Organisation founded ahead of 2016 US election is classified by the FBI as an ‘extremist group’, Guardian, Martin Belam in London and Adam Gabbatt in New York, Thu 1 Oct 2020 Freshly brought to the world’s attention by Donald Trump’s refusal to condemn their associations with white supremacist ideology during Tuesday night’s US presidential debate, the US neo-fascist group the Proud Boys was created by the Canadian-British far-right activist and Vice magazine co-founder Gavin McInnes in 2016 in the lead-up to Trump’s election as president.
The group, which admits men only, was classified in 2018 by the FBI as an “extremist group”, while the US research and advocacy organization Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) lists it as a hate group. The Anti-Defamation League describes the group as misogynistic, Islamophobic, transphobic and anti-immigration.
It is based in America, mostly the western US, but has a presence in some other countries, notably Canada, the UK and Australia.
And while it has an outsize reputation based on the high-profile agitation events and street brawls its members are most infamous for, and now a reference in a presidential debate, the Proud Boys is believed to be a very small group comprising maybe just a few hundred members in the US.
It is one of a sheaf of far-right groups with ready access to legal firearms in the US and with overtly pro-Trump or libertarian stances and an affinity for presenting as vigilantes or paramilitaries, especially during far-right gatherings or when showing up to disrupt liberal-leaning protests.
To join the Proud Boys, members must make an oath: “I am a proud western chauvinist, I refuse to apologise for creating the modern world”, as well as endure a violent “hazing” process. While the group maintains it is not racist, and simply wants to hark back to traditional ““western” values, its worldview incorporates elements of the “white genocide” conspiracy theory. Members are pro-gun rights, against feminism and gender equality, and take a libertarian stance on issues such as welfare.
During the debate, Trump was asked repeatedly by the moderator, Chris Wallace, to condemn violence by white supremacists and rightwing groups, such as armed militias.
When Trump asked specifically who he should be addressing, Biden prompted him by saying the Proud Boys.
Trump then addressed the Proud Boys, saying: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by! But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left.”
Members of the group immediately celebrated the president’s comment in posts on social media and rightwing discussion-board platforms such as Telegram and Parler. One Proud Boys group added the phrase “Stand Back, Stand By” to their logo. Another post was a message to Trump: “Standing down and standing by sir.”……….
The group are identifiable by their adopted uniform of red “Make America Great Again” caps, associated with Donald Trump’s 2016 and 2020 election campaigns, and black Fred Perry polo shirts with some narrow yellow stripes and the company’s yellow laurel wreath logo, which the company earlier this week stopped selling as a result. The sports clothing manufacturer recently withdrew the design, citing its unwillingness to be associated with the group……..https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/30/proud-boys-who-are-far-right-group-that-backs-donald-trump
October 1, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
election USA 2020, safety, secrets,lies and civil liberties |
Leave a comment
|
Trump administration orders assessment on bolstering nuclear warheads as talks with Russia stall
U.S. diplomats are trying to play hardball with Russia in negotiations over whether to extend New START, Politico, .By DANIEL LIPPMAN, BRYAN BENDER and LARA SELIGMAN, 09/28/2020 The Trump administration has asked the military to assess how quickly it could pull nuclear weapons out of storage and load them onto bombers and submarines if an arms control treaty with Russia is allowed to expire in February, according to three people familiar with the discussions.
The request to U.S. Strategic Command in Nebraska is part of a strategy to pressure Moscow into renegotiating the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty before the U.S. presidential election, the people said.
In making the request, the Trump administration wants to underscore that it is serious about letting the treaty lapse if Russia fails to meet U.S. demands. The negotiating team is leery that Russia is dragging out the talks in the hope that Joe Biden — who has pledged to extend New START under what Moscow believes will be more favorable terms than what this White House is offering — wins the election.
“It’s a clear signal that the costs for not negotiating before the election are going to go up,” said one of the people, who requested anonymity to relay sensitive discussions. The Trump administration is “trying to create an incentive, and it’s a real incentive, for the Russians to sit down and actually negotiate.”
The request for the assessment came in the last two weeks from a group of officials at the National Security Council and State, Defense and Energy departments that’s supporting Ambassador Marshall Billingslea in negotiations with Moscow to try to replace New START before it runs out in February.
The assessment will determine how long it would take to load nuclear weapons now in reserve onto long-range bombers, ballistic missile submarines and land-based silos to beef up the U.S. nuclear force in the event Russia increases its arsenal.
It comes as Billingslea has publicly raised the possibility of putting more weapons on bombers and submarines if New START lapses and has sharpened his rhetoric in recent days to try to secure more concessions from the Russians.
It would certainly be a question that you would want to ask STRATCOM,” said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Frank Klotz, who oversaw nuclear forces before serving as head of the DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration. “You would want to fully understand all the possible implications of your negotiating approach, both if it should succeed or, alternatively, if it should fail.”
But former senior arms control and military officials also consider the move a risky gambit. It could send a message that the Trump administration, which has already pulled out of two other nuclear-related treaties with Russia, is no longer interested in any limits on the world’s largest arsenals. And it could goad the Russians into taking similar steps.
I call that megaphone diplomacy,” said Rose Gottemoeller, who served as deputy secretary general of NATO until last year and negotiated New START when she was at the State Department. “Do we want to end up in a less stable place? Because we would be nuclear arms racing.”
“It’s very stupid,” added a former GOP arms control official who declined to be identified because he still advises the government. “It makes absolutely no sense to threaten to upload. It becomes a valid leveraging point only if the other side can’t do it. The Russians can do it, too.”
“But more importantly,” this person added, “the systems we have deployed today are the ones we believe are necessary to provide an adequate deterrent. There is no obvious reason and every reason not to in the absence of a change in the threat. It’s not going to scare the Russians. The likelihood of success with the Russians is about nil.”
A State Department spokesperson declined to comment on Billingslea’s behalf.
Capt. Bill Clinton, a spokesperson for Strategic Command, declined to address the military’s role in the deliberations. “We don’t talk about future operations, and really can’t speculate on arms control talks (as that is not [our] responsibility),” he wrote in an email.
An NSC spokesperson declined to comment.
New START, signed in 2010, mandated both sides draw down to 1,550 deployed strategic weapons and includes provisions to verify compliance, including reciprocal on-site inspections of nuclear bases.
The pact is set to expire on Feb. 5 unless both sides agree to an extension for up to five years. apply.
Russia in December offered to extend the treaty without preconditions. ………https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/28/trump-russia-nuclear-deal-talks-422736
|
|
October 1, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics international, USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
|
DOE Activities Raise Safety Concerns about Plutonium at Three Facilities http://nuclearactive.org/ According to the Department of Energy (DOE), plans are under way to remove unused plutonium fuel from the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The uranium-plutonium fuel, containing around 26.4 kilograms (58.2 pounds) of weapon-grade plutonium, is called “mixed-oxide,” or MOX. In a late-August document, DOE stated that the MOX fuel, produced in France for a program at the Savannah River Site (SRS), would be disposed of as transuranic waste and therefore go to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP).
At present the MOX fuel, in the form of pellets, is stored at LANL’s PF-4 plutonium facility. DOE needs to empty PF-4 to have space for its planned annual production of up to eighty plutonium “pits”, or triggers, for nuclear weapons.
The DOE proposal to dispose of the useless MOX fuel pellets is unprecedented, but has been subjected to only a brief mention in an environmental analysis on pit production. Tom Clements, director of SRS Watch, says, “The analysis conducted on the disposal of the plutonium fuel is totally inadequate and a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be conducted before any repackaging and shipment to WIPP. ”
One of Clements’ concerns about security of the disposal of MOX fuel pellets at WIPP is that safeguards on the material would be terminated and the weapon-grade plutonium would receive less monitoring. Clements says, “As the MOX pellets contain enough purified plutonium for perhaps 10 nuclear weapons, steps must be taken to prevent access to the material during both repackaging and disposal.”
Clements believes the material must remain in secure storage at LANL’s PF-4 until a full EIS is prepared by DOE and the proposal is finalized. Please see https://srswatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SRS-Watch-news-on-MOX-LTAs-to-WIPP-September-23-2020.pdf for additional information and references.
Clements also reports a second new development relating to plutonium. In a DOE fact sheet obtained on September 22, 2020, via the Freedom of Information Act, DOE revealed that 11.5 metric tons (25,353 pounds) of plutonium are stored at SRS. DOE stated in a February 2020 letter to the SRS Citizens Advisory Board that the stored plutonium “is not posing any additional risks to communities surrounding the SRS.” Clements concurs with that assessment but says, “It appears DOE has plans to bring an additional 35 metric tons (77,162 pounds) of plutonium into South Carolina for processing, some of which could end up being stranded here as we saw with the failed MOX project.”
Clements observes that plutonium waste disposal activities are less safe than storage. He says, “Those that claim imaginary risks of plutonium storage appear to be silent on the real long-term risks of nuclear processing and radioactive waste disposal activities at SRS.” Please see https://srswatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SRSW-news-on-SRS-plutonium-inventory-Sep-29-2020.pdf for additional information and references.
|
D
|
October 1, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
- plutonium, safety, USA |
Leave a comment
Kaysville withdraws from nuclear power project. Post Register, By NATHAN BROWN nbrown@postregister.com
Sep 28, 2020 One more Utah city has withdrawn from a project to build 12 small nuclear reactors west of Idaho Falls.
The Kaysville City Council voted unanimously a week-and-a-half ago to withdraw from the Carbon Free Power Project, although the resolution left the door open for the city to hold a special meeting to rejoin the project if anything changes……….
