What’s In a Name? The “Defense” Department Has Always Been About War.
Washington reserves for itself the unilateral right to intervene, violently and antidemocratically, in the affairs of other nations to secure what it considers its interests.
The reversion of the Defense Department to the War Department should be seen less as a rupture than a revelation. It strips away a euphemism to make far plainer what has long been the reality of our world.
Tom Dispatch, By Eric Ross, September 18, 2025
The renaming of the Defense Department should have surprised no one. Donald Trump is an incipient fascist doing what such figures do. Surrounded by a coterie of illiberal ideologues and careerist sycophants, he and his top aides have dispensed with pretense and precedent, moving at breakneck speed to demolish what remains of the battered façade of American democracy.
In eight months, his second administration has unleashed a shock-and-awe assault on norms and institutions, civil liberties, human rights, and history itself. But fascism never respects borders. Fascists don’t recognize the rule of law. They consider themselves the law. Expansion and the glorification of war are their lifeblood. Italian fascist leader Benito Mussolini put it all too bluntly: the fascist “believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace… war alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it.”
Pete Hegseth is now equally blunt. From the Pentagon, he’s boasting of restoring a “warrior ethos” to the armed forces, while forging an offensive military that prizes “maximum lethality, not tepid legality. Violent effect, not politically correct.” The message couldn’t be clearer: when the U.S. loses wars, as it has done consistently despite commanding the most powerful military in history, it’s not due to imperial overreach, political arrogance, or popular resistance. Rather, defeat stems from that military having gone “woke,” a euphemism for failing to kill enough people.
The recent rechristening of the Department of Defense as the Department of War was certainly a culture-war stunt like Trump’s demand that the Gulf of Mexico be renamed the Gulf of America. But it also signaled something more insidious: a blunt escalation of the criminal logic that has long underwritten U.S. militarism. That logic sustained both the Cold War of the last century and the War on Terror of this one, destroying millions of lives.
When Hegseth defended the recent summary executions of 11 alleged Venezuelan drug smugglers on a boat in the Caribbean, he boasted that Washington possesses “absolute and complete authority” to kill anywhere without Congressional approval or evidence of a wrong and in open defiance of international law. The next day, in responding on X to a user who called what had been done a war crime, Vance wrote, “I don’t give a shit what you call it.” It was the starkest admission since the Iraq War that Washington no longer pretends to operate internationally under the rule of law but under the rule of force, where might quite simply makes right.
While such an escalation of verbiage — the brazen confession of an imperial power that believes itself immune from accountability — should alarm us, it’s neither unprecedented nor unexpected. Peace, after all, has never been the profession of the U.S. military. The Department of Defense has always been the Department of War.
American Imperialism and “Star-Spangled Fascism”
The U.S. has long denied being an empire. From its founding, imperialism was cast as the antithesis of American values. This nation, after all, was born in revolt against the tyranny of foreign rule. Yet for a country so insistent on not being an empire, Washington has followed a trajectory nearly indistinguishable from its imperial predecessors. Its history was defined by settler conquest, the violent elimination of Indigenous peoples, and a long record of covert and overt interventions to topple governments unwilling to yield to American political or economic domination.
The record is unmistakable. As Noam Chomsky once put it, “Talking about American imperialism is like talking about triangular triangles.” And he was hardly the first to suggest such a thing. In the 1930s, General Smedley Butler, reflecting with searing candor on his years of military service in Latin America, described himself as “a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism… I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests… I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street.”
Historically, imperialism and fascism went hand in hand. As Aimé Césaire argued in his 1950 Discourse on Colonialism, fascism is imperialism turned inward. The violence inherent in colonial domination can, in the end, never be confined to the colonies, which means that what we’re now witnessing in the Trumpian era is a reckoning. The chickens are indeed coming home to roost or, as Noura Erakat recently observed, “The boomerang comes back.”……………………………………………………………
Imperialism incubates fascism, a dynamic evident in the carnage of World War I, rooted, as W.E.B. DuBois observed at the time, in colonial competition that laid the foundations for World War II. In that conflict, Césaire argued, the Nazis applied to Europe the methods and attitudes that until then were reserved for colonized peoples, unleashing them on Europeans with similarly genocidal effect.
War is Peace
In the postwar years, the United States emerged from the ruins of Europe as the unrivaled global hegemon. With some six percent of the world’s population, it commanded nearly half of the global gross domestic product. Anchored by up to 2,000 military bases across the globe (still at 800 today), it became the new imperial power on which the sun never set. Yet Washington ignored the fundamental lesson inherent in Europe’s self-cannibalization. Rather than dismantle the machinery of empire, it embraced renewed militarism. Rather than demobilize, it placed itself on a permanent global war footing, both anticipating and accelerating the Cold War with that other great power of the period, the Soviet Union.
The United States was, however, a superpower defined as much by paranoia and insecurity as by military and economic strength. It was in such a climate that American officials moved to abandon the title of the Department of War in 1947, rebranding it as the Department of Defense two years later. The renaming sought to reassure the world that, despite every sign the U.S. had assumed the mantle of European colonialism, its intentions were benign and defensive in nature………………………………………………………………………….
“The Greatest Purveyor of Violence”
As with the CIA, the not-so-aptly-renamed “Defense Department” would oversee a succession of catastrophic wars that did nothing to make Americans safer and had little to do with the protection of democratic values. Within a year of its renaming, the U.S. was at war in Korea. When the North invaded the South in 1950, seeking to reunify a peninsula divided by foreign powers, Washington rushed to intervene, branding it a “police action,” the first of many Orwellian linguistic maneuvers to sidestep the constitutional authority of Congress to declare war………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Washington reserves for itself the unilateral right to intervene, violently and antidemocratically, in the affairs of other nations to secure what it considers its interests. The reversion of the Defense Department to the War Department should be seen less as a rupture than a revelation. It strips away a euphemism to make far plainer what has long been the reality of our world.
We now face a choice. As historian Christian Appy has reminded us, “The institutions that sustain empire destroy democracy.” That truth is unfolding before our eyes. As the Pentagon budget tops one trillion dollars and the machinery of war only expands in Donald Trump’s America, the country also seems to be turning further inward. Only recently, President Trump threatened to use Chicago to demonstrate “why it is called the Department of War.” Meanwhile, U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement, or ICE, is set to become among the most well-funded domestic “military” forces on the planet and potentially the private paramilitary of an aspiring autocrat.
If there is any hope of salvaging this country’s (not to speak of this planet’s) future, then this history has to be faced, and we must recover — or perhaps discover — our moral bearings. That will require not prolonging the death throes of American hegemony, but dismantling imperial America before it collapses on itself and takes us all with it.
Eric Ross is an organizer, educator, and PhD candidate in the history department at the University of Massachusetts Amherst https://tomdispatch.com/whats-in-a-name/
Iran withdraws resolution banning attacks on nuclear sites following US pressure
Iran decided at the last minute Thursday to withdraw a resolution
prohibiting attacks on nuclear facilities that it had put forward along
with China, Russia and other countries for a vote before an annual
gathering of the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s member nations.
Western diplomats,
who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, said
the U.S. has been heavily lobbying behind the scenes to prevent the
resolution from being adopted. The U.S. has raised the possibility of
reducing funding to the International Atomic Energy Agency if the
resolution was adopted and if the body moved to curtail Israel´s rights
within the agency, the diplomats said.
Daily Mail 18th Sept 2025, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-15112913/Iran-withdraws-resolution-banning-attacks-nuclear-sites-following-US-pressure.html
Plutonium, Public Money and a Perilous Nuclear Dump on the Lake District Coast, a Letter to Cumberland Council’s “Nuclear Issues Board”
By mariannewildart, https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2025/09/19/plutonium-public-money-and-a-perilous-nuclear-dump-on-the-lake-district-coast-a-letter-to-cumberland-councils-nuclear-issues-board/
Sent by Email 19th September 2025
For consideration by the Nuclear Issues Board
of Cumberland Council on Monday 22nd Sept 2025
Dear Nuclear Issues Board of Cumberland Council,
On 14 October 2021, Copeland Borough Council’s Executive of just four councillors took the decision to establish two Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) Community Partnerships in accordance with the UK Government’s “GDF siting process”
West Cumbria is predictably the only consideration by NWS as a potential site for a GDF (also known as a nuclear waste dump for the abandonment of high level wastes).
A lot has changed since those four Copeland councillors put forward the Lake District coast as a sacrifice zone for the UK’s nuclear waste geological disposal plan.
We urge the Nuclear Issues Board to exercise their democratic duty and call for a debate by the Full Cumberland Council and a Full vote before going any further in the partnership with Nuclear Waste Services for delivery of a very deep, very hot and very experimental nuclear waste dump for high level wastes.
There is no democratic mandate to continue in partnership with Nuclear Waste Services in delivery of a GDF for the following reasons:
Community Unwillingness.
Despite the ongoing Community Partnership funding, Millom Town Council and Whicham Parish Council have both withdrawn from the South Copeland Community Partnership. Whicham PC also held a parish poll that clearly indicated a 77% majority against the GDF . Millom Without Parish Council will be consulting its parishioners on withdrawal. An external review of the SCCP also found the Partnership to be totally dysfunctional with infighting between community representatives and NWS staff.
The Community of Seascale within the Mid-Copeland Community Partnership have also voiced opposition. Seascale Parish Council talked about GDF’s potential area of focus for Headworks and were shown a map of a potential area for Seascale: “as a Parish Council we rejected the proposal as it was not suitable for Seascale at all, but there needs to be more that just our voice, attached is a map of the proposed Headworks location for Seascale.. We encourage residents to attend these events with GDF and voice their concerns too.
” It is ironic, given the above, that one of the Copeland (now Cumberland) councillors who took the delegated decision to ‘volunteer’ the West Cumbrian coastline once again into the nuclear dump plan is Vice chair of Seascale Parish Council.
It is clear that previous geological work, public inquiries and Cumbria County Council resolutions on this subject are being ignored in order to proceed with a clearly unwanted, expensive, ultimately public money and time wasting project once more, casting known and unknown blight on communities for decades to come. As Martin Lowe of Close Capenhurst has observed “Cumberland Council have a duty of care to the public which this development flies in the face of.”
Increase of the mine footprint from 25km2 to 36km2 since Copeland Executive volunteered the Lake District coast.
Initially NWS literature stated that the mine footprint would be 25km2. A letter to Lakes Against Nuclear Dump from Nuclear Waste Services states that the footprint would now be 36km2 (or larger).
Increase in heat of the “thermal footprint” of the GDF from 100 degrees c to 200 degrees c.
100 degrees c is the maximum heat “allowed” to try to ensure integrity of the bentonite buffer (clay slurry to be pumped into the mine as backfill and to delay leakage), however the thermal footprint has been increased to 200 degrees c as confirmed in a letter to Lakes Against Nuclear Dump from Nuclear Waste Services.
Inclusion of Plutonium along with High Level Wastes.
The inclusion of plutonium for burial in a GDF is a new, experimental and dangerous concept. There are unresolved (and likely unresolvable) difficulties of containing the radiotoxic nature and criticality of plutonium in a geological disposal facility.
“The problems of criticality and toxicity to the biosphere essentially come down to water—it creates the conditions for potential criticality and provides the transport mechanism for plutonium’s toxicity.” (Plutonium—the complex and ‘forever’ radiotoxic element of nuclear waste. How exactly should we manage its containment? Nick Scarr 22/08/25).
Top geologists call the plan “dangerous”
– this is why…
Professor Stuart Haszeldine, Professor of Carbon Capture and Storage, School of Geosciences Edinburgh Climate Change Institute said: “Making waste into specialised solid compounds can help to become more resistant to dissolution in groundwater. But the heat generated from the radioactive decay of isotopes is not affected by that re-engineering. Adding material which may heat to 100-200C is a huge disruption and will undoubtedly change the pathways of groundwater flow. This is like having an electric kettle containing stable stationary water and then turning on the electricity to add heat – the water soon circulates and if heating continues, the water boils.”
Professor Haszeldine added: “Have the developers actually made computer predictions of these effects in this GDF? Because plutonium has isotopes which can last for thousands of years, it may be sensible to spread that through the GDF to minimise heating – but that will make predictions of containment in circulating hot water much more difficult. It’s perfectly reasonable to think of a 150C-200C heat source at 0.5km, producing a geyser of boiling water intermittently erupting at surface temperatures above boiling.”
The spread of this increased temperature, known as a thermal pulse, would be conducted through the rock over several thousand years. With the additional pressure of water column above the GDF (a hypothetical 500m below the surface), water would boil at the higher temperature of 250C, in which case superheated steam may also occur. There is currently no guarantee that the maximum heat of the GDF will remain at 200C.
Even a 1.0C increase in ocean water [ii]can cause ‘massive impacts’ on the health of sea life and contribute to marine desertification, including loss of biodiversity, collapse of fisheries, and accelerated climate change. The proposed GDF is planned to be at least 37 km3, a substantial section of seabed under the Irish Sea, in a Marine Protected Area. Similar to nature reserves or SSSIs, Marine Protected Areas are parts of the ocean established to protect habitats, species and healthy, functioning marine ecosystems. Professor Haszeldine pointed out that seeps of warm or hot waterfrom a GDF onto the seabed are unlikely to stabilise, repair, and rewild the natural seabed ecosystems.
Professor David K. Smythe, Emeritus Professor of Geophysics, University of Glasgow, said he agreed with Professor Haszeldine about the danger of trying to bury High Level Waste, whether it was conditioned or not. “The waste should be kept on the surface of the earth, and immobilised beyond any possibility of re-use, until a proper long-term solution is found.”
For all these reasons and many more, thousands of people including hundreds of Cumbrians have signed a pettion calling for the full Cumberland Council to debate and vote before going any further in the partnership with Nuclear Waste Services for delivery of an experimental and uniquely dangerous plan to abandon nuclear wastes.
We urge the Nuclear Issues Board to exercise their democratic duty and call for a full debate and vote by Cumberland Council. Currently there is no democratic mandate to continue with the GDF “process” without at least carrying out a full debate and full vote by all Cumberland Councillors
Yours sincerely,
Marianne Birkby, Lakes Against Nuclear Dump, a Radiation Free Lakeland campaign
Richard Outram, Secretary of the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLAs)
Antifa Nation
The Australian Independent Media Network, By Walt Zlotow 19 Sept 25, https://wordpress.com/reader/blogs/240145538/posts/22161
I must thank President Trump for a moment of personal enlightenment. He’s made me aware that for the past 75 years I’ve been a member of the domestic terrorist group Antifa.
Back around first grade my parents informed me about WWII, the Holocaust and Nazism. It was a difficult concept for my young brain to grasp but it spurred a lifelong commitment to anti-fascism, which is precisely what Antifa is short for.
Eight decades on we have a cynical, McCarthyite-channeling president designating a long forgotten, amorphous fringe group with no organized structure, no leadership, no nothing as a ‘terrorist organization’. It’s a cynical dissent suppressing strategy to crush any peaceful opposition to his anti-democratic, fascistic agenda.
He spent his first term demonizing Antifa as a terrorist organization. In his current term he has officially designated Antifa as a terrorist organization with this bit of lunacy: “I am pleased to inform our many U.S.A. Patriots that I am designating ANTIFA, A SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER, AS A MAJOR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION”.
Our mentally disintegrating president believes his terrorist designation paves the way to expand his road to fascism in America. But there are tens of millions of us peacefully but strenuously resisting his fascistic mindset and governing agenda. We will not let Trump’s wide net of Antifa terrorist designation to our pushback deter us. Resisting the first attempt of fascist rule in America’s 250 years must be a priority of every decent American.
Iran, allies submit draft IAEA resolution to ban attacks on nuclear sites
Sep 16, 2025, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202509162278
Iran and five other countries have submitted a draft resolution to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s annual general conference calling for a ban on any attack or threat of attack against nuclear sites under UN safeguards, Iran’s foreign ministry said on Tuesday.
Foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on X that the text, backed by China, Russia, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Belarus, was intended “to defend the integrity of the NPT” and reaffirmed the inalienable right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
“All states must refrain from attacking or threatening to attack peaceful nuclear facilities in other countries,” Baghaei wrote. “These principles must be upheld; it is high time that the international community acted firmly to prevent the normalization of lawlessness.”
Draft resolution
The draft resolution condemns “the deliberate and unlawful attacks carried out in June 2025 against nuclear sites and facilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” calling them clear violations of the UN Charter and the IAEA Statute.
It says nuclear sites under IAEA safeguards “shall not be subject to any kind of attack or threat of attack,” adding that such actions pose serious risks to international peace and security, human health, the environment, and the credibility of the non-proliferation regime.
The document also recalls UN Security Council Resolution 487 of 1981, which condemned Israel’s bombing of Iraq’s Osirak reactor, and reaffirms previous IAEA decisions prohibiting attacks on safeguarded facilities.
It further stressed that all questions regarding nuclear programs should be resolved “exclusively through dialogue and diplomacy, as the only viable path.”
Israel launched a surprise military campaign on June 13 targeting Iranian nuclear and military sites, including senior commanders and nuclear officials in a conflict that lasted 12 days. On June 22, the United States joined the campaign, striking nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Washington brokered a ceasefire on June 24.
Iran’s nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami told the conference on Monday that Tehran’s atomic program “cannot be eliminated through military action,” accusing Israel and the United States of launching illegal strikes on Iranian sites in June.
“Despite our formal request, the agency did not condemn the attacks by the United States and Israel on the nuclear centers of the Islamic Republic,” Eslami said, calling the IAEA’s silence “a stain on the Agency’s history.”
Eslami said Tehran would use the conference to highlight what he called unlawful measures against its nuclear industry and to push for adoption of the draft.
The debate comes as Iran’s recent cooperation deal with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi awaits implementation and European powers press ahead with the UN “snapback” mechanism that could reinstate sanctions on Tehran by late September.
Chernobyl shelter repairs: ‘Difficult choices’ lie ahead
The arch-shaped New Safe Confinement structure built over the remains of
Chernobyl’s destroyed unit 4 suffered such extensive damage in a drone
strike in February that it may not be possible to restore it to its full
original design purposes and life-span of 100 years, a side event at the
International Atomic Energy Agency General Conference heard.
World Nuclear News 18th Sept 2025, https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/chernobyls-giant-shelter-may-never-return-to-original-state
Can the UK fast-track nuclear power without cutting corners on safety?
The UK’s nuclear regulator is being asked to consider radically
different designs on a scale and pace never before seen. That’s partly
why, as part of the deal, the two countries have agreed to accept each
other’s safety checks. The government claims this will “halve the time
for a nuclear project to be licensed”. The question is whether this can
be done as safely.
The US and UK take fundamentally different approaches to
nuclear regulation. The US’s Nuclear Regulation Commission (NRC) takes a
“prescriptive” approach. It sets detailed rules based on its own
research and enforces them directly. Like police setting speed limits, the
regulator decides the standards and then ensures nuclear operators meet
them. If an accident happens, operators can point to meeting every
requirement as evidence they followed the rules. They could even
legitimately blame the regulator.
The UK’s Office for Nuclear Regulation
(ONR) takes a “descriptive” approach. It sets broad standards but
leaves operators to prove how they will meet them. In road terms, the US
sets the speed limit and checks drivers obey it. The UK simply says cars
must stay on the road, leaving drivers to decide their own limits, prove
they’re safe, and take full responsibility if they crash. These two
approaches are driven to a large extent by the two country’s history and
make up of their nuclear industries. So while UK-US collaboration could
boost Britain’s nuclear industry and accelerate the path to low-carbon
energy, independence and transparency will be essential. Any perception of
corner cutting or transatlantic political interference could undermine
public trust and derail Britain’s nuclear ambitions.
The Conversation 18th Sept 2025, https://theconversation.com/can-the-uk-fast-track-nuclear-power-without-cutting-corners-on-safety-265614
Construction starts of Belgian disposal facility
Belgium’s Prime Minister Bart De Wever has laid a foundation stone,
marking the start of construction of a surface disposal facility for low-
and intermediate-level, short-lived waste at the Dessel site in Belgium.
The facility will consist of several concrete bunkers that will house large
concrete vaults in which short-lived low- and intermediate-level waste will
have been encapsulated with mortar. Currently, 28,831 vaults are planned,
spread across two zones: 20 bunkers in the first and 14 in the second. The
Dessel facility will house all Belgian low- and intermediate-level,
short-lived radioactive waste including that from nuclear power plants,
hospitals, research institutes and the decommissioning of nuclear
facilities. Currently, this waste is managed by national radioactive waste
management agency ONDRAF/NIRAS’s industrial subsidiary Belgoprocess in
several dedicated buildings on the Dessel site.
World Nuclear News 19th Sept 2025, https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/construction-starts-of-belgian-disposal-facility
Political witch hunts and blacklists: Donald Trump and the new era of McCarthyism
September 19, 2025 , Shannon Brincat, Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of the Sunshine Coast, Frank Mols, Senior Lecturer in Political Science, The University of Queensland, Gail Crimmins, Associate professor, University of the Sunshine Coast, https://theconversation.com/political-witch-hunts-and-blacklists-donald-trump-and-the-new-era-of-mccarthyism-265389?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Weekender%20-%2019th%20September%202025&utm_content=The%20Weekender%20-%2019th%20September%202025+CID_d7a6e5ec27e543170fba8540bf95d6ea&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=Political%20witch%20hunts%20and%20blacklists%20Donald%20Trump%20and%20the%20new%20era%20of%20McCarthyism
A modern-day political inquisition is unfolding in “digital town squares” across the United States. The slain far-right activist Charlie Kirk has become a focal point for a coordinated campaign of silencing critics that chillingly echoes one of the darkest chapters in American history.
Individuals who have publicly criticised Kirk or made perceived insensitive comments regarding his death are being threatened, fired or doxed.
Teachers and professors have been fired or disciplined, one for posting that Kirk was racist, misogynistic and a neo-Nazi, another for calling Kirk a “hate-spreading Nazi”.
Journalists have also lost their jobs after making comments about Kirk’s assassination, as has the late-night television host Jimmy Kimmel.
A website called “Expose Charlie’s Murderers” had been posting the names, locations and employers of people saying critical things about Kirk before it was reportedly taken down. Vice President JD Vance has pushed for this public response, urging supporters to “call them out … hell, call their employer”.
This is far-right “cancel culture”, the likes of which the US hasn’t seen since the McCarthy era in the 1950s.
The birth of McCarthyism
The McCarthy era may well have faded in our collective memory, but it’s important to understand how it unfolded and the impact it had on America. As the philosopher George Santayana once said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Since the 1950s, “McCarthyism” has become shorthand for the practice of making unsubstantiated accusations of disloyalty against political opponents, often through fear-mongering and public humiliation.
The term gets its name from Senator Joseph McCarthy, a Republican who was the leading architect of a ruthless witch hunt in the US to root out alleged Communists and subversives across American institutions.
The campaign included both public and private persecutions from the late 1940s to early 1950s, involving hearings before the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
Millions of federal employees had to fill out loyalty investigation forms during this time, while hundreds of employees were either fired or not hired. Hundreds of Hollywood figures were also blacklisted.
The campaign also involved the parallel targeting of the LGBTQI+ community working in government – known as the Lavender Scare.
And similar to doxing today, witnesses in government hearings were asked to provide the names of communist sympathisers, and investigators gave lists of prospective witnesses to the media. Major corporations told employees who invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to testify they would be fired.
The greatest toll of McCarthyism was perhaps on public discourse. A deep chill settled over US politics, with people afraid to voice any opinion that could be construed as dissenting.
When the congressional records were finally unsealed in the early 2000s, the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said the hearings “are a part of our national past that we can neither afford to forget nor permit to reoccur”.
Another witch hunt under Trump
Today, however, a similar campaign is being waged by the Trump administration and others on the right, who are stoking fears of the “the enemy within”.
This new campaign to blacklist government critics is following a similar pattern to the McCarthy era, but is spreading much more quickly, thanks to social media, and is arguably targeting far more regular Americans.
Even before Kirk’s killing, there were worrying signs of a McCarthyist revival in the early days of the second Trump administration.
After Trump ordered the dismantling of public Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs, civil institutions, universities, corporations and law firms were pressured to do the same. Some were threatened with investigation or freezing of federal funds.
In Texas, a teacher was accused of guiding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) squads to suspected non-citizens at a high school. A group called the Canary Mission identified pro-Palestinian green-card holders for deportation. And just this week, the University of California at Berkeley admitted to handing over the names of staff accused of antisemitism.
Supporters of the push to expose those criticising Kirk have framed their actions as protecting the country from “un-American”, woke ideologies. This narrative only deepens polarisation by simplifying everything into a Manichean world view: the “good people” versus the corrupt “leftist elite”.
The fact the political assassination of Democratic lawmaker Melissa Hortman did not garner the same reaction from the right reveals a gross double standard at play.
Another double standard: attempts to silence anyone criticising Kirk’s divisive ideology, while being permissive of his more odious claims. For example, he once called George Floyd, a Black man killed by police, a “scumbag”.
In the current climate, empathy is not a “made-up, new age term”, as Kirk once said, but appears to be highly selective.
This brings an increased danger, too. When neighbours become enemies and dialogue is shut down, the possibilities for conflict and violence are exacerbated.
Many are openly discussing the parallels with the rise of fascism in Germany, and even the possibility of another civil war.
A sense of decency?
The parallels between McCarthyism and Trumpism are stark and unsettling. In both eras, dissent has been conflated with disloyalty.
How far could this go? Like the McCarthy era, it partly depends on the public reaction to Trump’s tactics.
McCarthy’s influence began to wane when he charged the army with being soft on communism in 1954. The hearings, broadcast to the nation, did not go well. At one point, the army’s lawyer delivered a line that would become infamous:
Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness […] Have you no sense of decency?
Without concerted, collective societal pushback against this new McCarthyism and a return to democratic norms, we risk a further coarsening of public life.
The lifeblood of democracy is dialogue; its safeguard is dissent. To abandon these tenets is to pave the road towards authoritarianism.
The Department of War Is Back!
But Victoryless Culture Remains.
William J. Astore, 17 Sept 25, https://tomdispatch.com/the-department-of-war-is-back/
My fellow Americans, my critical voice has finally been heard inside the Oval Office. No, not my voice against the $1.7 trillion this country is planning to spend on new nuclear weapons. No, not my call to cut the Pentagon budget in half. No, not my imprecations against militarism in America. It was a quip of mine that the Department of Defense (DoD) should return to its roots as the War Department, since the U.S. hasn’t known a moment’s peace since before the 9/11 attacks, locked as it’s been into a permanent state of global war, whether against “terror” or for its imperial agendas (or both)
A rebranded Department of War, President Trump recently suggested, simply sounds tougher (and more Trumpian) than “defense.” As is his wont, he blurted out a hard truth as he stated that America must have an offensive military. There was, however, no mention of war bonds or war taxes to pay for such a military. And no mention of a wartime draft or any other meaningful sacrifice by most Americans.
Will the US Continue to Aid, Abet, and Arm Genocide in Gaza?
Every leader should move now to end our complicity.
Katrina vanden Heuvel, 16 Sept 25, https://www.thenation.com/article/world/israel-genocide-complicity-gaza-palestine/
he United States is aiding and abetting genocide in Gaza. This horror has the support —like so many of our most disastrous foreign debacles from Vietnam to Iraq—of both political parties.
As more and more children die of starvation and the famine deepens, as the Netanyahu government begins its attack on Gaza City, moving to occupy all of Gaza, as Israeli soldiers and bulldozers systematically level city after city in Gaza, the criminal horror is reaching its obscene goal: the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza (and, if Netanyahu’s ministers have their way, all of the occupied West Bank).
While all signatories to the Genocide Convention have the right—and indeed the duty—to intervene to halt this slaughter, only two countries have the power to actually stop the genocide: the Israeli government that is committing it and the US government that is aiding, abetting, and arming it. The US could stop this criminal assault by ending its support for Israel, cutting off the flow of arms, ammunition, bombs, and military coordination and demanding and helping to organize immediate, emergency humanitarian relief. To do any less makes us complicit in the ongoing crime.
Across the world—and within Israel itself—some brave leaders have demanded an end to the horror.
David Grossman, Israel’s leading literary and moral voice, says that for many years he has refused to use the word genocide, but now he must—“with immense pain and with a broken heart.”
Two leading Israeli human rights groups—B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel—released a report on “Our Genocide,” detailing the unfathomable violence and concluding that there is “no doubt” that since October 2023, the Israeli regime has been responsible for carrying out genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza strip.” Physicians for Human Rights Israel provided a medical-legal analysis documenting Israel’s deliberate destruction of the healthcare system in Gaza, as well as other systems critical for the survival of the Palestinian civilian population.
The special rapporteur of the United Nations has reported on the companies and countries profiting from the “economy of genocide.”
Back In January 2024, the International Court of Justice ruled that there was a plausible risk that Israel’s actions amounted to genocidal acts—long before the systematic starvation became apparent. The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, then–Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and a former Hamas commander on the suspicion of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
A growing number of countries have suspended all or part of their arms shipments to Israel, including Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Canada. Last month, in a resolution passed by 86 percent of its members, the oldest and largest association of genocide scholars concluded that Israel’s nearly two-year military campaign in Gaza meets “the legal definition of genocide,” The resolution, by the International Association of Genocide Scholars, added to a growing chorus from human rights organizations and academics concluding that Israel is committing genocide by “killing members of the group” and “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part,” according to Emily Sample, a member of the association’s executive board.
Across the world, citizens of conscience demonstrate in greater and greater numbers, demanding an end to the horror.
And in the United States where the responsibility and the complicity are the greatest?
Courageous Jewish scholars like Omer Bartov and writers like Peter Beinart have spoken out early against the calamity.
More than 1,000 rabbis have called for Israel to allow humanitarian aid, stating “we cannot condone the mass killings of civilians…or the use of starvation as a weapon of war
After months of looking the other way, more and more of the mainstream US media are beginning to awake to the humanitarian catastrophe that is being inflicted on the Palestinians.
But among those who could actually bring the horror to an end, courage is in short supply.
Only 13 members of Congress have been willing to state the obvious: that Israel is committing genocide. House minority whip Katherine Clark declared that the “genocide and destruction” in Gaza needs to end—only to walk back her comments a few days later.
The Senate Resolution submitted by Senator Bernie Sanders to block some weapons sales to Israel received not one Republican vote. Instead, Republicans line up behind Donald Trump, who muses about beachfront properties in Gaza and tells Israel to hurry up and finish the job.
A Gallup poll showed only 8 percent of Democrats support Israel’s military action in Gaza. The Sanders Resolutions received support from a majority of the Senate Democratic caucus, yet those still refusing to stand up include Senator Charles Schumer, the Democratic leader in the Senate, as well as Senator Corey Booker, who styles himself as a voice for human rights.
This is no longer a policy debate. This is now an urgent question of basic humanity. Will the United States continue to arm genocide in Gaza? Will legislators continue to support an unconscionable crime against humanity—or act to end it? As more Palestinians starve to death, as more doctors and aid workers and journalists are murdered, as needed food and water continues to be withheld, as families are huddled into smaller and smaller open-air camps, no amount of censorship, doubletalk, lies, or excuses can hide the true horror.
There is no excuse for inaction. There is no escape from responsibility. Each legislator, official, and officer will have to look in the mirror. Complicity in this crime will destroy their reputations. Growing numbers of their constituents, their neighbors, even their own children will demand to know why they chose complicity rather than courage.
Popular
- Charlie Kirk’s Legacy Deserves No MourningCharlie Kirk’s Legacy Deserves No MourningElizabeth Spiers
- Kafka-land at UC BerkeleyKafka-land at UC BerkeleyJudith Butler
- Jimmy Kimmel’s Bosses Sold Us All OutJimmy Kimmel’s Bosses Sold Us All OutJeet Heer
- The Call Is Out for Mass, Simultaneous Strikes in 4 YearsThe Call Is Out for Mass, Simultaneous Strikes in 4 YearsSarah Lazare
Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
America is aiding, abetting, and arming that genocide.
Every American should stand up to protest the horror being committed in our names.
Every leader should move now to end our complicity.
Every American should stand up to protest the horror being committed in our names.
Every leader should move now to end our complicity.
Why Starmer’s nuclear ‘golden age’ risks becoming a lot of hot air.
Crippling costs and mountains of red tape threaten to pour cold water on the PM’s ambitions.
Donald Trump hasn’t been shy about criticising British
energy policy under Labour, lashing out at “ugly” wind farms and
crippling taxes on North Sea oil and gas. Yet one area where the US
president and Sir Keir Starmer seem to fervently agree is on nuclear power.
This week, the US and UK governments promised to work together to deliver a
“golden age” of privately-financed power plant construction.
The agreement will see the two countries fast-track the approval of new,
cutting-edge reactor designs by recognising each other’s safety regimes – a
controversial move that has already raised the hackles of activists. But to
underline the economic prize on offer, the announcement featured a string
of eye-catching investments being looked at by American and British
companies with plans for fleets of reactors that will power the grid, as
well as high-tech data centres needed for artificial intelligence (AI)
software. British Gas owner Centrica and X-energy, a nuclear start-up
backed by Amazon, said they were exploring building up to 80 advanced
modular reactors (AMRs) capable of delivering electricity and heat to both
industrial businesses and millions of homes. Meanwhile, Holtec
International and the UK arm of EDF are looking at building a small modular
reactor (SMR) on the former site of a coal power plant in Nottinghamshire.
Micro-reactor firm Last Energy is also exploring plans to power the London
Gateway port, while Bill Gates-backed TerraPower is scouting out locations
for mini power plants as well.
On the face of it, the deals looked like a
major triumph for the Prime Minister. But industry veterans were quick to
note that, in their current form, they are just loosely-worded commitments,
with the companies yet to sign binding contracts or exchange serious sums
of cash. One potential blueprint may lie in a new report by pro-growth
campaign group Britain Remade, which argues that nuclear power can offer
“abundant, clean, reliable electricity” and lower bills for consumers –
but only if the Government overhauls red tape that is “not fit for
purpose”. “US firms want to build here,” says Sam Dumitriu, the
report’s author. “But turning it into shovels in the ground, data centres
online, on time and on budget, depends on making the UK a lower-cost,
faster place to build”
Telegraph 18th Sept 2025, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/09/18/why-starmer-will-struggle-to-deliver-nuclear-golden-age/
UN genocide report puts Starmer in the dock.
Declassified UK , 19 Sept 25.
This week, the UN commission of inquiry concluded on reasonable grounds that “the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have committed and are continuing to commit [acts] of genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip”. The acts include killing members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, and imposing measures intended to prevent births.UN member states are consequently urged to employ all means reasonably available to them to prevent genocide in Gaza, including the cessation of arms transfers and the facilitation of legal investigations into Israel’s actions. The commission of inquiry was set up four years ago by the UN human rights council, and is staffed by three independent experts. While it does not speak officially for the UN, it strongly reinforces the growing consensus around the genocidal nature of Israel’s war. So what are the implications for Britain? Perhaps most significantly, the commission flatly rejects the UK government’s argument that the duty to prevent genocide is only triggered when an international court has established that a genocide has taken place. “Since at least January 2024, when the International Court of Justice ordered its first provisional measures, all states… have been on notice of a serious risk that genocide was being or would be committed”, the report notes. |
The UK government, in other words, has misconstrued its obligations under the Geneva Convention to prevent and punish genocide. Indeed, how is it possible to prevent genocide if you wait until it has taken place? The report also notes how “Israeli security forces shot at and killed civilians, including children who were holding makeshift white flags”. Days before, a Dutch newspaper found that at least 114 Palestinian children had been hit with single gunshot wounds to the head or chest. The UK government is clearly aware this is occurring, but it has covered up its own evidence on Israel’s killing of minors. |
In June, the government’s lawyers refused to submit a research report to court on “Long-Range Shootings or Shootings of Minors”. Subsequent requests from MPs and the media for the report have been repeatedly refused.
And then there’s the Israeli president, Isaac Herzog, who was welcomed to London last week by prime minister Keir Starmer.
The report found that Herzog, alongside Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant, “incited the commission of genocide and that Israeli authorities… failed to take action against them to punish this incitement”.
These are serious findings, and they require a serious response from the UK government. Yet ministers, unsurprisingly, have largely shied away from talking about the report – perhaps unwilling to incriminate themselves further.
Rolls Royce “Small” nuclear reactors are not at all small!
Dr Paul Dorfman Letter: Further to your report “Deal with US to
fast-track mini nuclear reactors” (Sep 15; letter, Sep 16), small modular
reactors (SMRs) are defined by the International Atomic Energy Agency as
reactors that generate up to 300MW power.
At 470MW, the Rolls-Royce design is not an SMR: it is larger than the UK Magnox reactor, more than half the size of the 900MW reactors that make up the bulk of the French nuclear fleet, and about a third the size of the very large EPR reactor design at Hinkley Point C.
This matters because the Rolls-Royce design will need big
sites, standard nuclear safety measures, exclusion zones, core catchers,
aircraft crash protection and security. All this is important because in
calling its design an SMR, or small, Rolls-Royce appears to me to have been
economical with the truth — and all that implies for its other claims,
especially about time and cost.
As for the nuclear waste problem, the former chair of the US government Nuclear Regulatory Commission reports
that SMRs would produce more reactive waste per kWh — the key parameter — than large reactors.
Times 17th Sept 2025. https://www.thetimes.com/comment/letters-to-editor/article/times-letters-ethics-of-danny-krugers-defection-to-reform-uk-3rbg90m3b
Trump not Commander in Chief…he’s Violence Inciter in Chief.
Walt Zlotow, Glen Ellyn IL 16 Sept 25
45 men have served as president. Everyone had a base of voters they geared their presidency toward to remain politically viable and enact their agenda. But all pledged fealty to serving all the people throughout their presidency without regard to political affiliation. All but one that is.
Donald Trump has served every one of his 1,700 days over 5 years ignoring his opposition. Worse, he relentless demonizes them, inciting threats and actual violence unprecedented in American history.
It began with his very first words campaigning for the 2016 election. He glided down the escalator at Trump Tower charging undocumented from Mexico are murderers and rapists, the worst of the worst.
That set the tone for his entire administration. Knowing he was likely to lose reelection, he pivoted to a treasonous assault on the electoral system that put a target on every election official, judge and worker not affiliated with the Trump base. Worse, he inspired, indeed orchestrated, a violent riot to overturn the 2020 election in which he was crushed by over 7 million votes. Also crushed were over 100 patriotic law enforcement injured by a ravenous mob doing Trump’s bidding. One died and 4 committed suicide shortly thereafter from Trump’s riot trauma.
His second term has continued apace. He’s sent his masked immigration storm troopers into American workplaces rounding up undocumented workers serving the economy. Why? Because he can’t round up enough law breaking undocumented on the street to satisfy his vengeful base.
When right wing influencer Charlie Kirk was gunned down Trump immediately blamed the ‘extreme left’, his favorite target for retribution. A number of his high profile supporters called for war against his imaginary enemy. Trump said nothing against this madness that will near certainly result in reprisal violence. Democratic office holders, media influencers and election personnel are all reassessing their security endangered by the very man responsible for their safety.
Trump’s love affair inciting demonization, if not outright violence against the ‘other’, is an aberration in American presidential history.
Someday Trump will leave the presidency he has shockingly betrayed. The only remaining question is how many will fall victim, whether threatened or assaulted, to the madness Trump has unleashed.
1 This Month
19 February – VIRTUAL EVENT-Decision Time: AI and Our Nuclear Arsenal
12:45 p.m. Central / 1:45 p.m. Eastern
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- February 2026 (161)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 