TODAY. Space X rocket – “A successful failure” – George Orwell would love it!
If only George Orwell were alive today! He would love it – Orwell, who wrote:
“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
George Orwell tried to show us the danger of accepting sloppy, dishonest language, and how this erodes democracy.
Already we have the mantra on Ukraine and Taiwan, spreading one of Orwell’s favourites “War is Peace“, and the corporate media news happy with “Ignorance is strength.”
“Failure is Success” – this beautiful Orwellian-style phrase is right now being pushed across the media, as we learn of the obscenely expensive, tax-payer funded Star X space rocket launch. So successful that it lasted a full 3 minutes before it exploded!
Wake up people – we are all being taken for a ride by the space-nuclear-weapons establishment – for a pointless aim of USA ruling space and colonising Mars.
Meanwhile people are homeless, children go hungry, and global heating rampages on.
And we’re supposed to rejoice at this disgusting rocket “success” !!
Greens support Barngarla people’s opposition to Kimba radioactive waste dump set to open after 2030
ABC North and West SA / By Nicholas Ward https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-04-21/greens-affirm-nuclear-dump-opposition-at-kimba-visit/102252440
Greens senators travelled to Kimba on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula this week to hear from farmers and First Nations groups opposed to the national radioactive waste management facility proposed at Napandee.
Key points:
- Calls are growing for the federal government to drop court action against a First Nations group opposing a nuclear dump
- The local Native Title chair says the government is “not being truthful” about listening to Aboriginal voices
- Greens senators say intermediate-level waste must stay at Lucas Heights until a permanent storage solution is found
SA senator Barbara Pocock said the federal government’s process to determine the site for permanent low-level and temporary intermediate-level waste storage was flawed.
“It didn’t listen to First Nations people, it hasn’t listened to local farmers in the community, and it’s not an appropriate site for intermediate-level waste coming out of Lucas Heights [in Sydney],” Senator Pocock said.
“It results in the double-handling of highly toxic intermediate-level waste, which will be temporarily stored at Kimba, and future generations are going to have to find a long-term solution.
“Bearing in mind the history of nuclear testing in our state, it’s especially important that we … can find a safe long-term solution, not a temporary solution.”
Calls to listen to Aboriginal voices
Jason Bilney is chair of Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation (BDAC), which is fighting the federal government in court to block the current proposal.
He said the government’s continued legal action showed a lack of commitment to listening to Aboriginal voices.
“They’re breaking First Nations hearts by continuing down this path of the Liberals and outspending us 4: 1 in court to put a nuclear waste dump on our country,” Mr Bilney said.
“What does that say about the Statement from the Heart, let alone constitutional recognition?
“It’s about truth-telling and yet they’re not being truthful about listening to our voice.”
Mr Bilney welcomed the senators’ visit to Kimba and said proponents of the waste dump needed to speak honestly about its impact on Barngarla culture.
“It’s always good to come out on country and actually see for themselves where the site is and meet us on country. It’s a very positive step,” he said.
‘Don’t need a court to tell us’
BDAC holds native title over large areas of the Upper Spencer Gulf and Eyre Peninsula, including around Kimba, but not at the specific location of the proposed radioactive storage site at Napandee.
The Greens’ spokesperson for First Nations, Science and Resources, Senator Dorinda Cox, said that did not delegitimise Aboriginal concerns about its placement.
“The Barngarla people have stories, know the songlines, know the importance of birthing places, know the importance of country and practice of their culture in a very strong and traditional way still,” Senator Cox said.
“I don’t think we need a court to tell us that, and unfortunately that is a process they are pushed into.
“There was no free, prior, informed consent.”
Waste at Kimba ‘not expected before 2030’
The Australian Radioactive Waste Agency (ARWA) is overseeing site preparation works at Napandee, while awaiting final approvals to begin construction of the waste facility.
“Construction of the facility can only commence after all necessary siting, construction, nuclear, and environmental regulatory approvals are received,” an ARWA spokesperson said.
“The facility is not expected to be operational before 2030.”
Six war mongering think tanks and the military contractors that fund them.
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Center for a New American Security
Hudson Institute
Atlantic Council
International Institute for Strategic Studies
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
Note: ASPI has been one of the primary purveyors of the “Uyghur genocide” narrative
From their 2021-2022 annual report
$186,800: Thales Australia (aerospace and defense corporation)
$100,181: Boeing Australia
$75,927: Lockheed Martin
$20,000: Omni Executive (aerospace and defense corporation)
$27,272: SAAB Australia
Amanda Yee, March 7, 2023 https://www.liberationnews.org/six-war-mongering-think-tanks-and-the-military-contractors-that-fund-them/
From producing reports and analysis for U.S. policy-makers, to enlisting representatives to write op-eds in corporate media, to providing talking heads for corporate media to interview and give quotes, think tanks play a fundamental role in shaping both U.S. foreign policy and public perception around that foreign policy. Leaders at top think tanks like the Atlantic Council and Hudson Institute have even been called upon to set focus priorities for the House Intelligence Committee. However, one look at the funding sources of the most influential think tanks reveals whose interests they really serve: that of the U.S. military and its defense contractors.
This ecosystem of overlapping networks of government institutions, think tanks, and defense contractors is where U.S. foreign policy is derived, and a revolving door exists among these three sectors. For example, before Biden-appointed head of the Pentagon Lloyd Austin took his current position, he sat on the Board of Directors at Raytheon. Before Austin’s appointment, current defense policy advisor Michèle Flournoy was also in the running for the position. Flournoy sat on the board of Booz Allen Hamilton, another major Pentagon defense contractor. These same defense contractors also work together with think tanks like the Center for Strategic and International Studies to organize conferences attended by national security officials. On top of all this, since the end of the Cold War, intelligence analysis by the CIA and NSA has increasingly been contracted out to these same defense companies like BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin, among others — a major conflict of interest. In other words, these corporations are in the position to produce intelligence reports which raise the alarm on U.S. “enemy” nations so they can sell more military equipment!
And of course these are the same defense companies that donate hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to think tanks. Given all this, is it any wonder the U.S. government is simultaneously flooding billions of dollars of weaponry into an unwinnable proxy war in Ukraine while escalating a Cold War into a potential military confrontation with China?
The funding to these policy institutes steers the U.S. foreign policy agenda. To give you a scope of how these contributions determine national security priorities, listed below are six of some of the most influential foreign policy think tanks, along with how much in contributions they’ve received from “defense” companies in the last year.
All funding information for these policy institutes was gathered from the most recent annual report that was available online. Also note that this list is compiled from those that make this information publicly available — many think tanks, such as the hawkish American Enterprise Institute, do not release donation sources publicly.
1 – Center for Strategic and International Studies
According to their 2020 annual report
$500,000+: Northrop Grumman Corporation
$200,000-$499,999: General Atomics (energy and defense corporation that manufactures Predator drones for the CIA), Lockheed Martin, SAIC (provides information technology services to U.S. military)
$100,000-$199,999: Bechtel, Boeing, Cummins (provides engines and generators for military equipment), General Dynamics, Hitachi (provides defense technology), Hanwha Group (South Korean aerospace and defense company), Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. (largest military shipbuilding company in the United States), Mitsubishi Corporation, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (provides intelligence and information technology services to U.S. military), Qualcomm, Inc. (semiconductor company that produces microchips for the U.S. military), Raytheon, Samsung (provides security technology to the U.S. military), SK Group (defense technology company)
$65,000-$99,999: Hyundai Motor (produces weapons systems), Oracle
$35,000-$64,999: BAE Systems
2 – Center for a New American Security
$500,000+: Northrop Grumman Corporation
$250,000-$499,999: Lockheed Martin
$100,000-$249,000: Huntington Ingalls Industries, Neal Blue (Chairman and CEO of General Atomics), Qualcomm, Inc., Raytheon, Boeing
$50,000-$99,000: BAE Systems, Booz Allen Hamilton, Intel Corporation (provides aerospace and defense technology), Elbit Systems of America (aerospace and defense company), General Dynamics, Palantir Technologies
3 – Hudson Institute
According to their 2021 annual report
$100,000+: General Atomics, Linden Blue (co-owner and Vice Chairman of General Atomics), Neal Blue, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman
$50,000-$99,000: BAE Systems, Boeing, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
4 – Atlantic Council
According to their 2021 annual report
$250,000-$499,000: Airbus, Neal Blue, SAAB (provides defense equipment)
$100,000-$249,000: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon
$50,000-$99,000: SAIC
5 – International Institute for Strategic Studies
Based in London. From fiscal year 2021-2022
£100,000+: Airbus, BAE Systems, Boeing, General Atomics, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Rolls Royce (provides military airplane engines)
£25,000-£99,999: Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems, Northrop Grumman Corporation
6 – Australian Strategic Policy Institute
Note: ASPI has been one of the primary purveyors of the “Uyghur genocide” narrative
From their 2021-2022 annual report
$186,800: Thales Australia (aerospace and defense corporation)
$100,181: Boeing Australia
$75,927: Lockheed Martin
$20,000: Omni Executive (aerospace and defense corporation)
$27,272: SAAB Australia
Globally, taxpayers are on the hook for nuclear accidents. Nuclear is uninsurable and unacceptable
Simon Daigle – 21 Apr 23,
Simon J Daigle, B.Sc., M.Sc., M.Sc.(A) Concerned Canadian Citizen. Occupational / Industrial Hygienist, Epidemiologist. Climatologist / Air quality expert (Topospheric Ozone).
Any NPP plant globally has no guarantees from insurers, or governments, or have adequate accident liabilities to cover for just one NPP accident and any country host NPP taxpayers are always on the hook for damages.
When will governments globally understand that taxpayers should not be collateral damage (tokens) financially for potential human suffering and/or irreversible biosphere damage as « willing » participants for the nuclear industry ? The answer should be none. Yet we see a different reality and narrative. It’s all Shameful.
In India, a US company paid a fraction of the true cost of one chemical disaster: Bhopal (less than 500 million US dollars) for one chemical accident. And worse, they were never found guilty in a court of law in the US. Imagine when nuclear accident happens in India ? Who will be responsible? We know today that the true cost are billions (USD) because of Chernobyl and Fukushima tragedies for examples.
Now, in 2023, and for past decades, any nuclear accident in India, or elsewhere, citizens and taxpayers, had and will continue to absorb the true public burden in the global insurance pool for all nuclear energy countries that are contributing in for covering any NPP risks or accident liabilities.
Current insurance policy are clearly inadequate to repair and compensate for any human suffering, death, disease, and biosphere irreversible damages for any potential NPP accident, nuclear waste and compensation.
Unacceptable.
SpaceX launches most powerful rocket in history in explosive debut – like many first liftoffs, Starship’s test was a successful failure.
The Conversation, Wendy Whitman Cobb 21 Apr 23
Professor of Strategy and Security Studies, Air University
Starship is almost 400 feet (120 meters) tall and weighs 11 million pounds (4.9 million kilograms). An out-of-control rocket full of highly flammable fuel is a very dangerous object, so to prevent any harm, SpaceX engineers triggered the self-destruct mechanism and blew up the entire rocket over the Gulf of Mexico.
On April 20, 2023, a new SpaceX rocket called Starship exploded over the Gulf of Mexico three minutes into its first flight ever. SpaceX is calling the test launch a success, despite the fiery end result. As a space policy expert, I agree that the “rapid unscheduled disassembly” – the term SpaceX uses when its rockets explode – was a very successful failure.
The most powerful rocket ever built
This launch was the first fully integrated test of SpaceX’s new Starship. Starship is the most powerful rocket ever developed and is designed to be fully reusable. It is made of two different stages, or sections. The first stage, called Super Heavy, is a collection of 33 individual engines and provides more than twice the thrust of a Saturn V, the rocket that sent astronauts to the Moon in the 1960s and 1970s.
The first stage is designed to get the rocket to about 40 miles (65 kilometers) above Earth. Once Super Heavy’s job is done, it is supposed to separate from the rest of the craft and land safely back on the surface to be used again. At that point the second stage, called the Starship spacecraft, is supposed to ignite its own engines to carry the payload – whether people, satellites or anything else – into orbit.
An explosive first flight
While parts of Starship have been tested previously, the launch on April 20, 2023, was the first fully integrated test with the Starship spacecraft stacked on top of the Super Heavy rocket. If it had been successful, once the first stage was spent, it would have separated from the upper stage and crashed into the Gulf of Mexico. Starship would then have continued on, eventually crashing 155 miles (250 kilometers) off of Hawaii.
During the SpaceX livestream, the team stated that the primary goal of this mission was to get the rocket off the launch pad. It accomplished that goal and more. Starship flew for more than three minutes, passing through what engineers call “max Q” – the moment at which a rocket experiences the most physical stress from acceleration and air resistance.
According to SpaceX, a few things went wrong with the launch. First, multiple engines went out sometime before the point at which the Starship spacecraft and the Super Heavy rocket were supposed to separate from each other. The two stages were also unable to separate at the predetermined moment, and with the two stages stuck together, the rocket began to tumble end over end. It is still unclear what specifically caused this failure.
Starship is almost 400 feet (120 meters) tall and weighs 11 million pounds (4.9 million kilograms). An out-of-control rocket full of highly flammable fuel is a very dangerous object, so to prevent any harm, SpaceX engineers triggered the self-destruct mechanism and blew up the entire rocket over the Gulf of Mexico…………………………………… https://theconversation.com/spacex-launches-most-powerful-rocket-in-history-in-explosive-debut-like-many-first-liftoffs-starships-test-was-a-successful-failure-204248
This is why Youth, MPs and ICAN are going to Hiroshima next week
| Daniel Högsta, ICAN <admin@icanw.org> |
In May, the heads of the G7 states will meet in Hiroshima for their annual summit. Given the location, all eyes will be on these seven leaders – who represent states that either have, host or rely on nuclear weapons- to see if they can commit to real action to eliminate the weapons that once flattened Hiroshima, or whether it will all be empty rhetoric. So in the coming month we’ll be ramping up the pressure on them to do the right thing!
The signs aren’t looking great so far. Earlier this week, the G7 foreign ministers met in Japan, and their statement neglected to acknowledge how their own nuclear weapons policies including foreign stationing, modernising their arsenals and the implicit threat to use these weapons in their nuclear doctrines undermine global security. They also failed to present any new or concrete ideas for moving towards the elimination of nuclear weapons.
In May, the G7 leaders will have to do better. Reports indicate the leaders have committed to meet with atomic bomb survivors, hibakusha, during their visit. The call of the hibakusha is loud and clear – we need to prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons. The UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) is the clearest path to doing so.
That is why we’re spending this month making these leaders feel the pressure:
That is why we’re spending this month making these leaders feel the pressure:
• Last week, ICAN coordinated with hundreds of civil society organisations around the world to present a set of joint demands to the G7 from the official civil society engagement group, the C7.
• Next week, on 25-27 April, the G7 Hiroshima Youth Summit will bring together over 50 participants to meet with survivors, visit Hiroshima, connect with others in advance of the G7 summit and announce the recommendations they’ve developed together for G7 leaders.
Immediately afterwards, the G7 Parliamentarian Forum for the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons – held in Tokyo and Hiroshima on April 28th to 30th – will bring together elected officials from all 7 states to discuss and recognise the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons, condemn threats to use them, and discuss ways to eliminate them altogether through the TPNW.
We hope these events will inspire and empower the participants to go back to their countries and demand action from their governments, so that the leaders feel the pressure even before they arrive. And in the coming weeks, we will keep you posted on ways you can get involved, particularly if you are also in a G7 state.
And of course, we will be sharing a lot of our activities on social media next week, so make sure you are following us (we’re on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Tiktok and LinkedIn) and tune in to the livestream from the Youth Summit’s public event on April 26th here.
Searing heatwave hitting Southern and South Eastern Asia
Much of southern and southeastern Asia is enduring a deadly,
record-smashing heat wave, one that’s being called the continent’s worst
ever recorded in April. Several all-time record high temperatures have been
broken, including a torrid 113.7 degrees in Tak, Thailand, the nation’s
hottest reading on record. Laos also recorded its highest reliable
temperature in its history earlier this week, with 108.9 degrees at Luang
Prabang, reported climatologist and weather historian Maximiliano Herrera.
As the searing heat spread from India to China to Thailand to Japan,
Herrera called it a “monster Asian heat wave like none before.”
USA Today 19th April 2023
One in three people on the planet hit by ‘monster Asian heatwave’. The
searing heat has spread across large parts of south and southeast Asia in
recent weeks, and impacted more than a dozen countries including India,
China, Thailand, Laos, Bangladesh, Turkmenistan, Japan and Korea. The
temperature hit a scorching 44.6 degrees Celsius in the western province of
Tak, Thailand this week, the hottest temperature ever recorded in the
country. Thailand’s Meteorological Department warned that the baking
weather would continue into next week.
Independent 20th April 2023
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/asia-heatwave-india-china-thailand-b2323666.html
Nuclear reactor in Antarctica turned out to be a dud.
Why Navy Seabees built a nuclear power plant on Antarctica, We are the Mighty, Miguel Ortiz April 21, 2023
U.S. Naval Construction Battalions, better known as Seabees, are famous for their building projects in some of the most austere conditions. Their mottos “We build, We fight” and “Can Do” are perhaps best exemplified in the construction of the first and only nuclear power plant on Antarctica……………………..
In August 1960, Congress approved the construction of a nuclear power plant at McMurdo Station. Martin Marietta was contracted to build the reactor named PM-3A. Designed to be portable and delivered by LC-130, the reactor’s fuel assembly was roughly the size of an oil drum. Although McMurdo Station is accessible by ship, it was hoped that nuclear plants could be expanded to facilities deeper in Antarctica that are only accessible by aircraft……………………………………………………….
Unfortunately, the nuclear plant was found to be about 72% reliable with 438 malfunctions in its lifetime. Moreover, newer diesel-electric generators would require less staff, be more reliable and pose no risk of nuclear radiation. The PM-3A suffered minor cracks in its containment vessel which leaked coolant water. All of these factors resulted in the plant’s shutdown in September 1972……………………. https://www.wearethemighty.com/history/why-navy-seabees-built-a-nuclear-power-plant-on-antarctica/
Maori workers exposed to radiation in cleaning up USA’s failed nuclear reactor in Antarctica
Detour: Antarctica – Kiwis ‘exposed to radiation’ at Antarctic power plant, https://www.nzherald.co.nz/travel/detour-antarctica-kiwis-exposed-to-radiation-at-antarctic-power-plant/NY5WTQ72JF4OFUW4F35ZSUCB6U/ 8 Jan, 2022 By Thomas Bywater, Thomas Bywater is a writer and digital producer for Herald Travel
In a major new Herald podcast series, Detour: Antarctica, Thomas Bywater goes in search of the white continent’s hidden stories. In this accompanying text series, he reveals a few of his discoveries to whet your appetite for the podcast. You can read them all, and experience a very special visual presentation, by clicking here. To follow Detour: Antarctica, visit iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts.
The Waitangi Tribunal will consider whether NZ Defence Force personnel were appropriately warned of potential exposure to radiation while working at a decommissioned nuclear reactor in Antarctica.
It’s among a raft of historic claims dating from 1860 to the present day before the Military Veterans Inquiry.
After an initial hearing in 2016, the Waitangi Tribunal last year admitted the Antarctic kaupapa to be considered alongside the other claims.
“It’s been a bloody long journey,” said solicitors Bennion Law, the Wellington firm representing the Antarctic claimants.
Between 1972 and the early 1980s, more than 300 tonnes of radioactive rubble was shipped off the continent via the seasonal resupply link.
Handled by US and New Zealand personnel without properly measuring potential exposure, the submission argues the Crown failed in its duty of care for the largely Māori contingent, including NZ Army Cargo Team One.
“This failure of active protection was and continues to be in breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi,” reads the submission.
The rubble came from PM3A, a portable nuclear power unit on Ross Island, belonging to the US Navy. Decommissioned in 1972, its checkered 10-year operating history led it to be known as ‘Nukey Poo’ among base inhabitants. After recording 438 operating errors it was shut off for good.
Due to US obligations to the Antarctic Treaty, nuclear waste had to be removed.
Peter Breen, Assistant Base Mechanic at New Zealand’s Scott Base for 1981-82, led the effort to get similar New Zealand stories heard.
He hopes that NZDF personnel involved in the cleanup of Ross Island might get medallic recognition “similar to those who were exposed at Mururoa Atoll”. Sailors were awarded the Special Service Medal Nuclear Testing for observing French bomb sites in the Pacific in 1973, roughly the same time their colleagues were helping clear radioactive material from Antarctica.
A public advisory regarding potential historic radiation exposure at McMurdo Station was published in 2018.
Since 1975 the Waitangi Tribunal has been a permanent commission by the Ministry of Justice to raise Māori claims relating to the Crown’s obligations in the Treaty of Waitangi.
The current Military Veterans’ Kaupapa includes hearings as diverse as the injury of George Nepata while training in Singapore, to the exposure of soldiers to DBP insecticides during the Malayan Emergency.
Commenced in 2014 in the “centenary year of the onset of the First World War” the Māori military veterans inquiry has dragged on to twice the duration of the Great War.
Of the three claimants in the Antarctic veterans’ claim, Edwin (Chaddy) Chadwick, Apiha Papuni and Kelly Tako, only Tako survives.
“We’re obviously concerned with time because we’re losing veterans,” said Bennion Law.
Detour: Antarctica is a New Zealand Herald podcast. You can follow the series on iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 