nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Palestinian Subordination: Donald Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan

2 October 2025 Dr Binoy Kampmark, https://theaimn.net/palestinian-subordination-donald-trumps-gaza-peace-plan/

He had moments of discomfort and embarrassment – pressed into calling the Qatari Prime Minister by his host to apologise for striking Doha and made to pay lip service to the prospect of a Palestinian state – but Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu had many reasons to be pleased. On September 29, President Donald Trump advanced a peace proposal that essentially preservesIsraeli pre-eminence regarding the fate of Palestinians, though it entails a cessation of hostilities, an affirmation that Gazans would not be expelled (those leaving would have the right to return), and an injunction against Israeli annexation of the Strip. But Hamas, militarily and politically, would have to surrender all claims, with the Palestinian Authority shepherded and supervised by foreign powers.

Trump’s peace proposal comprises twenty points. They include a “deradicalized terror-free zone,” Gaza’s redevelopment for the benefit of its people aided by “a panel of experts who have helped birth some of the thriving miracle cities in the Middle East,” and an immediate end to the war on its acceptance by the parties. Israel would withdraw to an agreed upon line in anticipation of a hostage release, during which all military operations would cease pending complete withdrawal. All hostages, dead and alive, would be returned within 72 hours, to be followed by the release of 250 Palestinian life sentence prisoners and Gazans detained since October 7, 2023.  

Hamas and militant factions will forfeit any role in governing Gaza, with any offensive infrastructure and equipment destroyed, but any of its members wishing to commit to “peaceful co-existence” and decommissioning of weapons will be granted amnesty, with those wishing to leave given safe passage to receiving countries. Compliance by the militant group will be overseen by “regional partners.” Full aid would resume, with the UN and Red Crescent restored to their role as chief distributors.

On the issue of governance, a temporary technocratic “apolitical Palestinian committee” of qualified Palestinians and “international experts” would form a temporary transitional body, subject to a “Board of Peace” personally chaired by Trump. Most unfortunately, it is likely to include such figures as Sir Tony Blair, the Middle East’s typhoid Mary when it comes to peace. The transitional authority would hold the reins till reforms by the Palestinian Authority had been completed. With immediacy, however, the US would work with Arab and international partners to deploy an “International Stabilisation Force” to Gaza. The ISF will be responsible for training Palestinian police forces and provide support in terms of vetting recruits, with assistance from Jordan and Egypt.

The proposal clearly envisages a significant role for the ISF, though says about who will comprise it. Israel will not, under the plan, occupy or annex Gaza, surrendering what territory it has taken to the ISF. Even if Hamas were to delay or reject the proposal, the Israeli Defense Forces would still hand over occupied territory of “terror-free areas” to the stabilisation force but retain a security perimeter to stem “any resurgent terror threat.”

The plan also envisages the establishment of an interfaith dialogue to promote the values of peace between the parties, and a “credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood” if the programs for Gaza’s redevelopment and PA reform take place as planned. A vague US promise to “establish a dialogue” between Israel and the Palestinians regarding peaceful and prosperous co-existence rounds off the points.

There was palpable grumbling from the Israeli camp. Netanyahu undoubtedly harbours ambitions of finishing “the job”, and there is little to say the war will not resume once the Israeli hostages are returned. Having previously rejected any governing role of the Palestinian Authority in Gaza, he now reluctantly accepts the idea subject to a “radical and genuine overhaul” of the body.  

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, one of the right-wing heavies in the Israeli cabinet, is threatening to withdraw his Religious Zionist Party from the coalition. Agreeing with the plan had been “an act of wilful blindness that ignores every lesson of October 7.” It would only “end in tears.” Fellow zealot, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, is also likely to be seething.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid is also suspicious of Netanyahu, who tends to say “yes” when visiting Washington, “standing in front of the cameras at the White house, feeling like a breakthrough statesman.” On returning to Israel, however, he always seemed to add a qualifying “but”, his political base always reminding him “who the boss is.”

In keeping with history, the Trump plan, even if it were to be implemented to the letter, enshrines the essential subordination of Palestinian goals to the dictates of other powers. Palestinian military presence is not only to be curtailed but essentially eliminated altogether. Hamas, never consulted regarding the peace terms, is to accept its own effacing. The PA is to accept its own subservience and infantilisation. The Gazans are also to accept an economic and development program dictated and directed from without. Statehood is to be kept in cold storage till appropriate, controlled conditions for its release are approved – and certainly not by the Palestinians themselves. They, it would seem, remain the considered errant children of international relations, mistrusted and requiring permanent, stern invigilation.

October 2, 2025 Posted by | Gaza, Israel, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

DOE can’t pin down costs, schedules for nuclear cleanups — audit

The Government Accountability Office found that cleanups at just eight waste sites could cost roughly $15 billion.

Politico, By: Brian Dabbs | 09/29/2025

ENERGYWIRE | The Department of Energy is unable to outline the precise costs and schedules for waste cleanups at a dozen federal sites that produced nuclear weapons materials during World War II and the Cold War, the Government Accountability Office said in a report published Friday.

At just eight of the 12 sites, cleanup could cost roughly $15 billion over the next 60 years, GAO said.

