cost of $20 million, or storing it on the site. Releasing the wastewater into the bay was and remains the company’s top choice.
………………………………………………………Members of the NDCAP panel and the public have become increasingly concerned over the evaporation of the wastewater, which has not yet been treated to reduce radioactive contamination levels.
The Lamperts have said at NDCAP meetings that the evaporated water and its contaminants ultimately end up in Cape Cod Bay in the form of precipitation.
They are not the only ones to make that point.
Diane Turco, president of the Cape Downwinders advocacy group, said in an email that DEP’s denial of Holtec’s request to discharge the wastewater should also apply to its evaporation of the wastewater because “it’s falling into our environment and Cape Cod Bay.”
Andrew Gottlieb, an NDCAP member and executive director of the Association to Preserve Cape Cod, posted on his agency’s website that Holtec now has a choice. The company could forgo appeals and dispose of the wastewater legally and responsibly, Gottlieb wrote, or it could continue with “serial appeals” to give it time to evaporate the wastewater “into the air breathed by residents of southeast Massachusetts and the Cape.” https://provincetownindependent.org/featured/2025/11/19/state-finds-no-exemption-for-holtec-on-nuclear-wastewater-release/
nuclear-news 