Australian news, and some related international items

Rare admission from Australia’s corporate media that hosting America’s Pine Gap surveillance system makes Australia a legitimate target for long-range ICBMs

Jennings says Americans would defend Taiwan by fighting from bases in Australia.

Arrows at top indicate militrary “bases” ie; TARGETS in Northern Australia

RAAF base Curtin RAAF base Darwin RAAF base Tindal. HMAS Cairns Lavarack Baracks Townsville

The BIG TARGET is Joint Defence Facility Pine Gap – in the centre

Arrows further South indicate military bases ie; TARGETS

Naval Communications Station Harold E Holt RAAF Base Amberley

Australian Defence Satellit Communications Station Kojarena

Fleet Base West – Royal Australian Navy Fleet Base East Royal Australian Navy

Joint Defence Facility Pine Gap

“Five defence experts assembled by The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age for Red Alert, a special review of Australia’s national security, agree such a conflict could break out within three years and would almost certainly involve Australia.

In the first three days of a war, he says Beijing would be tempted to target Australian military bases with a long-range intercontinental ballistic missile attack to minimise our usefulness in the conflict.

“If China seriously wants to go after Taiwan in a military sense, the only way they can really contemplate quick success is to pre-emptively attack those assets that might be a threat to them. That means Pine Gap goes,” he says, referring to the top secret US-Australian base in the Northern Territory that the US uses to detect nuclear missile launches.

…………………………….. Take Australia’s military bases. These facilities – especially those shared with or controlled by the US – are obvious targets for an adversary.

……………………………. Ryan says there is a strong agreement among military strategists that a war over Taiwan would “involve strikes on US bases, on fuel and munitions holdings, ships across the region, including our own country potentially”.

………………………….. Jennings says Americans would defend Taiwan by fighting from bases in Australia.………………………………………………………………………………………………

Passing the Zelensky test

………………………. “How many Australian leaders would pass the ‘Zelensky test’?” he asks, referring to Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky. “How many could get out there and say, ‘I don’t need a ride, I need ammunition’……………….

March 10, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Australian Media Are Outright Telling Us They Are Feeding Us War Propaganda About China

Caitlin’s Newsletter, 8 March 23

The mass media in Australia have been churning out brazen propaganda pieces to manufacture consent for war with China, and what’s interesting is that they’re basically admitting to doing this deliberately.

Australians are uniquely susceptible to propaganda because we have the most concentrated media ownership in the western world, dominated by a powerful duopoly of Nine Entertainment and the Murdoch-owned News Corp. Both of those media megacorporations have recently put out appalling propaganda pieces about the need for Australians to rapidly prepare to go to war with China in defense of Taiwan, and in both of those instances have straightforwardly told their audiences that there’s an urgent need to effect a psychological change in the way all Australians think about this war.

Nine Entertainment’s Sydney Morning Herald and The Age have been busy flooding the media with testimony from a panel of war machine-funded “experts” who say Australia must hasten to get ready to join the United States in a hot war with China in the next three years. Yesterday’s dual front-page propaganda assault featured imagery of Chinese war planes flying straight at the reader, awash in red and emblazoned with the words “RED ALERT” to help everyone understand how evil and communist China is.

“Today’s Sydney Morning Herald and Age front-page stories on Australia’s supposed war risk with China represents the most egregious and provocative news presentation of any newspaper I have witnessed in over 50 years of active public life,” former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating opined in response to the publications.

“Apart from the outrageous illustrations of jet aircraft being shown leaving a profiled red-coloured map of China, the extent of the bias and news abuse is, I believe, unparalleled in modern Australian journalism,” he added.

In the first installment of their “Red Alert” propaganda series, SMH and The Age share that their empire-funded panelists believe there’s a need to bring about a “psychological shift” in the public’s attitude toward war with China, with one panelist asserting that “the nation’s leaders should trust the public enough to include them in what can be a confronting discussion” about the need to prepare for that war.

In the second “Red Alert” installment, this same message is repeated, saying that “Australia’s vulnerabilities are not only physical, but psychological,” and again repeating the need to get everyone talking and thinking about the possibility of war with China.

“It is a real national taboo to think about the likelihood of a conflict in anything other than the most remotely theoretical perspective,” says Peter Jennings of the war machine-funded propaganda firm Australian Strategic Policy Institute, countering that “we will sleepwalk into disaster unless we openly discuss unpalatable scenarios.”

Saying that the real threat is “complacency rather than alarmism,” think tanker Lavina Lee urges Australia to confront “the possibility that we might go to war and what would happen either way. We should talk about what the world would look like if we win and what it would look like if we lose.”

Over and over again they are telling us that something must be done to change the way Australians think and talk about a war with China, in articles designed to change the way Australians think and talk about war with China. They are doing the exact thing they say must be done, while explaining why it needs to be done. They are brainwashing us with propaganda while explaining why it is necessary to brainwash us with propaganda.

Last month Murdoch’s Sky News Australia released an astonishingly propagandistic hour-long special titled “China’s aggression could start new world war,” which in its attempts to show “China’s aggression” hilariously flashed a graphic of all the US military operations currently encircling China. The segment features footage of bayonet-wielding Chinese forces overdubbed with ominous cinematic Bad Guy music, and in Sky News’ promotions for the special all the footage from China was tinged red to help viewers understand how evil and communist China is.

Toward the end of the special, Sky News’ empire-backed “experts” tell their audience that Australia needs to double its military spending, and that those in power need to explain to them why this is so important…………………………………….

Again, they’re saying there’s a desperate need to explain to Australians why they need to make sacrifices to prepare for war with China, while explaining to Australians that they need to make sacrifices to prepare for war with China. They are openly telling us that we need to be propagandized for our own good, while filling our heads with propaganda. 

They’re not just filling our minds with war propaganda, they are openly telling us that war propaganda is good for us.

………………………….. This latest propaganda piece says that in the event of a hot war with China, our nation may be struck with intercontinental ballistic missiles, we may find ourselves cut off from the world while the fuel supplies we rely on dry up in a matter of weeks, and we may find our infrastructure rendered useless by massive Chinese cyberattacks.

The empire-funded “experts” acknowledge that this will not be because China is just randomly hostile to Australia, but because we are a US military and intelligence asset who will support the US empire in its war:

But why would China use its limited resources to attack Australia instead of focusing solely on seizing Taiwan? Because of the strategically crucial role Australia is expected to play for the United States in the conflict.

“Our geography means we are a southern base for the Americans for what comes next,” Ryan says. “That’s how they’re seeing us. They want our geography. They want us to build bases for several hundred thousand Americans in due course like in World War II.”

Interestingly, the article contains a rare acknowledgement in the mainstream press that the presence of the American surveillance base Pine Gap makes Australia a legitimate target for ICBMs:

At no time is it ever suggested that the fact that going to war with China could cost Australia its shipping lanes and infrastructure and even get us nuked means we should probably reconsider this grand plan of going to war with China. At no time is it ever suggested that riding Washington’s bloodsoaked coattails into World War Three against our primary trading partner might not be a good idea. At no time is it ever suggested that de-escalation, diplomacy and detente might be a better approach than rapidly increasing militarism and brinkmanship.

And at no time is it ever suggested that we should reconsider our role as a US military/intelligence asset, despite the open admission that this is exactly what is endangering us. We’re not being told to prepare for war with China because China is going to attack us, we’re being told to prepare for war with China because our masters in DC are planning to drag us into one. We’re not being told to prepare for war to defend ourselves, we’re being told to prepare for war because our rulers plan to attack China.