DOE’s Office of Environmental Management cannot “readily identify the scope, schedule, and cost of soil and legacy landfill cleanup,” the report said, adding that “having information available that is specific to soil and legacy landfill cleanup at EM sites would improve headquarters’ ability to track resources needed to implement remedy decisions.”

The eight sites investigated by GAO include the Hanford Site in Washington state, Los Alamos in New Mexico, Oak Ridge in Tennessee and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. GAO said 12 total sites have “remaining soil or legacy landfill cleanup.”………………………………….(Subscribers only) https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2025/09/29/doe-cant-pin-down-costs-schedules-for-nuclear-cleanups-gao-00582626

October 2, 2025 Posted by | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

Netanyahu’s General Assembly Tirade Telegraphs A Resumption of Israel’s War On Iran.

Dimitri Lascaris, Sep 28, 2025, https://reason2resist.substack.com/p/netanyahus-general-assembly-tirade?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2811845&post_id=174714909&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

On September 26, indicted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a bombastic speech in the UN General Assembly in which he set Israel’s sights squarely upon the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Netanyahu also castigated many of Israel’s few remaining allies for taking the purely cosmetic step of recognizing a Palestinian state.

Shortly before Netanyahu’s speech at the UN, U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth summoned hundreds of senior U.S. military officers from around the world to a highly unusual, emergency meeting in Virginia. The Trump regime is being tight-lipped about the purposes of this meeting.

n this episode of Reason2Resist, I examine these recent developments and argue that we may be mere days away from a resumption of Israel’s criminal war of aggression on Iran.

I also discuss a new poll by Quinnipiac University which confirms that support for Israel continues to plummet in the United States.

September 30, 2025 Posted by | Israel, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Steve Witkoff’s Latest ‘Peace Plan’ Is A Scam

Only weeks after Israel attempted to murder the negotiating team of the Palestinian resistance in Qatar, Israeli media report that Donald Trump’s ‘peace envoy’, Steve Witkoff, has developed a 21-point peace plan.

Moreover, both Trump and U.S. Vice-President Donald Trump claim that the U.S. government is on the precipice of ending Israel’s war on Gaza.

Is any of this credible?

Dimitri Lascaris examines closely the reported substance of Witkoff’s proposal, as well as the record of the Trump and Netanyahu regimes, with a view to assessing whether Witkoff’s proposal stands a serious chance of ending Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

September 30, 2025 Posted by | Israel, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Paper reactors and paper tigers

John Quiggin, September 27, 2025, https://johnmenadue.com/post/2025/09/paper-reactors-and-paper-tigers/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

The culmination of Donald Trump’s state visit to the UK was a press conference at which both American and British leaders waved pieces of paper, containing an agreement that US firms would invest billions of dollars in Britain.

The symbolism was appropriate, since a central element of the proposed investment bonanza was the construction of large numbers of nuclear reactors, of a kind which can appropriately be described as “paper reactors”.

The term was coined by US Admiral Hyman Rickover, who directed the original development of nuclear powered submarines.

Hyman described their characteristics as follows:

1. It is simple.
2. It is small.

3. It is cheap

4. It is light.

5. It can be built very quickly.

6. It is very flexible in purpose (“omnibus reactor”)

7. Very little development is required. It will use mostly “off-the-shelf” components.

8. The reactor is in the study phase. It is not being built now.

But these characteristics were needed by Starmer and Trump, whose goal was precisely to have a piece of paper to wave at their meeting.

The actual experience of nuclear power in the US and UK has been an extreme illustration of the difficulties Rickover described with “practical” reactors. These are plants distinguished by the following characteristics:

1. It is being built now.

2. It is behind schedule

3. It requires an immense amount of development on apparently trivial items. Corrosion, in particular, is a problem.

4. It is very expensive.

5. It takes a long time to build because of the engineering development problems.

6. It is large.

7. It is heavy.

8. It is complicated.

The most recent examples of nuclear plants in the US and UK are the Vogtle plant in the US (completed in 2024, seven years behind schedule and way over budget) and the Hinkley C in the UK (still under construction, years after consumers were promised that that they would be using its power to roast their Christmas turkeys in 2017). Before that, the VC Summer project in North Carolina was abandoned, writing off billions of dollars in wasted investment.

The disastrous cost overruns and delays of the Hinkley C project have meant that practical reactor designs have lost their appeal. Future plans for large-scale nuclear in the UK are confined to the proposed Sizewell B project, two 1600 MW reactors that will require massive subsidies if anyone can be found to invest in them at all. In the US, despite bipartisan support for nuclear, no serious proposals for large-scale nuclear plants are currently active. Even suggestions to resume work on the half-finished VC Summer plant have gone nowhere.

Hope has therefore turned to Small Modular Reactors. Despite a proliferation of announcements and proposals, this term is poorly understood.

The first point to observe is that SMRs don’t actually exist. Strictly speaking, the description applies to designs like that of NuScale, a company that proposes to build small reactors with an output less than 100 MW (the modules) in a factory, and ship them to a site where they can be installed in whatever number desired. The hope is that the savings from factory construction and flexibility will offset the loss of size economies inherent in a smaller boiler (all power reactors, like thermal power stations, are essentially heat sources to boil water). Nuscale’s plans to build six such reactors in the US state of Utah were abandoned due to cost overruns, but the company is still pursuing deals in Europe.

Most of the designs being sold as SMRs are not like this at all. Rather, they are cut-down versions of existing reactor designs, typically reduced from 1000MW to 300 MW. They are modular only in the sense that all modern reactors (including traditional large reactors) seek to produce components off-site. It is these components, rather than the reactors, that are modular. For clarity, I’ll call these smallish semi-modular reactors (SSMRs). Because of the loss of size economies, SMRs are inevitably more expensive per MW of power than the large designs on which they are based.

Over the last couple of years, the UK Department of Energy has run a competition to select a design for funding. The short-list consisted of four SSMR designs, three from US firms, and one from Rolls-Royce offering a 470MW output. A couple of months before Trump’s visit, Rolls-Royce was announced as the winner. This leaves the US bidders out in the cold.

So, where will the big US investments in SMRs for the UK come from? There have been a “raft” of announcements promising that US firms will build SMRs on a variety of sites without any requirement for subsidy. The most ambitious is from Amazon-owned X-energy, which is suggesting up to a dozen “pebble bed” reactors. The “pebbles” are mixtures of graphite (which moderates the nuclear reaction) and TRISO particles (uranium-235 coated in silicon carbon), and the reactor is cooled by a gas such as nitrogen.

Pebble-bed reactor designs have a long and discouraging history dating back to the 1940s. The first demonstration reactor was built in Germany in the 1960s and ran for 21 years, but German engineering skills weren’t enough to produce a commercially viable design. South Africa started a project in 1994 and persevered until 2010, when the idea was abandoned..Some of the employees went on to join the fledgling X-energy, founded in 2009. As of 2025, the company is seeking regulatory approval for a couple of demonstrator projects in the US.

Meanwhile, China completed a 10MW prototype in 2003 and a 250MW demonstration reactor, called HTR-PM in 2021. Although HTR-PM100 is connected to the grid, it has been an operational failure with availability rates below 25%. A 600MW version has been announced, but construction has apparently not started.

When this development process started in the early 20th century, China’s solar power industry was non-existent. China now has more than 1000 Gigawatts of solar power installed. New installations are running at about 300 GW a year, with an equal volume being produced for export. In this context, the HTR-PM is a mere curiosity.

This contrast deepens the irony of the pieces of paper waved by Trump and Starmer. Like the supposed special relationship between the US and UK, the paper reactors that have supposedly been agreed on are a relic of the past. In the unlikely event that they are built, they will remain a sideshow in an electricity system dominated by wind, solar and battery storage.

September 29, 2025 Posted by | spinbuster, UK, USA | Leave a comment

Why President Trump should put off the new nuclear arms race for one more year

Bulletin, By Jon B. Wolfsthal | September 26, 2025

On September 22, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia would be willing to abide by the limits in the New START nuclear arms control treaty for an additional year if the United States did the same. Both the United States and Russia are parties to the treaty. That agreement commits both countries to deploy no more than 1,550 strategic offensive nuclear weapons.

The agreement was negotiated in 2010 and is set to expire in February of next year.[1] After it expires, there will be no restrictions on the number and types of nuclear weapons that those two countries can build and deploy. The treaty was extended for one five-year term in 2021, but it cannot be legally extended as a formal treaty a second time.

While both sides stopped fully implementing the verification provisions under the treaty during the COVID-19 epidemic, Russia refused to restart them in 2022 after it launched its war against Ukraine.  Yet even so, both Washington and Moscow are complying with the treaty’s central numerical limits. Without a new agreement, however, the world’s two largest nuclear weapons states would coexist without any caps on their arsenals for the first time in two generations.

Extending the deal by a year, even informally, would be a security and diplomatic win for the United States. However, as with many things these days, nothing is simple.

Words need action. US President Donald Trump announced at the United Nations on September 23 that he’d like to cease the development of all nuclear weapons (and biological weapons) “once and for all.” Trump has previously said that he would like to negotiate new nuclear agreements with Russia and to find a way to include China in those efforts. But to date, neither his first nor current administration has delivered any results on those fronts.

There are also voices both inside and outside of the Trump administration who maintain that Washington should not agree to any new limits with Moscow, and that the United States needs more nuclear weapons to address the threats posed by Russia and China combined. These voices are rightly concerned about Russia’s aggressive behavior and the rapid growth of China’s nuclear arsenal. They are also increasingly worried about coordination and cooperation between Russia and China, as well as with North Korea and Iran—known increasingly as the “Axis of Upheaval.”

While these concerns are legitimate, the need to respond to them with immediate increases in US nuclear deployments is questionable. Today, China has an estimated total nuclear arsenal of roughly 600 weapons, and is adding about 100 per year. The United States has just over 3,700 nuclear weapons, and Russia is thought to have just over 4,300. At the current rate of increase, it will take China almost 30 years to reach parity with the United States.

There is simply not enough time to realistically address the longer-term concerns about Chinese and Russian nuclear capabilities before New START expires in February. The question, therefore, is whether the United States and its allies would be more secure with having a one-year extension of the New START limits or living in a world in which all countries can build as many nuclear weapons as they want, and the United States has turned down an offer to maintain at least some caps in place.

The US administration should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good here and should agree to a one-year extension of New START as long as it is confident that it can monitor Russia’s compliance with the central limits. As of today, there is every reason to believe that it can, although the increasing politicization of US intelligence agencies is a growing concern.