Lehi and Logan have also withdrawn from the Carbon Free Power Project over the past month-and-a-half, citing potential risks to local taxpayers if costs go up. There are still more than 30 cities and power systems, including Idaho Falls, that are part of it, and the members have until Oct. 31 to recommit to the project’s next phase by approving the new budget. Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems is waiting for the U.S. Department of Energy to give final approval to a promised $1.4 billion to support the project. ……. https://www.postregister.com/news/government/kaysville-withdraws-from-nuclear-power-project/article_fbb6f15e-e8c6-5207-b6e9-bbf632538c85.html
October 1, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA |
Leave a comment
Provocation on the High Seas: U.S. Naval Adventures Near the Shores of Russia, China and Iran, by https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/09/25/provocation-on-the-high-seas-u-s-naval-adventures-near-the-shores-of-russia-china-and-iran/?fbclid=IwAR3aA7GT52EdGN66LcYfQzrWYby-J9MqmSRI9xaU0gz7TyVLcRXJMa9z6GM EVE OTTENBERG The war on terror is slowly ending. The U.S. military will try to keep bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, but with most troops gone in the next few years, the lives of the few who remain will be at constant risk. Pressure will mount to get those soldiers out. But Pentagon bureaucrats and brass are masters of institutional infighting, and, apparently, ignoring presidential orders they don’t like, so who knows how that will turn out? One thing is sure: the military’s focus has shifted, from the Middle East to Russia and China. That means U.S. soldiers and materiel will continue to be in places they shouldn’t, in ever greater numbers, namely the Black Sea and the South China Sea.
Lest you fear that peace might break out in the Middle East, there’s always the possibility of a U.S. assault on Iran. That chance greatly increased with the Trump regime’s monumental blunder of smashing the Iran nuclear treaty. Trump clearly thought his high-handed rejection would cow the Iranians. He was wrong. In an apparent rage, he ratcheted up sanctions, threats, insults and then – an assassination, the logical conclusion of which was war, had Trump not come to his senses. Since then things have cooled down a bit, though not enough to stop the Trump regime from interfering with Iran’s oil trade with Venezuela or from making preposterous accusations about Iranian plots against the U.S. ambassador to South Africa, an official with no relation to Iran, known mostly for her business in expensive handbags and for donating to Trump.
What the idiotically bellicose U.S. policy toward Iran – including the recent U.S. push for more sanctions – has mainly achieved is a warm embrace between Iran and China. And that’s not a matter susceptible to piracy on the high seas – the preferred U.S. approach to tankers taking Iranian fuel to Caracas. Nor will wild charges about planned assassinations of obscure, random U.S. bureaucrats affect this relationship. The Trump regime has blustered, threatened, insulted and caused the great Iran-China friendship to sink deep roots and blossom. Lest you fear that peace might break out in the Middle East, there’s always the possibility of a U.S. assault on Iran. That chance greatly increased with the Trump regime’s monumental blunder of smashing the Iran nuclear treaty. Trump clearly thought his high-handed rejection would cow the Iranians. He was wrong. In an apparent rage, he ratcheted up sanctions, threats, insults and then – an assassination, the logical conclusion of which was war, had Trump not come to his senses. Since then things have cooled down a bit, though not enough to stop the Trump regime from interfering with Iran’s oil trade with Venezuela or from making preposterous accusations about Iranian plots against the U.S. ambassador to South Africa, an official with no relation to Iran, known mostly for her business in expensive handbags and for donating to Trump.
What the idiotically bellicose U.S. policy toward Iran – including the recent U.S. push for more sanctions – has mainly achieved is a warm embrace between Iran and China. And that’s not a matter susceptible to piracy on the high seas – the preferred U.S. approach to tankers taking Iranian fuel to Caracas. Nor will wild charges about planned assassinations of obscure, random U.S. bureaucrats affect this relationship. The Trump regime has blustered, threatened, insulted and caused the great Iran-China friendship to sink deep roots and blossom. It probably would have anyway, but Trump surely deserves credit for nourishing it.
As Time reported on July 29, Iran is negotiating a 25-year deal with China, with “billions of dollars worth of Chinese investments in energy, transportation, banking and cybersecurity in Iran.” There also could be “weapons development and intelligence sharing and joint military drills.” In short, this $400 billion deal is huge and alarm bells are ringing frantically in Washington. They shouldn’t be. If the Trump regime had been paying attention, they would have seen this coming, because it’s the logical outcome of their absurd hostility to both countries.
But then, cultural illiteracy regarding Iran is a feature of Republican policy in the Middle East. After all, the Bush regime invaded, conquered and destroyed Iraq – war crimes whose main beneficiary was Iran, which had no love, to say the least, for Saddam Hussein and was more than happy to cement its brotherhood with newly ascendant Iraqi Shia. This is the sort of stuff any high schooler could have alerted the Bush regime to in advance. But alas, the GOP’s geopolitical geniuses had no use for even high school wisdom. To ensure we all got that point, the Trump regime quickly pounced on one of Obama’s few decent and intelligent moves in the Middle East – the Iran nuclear treaty – and shredded it.
Still, the U.S. military’s focus has shifted. That shift started with Obama’s odious “pivot to China.” According to Chinese State Councilor Wang Yi, quoted by Russia Today, U.S. intervention in the South China Sea is “the main driver of militarization there.” Currently several countries in the region claim territory in the South China Sea – China, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Indonesia and Brunei. Some of these claims overlap, thus causing disputes, RT reports. The U.S. stirs the pot with its “freedom of navigation” military patrols. Naturally this intervention has led to incidents between the Chinese and U.S. militaries. And worse could happen any time. China regards the South China Sea as its backyard and the U.S. presence there as a provocation. After all, how would Washington react to Chinese military patrols in the Gulf of Mexico? That is the territorial equivalent of what the U.S. does to China, though Washington refuses to recognize this in its quest for global dominance.
It’s the same with U.S. aggression in the Black Sea, where the target is Russia. In August, the U.S. held military drills in the Black Sea, known, in the not too distant past, as the shores of Russia. Earlier, Andrei Krasov of the State Duma Defense Committee told the Interfax agency: “The actions of American reconnaissance aircraft will not remain without reaction.” Indeed, in late July, Russia reported intercepting an American reconnaissance flight over the Black Sea. Two much of this sort of stuff could lead to war.
So what we have here is the U.S. fishing in troubled waters. NATO has already nearly surrounded Russia, which now boasts supersonic nuclear weapons. In response, Trump recently revealed that the U.S. has some sort of secret “super” weapon. Which only makes the Black Sea brinksmanship more dangerous. Both adversaries are armed to the teeth. To make matters worse, Trump has ripped up all nuclear treaties with Russia except START – and that is at death’s door.
A war with either Russia, China or Iran would be catastrophic, as anyone with a brain knows. Nor would it solve any of the myriad disasters currently besetting the U.S.: an out-of-control pandemic, with more fatalities than any other country in the world and no end in sight; economic collapse, with tens of millions jobless and millions facing eviction and homelessness in a few months; a climate taking revenge on fossil fuel capitalism by burning up large swaths of the globe, including the American West Coast; other human-induced, climate change, extreme weather events elsewhere in the U.S., like the currently soggy Gulf Coast; the rise of violent, over-armed, know-nothing, radical right-wing vigilantes; racial unrest. And those are just the big, obvious monster weeds in the American front yard. Washington should take a page from Voltaire and tend its own garden. Forget about the Black Sea, the South China Sea and the Gulf of Oman. Now is not the time for new conflict. Because as every school child knows, never is the only time for nuclear war.
|
|
September 29, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics international, USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
DONALD TRUMP JR. CALLS FOR VOLUNTEERS TO JOIN AN ‘ARMY’ AND ‘SECURE’ THE 2020
ELECTION https://www.lancastercourier.com/2020/09/27/donald-trump-jr-calls-for-volunteers-to-join-an-army-and-secure-the-2020-election/, by Will Bishop | Sep 27, 2020 | Election 2020, A new video ad appearing on social media features the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., urging volunteers to join an “army” and keep the “radical left” from succeeding in their attempt to “steal” the 2020 election: [tweets shown here]…….
Be sure and note the militancy of the language in the ad, which could easily lead some Trump supporters to take up arms and show up at polling places in an attempt to intimidate voters trying to cast a ballot. The intent could not possibly be clearer or more disgusting: To hold down turnout on Election Day because Republicans don’t do well in high turnout elections. As high-tech website BoingBoing explains.
“What else does one even say about these insane … Trump-Pence ads, and the curiously addled Don Jr., who resembles a crackhead in the throes of addiction? What else does one say, but holy shit. Long past time for Twitter and Facebook, where these ads are trending, to take action — the ads are lying, and they’re inciting armed violence against Americans.”
That sentiment was echoed by tech reporter Garrett Graff of Wired:
These posts, by a president’s son, should rank among the most worrisome threats to American democracy in our history. Calling for an “army” to prevent the election from being stolen?!? This should be disowned by the GOP—but we know it won’t be.
If there is indeed violence on Election Day and it can be traced back to this ad or others circulating online, those who made the spots need to be arrested and charged with conspiracy to interfere with an election and accessory to commit a violent crime.
Oh, and let’s make sure the first person arrested is Donald Trump
September 29, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
election USA 2020 |
Leave a comment
|
Greater Cleveland Partnership calls for repeal of Ohio nuclear bailout law, By staff | cleveland.com28 Sept 20, CLEVELAND, Ohio – The Greater Cleveland Partnership is calling on Ohio lawmakers to repeal and possibly replace House Bill 6, the $1.3 billion nuclear plant bailout law that federal authorities say was the product of a massive corruption scheme.
“We recommend a repeal and replace stance on HB 6 to remove the alleged stain of corruption on the law and to enable the restoration of the energy efficiency programs supported by our members,” said Joe Roman, President and CEO of the GCP. “Our membership continues to encourage policies that provide incentives for businesses to leverage energy programming to foster growth. We recognize a level of flexibility may be needed to meet those goals, reverse HB 6, and balance Ohio’s energy environment……….
A select committee of lawmakers is considering whether to repeal and replace the law. The committee has held hearings but hasn’t yet recommended specific actions.
The nuclear bailout is funded by new monthly surcharges ranging from 85 cents for residential customers to as much as $2,400 for large industrial plants. In addition to the nuclear plant bailout, House Bill 6 provides subsidies to specific coal and solar plants around the state, dismantles the state’s green-energy standards for utilities, and allows FirstEnergy Corp. and other utilities to lock in a guaranteed level of ratepayer revenue for years to come. https://www.cleveland.com/open/2020/09/greater-cleveland-partnership-calls-for-repeal-of-ohio-nuclear-bailout-law.html
|
|
September 29, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, politics, USA |
Leave a comment
|
At Greenfield, Sunderland standouts, residents protest nuclear weapons, Greenfield Recorder By MARY BYRNE
Members of the Greenfield and surrounding communities gathered on the Greenfield Common Saturday morning, joining a national movement in support of eliminating nuclear weapons.
Activists stood on each corner of the intersection from 11 a.m to noon on Saturday, according to Anna Gyorgy, communications coordinator for Traprock Center for Peace and Justice. A standout was also expected to take place on Saturday in Sunderland.
The date for the standouts was chosen, Gyorgy explained, in recognition of the United Nation’s International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, which was established in the months following a meeting of the UN General Assembly in 2013.
|
|
September 29, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
opposition to nuclear, USA |
Leave a comment
‘The Bomb’ Presents A ‘Secret History’ Of Nuclear War Planning In America, NPR, September 28, 2020
Heard on Fresh Air
DAVE DAVIES, Author Fred Kaplan reveals how U.S. presidents, their advisers and generals have thought about, planned for — and sometimes narrowly avoided — nuclear war. Originally broadcast Jan. 27, 2020.(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED NPR BROADCAST)
DAVE DAVIES, HOST:
This is FRESH AIR. I’m Dave Davies, in for Terry Gross. In 2017, when President Trump threatened to rain fire and fury on North Korea if it leveled any more threats at the United States, our guest, Fred Kaplan, decided it was time for a new book. Kaplan’s 1983 book, “The Wizards Of Armageddon,” was about nuclear war strategy during the Cold War. He says the recent confrontation between North Korea and the United States got Americans thinking about the prospect of nuclear war in a way they hadn’t since the end of the Cold War nearly 30 years before. So he decided it was time to look again at how American leaders have managed these terrifying weapons and the threat they pose to the world today.
Kaplan read thousands of declassified documents and interviewed former military leaders and government officials. The result is his new book about how American presidents and their advisers and generals have thought about, planned for and sometimes narrowly avoided nuclear war over the past 70 years. Fred Kaplan is a national security columnist for Slate and the author of five previous books. His latest is “The Bomb: Presidents, Generals, And The Secret History Of Nuclear War.”
September 29, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
Where’s the proof that nuclear power plants need a bailout? This Week in the CLE, By Laura Johnston, cleveland.com 28 Sept 20, CLEVELAND, Ohio — How do Ohioans know Energy Harbor’s nuclear power plants need a $1.3 billion bailout? Cleveland.com
The company hasn’t said, and we’re talking about the lack of disclosure on This Week in the CLE…….
Here are the questions we’re answering today:
The owner of the nuclear plants getting our $1.3 billion bailout won’t show proof that it actually needs the money: The Wake Up podcast, Sep 28, 2020, By Staff, cleveland.com, CLEVELAND, Ohio — A bill to bail out Ohio’s two nuclear power plants has led to one of the state’s biggest scandals … and it’s unclear if the plants really needed the money.
September 29, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, politics, USA |
Leave a comment
Most of the Kings Bay Plowshares still await sentencing. Mom was sentenced to time served by video conference in June — a surreal and dislocating experience that is now more and more common in our criminal justice system. Her co-defendants opted to postpone sentencing in hopes that it could be in person, but it is unclear if that will happen.
After 4 decades of Plowshares Actions, It’s Nuclear Warfare that Should Be on Trial — Not Activists, Forty years ago, the Plowshares Eight sparked a movement of nuclear disarmers that continues to take responsibility for weapons of mass destruction.
Common Dreams, by Frida Berrigan 26 Sep 20, “Nuclear warfare is not on trial here, you are!” said Judge Samuel Salus, in exasperation.
Before him were eight activists, including two priests and a nun. As Judge Salus tried to preside over the government’s prosecution of them for their trespass onto — and destruction of — private property, the eight were trying to put nuclear warfare, nuclear weapons, nuclear policy and U.S. exceptionalism on trial.