We see this in the way Australia is assembling its war machinery, buying up air-to-ground missiles that cannot possibly be used defensively because their sole purpose is for taking out an enemy nation’s air defenses. We see it in the way Australia is buying up sea mines, which as journalist Peter Cronau has noted is less suitable for protecting our 34,000 km of coastline than for blockading the shipping lanes of an enemy nation you wish to lay siege to. We see it in the fact that China’s military budget remains steady at around one and-a-half percent of its GDP, while the US spends 3.4 percent and Australia is being persuaded to double our share from two to four percent. 

We’re not being prepared for a war to defend ourselves, we’re being prepared for a war of aggression to secure US unipolar hegemony — one that has been in the works for many years. We must resist this, and we must resist the tsunami of mass media propaganda that is designed to manufacture our consent for it. China

March 9, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, media, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Rare type of leukaemia, other health effects, in British veterans of nuclear testing


“My task was to go in and pick up all the radioactive debris, load them into my truck and take them to the decontamination centre.

“I had no protection whatsoever. The only people who had protection on Christmas Island were civilian AWREs – Atomic Weapons Research Establishment people.” 

A study undertaken by Sue Rabbitt Roff, a social scientist at Dundee University in 1999, found that of 2,261 children born to veterans, 39% were born with serious medical conditions. By contrast, the national incidence figure in Britain is around 2.5%.

“I want them to apologise to all the nuclear veterans for using us as experiments,” he said.   

I still maintain that they wanted to find out the level of radiation that a person could survive the nuclear bombs with.

I want them to apologise to all the nuclear veterans for using us as experiments’, says Fife Christmas Island veteran, July 4 2020  Michael Alexander. Here’s why nuclear test veteran Dave Whyte from Fife intends to campaign for justice “until the end”

In the 18 years that Christmas Island veteran Dave Whyte from Fife has been campaigning for “justice” for Britain’s nuclear test veterans, he has never held back with the language he has used to describe the Ministry of Defence’s treatment of British soldiers during the nuclear tests of the 1950s.
He has compared the nuclear tests with the “experiments of Nazi Doctor Joseph Mengele”, accused the MoD of treating soldiers as “guinea pigs” and made comparisons with the aftermath of “Chernobyl”.

He blames his exposure to the fallout from five atomic and hydrogen bomb blasts in 1958 for a catalogue of health problems he’s experienced over the years including the loss of all his teeth at 25 and the discovery in his mid-30s that he was sterile.

The Ministry of Defence, meanwhile, has said there is no valid evidence linking the nuclear tests to ill health.

But despite numerous attempts at legal action against the MoD over the years, which, he admits have “hit every brick wall available”, the now 83-year-old, of Kirkcaldy, is refusing to give up as he continues searching for an admission that he, and thousands of other servicemen – now dwindling in numbers – were exposed to more radiation than the authorities have ever admitted. 

Born and raised in Montrose before a spell living in Edinburgh and Germany where his sergeant major father served with the Royal Artillery, Mr Whyte was 22-years-old and serving with the Royal Engineers when he was sent to Christmas Island in the South Pacific in 1958.

The Cold War was at its height and Mr Whyte was stationed there, off the north-eastern coast of Australia, to assist with British nuclear tests.

His job was to collect samples afterwards.

At the time the stakes were high. Amid real fears that the Cold War could escalate into open warfare with the USSR, Britain was determined that it should have its own nuclear deterrent.

In all, Britain and the USA caused some 40 nuclear test explosions in the Pacific region between 1952 and 1962.

Something like 21,000 British servicemen were exposed to these explosions.

But little did Mr Whyte and his colleagues realise that in years to come, some would suffer ill health and in some cases premature death.

Some would suffer from rare forms of leukaemia.

Others reported congenital deformities in their children with a disproportionate number of stillbirths.

“I was at Grapple Y – the largest hydrogen bomb exploded by Britain,” said Mr Whyte. Continue reading

July 6, 2020 Posted by | General News | Leave a comment

No advantage in ‘new’ back-to-the-future nuclear reactors for Australia. Is the real motive military?

It is a spurious argument to say any reactor type will reduce Australia’s power industry high level nuclear waste when we produce zero at the moment.
only a devotee of nuclear power would see any advantage in introducing any type of nuclear reactor to Australia. Unless the real motive for such a reactor is a military motive. If so, the O’Brien Committee and the government need to come clean on that.
The waste from the very first molten salt fuelled and cooled reactor, as we saw in the previous post, continues to cost US taxpayers money 60 years later.
The sub text of the picture admits that nuclear industry cannot keep going in the way that it has done since the days between 1945 and now. The industry would disappear if it did not “modernise”.  
Seeing as there actually no new concepts, why not look again, in desperation, at the rejected designs of the past?

Part 2 of A Study of the “Report of the inquiry into the prerequisites for nuclear energy in Australia” Australian Parliamentary Committee 2020.       The Industry Push to Force Nuclear Power in Australia    

The Parliamentary Committee recommends, in part, the following: Recommendation 2

The Committee recommends that the Australian Government undertake a body of work to progress the understanding of nuclear energy technology by:

  1. Commissioning the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), or other equivalent expert reviewer, to undertake a technological assessment on nuclear energy reactors to:
    1. produce a list of reactors that are defined under the categories of Generation I, II, III, III+ and IV;
    2. advise on the technological status of Generation III+ and Generation IV reactors including small modular reactors;
    3. advise on the feasibility and suitability of Generation III+ and Generation IV reactors including small modular reactors in the Australian context; and
    4.  formulate a framework to be used by Government to monitor the status of new and emerging nuclear technologies.The first item of the recommendation – for ANTSO to compile of reactors according to each one’s status within the table of Generation – 1 to 4 might be a good idea, for many of the Generation IV reactor designs were first envisaged and trialled in the 1950s and 1960s before being discarded. Whereas, at the present time, and since the time the US Department of Energy sought ways of halting the decline of nuclear power’s percentage contribution to global energy supply in the 1990s. For that is the time that the idea of resurrecting old designs and calling them new and “Generation IV” and re marketing them first arose

The waste from the very first molten salt fuelled and cooled reactor, as we saw in the previous post, continues to cost US taxpayers money 60 years later.

In 2014 the Brookings Institute published an essay by Josh Freed entitled “Back to the Future, Advanced Nuclear Energy and the Battle Against Climate Change”. This essay is available to read at The cover illustration is very interesting.

The titled cover includes the disclosure that the nuclear industry sees a future for previously discarded, old reactor designs. It shows a nuclear reactor sitting below sea level, protected by a combined Dyke / Causeway for levitating vehicles. Huge waves threaten the Dyke, vehicles, reactor and giant Science Woman, who is watching on with skilled impartiality. In the distance, buildings taken straight from the cartoon “The Jetsons” appear. The illustration is also, actually, a reinterpretation of the events which occurred in March 2011 at Fukushima. The sub text of the picture admits that nuclear industry cannot keep going in the way that it has done since the days between 1945 and now. The industry would disappear if it did not “modernise”.

The fission industry is dying as more and more competition arises in the form of alternative technologies in the energy generation technology market. Even Fusion research continues to make inroads toward the goal of successful and economic power generation, but it still a few years off. The 1930s fission patents of Szilard are long in the tooth and actually, in terms of economic energy production has always been a failure. Kick started by governments, the standard designs are trusted by fewer and fewer people, especially throughout Asia. Westinghouse Nuclear, GE Nuclear, Toshiba Nuclear are all bankrupt. British Nuclear Fuels Ltd is broke, Sellafield is broke and a growing cleanup cost liability.

So increasingly, the industry needs a unique selling point, something new and radical, something that solves the old nuclear problems. It needs a product which never fails or spills radioactive materials into the biosphere, it needs a product that will not fail because the grid goes down for a few days, it cannot melt down, catch fire like Windscale, Monju and Fermi 1 did.

Seeing as there actually no new concepts, why not look again, in desperation, at the rejected designs of the past? The essay by Josh Freed (his real name) mentions a company called Transatomic. In contrast to the contents of the Freed article, which claims the old new reactor envisioned by Transatomic run on nuclear waste, Transatomic make no such claim. They state that their proposed reactor would run on liquid uranium fuel. As per the original 50s/60s design. They claim that the Molten salt reactor would create less weight of high level waste.

Because the waste would be continuously removed from the reactor. he corporate website for Transatomic is here: And this, from their web site, is precisely what they promise: Molten salt reactors like Transatomic Power’s are fueled by uranium dissolved in a liquid salt. The fuel is not surrounded by cladding, making it possible to continuously remove the fission products that would otherwise stop the nuclear reaction. The liquid fuel is also much more resistant to structural damage from radiation than solid materials – simply, liquids have very little structure to be damaged. With proper filtration, liquid fuel can remain in a molten salt reactor for decades, allowing us to extract much more of its energy.” end quote. They claim their reactor design produces half the nuclear waste of a comparable conventional light water reactor.

This still does not solve the high level nuclear waste stockpile. It adds to it. Given the competition nuclear power has in the modern world, given that the need for ‘baseload’ energy is now shown to be nonsense, what would 1 or 2 small modular molten salt reactors add to Australia? Would they merely replace coal fire powered generation? SA has not had coal fired electricity for some years now. A combination of solar, wind and storage in SA means SA is a net electricity exporter to the Eastern States. We have back up of gas fired generation which very rarely needed.

Sadly for Transatomic, Green Tech Media state the following at announced the following in 2018:

“Transatomic to Shutter It’s Nuclear Reactor Plans, Open-Source It’s Tecnology.

The startup backed by Peter Thiel won’t be able to build its advanced reactor designs—but it’s making its IP available for others to carry on the work.” Source: Jeff St. John, 25 Sept given above.

This gift to the world by Transatomic occurred at the time in Australia when various people began a bombastic and highly enthused campaign to convince Australians that Molten Salt Reactors, fuelled with either Uranium or Lithium or nuclear waste, were Jesus Mark 2. “We’ll Save Yer, just like we did in the Cold War. Solar and batteries are for whimps. We Can’t have solar and wind power in Australia, its a threat to Queensland Coal. Let’s nuclear instead and all make a quick a buck with IP”.

Funny that. Talk about drumming up business prospects and investment funds, and in 2020, floating a float on the back of sympathetic and one eyed Parliamentary Inquiry!

Double or Nothing?

The promise made by Transatomics is that molten fuel/molten salt reactors made with modern techniques will reduce by roughly half the amount of high level nuclear waste generated per unit of power generated. However, at the current time the amount of high level nuclear waste (ie, fission products -the transmutation products described in Szilard’s 1930s patents) and the release of the gaseous forms of these substances into the atmosphere, generated by Australian electricity generation is ZERO.

So the introduction of Molten Salt Reactor into Australia for electricity production will RAISE the production of high level nuclear waste from this activity by 100%. It won’t half, it won’t double, it will increase by x grams per watt. It is a spurious argument to say any reactor type will reduce Australia’s power industry high level nuclear waste when we produce zero at the moment. And if Australia continues on its non nuclear path, that zero rate of power related high level waste will remain zero forever. So where is the advantage for Australia in introducing power reactors in the civilian sphere?

I am led to believe that it will take between 10 – 20 years for any Australian nuclear power reactor to come on line from the time it is approved. By that stage the competition from other forms of low carbon power production will be much, much more severe than it is now. And today, in my opinion, only a devotee of nuclear power would see any advantage in introducing any type of nuclear reactor to Australia. Unless the real motive for such a reactor is a military motive. If so, the O’Brien Committee and the government needs to come clean on that. Not that they will. Such an admission is likely to be impossible for several reasons. Besides, no nuclear industry is free to fully disclose the corporate production and disposition of “special nuclear materials”.

So, I suppose in the end the Committee recommend ANTSO compile a list of reactor types and nominate the current industry PR terms for each type. For the Generational types (1 through IV) have actually very little to do with the chronological order and date range over which each type first manifest as a prototype. The small World War 2 German reactors, of which there were many, are little known, and the US ALSOS project has not disclosed that much about them. Germany had at least 4 reactor programs, 7 ways of enriching uranium. Japan had an Army fission project, a Navy fission project, an Air Force Fission project. All were formally abandoned, ironically , in July 1945. Germany was able to enrich uranium.

This is ancient history, but the world remains fairly ignorant I think, as to which reactor type is the safest, most economic, most reliable and so on. So far, all I have heard from the nuclear industry is PR manufactured originally by the US Department of Energy which relabelled the various reactor designs originated in the US according to a “Generation Number” which is completely detached from the chronological sequence in which they occurred.

In World War 2 Germany was working on heavy water reactors. Does that mean Hitler’s heavy water reactors were Generation III+ ? Of course not. They were Gen 1. As was the Canadian heavy water reactor of World War 2 which supplemented the US plutonium production at Hansford. If the Candu reactor is Gen III+ I’m Father Christmas. What the US DOE is doing with its naming is using marketing techniques to sell old concepts as new ideas.

Car companies do the same when naming cars. Makers of garbage trucks send salesmen around to Council depots extolling the virtues of the Gen IV 2 ton rubbish truck, complete with compactor, a tilt tray and 8 track stereo sound. And Depot managers get given toy model rubbish trucks they sit on their book cases to show how technically astute they are in the field of garbage.

Same deal here. It’s a no brainer. Yet, start collecting lists from ANSTO Mr. O’Brien. Great idea sir. It’ll keep you off the streets for awhile.

March 3, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics, spinbuster | Leave a comment

Rare earths AND URANIUM company allying with Clean Energy Council

a-cat-CANWe do need to keep an eye on rare earth developments. In the longer term, recycling must be the major way to obtain these. In the shorty term, rare earths are needed, but require vigilant management because of their radioactive toxicity, and need for secure radioactive wastes disposal
AND – this company is involved in uranium exploration ” Its projects include Nowthanna Uranium project, McKeddies project and West Arnhem Tenure. Its wholly owned subsidiaries include Australian Uranium Limited and Cabe Resources Limited.”
Yellow Rock Resources joins Clean Energy Council of Australia Tuesday, June 02, 2015 by Proactive Investors

Yellow Rock Resources has been accepted as an associate member of the Clean Energy Council of Australia.

Yellow Rock Resources (ASX:YRR) has been accepted as an associate member of the Clean Energy Council (CEC) of Australia.

The membership will allow Yellow Rock to engage with industry participants and policy makers.

Yellow Rock’s admission as a member demonstrates the company’s commitment to developing its world-class Gabanintha vanadium deposit in Western Australia specifically for emerging technology servicing the renewable energy market.

Gabanintha is a project which has the ability to support renewables as a supplier of vanadium for Vanadium Redox Battery technology.

Yellow Rock in discussions with renewable energy suppliers

Yellow Rock has initiated discussions with renewable energy suppliers SunEdison and Total Energy Australia, among others, focused on potential collaborative opportunities at Gabanintha.

Vincent Algar, chief executive, commented: “The latest excellent drilling results give us another opportunity to expand our relationships in the financial and renewable energy sectors.

“Gabanintha is a project which has the ability to support renewables as a supplier of vanadium for battery storage technology.

“In addition, Gabanintha can be supported by renewable energy generation to reduce its own operating costs, making it a unique opportunity for investors.”

About Gabanintha

The Gabanintha deposit is an intrusive layered intrusive body smaller, but displaying similar characteristics to the igneous Bushveld Complex, host to some of the world’s most significant platinum, vanadium and chromite deposits.

The project will have continued newsflow over coming weeks as more results flow through from the recent reverse circulation drilling program. commence on receipt of all assay results.
Currently 167 historical drill holes support an Inferred Resource of 125 million tonnes at 0.70% vanadium, 8.64%TiO2 and 32.6% iron.

This includes a separate high grade Indicated and Inferred Resource of 60.4 million tonnes at 0.98% vanadium, 11.4% TiO2 and 42.15% iron.

June 4, 2015 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, rare earths, Western Australia | Leave a comment

Fukushima remembrance week – nuclear news

Some bits of good news – It’s time for some good news about protections for mother Earth.

Climate. 60 Climate Feedbacks & “A Better Catastrophe”.

Coronavirus. Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19): Weekly Epidemiological Update.

Nuclear. 11 March was the 12 year anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe. The Japanese government would prefer that this should be forgotten. Trouble is – the catastrophe is not over.

As an Australian, I am finding our media – TV, radio, newspapers – quite nauseating. All falling over themselves in an orgasmic joy over the decision to pay $squillions for motley USA-UK-pretend-Australian nuclear submarines, that will be useless for monitoring our coast, but useful for feeding the coffers of USA-UK weapons-makers who now seem to own their governments. Everyone’s on the bandwagon – even former PM Kevin Rudd, supposedly a friend of China, now twisting himself in knots with weasel words about China, as he’s about to be Australia’s ambassador to Washington.  We need a Diogenes, to go about Australian politics and media,  in daylight, with a lighted lantern, trying to find an honest person.

AUSTRALIA. Australian Media Are Outright Telling Us They Are Feeding Us War Propaganda About China. Rare admission from Australia’s corporate media that hosting America’s Pine Gap surveillance system makes Australia a legitimate target for long-range ICBMs. Australian corporate papers call for war with China, nuclear weapons and mass conscription.

. War over Taiwan: Australia’s Gang of Five. For Australia, horror of war over Taiwan is not inevitable. ‘Red Alert’ is a paper tiger.

The British-American coup that ended Australian independence.

Australia to buy 5 nuclear-powered submarines as part of AUKUS in violation of previous commitments to China. Albanese and the subs: a looming “Goat Rodeo”.

Aukus submarine deal: Australia expected to choose UK design, sources say. Nuclear submarine zealot Jonathon Mead tries hard to reassure Australians about the “sovereignty” safety etc of the $171 billion submarine purchase, (avoids mention of costs and wastes). Fixing a fatal, nuclear flaw in AUKUS. Port Kembla to be the target! – with nuclear submarines.

On anniversary of the Fukushima disaster, Australia must stand firm against nuclear. Meet the man who uncovered the scandal of nuclear testing in South Australia. Benjamin Cronshaw Submission – nuclear power a bad choice – would delay real climate action.


EDUCATION. Nuclear and space lobbies increase their grip on universities, a new example in UK . The extraordinary popularity of renewable energy university courses.

ENVIRONMENT. Campaigners claim permit change at Hinkley Point would kill billions of fish.

HEALTHWhy were studies canceled? The voices of the victims Social effects. 2 yrs after Fukushima nuclear disaster, gov’t not facing evacuees’ hardship.

LEGAL. Another executive goes to prison for lying about doomed nuclear project. National remembrance day , and huge civil case penalty for Tepco executives, but memory of Fukushima now fading in Japan.

OPPOSITION To NUCLEAR. In Taiwan, strong opposition to extending life of nuclear reactor.

PERSONAL STORIESFukushima’s first responders recall the disaster 12 years on.

PLUTONIUM. DOE wanted to quadruple plutonium pit production. For now, activists have stopped them.

POLITICS. The Nightmare Espionage Act That is Killing Julian Assange and the First Amendment Some ‘sober thinking’ remains in Ukraine as portions of population are in favor of peace talks.

POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACYSaudi Arabia Seeks U.S. Security Pledges, Nuclear Help. Saudi Arabia seeks US security guarantees, nuclear assistance in return for Israel normalisation.

PROTESTSFukushima Vigil Outside the UK’s Uranium Fuel Manufacturing Factory .

RADIATIONLow-dose radiation linked to increased lifetime risk of heart disease. Dr Ian Fairlie -Low-dose radiation a health danger in the nuclear industry , as well as in medicine.


SECRETS and LIESFake ‘nuclear bomb’ alert on TV and radio scares Russians.

SPACE. EXPLORATION, WEAPONS.  War in space: U.S. officials debating rules for a conflict in orbit.

SPINBUSTERHow the nuclear lobby scuttled the EU’s anti-greenwashing tool.

WASTESTwelve years after 3/11, dispute grows over Fukushima’s radioactive soil. What´s happening at Fukushima plant 12 years after meltdown? Massive amounts of fatally radioactive melted nuclear fuel remain inside the reactors. Pacific island leaders urge Japan to stop dumping nuclear waste into ocean: report. Graphite – deadly dirt or dusty diamonds? Ocean discharge is the worst plan for Fukushima waste water.  new blow to fishermen.

WAR and CONFLICT Observations on the NATO-Russia Ukrainian War. Ukraine: A war to end all wars in Europe. The Foreseeable End of Ukraine. Netanyahu justifies strikes on nuclear facilities. Romania: airborne troops among 100,000 U.S. forces in Europe poised for war with Russia.


March 13, 2023 Posted by | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

During the pandemic, health and wellbeing of the First Nations people is disregarded, as usual.

First Nations communities continue to be left behind, Eureka Street, Michele Madigan, 22 April 2020  

During the crisis that sweeps over us all, there has been a strong implicit admission by government that the health and wellbeing of the First Nations people in Australia has been long disregarded; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are the only group listed as vulnerable over the age of just 50 — a full two decades below that of the general population so listed.

On the other hand, while there have been literally billions of dollars allocated to the crisis in general and to very many organisations, it is astounding that the most vulnerable group of all remains at the bottom of the pile. First Nations people themselves and their allies remain nonplussed at the clear lack of resources allocated to First Nations people. No one left behind? The facts suggest otherwise.

Who else in our nation is living in housing with another 26 or so people?

This huge, rarely mentioned and ongoing deeply shameful situation regarding the health and housing of First Nations people comes into sharp relief by the present crisis…….

April 23, 2020 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL | Leave a comment

Compelling case against the Trans-Pacific Partnership

logo-anti-TPPhighly-recommendedSovereignty For International Investors (Trans-Pacific antnuke-relevantPartnership (TPP)) May 11th, 2015 Elizabeth Warren makes a compelling case against the Trans-Pacific Partnership in The Trans-Pacific Partnership clause everyone should oppose, where she says:…

ISDS [Investor-State Dispute Settlement] would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. laws — and potentially to pick up huge payouts from taxpayers — without ever stepping foot in a U.S. court. Here’s how it would work. Imagine that the United States bans a toxic chemical that is often added to gasoline because of its health and environmental consequences. If a foreign company that makes the toxic chemical opposes the law, it would normally have to challenge it in a U.S. court. But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators. If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages.

If that seems shocking, buckle your seat belt. ISDS could lead to gigantic fines, but it wouldn’t employ independent judges.Instead, highly paid corporate lawyers would go back and forth between representing corporations one day and sitting in judgment the next. Maybe that makes sense in an arbitration between two corporations, but not in cases between corporations and governments. If you’re a lawyer looking to maintain or attract high-paying corporate clients, how likely are you to rule against those corporations when it’s your turn in the judge’s seat? Continue reading

May 13, 2015 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics international | Leave a comment