Better restraint than arms racing. The one-year deal on offer should be pursued for at least two reasons.

First, there is no compelling military rationale for the US to increase the number of warheads above the limit set in New START. No such statement has been made by the president, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or the Commander of US Strategic Command. Ultimately, a decision to build and deploy military capabilities should be driven by military necessity. In the absence of such a statement or compelling case, the money, time, and effort needed to deploy more weapons over the near term would be better used to enhance US conventional and other military capabilities. This does not mean the United States should stop preparing to possibly increase the number of deployed weapons if needed, but available information suggests that may not be needed any time soon.

The United States advances three reasons to maintain its nuclear weapons: to deter its adversaries and those of US allies, to reassure allies that the United States can and will come to their defense, and to limit the damage that an adversary can do to the United States or its allies should deterrence fail. In the US system, it is the president who determines how many nuclear weapons are needed to achieve these goals.

Deterrence theory makes clear that deterrence can work if one country can hold at risk the things that matter most to its adversary. (Whether the threat of using those forces is credible is another issue.) The United States is very capable of holding key Russian and Chinese leadership and valued targets at risk even within the New START limits. That has been and remains true today.

Another critical role for US nuclear weapons is to reassure US allies. This need is greater than ever, and some support for increasing US nuclear weapons comes from this motive. However, if the US goal is to reassure allies of Washington’s commitment to their security, then there are much greater problems the United States must address—including the egregious use of tariffs against key partners and allies, the abusive detention and deportation of South Korean workers in the United States, and the seemingly random and unpredictable nature of President Trump’s statements and behavior toward US allies overall. Yes, allies are eager for the United States to convincingly recommit to their defense and alliance relationships, but very few of these are built around a wish list that starts with increasing the number of deployed US strategic weapons. Any new deployments of US nuclear weapons are years away, and damage to US alliances is happening now. New weapons will not fix or prevent those rifts from manifesting in real and dangerous ways. And the United States must recognize that it cannot fix a credibility problem with capability alone.

Limiting the damage an enemy can inflict on the United States and its allies, should deterrence fail and a war take place, also remains a long-standing and key US objective. However, the leaders of the United States, Russia, and China have stated that a nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought. This echoes the historic statement of Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev that helped end the Cold War……………………………………………………………. https://thebulletin.org/2025/09/why-president-trump-should-put-off-the-new-nuclear-arms-race-for-one-more-year/

September 29, 2025 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

UN Declares Genocide in Gaza While 250 US Lawmakers Are in Israel. 

The visit was previously announced as part of a broader campaign launched last month to host some 400 delegations involving over 5,000 participants by year’s end, “to help spread the Israeli narrative in international media,” according to the ministry.

Tyler Poisson, September 26, 2025 https://fair.org/home/un-declares-genocide-in-gaza-while-250-us-lawmakers-are-in-israel/

The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory published a report on September 16 that charged Israeli authorities and security forces with having committed, and continuing to commit, acts of genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

The 72-page report, replete with 495 footnotes, was compiled by senior independent rights investigators appointed by the UN Human Rights Council. Specifically, the report concludes that Israel is responsible for committing four of the five genocidal acts defined by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, namely:

  • (i) killing members of the group;
  • (ii) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  • (iii) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and
  • (iv) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

This report brings the UN into line with leading human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, Genocide Watch, Amnesty International, B’Tselem and Oxfam, all of whom have explicitly labeled Israel’s crimes in Gaza genocidal. The International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) also recently passed a resolution stating that Israel’s policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide.

The corporate press relayed the IAGS resolution to its readers and viewers with varying degrees of emphasis and efficacy. Writing for FAIR (9/4/25), Saurav Sarkar highlighted the fact that the New York Times (9/1/25) “buried the news in the 31st paragraph of a story headlined ‘Israel’s Push for a Permanent Gaza Deal May Mean a Longer War, Experts Say.’”

Corporate coverage of the United Nation’s latest report was also of varying seriousness. The New York Times (9/17/25) decided that it was appropriate to relegate the headline that “Israel Is Committing Genocide in Gaza, UN Inquiry Says” to page A8 of its print edition. Granted, the UN finding that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza was mentioned on the front page, only under the heading “Israeli Ground Forces Push Into Gaza City, Forcing Many to Flee: Assault Deepens a Humanitarian Crisis.”

ABC (9/16/25) similarly treated the UN report as a footnote, referring to it in the final moments of a minute-and-15-second report on the assault on Gaza. Fox News (9/17/25) covered the news in the course of rebuking the UN, going so far as to put the label of “genocide” in quotes. While the Wall Street Journal (9/16/25) included the most recent genocide allegations as a subhead, the only mention we could find on MSNBC‘s website (9/18/25) came in an opinion piece headlined “The New Gaza City Offensive Is a Disaster. Trump Is Shrugging.”

The Washington Post (9/16/25) ran a piece on its website about the UN declaration, but did not find it worth a spot in its print edition.

Some corporate outlets, such as CNN (9/17/25) and Time (9/16/25), have given more appropriate emphasis to the news that the world’s preeminent governing body has officially labeled what is happening in Gaza genocide, offering dedicated articles.

‘Help spread the Israeli narrative’

On the same day the UN released its report, approximately 250 US state legislators, representing all 50 states and both parties, were in Israel for a “50 States, One Israel” conference sponsored by the Israeli government. The Jerusalem Post (9/15/25) characterized it as “the largest-ever delegation of US lawmakers” to Israel.

According to ethics disclosures reported in the Boston Herald (9/14/25), Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Alan Silvia’s trip to Israel for the conference cost $6,500. The Herald said Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs would “reimburse, waive or pay for travel expenses, though it was unclear what portion of the costs the government planned to cover.”

Quoting Rep. Ilana Rubel (D-Idaho), Boise State Public Radio (9/17/25) reported that no Idaho taxpayer funds were used to send any of five Idaho state legislatures to the conference.

The Oregon Capital Insider (9/18/25) reported that Rep. Emily McIntire (R-Ore.) “said in an email from Israel that traveling to the country has always been a dream for her, and the trip has only solidified her support for Israel.”

In this connection, the Times of Israel (9/7/25) was open about the purposes of the conference:

The ministry stresses the [“50 States, One Israel”] delegation’s strategic importance, noting that state legislators often influence anti-Israel bills, such as those supporting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. Israel hopes the visitors will help block hostile legislation at the state level and promote initiatives combating antisemitism and strengthening US/Israel ties.

The visit was previously announced as part of a broader campaign launched last month to host some 400 delegations involving over 5,000 participants by year’s end, “to help spread the Israeli narrative in international media,” according to the ministry.

Alert readers may have noticed that this article has only cited local, independent and Israeli sources about the “50 States, One Israel” conference. (See also Columbus Dispatch, 9/17/25; Georgia Public Broadcasting, 9/15/25; Mondoweiss, 9/25/25.)

At the time of this writing, the “50 States, One Israel” conference is conspicuously absent from all existing reporting on Israel in the national US corporate media. Not one major US outlet has covered the largest delegation of US state legislators to Israel. This is a startling act of omission on the part of the corporate media in the United States, and it speaks to the indispensability of local, not-for-profit, independent news.

Given that half of US voters believe that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza (Al Jazeera, 8/25/25), it is surely in the interest of the public to know if, when, why and that their local representatives were in Israel networking with parties to what the UN has labeled a genocide.

September 28, 2025 Posted by | media, USA | Leave a comment

The Shift: 50 States, One Israel

Amid the ongoing genocide, the largest-ever delegation of U.S. lawmakers attended the “50 States, One Israel” conference in Jerusalem last week. It’s clear from the event, and the local reactions it sparked, that Israel’s isolation is only worsening.

It seems clear that this event was organized out of a growing sense of desperation, not a position of strength.

By Michael Arria  September 25, 2025 https://mondoweiss.net/2025/09/the-shift-50-states-one-israel/

Multiple installments of this newsletter have covered congressional delegations to Israel, but the “special relationship” goes far beyond Washington and permeates politics at the most local of levels.

Last week, lawmakers from across the U.S. flew to Jerusalem to attend “50 States One Israel,” which was billed as the largest delegation of politicians to ever visit the country.

“I thank you for coming here to stand with Israel. Thank you, Democrats and Republicans alike,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the attendees. “We value and cherish your support. This is an active effort to counter attempts to besiege Israel – not isolated, not symbolic, but a real effort to push back.”

“It may sound a little bit this afternoon as if I’m almost speaking on behalf of Israel rather than the U.S.,” Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee told the group.

“If you came to my house tonight for dinner and you came in and you said, ‘Oh, Mike, we like you,” he continued. “We really think the world of you. We just enjoy being with you. So excited to be here with you and have dinner with you. ‘But your wife, we can’t stand her. We don’t like her a bit. I hope she’s not going to be at the table.’ I would say, ‘Well, she will be. You won’t be. Get out.’ Because if you were to insult my partner, you have insulted me.”

Normal stuff.

There wasn’t much coverage of the event in the mainstream media, but you can find a lot of interesting coverage in local outlets, and see how the battle over Israel is taking shape in multiple states.

Let’s start with the Idaho Capital Sun, where Clark Corbin covered the state’s participants. Idaho sent five lawmakers to Israel, four of whom were Republicans. The only Democrat to attend was House Minority Leader Ilana Rubel (D-Boise).

A group of state Democrats is circulating a letter condemning Rubel for attending and calling for her to step down from her leadership position. The Idaho Young Democrats published a statement criticizing the move as well.

Shiva Rajbhandari, an Idaho human rights advocate, wrote an Op-Ed for the Idaho Statesman, arguing that Rubel and her Republican colleagues “lack the moral courage for public service of any kind.”

Rubel published her own Op-Ed, in which she wonders why we can’t all just get along.

“If you want someone that will indignantly shun the other side, I’m not your person,” writes Rubel. “I prefer useful results.”

It’s unclear what results Rubel’s referring to, but she goes on to dismiss the anti-genocide position as an example of “ideological purity,” giving people “false comfort.”

Next, the Alaska News Source. Wil Courtney reports on four Alaskan lawmakers making the trip.

Courtney says his paper “sent all members of the delegation questions..including questions over the war in Gaza, which were not answered.”

He notes that the World Health Organization estimates over 640,000 people will face “catastrophic levels of food insecurity” in the Gaza Strip.

Alaska’s News Source also reached out to the governor’s office, but did not receive a response.

On Instagram, the daughter of New Mexico State Senator Jay Block (R) posted a video criticizing her dad and other “loser politicians” for attending the conference.

“It seems like he sold his soul to the devil and is now just peddling lies and propaganda,” she declared. “I just genuinely hope this will be the end of my dad’s political career.”

“50 States, One Israel” occurred amid growing international solidarity against the ongoing genocide in Gaza and Israel’s further isolation on the world stage. Lately, Netanyahu has expressed anxiety about the country’s actions impacting its economy.

A recent piece by Mitchell Plitnick, explains why BDS is so crucial at this juncture. “An isolated Israel is a failed Israel, and Netanyahu knows it. So do his business cronies,” he wrote.

Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar called on the conference attendees to combat the BDS movement within their communities.

“Instead of boycotting Israel, promote engagement with Israel,” he told the lawmakers. “Instead of divesting from Israel, promote investments in Israel. And instead of sanctioning the only Jewish state, speak out clearly against those who recycle age-old hatred in modern form.”

It seems clear that this event was organized out of a growing sense of desperation, not a position of strength.

Block the Bombs

The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) has voted to endorse the Block the Bombs Act.

The news was first reported by Prem Thakker at Zeteo.

“The Block the Bombs bill is the first step toward oversight and accountability for the murder of children with US-made, taxpayer-funded weapons,” said Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-IL), who leads the bill. “In the face of authoritarian leaders perpetrating a genocidal campaign, Block the Bombs is the minimum action Congress must take.”

The legislation currently has 50 House co-sponsors.

It focuses on bunker buster bombs, 2,000-pound bombs, Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), 120mm tank rounds, and 155mm artillery shells.

Many find it difficult to take the merits of this bill seriously.

It does nothing to deter “defensive weapons” like Iron Dome. In fact, it allows Israel to keep receiving all weapons by simply providing “written assurances satisfactory to the President.”

On top of all that, it obviously has no chance of passing.

However, the Progressive Caucus is one of the largest in Congress, and it has traditionally avoided the issue altogether. This is the first time it has endorsed legislation directly related to Palestine.

The fact that it’s backing an effort that’s opposed by groups like AIPAC is certainly notable, as it points to the decline of Israel’s brand among Democratic voters.

In a recent Common Dreams Op-Ed, Peace Action president Kevin Martin puts this bill, and recent related efforts, in a wider context:

The bill is as close as we have to a de facto arms embargo on Israel, as it would ban transfers of seven specific offensive weapons systems, from bunker busting bombs to tank ammunition to white phosphorus artillery munitions. While House Speaker Mike Johnson and the Republican majority will probably not allow the bill to advance, even to consideration by a House committee, building support to Ban the Bombs to Israel can help put pressure on President Trump (who recently blurted out that Israel had lost its “total control” of Congress) to exert leverage on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to end his inhumane slaughter in Gaza.

In addition to further votes on Joint Resolutions of Disapproval on specific weapons transfers to Israel, the Senate could also move privileged measures including a War Powers Resolution to prevent further support for Israel’s actions in Gaza, or an inquiry under section 502(B) of the Foreign Assistance Act for Israel’s clear violations of U.S. law. Or, the Senate could attach language such as that in the House Block the Bombs bill as an amendment to an Appropriations Bill.

None of those actions would be an easy lift, and would not be likely to pass (or override an expected presidential veto) but the reality now is the political tide has turned decisively against Israel.

Perhaps the simplest way to look at this is that advocates for peace and human rights have done their job, and the public has responded, as only 8% of Democrats approve of Israel’s actions in Gaza, with the overall number at only 32%, according to a recent Gallup poll.

September 28, 2025 Posted by | Israel, media, politics, USA | Leave a comment

US-UK deal nuclear signed to speed up reactor approval, as companies announce cross-border partnerships

SIR KEIR STARMER and Donald Trump have signed a bilateral agreement to
advance nuclear technology, alongside a series of commercial partnerships
between US and UK companies. The Atlantic Partnership for Advanced Nuclear
Energy, signed between the two leaders during the US president’s second
state visit to the UK, aims to speed up regulatory approval in both
countries for nuclear power projects by allowing assessment results to be
shared.

The deal is focused on next generation nuclear technology as well
as small modular reactors (SMRs). The deal has been welcomed by industry
and is viewed as a step toward deeper transatlantic collaboration on
nuclear development between the US and UK.

The bilateral agreement allows
regulatory tests approved in one country to support reactor assessments in
the other. The UK government expects the agreement to cut the time required
to secure a nuclear project licence from three to four years down to two.

 Chemical Engineer 25rg Sept 2025, https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/news/us-uk-deal-nuclear-signed-to-speed-up-reactor-approval-as-companies-announce-cross-border-partnerships/

September 28, 2025 Posted by | politics international, UK, USA | Leave a comment

Federal Judge Strikes Down New York’s “Save the Hudson” Nuclear Discharge Ban

A federal judge has sided with Holtec International in a dispute over a New
York law that barred the discharge of radioactive materials into the Hudson
River during the decommissioning of the Indian Point nuclear facility. The
ruling underscores the primacy of federal oversight in nuclear safety
decisions.

On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Karas held that a 2023
New York statute (commonly known as the “Save the Hudson” law) was
preempted by federal law. The judge found that the state statute, which
prohibits radioactive discharges in connection with decommissioning,
“categorically precludes Holtec from utilizing a federally accepted
method of disposal.”

Oil Price 24th Sept 2025, https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Federal-Judge-Strikes-Down-New-Yorks-Save-the-Hudson-Nuclear-Discharge-Ban.html

September 28, 2025 Posted by | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

US senator says he is concerned energy secretary acting in nuclear firm’s interest

. U.S. Senator Edward Markey sent a letter to President Donald
Trump on Tuesday saying he is concerned U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright
is working in the interest of nuclear power company Oklo (OKLO.N), opens
new tab, of which he used to be a board member. Markey, a Democrat, noted
that the administration is moving ahead with plans to allow Oklo to build a
nuclear waste reprocessing plant and transfer government-held plutonium
from nuclear weapons to use as fuel in planned reactor projects.

Reuters 23rd Sept 2025, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-senator-says-he-is-concerned-energy-secretary-acting-nuclear-firms-interest-2025-09-23/

September 28, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

50 States One Israel – Wikipedia

26 Sept 25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_States_One_Israel

50 States One Israel was a conference held in Israel from September 14, 2025 to September 18, 2025[1] for state legislators from the United States and members of the Israeli government.[2][3] Hosted by the Israeli Foreign Ministry, the conference was described as the largest delegation of elected officials to visit Israel.[2] According to Lior Haiat, Deputy Director for North America at the Foreign Ministry, lawmakers including state legislators from all 50 states were in attendance.[2]

Background

………………………….. The conference, including travel, is paid entirely by the Israeli government.[4] 

According to a July 8, 2025 letter to Oregon Representative David Gomberg sent by Israel’s consulate-general to the Northwest, The Ministry of Foreign Affairs will provide “roundtrip economy airfare from New York to Tel Aviv (including domestic U.S. flights to NYC),” and “all in-country transportation, accommodations, meals, and guided programming.”[1] Five lawmakers from every state were expected to attend.[5

……………… On September 15, 2025, attendees visited the Western Wall and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.[6] Later, Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar urged American lawmakers to pass anti-BDS laws in their states.[7] In the evening, Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu gave a welcome address to the delegation.[8][9] ……………………..

On September 17, 2025, President of Israel Isaac Herzog addressed the delegation, saying that Israel’s “ironclad bond with the United States of America [exists] because we drink from the same fountain: the values of the Bible”.[11]………………….

Attendees…………incomplete list of 105 lawmakers named here

Impact

In the period following the conference, several participants faced criticism from constituents, the general public, and family. The daughter of New Mexico State Senator Jay Block took to social media platforms to register her disgust with her father’s participation in the conference, stating “It seems like he sold his soul to the devil and is now just peddling lies and propaganda… I just genuinely hope that this will be the end of my dad’s political career…”[61] Leading up to a potential government shutdown, Republican House Speaker Matt Hall of Michigan had instructed the Republican caucus not to leave the state while the budget was not completed and removed all bills from Representative Jaime Greene’s committee for her absence in attending the event.[62]

References.…………………………………………………

September 27, 2025 Posted by | Israel, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Cato Institute: Nuclear power’s hamster wheel

Beyond Nuclear,September 23, 2025 https://beyondnuclear.org/cato-institute-nuclear-powers-hamster-wheel/

Accelerating climate change demands a stop to wasting  precious little time along with human and financial resources being diverted from real solutions on nuclear power that’s going nowhere.

The conservative Cato Institute’s Fall 2025 status report on “The Next Nuclear Renaissance?” provides a comprehensive status report and global overview, nuclear nation by nation.

The report is best summed up in its concise conclusion:

The mystery is why the nuclear industry retains any credibility. Throughout its history, nuclear proponents have made rosy claims about the safety and economics of the next generation of nuclear projects, but they have all gone unfulfilled. In the early years of nuclear development, claims that processes such as learning by doing, technology change, standardization, economies of scale, and economies of number would result in improved performance had an intuitive credibility. However, after repeated failures to produce the forecasted results, why are renewed claims of this type being taken seriously now? Is it simple ignorance of the past, or are there other factors that make policymakers cling to a belief in nuclear?

Why are people unwilling to consider the reason that nuclear projects fail so often is the technology itself? Instead, they fall back on old, tired excuses such as unsympathetic regulators, delays caused by local protestors, and simply not getting the right ‘recipe’ for building nuclear power plants. 


In March 2025, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer claimed: For too long, blockers have had the upper hand in legal challenges—using our court processes to frustrate growth. We’re putting an end to this challenge culture by taking on the NIMBYs and a broken system that has slowed down our progress as a nation.

Starmer has created a taskforce to streamline safety regulation, but he has offered no evidence that the delays and cost escalation suffered at Hinkley Point C are in any way attributable to opposition or obstructive regulation—and he cannot because there is none.

The problem is not so much that money will be wasted on large numbers of uneconomic facilities. Rather, it is the opportunity costs of the time and human resources that are consumed by nuclear power and not available to other, quicker, more cost-effective and less financially risky options. We appear now to be facing serious risks from climate change, and there will not be a second chance if we fail to tackle it because too many resources are being consumed by an option—new nuclear—that will not work.”

September 27, 2025 Posted by | spinbuster, USA | Leave a comment

The Real Violent Extremists Are The Freaks Who Run The US Empire

Caitlin Johnstone, Sep 26, 2025, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-real-violent-extremists-are-the?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=174612556&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

The real violent extremists are the oligarchs and imperialists who run the US-centralized empire from both mainstream parties.

Not Antifa. Not trans people. Not anti-genocide activists. Not protesters against ICE.

The extremists who are inflicting the real violence and abuse in our world are the ones committing genocide, starting wars, backing blockades, imposing starvation sanctions, arming proxy conflicts, circling the planet with hundreds of military bases, and flirting with nuclear armageddon.

Donald Trump is a violent extremist. Joe Biden is a violent extremist. Keir Starmer is a violent extremist. Benjamin Netanyahu is a violent extremist.

Oligarchs who knit themselves into the murderous imperial power structure like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Miriam Adelson and Larry Ellison are violent extremists.

The Democratic Party is a violent extremist organization. The Republican Party is a violent extremist organization.

War profiteers like Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman are violent extremist organizations.

Empire management firms which facilitate imperial violence and control like Palantir, Oracle and Starlink are violent extremist organizations.

There is no designated terrorist group foreign or domestic which can hold a candle to the death toll and human suffering that has been inflicted by the western empire.

I think it’s worth remembering this as the empire harnesses the emotional hysteria around Charlie Kirk’s death to whip up a moral panic about violent radical leftists in the United States in order to justify increased authoritarian measures to stomp out political dissent. The real violence is coming from the powerful manipulators who want you consenting to these measures. The call is coming from inside the house.

The US and its allies have killed millions of people in their wars of aggression since 9/11, and displaced tens of millions. Their cruel sanctions have killed tens of millions since 1970. Their policies of imperialist extraction force populations throughout the global south to live lives of endless poverty and toil. They are currently perpetrating a genocide in full view of the entire world.

These are the violent extremists. The only reason they are able to claim that some kid wearing a keffiyeh or a balaclava is a violent extremist while they themselves are not is because they control the narrative. The plutocrats who benefit from the imperial status quo own and control the media platforms and information systems which people use to learn about the world, and they use this narrative control to frame the imperial status quo as normal and any opposition to it as freakish extremism.

That’s the only reason a westerner who supports genocide, warmongering, militarism and imperialism gets to call themselves a “centrist” or a “moderate”. They live in an empire whose propagandists actively normalize imperial abuses while spinning any deviation from this violent madness as abnormalities on the radical political fringe.

But it’s a lie. Genocide is violent extremism. Mass murder is violent extremism. Siege warfare is violent extremism. Global tyranny is violent extremism.

Peace is moderate and normal. Justice is moderate and normal. Health is moderate and normal. Equality is moderate and normal. Equitable wealth and resource distribution is moderate and normal.

The genocidal, ecocidal, omnicidal nightmare we see before us in our world today is what it looks like when the violent extremists are in charge.

September 27, 2025 Posted by | Atrocities, USA | Leave a comment

Trump Claims Ukraine Can Retake All Territory Captured by Russia, May Be Able to ‘Go Further’

So much for Trump’s promise to bring peace to Ukraine “in 24 hours”

So much for the push to give Trump the Nobel Peace Prize

Worst – Trump does not understand that (a) Russia is winning this war, and (b) Putin would use nuclear weapons if he thought that Russia really was threatened by NATO

The comments reflect the opinion of Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine, Keith Kellogg

by Dave DeCamp | September 23, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/09/23/trump-claims-ukraine-can-retake-all-territory-captured-by-russia-may-be-able-to-go-further/

President Trump claimed on Tuesday that Ukraine could retake all of the territory Russian forces have captured since the February 2022 invasion and may be able to “go further,” suggesting he’s willing to back the idea of a Ukrainian invasion of Russia.

“After getting to know and fully understand the Ukraine/Russia Military and Economic situation and, after seeing the Economic trouble it is causing Russia, I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form,” the president said in a long post on Truth Social.

“With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option. Why not? Russia has been fighting aimlessly for three and a half years a War that should have taken a Real Military Power less than a week to win,” the president added.

Trump said that Russia looked like a “paper tiger” and that Ukraine was “getting better.” His comments reflect the opinion of his special envoy for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, who recently claimed the US could “kick Russia’s ass” and insisted Ukraine could win the war despite Russia’s continued gains in eastern Ukraine and its clear manpower advantage.

Trump said in his post that Ukraine could “be able to take back their Country in its original form and, who knows, maybe even go further than that!” The president also claimed that Russia and Putin were in “big” economic trouble, though there’s no sign that threats of new US sanctions or tariffs will have any impact on the war.

“In any event, I wish both Countries well. We will continue to supply weapons to NATO for NATO to do what they want with them. Good luck to all!” the president said at the conclusion of his post.

Trump’s comment that the US will continue to supply “weapons to NATO” refers to the new initiative under which US allies are providing the funds for US weapons that will be shipped to Ukraine. Reuters reported last week that the Trump administration approved the first weapons packages that will be drawn from US military stockpiles under the initiative, known as the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL).

Trump has justified his continued support for the proxy war, which he pledged to end while on the campaign, by pointing to the fact that NATO countries are now funding US weapons shipments. But the US recently approved a cruise missile deal for Ukraine that will be partially funded by the US, and the Trump administration has continued arms shipments that were previously approved by President Biden.

September 26, 2025 Posted by | Russia, Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »