Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

TODAY: Vitriolic hatred of Arabs and Russians versus THINKING and practical military strategy.

This little post is based on the video above, and the long transcript at “Richard D. Wolff & Michael Hudson: Middle East Exploding, Ukraine Crumbling! the US Take Action?.“

These voices of sanity won’t be heard on the mainstream media – which prefers to obsess over “border incursions and the ingestion of cats and dogs and other minor matters because the big ones aren’t a problem“

While discussing the history of the present crises, Wolff and Hudson show us the danger that we are in: – “the mentality we’re dealing with:

the State Department and the National Security Agency and the Democratic Party leadership, with its basis in the military-industrial complex, is absolutely committed to “if we can’t have our way, then who wants to live in such a world.” …………. what Putin said was, “well, who wants to live in a world without Russia after all?”

The public is being mesmerised into the idea that people of different religions, different languages and ethnicities, cannot get along together. Thus a one-state solution for Israel is seen as impossible, and an autonomous region in the Donbass of Ukraine, or at this stage Donbass as part of Russia, is seen as impossible.

How is this mesmerisation achieved?

The authors outline the background – the individuals within American officialdom, who have, over time, fostered the hatreds that foment conflict.- . “Everything that’s happened today was planned out just 50 years ago back in 1973 and 1974” …… ” Henry ‘Scoop’ Jackson”… “Herman Kahn, the model for Dr. Strange Love” and “the Hudson Institute” ……Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Pearl, Douglas Fife”…

They go on to explain how the USA’s goal of domination can no longer be pursued by U.S. army invasions and occupations of foreign countries.  “today’s tactics are limited to bombing, not occupying, countries” Now it depends on foreign troops to do the fighting – and that needs zealous fanaticism among those foreign countries – to supply the troops :

 “that’s willing to fight to the last member of its country — the last Afghan, the last Israeli, the last Ukrainian — you really need a country whose spirit is one of hatred towards the other”

“The whole idea of the Ukrainians and Israelis is to bomb civilians, not military targets, but civilians. It’s a fight literally to destroy the population under an ideology of genocide. And that is absolutely central. It’s not an accident – it’s built in, built into the program. And Lebanon, even though it’s largely Christian, is part of that.“

“The foreign policy has backed Israel and Ukraine, providing them with arms, bribing their leaders with enormous sums of money, and electronic satellite guidance for everything they’re doing.’

Here’s where Zionism comes in, as distinct from the secular Jews, the successful middle-class assimilationists who are for peace. The Zionists have “that visceral hatred of Islam” . Also there is “the visceral hatred of Russia, specifically for anti-Semitism of past centuries,“

In Ukraine, and in some parts of Europe, there is also that visceral hatred of Russia, with memories of the Stalinist genocidal regime.

But guess what? – religious fervour and hatred is not limited to Jewish Zionists, Islamic theocracies, Ukrainian zealots, – now we have Christian Evangelicals joining in. Now there is:

“a marriage of convenience here between the Zionists …and…it’s in the evangelical community…..The biggest festivals every year of Israeli films are held in mega-churches of the Protestant faith in this country, not in synagogues. “

The only way that these suicidal wars can continue, is if the governments – of Ukraine, of Israel, and especially of the USA, can maintain the public mood of anger and hatred of Russians, of Hamas, of Hezbollah, of China, …. of whoever .

To maintain that mood requires a compliant media.

No problem there: – conflict, hatred – all that brings in far more attention and money, than wimpy, calm, discussion and diplomacy. can ever do. (An interesting example here is the current legal battle in the Murdoch family – a calmer, more reasonable Murdoch media would be less profitable – a prospect that appalls old Rupert Murdoch)

And the corporate media is embedded on the nuclear-military-corporate -industrial -political complex, – so the media owners like things the way they are.

 Here is the irony: “the opponents of all this are the U.S. military“…..….” there is an opposition right now between the army – we’ll call them the realists – who say that if you really want to extend the war, it’s not going to work”

What is to be done? Michael Hudson poses the question: ‘

“Who are the Americans, who, with their donors backing them, who are going to say, “yes, we prefer saving civilization to making money this week and next week for living in the short term. The American point of view is short term; the rest of the world is taking a longer term position – who’s going to win?“

October 10, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Australian nuclear news headlines Oct 7 – 14.

Headlines as they come in :

October 10, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Labor springs surprise nuclear power committee to call Coalition bluff on energy policy.

 https://reneweconomy.com.au/labor-springs-surprise-nuclear-power-committee-to-call-coalition-bluff-on-energy-policy/ 10 Oct 24
The Labor government has sprung a surprise on the last sitting of the winter parliament by establishing a parliamentary select committee to inquire into the viability of nuclear power.

The committee is not designed to support any shift in Labor government policy, but more to call out the Coalition bluff, and fill in the the lack of details, and costings, of its own nuclear power plans.

The committee has been proposed and will be chaired by Labor’s Dan Repacholi, the MP for the Hunter region which is host to one of seven sites identified by Opposition leader Peter Dutton and energy spokesman Ted O’Brien for their nuclear power plants.

The committee is expected to report by April 30, but given that the next federal election is now almost certain to be held in May next year, it can also issue an interim report.

Its term of reference are focused on the unknown and contested parts of the Coalition’s nuclear policy, including the costs and timeframes of both large scale and small modular reactors, its potential share of the country’s energy mix, water and waste issues, enrichment capabilities, and state and federal regulations.

The committee will have a majority four members appointed by the government, two from the opposition and one cross-bencher. O’Brien sought to make it three government and 3 opposition, but the motion failed.

The decision to create the committee comes just weeks after Dutton failed to outline details of his nuclear power plans at a CEDA event where he was expected to do just that. His claims that nuclear will deliver cheaper prices to consumers, and that the first reactor can deliver power by 2035, have been rejected by virtually everyone in the energy industry.

Federal energy and climate minister Chris Bowen told parliament on Thursday that nuclear is clearly the most expensive form of energy.

Bowen said O’Brien had refused an invitation to debate the issue on ABC’s Q&A program. I said yes, he said no,” Bowen said.

“Report after report shows that the Oppositions plan will push prices up. Professor Rod Sims said maybe $200 a year. Dr Dylan McConnell said $400 or $500 a year. Dr Roger Dargerville said $1,000 a year. And of course, we’ve also seen the report from IEEFA which said $665 a year on average.”

Repacholi told the house earlier on Thursday that he had been “out and about in the Hunter electorate” listening to people about the opposition’s proposed nuclear scheme.

“One thing that has been absolutely clear is that people have many questions. Whether they support or oppose the scheme, the questions raised by Australians show that they want more detail. Right now, the information Australians need to fully understand the proposal is simply not there.”

In a shock move early this morning, leader of the House Tony Burke moved a motion to establish the inquiry which would report back by April 30, 2025, but it can issue an interim report.

October 10, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment