Antinuclear

Crunch time for the nuclear lobby’s biggest lie (Small Modular Nuclear Reactors)?

22 July 2026, https://theaimn.net/crunch-time-for-the-nuclear-lobbys-biggest-lie-small-modular-nuclear-reactors/

There could be a big drama now, about Small Modular Nuclear Reactors sort of not really going to happen in the UK. But I don’t think so. The nuclear lobby is adept at twisting a negative outlook into a sorta positive one. And I’m sorry to say, but I think that Andy Burnham might just co-operate in this process.

At the moment, the UK, and the world, are waiting for the UK’s new progressive poster boy, Andy Burnham, to declare his policies on all sorts of things. His general theme is “left of centre”, socially progressive, with the emphasis on economic reform – “business-friendly socialism”. Most likely, Burnham’s approach to the big issues of climate and nuclear will be a cautious “business-as usual.” Those who are deeply concerned about climate and nuclear issues can hardly blame him. Unfortunately, the reality is that Burnham could never have got where he is now, if he bucked the prevailing system, with Labour now a kind of weaker Tory party.

At the moment, the UK, and the world, are waiting for the UK’s new progressive poster boy, Andy Burnham, to declare his policies on all sorts of things. His general theme is “left of centre”, socially progressive, with the emphasis on economic reform – “business-friendly socialism”. Most likely, Burnham’s approach to the big issues of climate and nuclear will be a cautious “business-as usual.” Those who are deeply concerned about climate and nuclear issues can hardly blame him. Unfortunately, the reality is that Burnham could never have got where he is now, if he bucked the prevailing system, with Labour now a kind of weaker Tory party.

What has this got to do with Small Modular Nuclear Reactors?

Well, as I have written before, the global nuclear lobby now depends on the UK to kick off the new nuclear renaissance, with a fleet of small nuclear reactors in the UK, as promised by the previous Prime Minister with his Great British Energy – Nuclear. The stated purpose is to provide the UK soon, with cheap, plentiful, clean, climate-friendly, proven technology, safe, community-welcomed, waste-free, peaceful electricity. In that statement there are already 10 lies. Of all those lies, I would say that “soon” is the biggest whopper of them all.

SOON

The most “exciting” SMR plan, that of Poland-based SGE (Synthos Green Energy), promises 14 SMRs in operation by 2034. That would provide about the same amount of electricity as one large nuclear reactor. However, SMRs that each provide 300 MW would provide very much more – but then they would have to be larger, and no longer qualify as “small”. Either way, that would be only a beginning – many, many more SMRs would be needed to meet the UK’s electricity needs. And, let’s not forget – the coming wave of data farms for artificial intelligence is going to probably double that need.

So, even in the most optimistic scenario, SMRs are not going to cut the mustard for showing the world that soon Small Modular Nuclear Reactors will power a nation. Of course the promise of “soon” also relates to the claim that SMRs are needed for action on climate change. Clearly, they are going to be irrelevant, too late for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, whereas we have renewable energy right now. And of course, but rarely mentioned – energy efficiency, energy conservation – the really effective way to reduce greenhouse emissions.

CHEAP

The next biggest whopper about Small Modular Nuclear Reactors is the statement that they would be cheap. Here we get into the minefield of deliberate obfuscation about the financial facts. The cost of building SMRs is likely to be astronomic, and the only practicable way is to build them en masse. That would mean that the company building them would need to have big orders, not just for one or two reactors. Big orders bring with them a heap of problems. Like an IKEA cupboard, these “modular” items are all the same – if you buy a whole lot of them they’d better all work out perfectly – no chance really to just try out one. Buyers are reluctant, and so are investors.

Of course, the argument will be that SMRs will provide cheap electricity. Well that absolutely would necessitate economies of scale. That was the reason that the idea of small reactors was abandoned in the past. Simply, a large reactor producing a huge amount of electricity has got to produce it more efficiently and cheaply. The proponents of SMRs never talk about the accompanying costs – insurance, the security staff required, the transport and disposal of toxic long-lasting wastes. The truth is, those proponents absolutely know that their product is in fact very expensive. And that is why the subservient corporate media consistently baffle us with convoluted arguments that minimise the cost to tax-payers. They know damn well that the only way that SMRs could possibly be developed is by government funding. Keir Starmer backed a Rolls Royce plan that would be blatantly funded by the tax-payer. The SGE plan purports to be privately funded, but it’s tangled up with various government-funded schemes.

These were 2 lies – but there are 8 more to go.

Plentiful? – well, apart from Russia and China’s 2 duds – SMR’s don’t actually exist – quite the reverse of plentiful.

Clean? They are still part of a dirty production system, starting from uranium mining, with its workers exposed to radiation, and its piles of radioactive tailings.

Climate-friendly? There is a whole chain of steps from mining through to waste disposal that involve fossil fuel energy.

Proven technology? Well, they don’t even exist.

Safe? SMRs can’t melt down in the same way as big reactors, but still contain radioactive material, a target for theft, terrorists or military attacks Can still have accidents releasing radiation.

Community-welcomed? This really is a big one, with a lack of proper consultation on plans – There’s strong resistance from some local groups, such as Radiation Free Lakeland.

Peaceful? The hidden military pressures behind the new push for small nuclear reactors.

Wastes? Stanford-led research finds small modular reactors will exacerbate challenges of highly radioactive nuclear waste.

Now that Starmer, with his big promises, has gone, it’s probably no longer up to the UK’s Prime Minister to lead the global charge on small nuclear reactors. Andy Burnham has to negotiate the whole troubled energy scene, try to be progressive, placate the fossil fuel lobbies, and the nuclear lobby. He has been very quiet on nuclear policy, but he is committed to the existing defence and AUKUS nuclear agreements. So for “peaceful” nuclear, he’s most likely to go for a compromise – SMRs, supporting just a few, rather than the much-touted “fleets” of them.

So, no doubt the USA will take up the torch – One Year After Executive Orders, U.S. Nuclear Energy Renaissance is in Full Swing.

The media is awash with the wonder of new nuclear reactors, in concert with the AI data farm boom. The few voices who call for restraint, and point out the problems, are drowned out by the cacophony of handouts from the companies promising SMRs, handouts faithfully regurgitated by the corporate media, and by those universities which have bought into the propaganda.

There are the many good, decent people, whose living depends on their work within the uranium-nuclear-defence industries. And communities that are caught up in the nuclear industry, and its associated government bonuses. And many professionals, especially journalists, who, if they paused to look at the whole picture, might see the folly and the danger and the lies, of this so much touted technology. And of course, politicians who would be out of a job if they opposed the sacred cows of new energy and nuclear defence. So the whole SMR juggernaut moves on, bit by bit, and has itself become one big lie.

July 24, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

The global small nuclear reactor bandwagon is led by Britain. It ought to fail, but will it?

14 July 2026 Noel Wauchope, https://theaimn.net/the-global-small-nuclear-reactor-bandwagon-is-led-by-britain-it-ought-to-fail-but-will-it/

Why on Earth does the Small Nuclear Reactor media bandwagon exist?

That’s a fair question, because it has been shown time and time again that small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) are not an economically viable way to provide electricity.

I can only conclude that there are other reasons for the present juggernaut of promotion of SMRs.

You may not have noticed the blithering onslaught of media promotion of SMRs going on over the past weeks, (interestingly, in conjunction with the political demise of Sir Keir Starmer). With the dramatic events in the Persian Gulf, and in climate extremities, dominating the media, a fuss about SMRs seems a small matter.

But it is not a small matter.

The global media juggernaut for SMRs is potentially essential for the survival of the global nuclear industry. If one nation sets up a multitude of, or even a few, small nuclear reactors, that will provide the necessary respectability for the industry – to be accepted as cheap. clean. safe, and embraced by local communities.

Hooray – Britain to the rescue!.

Now, there’s extraordinary excitement in both the British and overseas media. A current example:

The High Value Manufacturing (HVM) Catapult has launched a national consultation, to help UK industry capture the economic and industrial benefits of more than £100bn of expected investment in the country’s civil and defence nuclear programmes over the next decade. Industry, government, academia and regional partners are invited to contribute to the consultation through written submissions, stakeholder workshops and a programme of regional engagement running throughout 2026.

HVM Catapult doesn’t specifically state SMRs, but that’s where the UK media fervour is at. In a previous article, I have mentioned The Times, Telegraph, PR Newswire, Energy Live, Business Green, among the British enthusiasts. Internationally, there’s Construction News, Global Banking and Finance Review, World Nuclear News, Indux, and more.

What is new and remarkable about this UK SMR media fervour?

Well, there are two things. One is that it is all pitching the UK as the leader for the new nuclear renaissance. The other is that this will be a privately-led renaissance. Hence the importance of the “private” SGE £35bn plan for a fleet of SMRs across Britain, rather than the government supported Rolls Royce plan.

I digress here to point out that three nations have tried and failed to set up small nuclear reactors. Russia and China have each managed to develop one actually functioning small nuclear reactor. – in both cases – that took decades, and neither is working out very successfully – Russia – (Akademik Lomonosov floating NPP) and China (HTR-PM high temperature gas cooled reactor). The USA nearly got one happening – The Rise and Fall of NuScale: a nuclear cautionary tale.

So – at last it’s all going to happen ! And the UK is the leader – hip hip hooray! Except that the UK’s biggest SMR promoter, PM Keir Starmer is about to bow out at any moment. The policies of the heir apparent, Andy Burnham, are curiously unknown. He’s got a respectably Leftie background in supporting nuclear veterans, but I couldn’t find anything on his nuclear industry views. And, I’m inclined to think that he, or any new UK Prime Minister, would not be able to withstand the pressure of the cavalcade of vested interests in the nuclear industry. Those vested interests include not only all the UK and global stakeholders in the industry’s supply chain, but the fawning corporate media and the financially dependent universities.

There are some strong voices that speak out against this smr folly. Phil Johnstone and Andy Stirling of the University of Sussex have given a powerful condemnation of this SMR push – The hidden military pressures behind the new push for small nuclear reactors.

The nuclear industry was inaugurated in the early 1940s, specifically for creating an atomic bomb. That has continued to be its purpose for nearly a century, and it its sole real purpose today. Commercial “peaceful” nuclear power was set up as a temporarily successful fig leaf over that truly inhuman purpose. Temporarily successful, because it did provide efficient and seemingly cheap, seemingly clean, seemingly safe electricity for millions of people. We now know that not only are there long term costs – financial, environmental, health and safety costs – but that new big nuclear reactors are monumentally unaffordable.

In this 21st Century – how to make this industry look peaceful, clean, safe, and attractive to bright young career-oriented people? Well if that’s now an impossible task for dirty great Big nuclear reactors, how about a plethora of Small fig-leaves – Small Modular Nuclear Reactors.?

There may be a continued media deluge about UK’s golden SMR future, as promised by the dear soon-to- be-departed Starmer. But I doubt that there will be a deluge of investors keen to get on board the juggernaut. One saving grace of our capitalist society is that our financial writers tend to tell the truth about investment prospects. They might save the UK from this SMR folly. Then the nuclear lobby will have to really ramp up the war-mongering fever that already exists.

July 14, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Memory politics – a tragic military strategy in Ukraine

23 June 2026 Noel Wauchope, https://theaimn.net/memory-politics-a-tragic-military-strategy-in-ukraine/

I came across the views of Marta Havryshko in a YouTube video on June 15th, in a lengthy audio essay.

What struck me about this speech, was that it comes from a Jewish Ukrainian woman, who is describing her own observations, living in Ukraine today. I also found the title of her speech very interesting – The tragedy of Memory Politics in Ukraine, Israel & the West. That’s because I cannot help noticing that in the prevailing commentaries on Ukraine, the commentators seem to have forgotten the complexity in Ukraine’s recent modern history.

Marta Havryshko is aware of this complex history. She has been living through the most recent part of it. She sees it from a Jewish perspective, and she is no fan of Putin’s Russia. But – she also brings her awareness of history to current affairs in Ukraine, and she is no fan of Volodymyr Zelensky either.

I tried to transcribe the entire 95 minutes of her speech. It is too long for an article, but I will include excerpts here, to illustrate her themes. She discusses Ukraine’s troubled history of anti-semitism, and the Nazi period in Ukraine. She focusses on Zelensky and the current accepted views on Ukraine’s history – the apparent forgetting of the facts in that history, as Ukrainian extreme nationalism now flourishes.

Marta describes her childhood, and education in Ukraine. She learned at school the history of Soviet Russia’s oppression of Ukrainians, and of the heroic freedom fighters who resisted the Russians:

“I was was raised on this nationalistic myth about glorious fighters, members of the Ukraine underground movement the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) and the organisation of Ukraine nationalists. We learned all these patriotic songs. Our family gatherings involved histories about Soviet repressions and actually, the house that my parents built was on the territory on the land that was seized by Soviets in 1939. Some of my family were involved on the ground in the Ukrainian nationalist movement and they were oppressed. Some of them were booted in prison and some of them were sent to Siberia. So I was raised in this highly nationalistic environment.

When I became a student at Lviv National University actually I met almost the same atmosphere. Lviv is a very nationalistic city with the biggest monument to Stepan Bandera (leader of the UPA). My home was close to Bandera street, and many streets had these partisan names.”

Marta explains how the memories of wartime events have now become confused, enmeshed into present day views and anti-Russian fervour.

“After 2014 this very western Ukraine nationalistic historical myth started to move eastward. After 2022 it became really the national myth promoted on the very national level. That’s why for example under President Zelensky we nowadays have streets named Bandera and Shukhevych (another UPA leader) in Kirik, home town of our president Zelensky.

This myth is cultivated in Ukraine in war time. Another dimension of this very troubling development in is that Nazi apologism is flourishing because many members of the Ukraine nationalists on the ground during the second world war were members of auxiliary police under German occupation and some of them occupied chief positions, so they were not just ordinary rank and file policemen – they were chiefs of police. Vasyl Levkovych, for example, is a very glorious figure in this nationalist pantheon. Those people nowadays are celebrated as freedom fighters and their direct participation in the holocaust is obscured, is marginalised and silenced and even denied.

At the holocaust memorial I was really shocked. I saw these fancy souvenir magazines with Daddy Bandera socks and Daddy Bandera bags. In one day I spent almost three hours in the city center and I saw an amount of different hate symbols like SS bolts, like black sun like Nazi eagles, like swastikas. I never saw in my life. in Western Europe, this concentration of these Nazi hate symbols. and the amount of different hate symbols – SS bolts, black sun, Nazi eagle, different combinations of swastikas. In Ukraine it’s so normalised – why? Because it’s a part of military culture nowadays. Those symbols are adopted primarily by military actors and by soldiers. The trust in Ukraine military is so high in Ukraine society – approximately more than 90% of Ukrainians nowadays trust Ukraine military. That’s why they just accept this.

Ukraine military nowadays is full of different far right groups. They are sponsored and they are celebrated as freedom fighters. In the Ukraine military we have overt Nazi apologists. For example we have the Niga named after the Nachtigall Battalion formed by the Germans and this battalion participated in the Nazi Barbarossa plan against Russia in 1941. From the documents of some participants of this unit we know that they participated in anti-Jewish pogroms.

Especially after 2022 so many neo-Nazis and far right groups neo-Nazis and far right groups were empowered and they openly promote their agenda. They openly celebrate Nazi units. Why? Because their ideology is.” Those guys are lesser evil because they fought our eternal enemy, meaning Russia. And they compare themselves with Nazis.So it’s not only Putin who compares them with Nazis, but that they themselves compare themselves with Nazis, and it’s ridiculous, it’s just crazy.”

Marta explains “memory politics” as a strategy, a weapon of war:

Those who are against military mobilisation are not a minority any more, Those who want to have peace with Russia, those who want to build a relationship with Russia on good terms, who don’t want to be engaged in eternal war with Russia, they are “bad Ukrainians” – you need to view Russia as the eternal enemy. For our children, this means only permanent war. With the anti-Russian project and narrative we will be in constant war with the superior angry and very powerful aggressor., in constant destruction.

We don’t want to spend our lives, sacrificing our life for what? – for our political elites. Ukraine is now a colonial client of the West, The West is deciding what money will go where, what laws will be adopted. In our fight against the Russian imperial state we are becoming a colony of Western imperialism. No-one is talking about this, because it’s a “good” empire.

We still have enormous casualties, and those casualties are hidden.

Memory politics is the main issue. They make movies etc about Russian atrocities but never about Ukrainian atrocities. Ukraine killed Ukrainian students in occupied Donbass, in Spring 2022. It was painful to see how many people denied it, and then justified it, blaming those students for “collaboration with Russia,” some were trying to present this as collateral damage.

The state is pouring so much money into commemorating this war. It’s about producing, inflicting emotions. First of all it’s always in both Ukrainian and English language, It’s for Western audiences, to inflict emotion, to inflict empathy, to present Ukraine as poor victim, to present a black and white picture when Ukraine is of course presented as the forces of good, and Russia as the forces of evil. Nothing of course about what happened to the people of Donbass in 2014, 2015, 2016 – always about guilt of Russia, bad Russia, crazy Putin, imperialism in Russian blood, and angels Ukraine.

So memory politics is a part of Ukraine war propaganda. Many intellectuals are engaged in this propaganda, and many receive grants from abroad. And it supports the Western agenda: Many many Western people – who discovered Ukraine only in February 2022 – see Ukraine as this angel, who was unjustifiably attacked, and is bleeding, and needs support to continue resistance. Nobody is asking those people kidnapped in the vans. Nobody asking those women, their sisters, their mothers, their wives – “Do they want to fight, to be sent to the meat-grinder against their will?” This myth of resilience, of this nation, who would rather die than live under Russian occupation. But this myth is produced by Zelensky propaganda. I must admit they’re doing a very good job in this, because Zelensky is very good at entertainment – it’s his profession.

June 27, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

In praise of Pauline Hanson and One Nation

19 June 2026 Noel Wauchope, https://theaimn.net/in-praise-of-pauline-hanson-and-one-nation/

You can laugh. You can sneer. But we will show you!

BUT… the time needs action, not just words.

FIRST ACTION. We must get rid of compulsory voting. That is the Nanny State in operation. That is the Elites infringing on our civil liberties. People should have every right not to participate in the bureaucratic mumbo jumbo of the electoral mess. With voluntary voting, citizens would have true freedom to choose their own government. What happens at present, is that every uninformed person is forced to vote, and so tends to just follow the tired old established parties. A mindless vote. That disadvantages our really visionary party, One Nation, which deservedly gets the votes of real thinkers.

SECOND ACTION – but perhaps for later on – get rid of the rorting of the voting system, as that uppity lot of inner-city over-educated middle class women take advantage of preferential voting to get themselves into Parliament, and distract progress with their wayout and ultra-feminist agendas. Preferential voting does have its uses, I admit, but only in the short term, in this period of our negotiations with the sad sick Liberal and Labor parties.

NOW – once the very unfortunate Australian electoral system is corrected – we’ll be off and away in our noble quest to correct Australia itself. Fortunately, we have some wise and well-informed people to support us. People like Gina Rinehart, people who understand the realities of this resource-rich land, and of the skills and values of those who’ve colonised and improved this land, over 200 years. And let’s face it, that’s basically the white people.

And who are we counting on to bring One Nation to power? Well, there are people like myself – country dwellers who don’t want to be pushed around, patronised or ignored by the privileged pampered inner-city dwellers with their university degrees, and their latte-sipping, theatre-snobby culture. They prioritise the causes of various minority groups – foreigners who don’t speak English, and people with every kind of sexual deviance, rather than the needs of the real true-blue Australians.

Then there are the hard-working people in the outer suburbs, struggling with the increasing cost of living. They will know that One Nation is dedicated to improving their lot – we will cut the red and green tape that stifle business, and so we’ll help businesses to grow and prosper, thus creating more and better jobs as the increased profits trickle down to the workers.

We are sick and tired of all the pontificating about that non-existent climate change, and about the non-sustainable folly of renewable energy, propped up as it is by the incompetent Labor government. We intend of course, to take care of indigenous people, but not to allow the remnants of their backwards culture to be used by troublemakers whose aim is to impede progress in developing industry.

Pauline Hanson has spoken a lot about immigration, but it’s not that she’s against immigration. Of course we want some migrants, but a limited number, and they should be carefully restricted to people that have adopted our English language and share our values.

You have to admire Pauline. She courageously speaks her mind, and challenges those biased lefties, especially in the media. Our taxes should not be going to the ABC and to the SBS – institutions with such a dangerously left-wing attitude. One Nation will deal with those nefarious influences.

Which brings me back to publications like The Australian Independent Media Network, Independent Australia, Crikey, and the positively dangerous Urban Wronski Writes. Something will have to be done about those. It is my hope to correct Australian Independent Media, for example, perhaps to bring it back to respectable, reliable journalism that will aid the Murdoch media in showing Australians the news in the correct way.

So, in conclusion – to all you Australians who feel aggrieved and hardly done by, we at One Nation offer you what you need: Change, and the promise of a better life.

Signed,

Noel Wauchope, proud rural dweller.

June 19, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

The death of professional journalism?

11 May 2026 Noel Wauchope, https://theaimn.net/the-death-of-professional-journalism/

As a person who’s always been fascinated with Journalism, although myself pretty much an amateur, I have admired those writers who bring us the facts – “Just the facts, ma’am”. But in reality, even the facts can be used in a biased way. That is often done by the omission technique, by leaving out some of the facts.

So for me, all journalism has a bias, and I like it when a writer acknowledges that bias, and makes it clear. However, news and important events don’t happen in a vacuum, but in an environment of conflicting opinions and attitudes – involving people from different cultures, with different histories, emotions and ambitions. So the very best writers are able to step back a bit, and see the many shades of grey in a story.

And the other great qualities in a journalist are what I would call grace and respect. This becomes important in interviews. The really great journalist is one who knows the facts, and asks the hard questions in a courteous way. This is why I’ve always preferred the “mainstream” journalists, who have achieved that level of confidence, and have the backing, and funding, of a reputable professional journal to support their work.

But what’s happening now?

There are still some great mainstream journalists out there, doing their valuable work. I have mentioned some, in previous articles. But what about the current status of ‘reputable professional journals”?

In today’s news, one of the world’s top journalists is herself the news, on this very topic:
Christiane Amanpour Lays Out Her Fear for CNN With Blistering Attack on David Ellison’s CBS ‘Realignment’:

“Christiane Amanpour pointed to the “ideological realignment” at CBS News on Wednesday as she expressed her “concern” at what her own network might look like under the oversight of incoming owner David Ellison.

“Clearly I’m concerned, and I’m not sure how much I’m allowed to say about a corporate thing that’s underway, but I am, obviously, as a person, as a journalist with a record, concerned,” Amanpour said. “And I’m concerned based on what’s happened to the other things that he’s taken over already like CBS News right? I mean, do I have to list what’s happening there?”

Amanpour is not just anybody in the journalistic world. For one thing, Wikipedia lists her 35+ prestigious awards, and her membership of important global media organisations. She is a UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador for Freedom of Expression and journalist safety. I have admired her articles on world leaders, and controversial figures, and her respectful but persistent, questioning of them – for example, in interviewing Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

Some of Amanpour’s principles on reporting:

“There are some situations one simply cannot be neutral about, because when you are neutral, you are an accomplice. Objectivity doesn’t mean treating all sides equally. It means giving each side a hearing.” (The New York Times).

“Some people accused me of being pro–Muslim in Bosnia, but I realized that our job is to give all sides an equal hearing, but in cases of genocide, you can’t just be neutral. You can’t just say, “Well, this little boy was shot in the head and killed in besieged Sarajevo and that guy over there did it, but maybe he was upset because he argued with his wife.” No, there is no equality, and we had to tell the truth.” (The Guardian).

I think that I left out another quality essential in a great journalist – a humanitarian outlook, which clearly Christiane Amanpour has in spades. That is another reason why her concern about changes at CBS and CNN is significant.

For a long time, I’ve been worried about the mainstream media’s self-censorship, especially here in Australia, where we’re supposed to have such freedom of the press. How long is real freedom of the press going to last, here, or anywhere?

In the meantime, I do think that it is up to the ever-more important alternative media to keep on trying to get the facts out, but with recognition of those shades of grey, and some respect for the individuals involved in those events.

Australia has inherited an absolutely adversarial legal system, and now has an absurdly adversarial political system. We need commentary that is broader, more willing to pay attention to conflicting views.

A case in point is the current Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion. We in the alternative media are quick to pounce on this as kow-towing to the prevailing pro-Zionist propaganda. But in reality, already the Commission has allowed the voice of the Jewish Council, an organisation that is critical of Israel. And as for the Royal Commissioner, Virginia Bell – she has had a distinguished career in support of human rights. And I ask you – what better recommendation can Virginia Bell have, than this – from Liberal former treasurer and Jewish Australian Josh Frydenberg?:

“It is unthinkable the Prime Minister would choose a Commissioner that did not have the total confidence of the Jewish community.”

May 11, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

The new nuclear weapons are so much cheaper – they’re the enemy’s nuclear sites!

Noel Wauchope, 20 April 26, https://theaimn.net/the-new-nuclear-weapons-are-so-much-better-and-cheaper-theyre-the-enemys-nuclear-sites/#comment-24806

Yes, ain’t it grand! We, the God-fearing, God-loving West and Israel, don’t really need any longer to put our $billions of tax-payer money into those horribly expensive nuclear missiles, bombs, submarines. Good old new technology is proving us with much cheaper little drones

The beauty of it all is that our enemies, those bad people in Iran, Russia, China, have got readymade nuclear sites just sitting there, waiting to be gloriously exploded by our drones. If some sites, like nuclear reactors with strong containment covers are a bit too tough for drones, well non-nuclear missiles should do the job – still a lot cheaper than a nuclear weapon.

And of course, there’s an awful lot of other nuclear stuff that is just as vulnerable, even more vulnerable, than the actual nuclear reactor. Nuclear spent fuel pools are a beaut target, with their extremely high radiation levels, risk of cooling system failure, with ensuing fire. Nuclear canisters, even clad with concrete, are quite a good target, too. And so are the various forms of transport of nuclear materials. And that’s before we’ve even considered the nuclear submarines, (some in operation, many dead and awaiting burial) nuclear weapons sites, and the transport of nuclear weapons.

Nuclear facilities have strong safety protections, say the experts. But the trouble is, that was then, and this is now: in addition to material tools like drones and missiles, we have cyber digital tools – malaware and malicious computer code can be used to seriously disrupt, even destroy the other side’s nuclear systems – whether they be military, energy, or just research nuclear facilities.

So, it’s an exciting time for the war-makers.

Perhaps too exciting? The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists discussed the Epic Fury threat by Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth, to obliterate Iran and its nuclear sites –

“signaling” near a live reactor is a high-stakes gamble with an unclear ultimate purpose. While the plant continues to feed the grid, a direct hit on its containment dome would trigger a radiological catastrophe far exceeding that of Chernobyl or Fukushima. With 70-80 tons of uranium dioxide in its core and a massive inventory of spent fuel lying in nearby cooling ponds, a breach would shroud the Persian Gulf with a lethal miasma of radioiodine and cesium-137. This wouldn’t just be a strike against a regime; it would be a death sentence for the region’s environment and its people. 

And wait! What if the other side has the same idea ? And they do. In 2021, Hamas deliberately targeted Israel’s secretive Dimona nuclear reactor site.  Iran has recently attacked Israeli areas close to that site. Russia drones have struck he Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant , and  the defunct Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine, though these strikes could have been unintentional.

I don’t want to bore you with the gloomy details – but these are some countries that have already developed sophisticated drones and missiles capable of devastating “our side’s” nuclear facilities – Iran, Russia, China, North Korea.

And the other subject of gloom is the diminished safety policies of the United States. Karl Grossman – Harvey Wasserman report – Trump’s “flood of executive orders on nuclear power have weakened or eliminated nuclear safety regulations—making nuclear power plants more dangerous than ever—and has expedited their being built” .

Bennet Ramberg in his 2024 book Nuclear Power Plants as Weapons for the Enemy outlined the dangers posed by nuclear sites.

The Trump administration has not merely weakened nuclear safety regulation, but virtually abdicated from it. Even the nuclear lobby itself has recognised this, and encouraged private industry to address safety questions.

BUT – Futurism points out -( https://futurism.com/science-energy/nuclear-startups-safety ) “new reporting by Politico‘s energy publication E&E News found that several baby nuclear companies are avoiding requests to join one of the industry’s main safety organizations. The regulatory body, called the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO), was formed in the fallout of the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979. While not a government body, the INPO is a nonprofit nuclear watchdog, responsible for conducting plant inspections, sharing operational guidance between nuclear companies, and helping companies train nuclear personnel.

For a nuclear energy company, joining the INPO is completely voluntary, though every operator has — until now”

Nuclear experts are well aware of these new dangers. On April 13th on a Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists panel eminent experts discussed them. Rachel Bronson, Lars van Dassen, Laura S. H. Holgate, all closely tied to the International Atomic Energy Agency, (IAEA)went into the subject in some detail. They all looked to the IAEA as the one body that might lead the world out of this perilous nuclear vulnerability mire. But they expressed anxiety, in view of the fact that that the IAEA is underfunded and under-resourced.

I am sorry – experts. But I can’t get out of my mind the fact that the IAEA has a dual mission. Its job is to ensure the safety of nuclear facilities, and to promote the peaceful nuclear industry.

Even these three very earnest experts acknowledge that the “peaceful” and the “military” nuclear industries are now irrevocably entwined. So, apart from the weakness and lack of funding for the IAEA, it is hopelessly caught up in its own conflict of interest. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQGbJKEbzy8&t=63s

April 22, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Titanic misconceptions that things will be OK

Last night I watched a terrific programme on SBS world television. It was all about the sinking of the Titanic, covering so many aspects never shown on TV before. I was struck by the atmosphere on the ship, in the early hours of the sinking, with many people, particularly the rich upper-class passengers, taking the whole process as something not really serious, rather fun even. Of course, not all of them saw it that way. But enough of them – to be able to have quite a good party on the upper deck lounge, and to regard the messenger calling them up on deck as rather a nuisance, an ignorant lower-class person. And indeed, some people just refused to leave their (temporarily comfortable) beds, on such a cold night.

And here was I, trying to get my mind away form the rather scary world news. I suppose I’d have been better watching some “reality” show, or that good old Australian standby – sport.

Anyway, the thing was – the Titanic story showed how people are inclined not to take a critical event seriously, not to worry about it, until it’s too late.

And lo and behold, the same sort of thing is happening now. Today DW reports Iran war: Israel hits Iranian heavy water nuclear reactor. The good old news.com.au writes ‘Worst case scenario’: Wall St craters, oil surges as nuclear sites hit’. The fascinating part of this coverage, as shown by that last headline, is that the financial aspect is the first priority.. Yeah, I know that the world economy is important, and it’s not a good thing to have Wall St stocks going down, and investors “mashing the panic button”. I’m not saying that this is a trivial matter. It’s just that drone or missile strikes on a nuclear facility could be a helluva lot more serious than a drop on the stock exchange.

We don’t need an actual nuclear bombing to create a massive environmental and health catastrophe, a drone strike can do that job.

Both articles focus on this economic crisis, paying barely lip service to the fearful physical danger of a nuclear site being exploded, or even just damaged. Israeli air strikes hit a nuclear research reactor in Iran’s Khondab region, and a uranium processing plant in Yazd in Central Iran. The reports hastened to tell us there was no release of radioactive material. How reassuring! We can focus on the main issue – the share prices.

Questions come to mind. Will Iran retaliate by striking Israel’s Dimona reactor and other nuclear sites? How come it’s so terrible for Iran to have legally permitted nuclear research facilities, but apparently OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons. Estimates of Israel’s nuclear warheads range from 90 to 200, but Israel “does not confirm or deny” its nuclear weaponry numbers. So that’s apparently OK.

Yes, we’re all anxious about our petrol and diesel prices, and naturally so. But the possible ramifications of these Israeli strikes on nuclear facilities add up to something more horrendous. I don’t want to rave on here about the health, environmental, social toll that will ensue, if the warring states decide to use this very convenient weaponry – no need to have your own expensive nuclear bomb, just send a few cheap drones to attack your enemy’s nuclear sites.

As with those rich passengers on the Titanic, it’s time that world leaders woke up.

March 31, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Me and the Pope – but is he the Antichrist?

19 March 2026 Noel Wauchope, https://theaimn.net/me-and-the-pope-but-is-he-the-antichrist/#google_vignette

Following my recovery from Catholicism, I never imagined that I would become a fan of the Pope. Perish the thought that I would ever sink back into believing those weird dogmas, and agreeing to Catholicism’s punishing rules about sexuality and abortion, and so forth.

Well, I haven’t sunk back that far – yet, but I just have to applaud Pope Leo. Under the guidance of Pope Leo, Catholic spokesmen have acknowledged that artificial intelligence is a useful tool, but warn against AI “overloading us with information to the point of paralysis.” Pope Leo XIV has given a tactful, but unmistakable warning against AI taking over control of our thinking. He recently advised the priests of Rome to use “their brains more” rather than AI when preparing homilies.

I feel that Leo’s predecessor, Pope Francis, set the course for this trend, in the condemnation of military attack as a way to resolve conflicts, and urging for human discussion and negotiation.

All good – you think? But is there something sinister about Pope Leo’s attitude to AI? Well the squillionaire Peter Thiel thinks so. He’s just given a series of lectures on Pope Leo’s doorstep in Rome. A critique of Peter Thiel’s ideas has been supplied, beautifully explained, in Australian Independent Media by Ricky Pann, also supplying this video:

It’s too much of a coincidence, that Mr Thiel has decided to make Rome the centre of his lecturing activities. The Pope has a huge worldwide influence, and his views on artificial intelligence have an impressive  forcefulness and clarity. It’s pretty obvious that Thiel finds this a threat to the technological empire that he leads. And the Church recognises this – ‘Agent of chaos’ Peter Thiel is lecturing on the Antichrist at the Vatican’s doorstep.

You didn’t know that the technological geniuses who run our world can be not only so very scientifically knowledgeable, but also extremely religious. Scarily religious – I think. Thiel predicts a possible Caesar-Papist fusion, in which a tyrant – the Antichrist, joins up with government, in a sort of anti-science domination of the world. Thiel doesn’t actually see Pope Leo as the Antichrist (the Antichrist has to be young), but certainly worries about Pope Leo’s teachings.

Pope Leo is the first Pope with a formal degree in mathematics, and has called on mathematicians to be ”prophets of hope” and to integrate ethical responsibility into their technological advancements, particularly regarding artificial intelligence.

Oh dear, that’s very persuasive. Is Pope Leo indeed the Antichrist, the supporter of the facilitator of the coming Antichrist. Or is Peter Thiel a dangerous nutter?

March 19, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Why should Trump get all the blame?

10 March 2026 Noel Wauchope, https://theaimn.net/why-should-trump-get-all-the-blame/

I’ve just read an article about planning nuclear power for a “post-Trump world” I’m wondering how many people are actually doing just that – planning for a “post Trump world.” Well, Donald Trump isn’t one of them. He’s got a pretty good plan for re-election in 2028. Never mind the fact that the USA Constitution forbids a President from having a third term in office. Heck, by 2028 there won’t be an American Constitution if Trump is still in office.

One way or another, I’d bet that Trump won’t be in office for that third term. By 2028, the apparently dim-witted American public might just not vote for Donald Trump, however colourful and entertaining he might be. Or the Republicans might have had enough, and somehow kicked him out in the meantime. Or some more dramatic events might have made him lose his grip on power – a nuclear war? He might even be in gaol – though I guess that’s a silly left-wing fantasy. Or even the seemingly immortally healthy Donald might get sick, or even die.

I just hope and pray that he is not assassinated. That would turn him into a martyr. A saint? As a recovered Catholic, I do think kindly of my old church. I just can’t imagine that current Catholicism could stomach the idea of Saint Donald Trump.

But anyway, I digress. And indeed this whole post is a digression. But to try to get to the point – what is wrong with the leaders of the Western world? It seems that only Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchéz has denounced the USA/Israel’s illegal attack on Iran. Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney in January, briefly saw through Donald Trump, but by March, Carney had second thoughts, and fell into line in the conga dance behind him. The UK wavered and waffled, but ended up supporting the war. Confusion reigns in the EU. As for Australia – words fail me, as the ruling so-called Labor Party wriggles about, trying to deny that it supports the USA/Israel war. Twas so nice of Albanese to present Trump with a pretty little statue-thing of an AUKUS submarine.

It’s not just the war on Iran. It’s the support for Israel’s genocide. It’s the spectacle over two years, of politicians giving Trump standing ovations, smiling happily as they shake hands with this deranged, ignorant, sociopathic President of the USA. Surely they could manage mere politeness, and not a complete vision of fawning servility.

And when it all goes to shit, as it surely will, what will be their legacy? Will they be remembered as leaders of insight and integrity? Will they be remembered at all. Most likely, they’ll be gone and forgotten after the next election.

Let’s just remember, that pathetic lying confidence man, Trump, could not have done so much damage, so much harm, caused all that suffering, without their support.

March 14, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Australian nuclear-related news this week

AUSTRALIA. 

• Aussie Flotilla Team to Gaza Announced. 
• Herzog’s Visit to Australia: Just Who Is Being Comforted, and at What Cost? 
• NSW Police’s attacks on protesters in Sydney likely to lead to lawsuits​ – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OyqPfZvsC8&t=361s​                                   Herzog protests- Medics attacked too, lawyers question police violence.​                                      This was planned- And Chris Minns owns it. ​                                                           In Australia The Police Beat You UpFor Opposing Genocide. 
• Selective context: Why Isaac Herzog’s visit deepens Australia’s moral failure. ​             Albanese v Albanese. 
• “Beyond the Pale” – Protesters Slam Albanese for Hosting “War Criminal” | DRM News | AC1F – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URQnfpUbtds ​                                                 The Siege Within: How​ Clarity Died in the Aftermath of Bondi. ​                                     Bondi’s Blood, Herzog’s Shield: How Australia’s Grief was Hijacked for Geopolitics. ​           Sheikh who led prayer at Sydney protest against Herzog says police were ‘unhinged and aggressive’- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VhPsj4NZcc 
• Why The Economics of War in Australia Matter.

February 14, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

The complex, long-form writers – but is anybody listening?

11 February 2026 Noel Wauchope, https://theaimn.net/the-complex-long-form-writers-but-is-anybody-listening/

I sympathise with readers who have a short attention span. I myself am one of those. And nowadays, well – that’s pretty much everybody.

And yet, people keep writing long, and very long, articles. Are they wasting their time? Who actually reads these articles?

I used to think that long articles were indeed a waste of time. And in a certain sense, I was right. I came from the angle of an antinuclear activist, and for a long time, the “nuclear debate” was run by highly – informed people, who made sure to use the absolutely correct technical language – no weak slips into ordinary talk. The anti-nuclear experts generally showed their opponents that they were right up there with the jargon that only experts understood. So the ordinary peasant, the general public, including many well-educated people, “dazzled by science” couldn’t really understand the long arguments. The result was that most people were intimidated, felt they could not understand it all. which was exactly the situation that the nuclear lobby wanted.

Then along came Dr Helen Caldicott, and mucked it all up. She understood all the technical stuff, and could write about that. But she also used ordinary, understandable language. And worse – heaven forfend – she sometimes was emotional. God, she even described some nuclear propagandists as “wicked”. Personally, I thought that the term was accurate. Anyway, Dr Caldicott copped a lot of flak, including even from the anti-nuclear lobby, with their obsession about being “respectable”. How dare she be so “hysterical”. But then she couldn’t help it, having the disability of being female.

But, Dr Caldicott, with her many books, public speaking, meeting world leaders, even influencing Ronald Reagan, got her message through to people, and the “debate, has never been the same since.

So, I rejoiced at this development, which did help journalists to loosen up, and cover nuclear issues in a more readable and human way. And in shorter articles.

But now the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of being short and easily digestible, especially with the communications monster of social media. It is a sad thing that probably only old people have the time and the inclination to read long articles.

And people are missing out, because often the full story on a subject is really covered only in long articles. I have a collection of these, on a variety of topics, and I had planned to reference a number of them here. Some are very densely written, full of facts, dates, events – and therefore really informative – but still a bit of hard work to read. And some show how very complex a situation can be – how there are two sides, and maybe more than two, to a story.

So, here are examples of very informative ones:

Planet Plastic: How Big Oil and Big Soda kept a global environmental calamity a secret for decades, by Tim Dickinson.

US military action in Iran risks igniting a regional and global nuclear cascade, by Farah N. Jan.

Cumulative effects of radioactivity from Fukushima on the abundance and biodiversity of birds, by Timothy A Mousseau

Securing the nuclear nation, by Kate Brown

Very interesting are the articles which cover something in depth, showing contradictory sides, and how very complex a subject can be:

Some examples-

Betrayed: How Liberals Supported Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979 and Turned Against the Progressive Shah, by SL Kanthan,

The Long History Of Zionist Proposals To Ethnically Cleanse The Gaza Strip, by Mouin Rabbani.

And these can often be personal articles, about human conditions, character and integrity, leaving politics aside:

The heroes who saved the world from Chernobyl Two, by By Serhii Plokhy – also at The heroes who saved the world from Chernobyl Two.

Elon Musk’s Shadow Rule, by Ronan Farrow. Also at Elon Musk’s Shadow Rule, nuclear-news.

I hope that some people are reading long articles. Well, they must be, because some excellent movie documentaries and TV series often come up, and are derived from the written word. And perhaps many people are thus getting their longform stories in a different form. And perhaps some longform articles have a profound effect, even if it’s only on a relatively few readers.

February 13, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

The new world of journalism

My first effort. This is my first foray into the new jungle. I have been examining different types of journalism, and noting which sorts get an interested response. I plan to evaluate the different types – for their interest and effectiveness.

12 January 2026 Noel Wauchope https://theaimn.net/the-new-world-of-journalism/

Journalism is in a mess, and it is changing so fast. Meanwhile the world is changing even faster, and we need good journalism more than ever.

The old world of journalism is dead. Long live the new!

I liked the old world of journalism. And it still exists – a bit. In that old world, facts were valued, rather than opinions. Of course opinions were still there, not always apparent, and sometimes more effective in selective reporting of the facts, with some facts carefully omitted. Still, the facts were meant to be paramount. I loved an ancient TV series, Dragnet, in which Sergeant Joe Friday expressed it perfectly “Just wanna get the facts, ma’am – just the facts.”

Still, the old journalism did undergo editorial scrutiny, do fact-checking, and even had grammar and spelling checked. And it does still exist today, when the Internet has nearly killed print journalism, and its funding from advertisers.

But – it’s limited. The new digital media has overwhelmed it. You get not just young teenagers gossiping, but also heads of state announcing things, via TikTok or Twitter, X or Facebook, Instagram, and many other platforms. And the message is above all – new, fast, short and visually arresting. No, I haven’t done the research, nor produced a PhD paper about this, but my observation is that longform journalism is read by the much older generations.

Still, forms other than text are doing well, and information and opinion are broadcast by podcast and YouTube journalists, so providing perhaps a more accessible form of longer journalism, though the fact-checking may be dodgy.

So, in place of the staid, somewhat reliable old journalism, what do we have? We still have the struggling print, radio and TV “mainstream media”, where journalists “mind their p’s and q’s”, because they don’t have the job security that used to be taken for granted. Of course, there are “safe” specialities like sport, cooking and gardening, but current affairs, politics, environment, climate and much else – these are dangerous territories for the mainstream journalist.

Self-censorship is rife.

Then there’s “alternative media” where brave souls have branched out with new journals, funding this work sometimes by community organisations, libraries, universities, or just by themselves, and trying to get funding from readers. I really don’t know how successful they are, financially. But for some writers, myself included, these new journals provide the opportunity for self-expression.  For the public, they do provide a much-needed broader range of subject and opinion, than is available in the rather constipated traditional mainstream media.

So – where to – for the good journalism? And what is the good journalism? Well, back to good old Sergeant Joe Friday. For a start, we need to know that the writer’s facts are correct. Then there are those seemingly vague things, like authenticity and integrity. It’s a tortuous path to try and work this out. In Australia, the teaching of English does include awareness of logic, and of conflict of interest. These are aspects pretty much impossible to ascertain in the prevailing snappy digital media, but can be gauged in longer journalism.

Over many years, I’ve been studying articles from many sources – to find out what is effective, what is genuinely interesting and believable. I think that it’s time that those of us who appreciate integrity in writing should shout about it.

Just for a first shout – I’ll pick out a couple of shouts already made. Here I find examples of journalists who courageously identify mainstream media’s biased journalism. In FAIR (FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING) an experienced journalist, Ari Paul, takes on the enthusiastic coverage by The Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the New York Times, The Times, The Chicago Tribune of “Trump’s Doctrine in Venezuela.” Paul  concludes:

“By kidnapping a foreign head of state, the Trump administration is saying that international law doesn’t apply to the United States. That’s a sentiment most American editorialists are all too ready to applaud – despite the danger it poses for Americans, and for the world.”

Elizabeth Smith, writing for the NTI – The Nuclear Threat Initiative – asks:

“What does it take to reveal truth in the face of censorship?”

She applies that principle in the media coverage of the 1945 atomic bombing, described in a new PBS documentary, “Bombshell.” She concludes:

”Bombshell lays bare the power of narratives – and counter narratives. It shows, with infuriating and heartbreaking precision, how misinformation about the bombings influenced public opinion.”

There are a lot of independent writers out there – some, like Ari Paul and Elizabeth Smith are highly qualified and experienced journalists, who go into their subject in some depth, and are not scared to rock the prevailing boat of safe complacency that increasingly pervades the self-censoring mainstream media. Others are less masterful in their use of language, and less qualified, but still get their message across in a compelling way.

January 12, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Looking to 2026 in nuclear news

28 Dec 25 https://theaimn.net/looking-to-2026-in-nuclear-related-news/

There are really a lot of good things happening, involving a huge number of good people. My favourite is that very persistent, won’t-be-beat boat – the Golden Rule, with its crew and supporters – Veterans for Peace. They sail the world, but especially from port to port in the USA, with their message of hope. 

Dozens of groups sailed with the crew—including Code Pink, the NorCal TPS Coalition, the People’s Arms Embargo, the Comfort Women’s Justice Coalition, the Task Force on the Americas, and the Cal Sailing Club.

But of course there are thousands of other groups working for compassion and good will, in every country, of whatever political style.  There are millions of people aware of, and prepared to be active in getting action on global heating.

I think that there’s a revival beginning in the media, with the growth of so many truly independent and alternative journalism sites. Some get funding from their readers, some soldier on providing free news and information.

Even the corporate media, and some USA Republicans are appalled at the antics of the deranged American “President for Peace” – leading to the thought that he might not last that much longer as “leader of the free world”.

Still – a reality check – if Donald Trump does cease to be USA  President – there could be worse to come, with another choice from his pack of greedy sycophants.

So – a reality check is needed. It’s not going to be a happy new year as things are going at present 

– “If we make no effort to change direction, we will end up where we are heading.”

         — Chinese Proverb

Giving up is not an option. A world run by emotionally-unintelligent squillionaire technocrats is not going to be sustainably viable. Addiction to super-profits and power, and absurd ideas of exceptionalism and superior race -these are not the characteristics of good leadership.  Jesus said that ‘the meek shall inherit the earth“.  But I’m rather hoping that some of the meek get into charge before then, before the current power-brokers wreck the place.

Meanwhile, we continue to try to shed light on the  absurdities of our current ‘civilised’ culture. And there are many hazards to expose and to combat – the horror of Zionism (which is NOT the Jewish religion), booming militarism,  climate denial, racism, injustice, suppression of civil rights, AI gone wild-   to name only a few. Lots of work to do.

The past week has been a busy one in non-corporate nuclear and nuclear-related news. The detailed list is at https://antinuclear.net/2025/12/28/the-non-corporate-nuclear-news-week-to-27-december/

December 30, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews | Leave a comment