That was 40 years ago this week — ancient history by some measures. And no one reading this will be surprised to find that the eight were found guilty and the human family is still threatened by almost 15,000 nuclear warheads. So, four decades later, why isn’t nuclear warfare on trial?
They are the crime responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians 75 years ago. They have littered the landscape with radioactive waste. They have cost the United States more than $5 trillion from the public coffers. They are the apocalyptic nightmare on hair-trigger alert that haunt our children’s dreams.
On September 9, 1980, my father, Philip Berrigan, along with his brother Daniel, John Schuchardt, Dean Hammer, Elmer Maas, Molly Rush, Sister Anne Montgomery, and Father Carl Kabat, gained entry into the General Electric plant in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Once inside the complex, they poured blood over two nuclear weapons’ nose cones, and used household hammers to dent the metal. They came to be known as The Plowshares Eight. Continue reading →
September 28, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Legal, opposition to nuclear, PERSONAL STORIES, Reference, USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
New generation of ICBMs means Nebraska will continue to be ‘nuclear sponge,’ warn nuke skeptics, Omaha World Herald, Steve Liewer-25 Sept 20,
In the unhappy event that the world’s nuclear powers cut loose with their atomic weapons, Nebraska would become an especially hellish place.
That’s because the Cornhusker State is one of a handful in the West and Midwest whose role in Armageddon is to soak up an unfathomable first strike of Russian bombs.
Under the weird logic of mutually assured destruction, the 450 Minuteman III missile silos containing 400 nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles in Montana, North Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado and western Nebraska are meant to be sitting ducks for any first strike by Russia, or any other potential adversary.
“The specific mission of the ICBMs is to be a nuclear sponge,” said Tom Z. Collina, director of policy for the Ploughshares Fund, a group dedicated to eliminating nuclear weapons. “They’re sitting in their silos. Their only purpose is to be a target.”
Today, the nation is once again at a nuclear crossroads. Tensions between the U.S. and Russia, its biggest nuclear adversary, have simmered to a boil since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine (a U.S. ally) and used proxies to occupy the eastern part of its territory.
Russia has begun modernizing its nuclear arsenal, and China is building one, leaving the U.S. in a rush to catch up because almost every plane, submarine, missile and bomb is 30 to 50 years old.
In addition, the New START arms control agreement, signed by the U.S. and Russia in 2010, expires in February. Negotiations to extend the agreement started late and have not gone far, leading to fears of a renewed nuclear arms race.
“The world has never been as dangerous,” said former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, who also represented Nebraska as a U.S. senator.
The modernization of the nuclear arsenal includes construction of the new Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines (replacing the Ohio-class boats), B-21 strategic bombers (replacing the B-1, B-2 and some B-52s), and the new “ground-based strategic deterrent (GBSD),” an ICBM to replace the Minuteman III.
Cost estimates exceed $300 billion. In Congress, the modernization has wide support in both political parties. Just this month, the Pentagon awarded defense contractor Northrop Grumman $13.3 billion to start work on the GBSD, a down payment on a $100 billion project.
Nebraska has an outsize stake in America’s nuclear enterprise. U.S. Strategic Command, which commands the arsenal, is at Offutt Air Force Base, on the east side of the state, and 82 Minuteman III silos are in the state’s far western counties.
The silos are underground and heavily reinforced — sturdy, but not invulnerable to a nuclear strike. They’re spaced far enough apart that it would take an enormous number of bombs to wipe them out.
“I’ve always wondered why the Midwest states don’t raise more of a ruckus,” Collina said. “You’re the states that have a target on your back.”
He and others have raised the possibility of scrapping the ICBM leg of the nuclear triad and doing away with the “nuclear sponge.”
Of course, the basic idea of nuclear deterrence is that the missiles’ presence means that they will never be used.
“ICBMs would only be used in world-ending situations,” said Matt Korda, a researcher with the Federation of American Scientists’ Nuclear Information Project. “If they don’t have any purpose in post-Cold War nuclear strategy, then what is the cost of keeping them?”…………………
Collina and others say the ICBMs have outlived their usefulness. The nuclear sponge, they say, is too dangerous and expensive to maintain. The air- and sea-based legs of the triad offer more than enough firepower to destroy any enemy that would dare to attack the U.S.
“If you remove all the ICBMs, we would be safer than we are today,” Collina said.
He and Korda fear an accidental nuclear war because of the speed with which a president must launch the missiles if sensors detect an incoming strike.
“The president would have only a couple of minutes to decide before they are destroyed,” Korda said. “The risk of miscalculation is very high.”
“The point of deterrence is if you attack us, we will devastate your country,” Collina said. “That invites the nightmare: that we might start a nuclear war by mistake.”
September 28, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment

As fossil fuel jobs falter, renewables come to the rescue, BY JEFF BERARDELLI CBS News, SEPTEMBER 25, 2020 “…………. Professor Jay Johnson runs the Wind Energy Technician Program at Lake Region State College in eastern North Dakota, and recently he’s seen a big increase in demand. “Wind energy development has been on a tear the last few years as wind turbines have become unbelievably efficient,” he said.
According to Logan Goldie-Scot, the head of clean power research at Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), combined solar and wind power capacity has quadrupled since 2010. And in that time, installed wind capacity has increased by 260%, from 41 gigawatts to 106. BNEF expects another 60 gigawatts of wind power to be added in just the next five years.
“The amount of money being invested in wind is staggering, and people don’t realize it, but there is a 100% renewable revolution going on right underneath our feet,” says Johnson, “This all means the cost of wind-generated electricity to homeowners and businesses is the low-cost solution.”
Prices of renewable energy have indeed fallen dramatically. According to BNEF, the cost of generating power from solar photovoltaic (PV) modules has fallen by 90% since 2010, and the price of wind power has been cut in half. In fact, the prices of onshore wind and solar are now even with gas and cheaper than coal and nuclear.
Professor Jeffrey Sachs, a world-renowned economist and sustainable development expert at Columbia University, says clean energy now has several advantages over traditional fuels.
“Renewable energy now is at what is called grid parity. That means it is no more expensive to put up a solar field than it is to put up a coal plant,” explains Sachs. “The only difference is the coal plant will pollute the air, kill the people nearby and create incredible climate damage, while the solar will enable clean air and a safe and stable environment and actually put a lot more people to work.”
Recent figures show renewable energy employs about 850,000 people in the U.S. (not including some 2.3 million jobs in energy efficiency), as compared to a little more than 1 million in traditional oil, gas and coal. But most of the future job growth is projected to come from clean energy sources.
In fact, the fastest growing occupation in the U.S., according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, is wind turbine service technician, with a median salary of about $53,000 per year. In total, the wind industry employs 120,000 U.S. workers. Solar installer is the third fastest growing occupation on the list, with a median salary of nearly $45,000.
The growth in renewable energy jobs can be explained by the fact that it is a newer, expanding industry and requires more workers per unit of energy than fossil fuels. Research shows that job creation is inherent in the transition required to combat climate change. “Such episodes of ‘creative destruction’ are often associated with innovation, job creation and growth,” as one study put it. A report by the UK Energy Research Centre concluded that for the same amount of energy produced, renewables required two to five times as many workers as compared to fossil fuels.
A poll released this week by Climate Nexus, conducted by Yale and George Mason University, finds that a large majority of registered voters in the U.S. believe combating climate change would be good for the economy. About 7 in 10 people surveyed expressed the view that government action on climate change would bolster renewable energy, create jobs and help the economy. Only about one-third thought government action on climate would impose burdensome regulations, weakening the economy and job creation.
CBS News asked Goldie-Scot how much the outcome of the 2020 presidential election would matter for the future of renewables. He says that while the industry would undoubtedly benefit more from a Democratic administration due to Joe Biden’s pledge to invest $2 trillion in clean energy and related infrastructure, “the fundamental advantages of renewables will persist despite politics. Renewables are the lowest [cost] form of generation in much of the country and renewables are popular in a number of Republican, and windy, states.”
As just one example, the typically red state of Texas is the clear leader in wind energy, generating three times as much as its nearest competitor. Sachs agrees that Republican-leaning states have the most to gain from the surge in renewables. “They could be the leaders in building the new green economy,” he said. “This is exactly a heartland issue for the United States.”
And back in the heartland, as Johnson sees more and more trainees walking through his door, he says the renewable revolution is well underway. “That’s where the jobs are, that’s where the wind energy is. It’s just free money flying across the sky.” https://www.cbsnews.com/news/renewable-energy-jobs-replacing-fossil-fuel-jobs-oil-wind/?fbclid=IwAR1aPeyOQTnh5UlpQKkRvonfkMOxT4cFwLn7uYMO-T1ckd-ldGCkOGlNNeU
September 28, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
employment, renewable, USA |
Leave a comment
SUPREME COURT. Could Barrett ‘shut the courthouse doors’ on enviros? Pamela King, E&E News reporter, September 26, 2020 President Trump today selected Amy Coney Barrett to fill the seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the nation’s highest bench.
If confirmed, Barrett, 48, will become the Supreme Court’s sixth Republican-appointed justice, replacing one of the court’s most liberal members and deepening a conservative majority on the bench that could affect the outcome of environmental litigation for decades.
“The courts in general and the Supreme Court in particular are not going to be much help on confronting the major environmental challenges we face,” Vermont Law School professor Pat Parenteau wrote in an email.
Barrett accepted the nomination at the White House this afternoon, highlighting Ginsburg’s achievements on the high court.
“She not only broke glass ceilings,” Barrett said of Ginsburg. “She smashed them.”
Barrett’s record on environmental and energy issues is largely undeveloped, but several environmental groups voiced concern about Barrett’s narrow view of public interest groups’ power to sue in opinions she wrote as a judge for the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where she has served since 2017.
In a ruling this summer, Barrett blocked an effort by a park preservation group and Chicago residents to stop construction of the Obama Presidential Center in the city’s Jackson Park.
The challengers’ lack of standing “pulls the rug out from under their arguments,” Barrett wrote.
She also signed on to a 2018 decision that asked the Army Corps of Engineers to revisit its decision that placed 13 acres of Illinois wetlands off-limits to a housing developer.
“Her slim judicial record shows that she’s hostile to the environment and will slam shut the courthouse doors to public interest advocates, to the delight of corporate polluters,” Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement yesterday.
Ginsburg, on the other hand, penned the Supreme Court’s opinion in the oft-cited 2000 case Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, which took a broad view of environmentalists’ standing to bring lawsuits (Greenwire, Sept. 19).
If Barrett is confirmed, the bench’s three remaining liberal justices — Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor — will need the support of their conservative colleagues to grant any petition, potentially making it much more difficult for environmental groups to challenge Trump administration rules at the high court. The court requires that four justices agree to take up a case and accepts fewer than 1% of cases.
Chief Justice John Roberts has become known for siding with the liberal justices in decisions with impact for environmental rulemaking, but his power as a swing voter would be diluted if a sixth conservative justice were added to the bench. Observers have pointed to Trump’s two other appointees — Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — as the court’s new potential center.
“I would expect that it will be tougher for EPA to act as aggressively with an Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court than it was with a Ruth Bader Ginsburg,” said Tom Lorenzen, head of the environment and natural resources practice at Crowell & Moring LLP…….https://www.eenews.net/stories/1063714781
September 28, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
environment, Legal, USA |
Leave a comment
Americans deserve a nuclear-free future, https://www.heraldnews.com/opinion/20200923/opinion-americans-deserve-nuclear-free-future Maryellen Kurkulos, 23 Sept 20, This Saturday, Sept. 26, marks the United Nations’ International Day for Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons. This year’s commemoration is of particular importance given the precarious states of our economy, public health, environment and democracy.
Conditions in our country were dire even before the pandemic with 40% of Americans living from paycheck to paycheck. Homelessness, food and housing insecurity as well as deteriorating living standards for much of the middle class had become the norm. Now we are contending with a soaring COVID-19 death-toll, Depression-era unemployment, and millions teetering on the brink of eviction.
Yet there are serious problems that loom even larger. People are finally acknowledging the ominous reality of a rapidly warming planet. In recent weeks “apocalyptic” fires along the West coast and extreme flooding in the South, both directly linked to global warming, have decimated entire towns and displaced hundreds of thousands.
But Americans must also confront the threat presented by nuclear weapons that could be launched accidentally or on purpose. Unless mitigated, irreversible damage to human civilization and our ecosystem from global warming will take decades; a nuclear war could wipe out everything that sustains life on Earth in an instant.
Until recently, a global architecture of nuclear treaties provided a measure of security from that happening, although too many accidents and close calls still happened. But President Donald Trump has demolished these treaties and agreements, undoing decades of painstaking work. His provocations against China and Russia, both nuclear powers, have stoked a new arms race. He has already deployed one of the new, more easily used “low-yield” atomic warheads and is committed to a needless $2 trillion, 30-year nuclear weapons modernization program.
Consequently each year President Trump has been in office experts at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists have moved the hands of the iconic Doomsday clock closer to midnight. Last January, they set the second hand at 100 seconds – closer than ever before – indicating the alarmingly heightened risk of a nuclear launch.
Even without a Trump second-term, reconstructing these treaties and repairing our damaged international relationships will be a formidable feat. Yet, there is hope for progress if Americans confront and correct the warped priorities in our federal budget. For two decades, Congress has been allocating over half of those funds – our tax dollars – to the Pentagon at the expense of many programs that include healthcare, housing and education. In 2018, over $22 billion went to nuclear weapons programs alone. The amount paid by Fall River taxpayers was $2.26 million, enough money to provide COVID-19 testing for most of the city or to hire 22 additional public school teachers that we now need for the smaller classes required in this era of social distancing.
Forty years ago during the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union a global movement of millions successfully pressured the leaders of the two nuclear superpowers to meet and negotiate a nuclear freeze. Today, movements led by young people and people of color all across the U.S. are rising up demanding racial, economic and environmental justice. They might be in the streets, but they also are organizing in their communities, lobbying elected officials and working to elect candidates at all levels of government who will deliver the transformative change our collective future is dependent on. Americans absolutely deserve quality healthcare, stable, affordable housing, debt-free education, and good-paying jobs. Above all we deserve a safe, sustainable and nuclear-free future.
September 28, 2020
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment