Key question Peter Dutton refuses to answer about his nuclear power plan
- Peter Dutton refused to answer question
- He was probed about nuclear power policy
By NCA NEWSWIRE and ELEANOR CAMPBELL FOR NCA NEWSWIRE, 16 June 2024 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13534571/Key-question-Peter-Dutton-refuses-answer-nuclear-power-plan.html
Peter Dutton has again refused to reveal key details on the Coalition’s nuclear power policy, declaring he would consider announcing his alternative 2035 emissions reduction goal if the government released modelling on interim climate targets.
In a fiery interview on Sunday with Sky’s Sunday Agenda host Andrew Clennell, the federal Opposition Leader became defensive after being pressed to reveal the locations and costings of his six proposed nuclear power plants.
Mr Dutton said he would reveal the opposition’s energy plan within ‘weeks’ in March but again declined to spell out the full details of his vision for Australia’s energy transition.
‘What we’ve said, the sites that we’re looking at are only those sites where there’s an end-of-life coal-fired power stations,’ he told Sky on Sunday.
‘One of the main reasons is that people in those communities know that they’re going when coal goes and we have the ability to sustain heavy industry, we have the ability to keep the lights on.’
A recent report from peak scientific body CSIRO suggested that building a large-scale nuclear power plant in Australia would cost at least $8.5bn and take at least 15 years to deliver.
The Coalition has refused to confirm reports of the locations of up to seven proposed power sites, which according to speculation, include sites in two Liberal-held seats and four or five Nationals-held seats.
Potential sites include the Latrobe Valley and Anglesea in Victoria, the Hunter Valley in NSW, Collie in WA, Port Augusta in South Australia, and potentially a plant in the southwest Queensland electorate of Maranoa, held by Nationals leader David Littleproud.
When pressed on the locations of the sites, Mr Dutton responded: ‘We’ve said that we’re looking at between six and seven sites, and we’ll make an announcement at the time of our choosing, not of Labor’s choosing.’
When asked if a power plant would be placed on each of the unspecified sites, Mr Dutton did not answer directly, saying only that he would consider output and environmental impact.
The Opposition Leader was then asked if the plants would be government subsidised, and responded by saying all power sources, other than coal, receives funding.
‘We’ll make an announcement in due course, but I just make the point that wind and solar don’t work without government subsidy,’ he said.
Mr Dutton also came under scrutiny this week after revealing he would oppose a legislated 2030 carbon emissions target at the next election.
Asked directly if he would consider a 2035 interim reduction target, which would be legally required under the 2015 Paris agreement, the Liberal leader said he would ‘take advice’ from the treasury before changing climate legislation, citing concerns about the nation’s economic situation
‘I think we have a look at all of that information and if there were settings we need to change … it doesn’t mean exiting Paris or walking away from our clear commitment to be net zero by 2050,’ he said.
Mr Dutton was asked for a second time if he would set a 2035 target, but again spoke at length about cost of living pressures facing the country.
Trade Minister Don Farrell said Mr Dutton’s comments were ‘outrageous’ and argued watered down climate commitments would damage Australia’s standing with its international allies.
‘It’s beyond the pale to be perfectly honest,’ Mr Farrell said on Sunday.
‘We went to the last election committing to a 2030 target and despite what Mr Dutton might say, we’re on track to meet that target.’
Judges Named for Assange Appeal
By Joe Lauria / Consortium News June 14, 2024, https://consortiumnews.com/2024/06/14/judges-named-for-assange-appeal/
Consortium News will be back inside the courtroom in London July 9-10 to cover Julian Assange’s appeal against extradition
The judges in Julian Assange’s two-day appeal hearing on July 9-10 are the same who granted Assange a rare victory last month: his right to appeal the Home Office’s extradition order to the United States.
Justices Jeremy Johnson and Victoria Sharp granted Assange the right to appeal on only two of nine requested grounds, but they are significant:
1). his extradition was incompatible with his free speech rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights; and 2.) that he might be prejudiced because of his nationality (not being given 1st Amendment protection as a non-American).
However the denial of his rights in an American courtroom would go beyond the First Amendment to all of his U.S. constitutional rights, according to the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in USAID v. Alliance for Open Society International Inc., which says that a non-U.S. citizen acting outside the U.S. has no constitutional protections at all.
The United States was unable to provide assurances that the European equivalent of his constitutional rights would be protected, required under British extradition law. That raises hopes for Assange in his appeal.
Assange has been imprisoned in London’s notorious Belmarsh Prison for more than five years on remand pending the outcome of his extradition. He has been charged in the United States for publishing classified documents that revealed prima facie evidence of U.S. state crimes.
CN has received an award and many accolades for our coverage of the Julian Assange case. We will be inside the courtroom and outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London for both days of the hearing, bringing you the latest news, analysis and commentary.
TODAY. G7 – and the juggernaut to the destruction of Ukraine rolls on – to the delight of weapons companies.
Cartoon from Sunday Telegraph
Well, well, ain’t it grand? The G7 will lend Ukraine $50 billion to help it buy weapons . Not that Ukraine will be expected to pay it back – it’s supposed to be repaid with profits earned from Russian assets in Europe. European companies want a share, especially European arms manufacturers. Some of the money will go to establishing weapons manufacture in Ukraine.
US President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed a 10-year bilateral security agreement on 13 June aimed at strengthening Kyiv’s defence capabilities – a step towards “Ukraine’s eventual membership in the NATO alliance”
Is everyone swallowing this nonsense?
Putin is suggesting an immediate ceasefire, with Ukraine withdrawing its troops from the predominantly Russian-speaking four former oblasts of Ukraine that Russia currently occupies, and which Russia has integrated into the Russian Federation, and publicly abandons its quest to join NATO. Russia would retain Crimea. Numerous surveys have confirmed that the people of Crimea are content with their 2014 choice to join Russia. Ukraine, Russia, and the European powers previously agreed to a similar plan in 2014
Zelensky originally came to power on a campaign of peace, ensuring the autonomy of those four regions. His term of office has expired. He’s now operating on behalf of the USA, and running a regime that suppresses political parties, free speech and religious affiliation. It’s almost comical how Zelensky struts the world stage demanding more weapons, as Ukraine’s military suffers huge death toll, and draft-dodging abounds. Ukraine’s economy, agriculture, wrecked, – millions have emigrated, and many are hungry. And it’s becoming clear that Russia is winning.
The Peace Conference in Switzerland a farce – designed to bolster Zelensky as the great world “freedom leader?
The hypocrisy of the “Peace Conference” now going on in Switzerland – not attended by leaders of USA, China, Brazil. India – and of course, Russia not invited. The peace terms are limited to nuclear safety, food security (i.e. Ukraine’s ability to export its food by sea) and the return of Ukrainian children transferred to Russia. But Volodymr Zelensky insists on matters not included on the agenda – a complete Russian withdrawal to 1991 borders, payment of reparations, and punishment for what he says are Russian war crimes.
Not on Ukraine’s, NATO nations’, USA’s, radar is any question of considering Putin’s terms, or even talking to Putin.
It looks as if U.S. President Joe Biden is leading NATO by the nose, -with U.S weapons companies rejoicing, with the saintly Zelensky as glowing lead Field Marshal – pressing on to the complete destruction of Ukraine.
Why bet on a loser? Australia’s dangerous gamble on the USA
June 15, 2024, by: The AIM Network, By Michael Williss, https://theaimn.com/why-bet-on-a-loser-australias-dangerous-gamble-on-the-us/
A fresh warning that the US will lose a war with China has just been made by a US data analytics and military software company with US Department of Defense contracts.
It seems no-one is prepared to back the US to win a war with China, so why is Australia going all-out to align itself with provocative moves and hostility from the US directed at China?
Govini released its latest study of US capacity to fight China in June. Its annual reports measure the performance of the US federal government, looking at 12 top critical national security technologies through the lens of acquisition, procurement, supply chain, foreign influence and adversarial capital and science and technology.
It concluded that it is nearly impossible for the US to win a war against the PLA if a conflict were to break out between the two global superpowers.
The report also found that China has more patents than the US in 13 of 15 critical technology areas, further demonstrating how the US is falling behind in AI development.
“This year’s report also highlighted another reason a US conflict with China could be unwinnable: the very real possibility of parts scarcity.”
It identified serious risks within seven major DoD programs, including the cornerstone of AUKUS, namely the Virginia-class submarines. Not that this will worry the cargo-culters in Canberra who keep throwing billions at the fraught arrangement.
Another factor was China’s lead in the global supply chains.
-ADVERTISEMENT-
Govini CEO Tara Murphy Dougherty said:
”China still has a dangerously high presence in US government supply chains. The Departments of the Navy and Army showed a decreasing reliance on Chinese suppliers over the past year, however, the Department of the Air Force showed a 68.8 percent increase in the usage of Chinese suppliers.”
Govini’s report adds to a number of similar scenarios in recent years, starting with the headlined warning by The Times on May 16, 2020 “US ‘would lose any war’ fought in the Pacific with China.”
In the New Atlanticist, Lieutenant Colonel Brian Kerg, an active-duty US Marine Corps operational planner, critiqued biases in modern US war games, in which military planners command opposing armed forces in simulated warfare. He writes that instead of a short, sharp war over Taiwan with a win for the US, as predicted by war games, the greater likelihood is one of a years-long war with China with uncertain outcomes. One of those, too terrible to contemplate, must be the likelihood of Chinese retaliation against Australia for joining the US, for being fully interoperable with its military, and the consequent rubbleisation of Australian cities and attacks on US military bases here.
Retired US Army Colonel Dr John Mauk agrees that any conflict over Taiwan will almost certainly be a prolonged war, and he says that it would be one that favours China. He writes:
“U.S. military forces are too small, their supply lines are too vulnerable, and America’s defense industrial capacity is far too eroded to keep up with the materiel demands of a high-intensity conflict. Another critical factor undermining U.S. capacity to sustain a war is that Americans lack the resilience to fight a sustained, brutal conflict.”
By contrast, China is well-postured to sustain a protracted high intensity war of attrition.
He says that the current political divide in the US impedes its ability to respond to national security crises, and that:
“Americans in general are unprepared for, unwilling, or incapable to perform military service. Short of reinstituting a draft, U.S. military services cannot attract or retain enough manpower quickly enough to sustain a fight with China.”
Former US assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasia, A. Wess Mitchell, believes that “United States is a heartbeat away from a world war that it could lose.” He writes that:
“… today’s U.S. military is not designed to fight wars against two major rivals simultaneously. In the event of a Chinese attack on Taiwan, the United States would be hard-pressed to rebuff the attack while keeping up the flow of support to Ukraine and Israel.”
Comparing US and Chinese naval growths, Mitchell says that the US is no longer able to “outproduce its opponents”. With US debt already in excess of 100% of GDP, he says that the debt loads incurred through war with China would risk catastrophic consequences for the U.S. economy and financial system.
He raises the possibility of a Chinese fire-sale of US debt:
“China is a major holder of U.S. debt, and a sustained sell-off by Beijing could drive up yields in U.S. bonds and place further strains on the economy.”
Hillary Clinton raised this quandary facing the US with then PM Kevin Rudd in 2010 when she asked him “How do you deal toughly with your banker?” It is a question that the US has yet to find an answer to.
And questions there are. Harlan Ullman, a senior adviser at the Atlantic Council, opens a January 2024 article with the observation that:
“Since World War II ended, America has lost every war it started. Yes, America has lost every war it started – Vietnam, Afghanistan and the second Iraq War.”
He sounds a warning:
“… given likely weapons expenditure rates should a war with China erupt, the U.S. has the capacity for about a month before, as in Ukraine, it runs out of inventory,” before asking his questions: “War with China would be a strategic catastrophe. The U.S. has not explained how such a war could be fought and won. The economic consequences would be disastrous. And how would such a war end? Can anyone answer these questions?”
China is quite adept at utilising sentiments such as these. Major Franz J. Gayl, a retired Marine Corps infantry officer has regularly written for Chinese online news outlet Global Times. Last year, a number of his contributed articles to GT were published as a book, “The United States Will Lose the Coming War with China” which is available on Amazon.
Australia’s Liberal-Labor pro-US coalition has placed a $368 billion bet on the ability of the US to prevent the expansion of Chinese influence in the South Pacific or its recovery of the island province of Taiwan.
It is an expensive way to be taught the African proverb that when the elephants dance, it is the grass that suffers.
A Detectable Subservience – Australia’s ill-fated nuclear submarine deal?
All of this leaves one wondering about just what due diligence was done before Morrison, and the 24-hour copycat decision-maker Albanese, committed us to the folly of paying $A368 billion to purchase a subservient position embedded within the US war machine by means of a soon-to-be fully detectable and therefore likely to be destroyed fleet of nuclear-powered submarines.
June 6, 2024 by: The AIM Network, By Michael Willis, https://theaimn.com/a-detectable-subservience/
The first operational outcome of the Pillar 2 AUKUS arrangement between the US, UK and Australia has just been announced.
The three countries will share data from their submarine-hunting PA-8 Poseidon aircraft, manufactured by the troubled Boeing Corporation.
This was announced on May 29 in an “exclusive interview” given to US online website Breaking Defense by Michael Horowitz, whose office serves as the Pentagon’s day-to-day lead on AUKUS issues.
(In a deliciously ironic slip, the website referred to the United Kingdom as the “Untied Kingdom”, true of the political cohesion of both the UK and the US at this time.)
All three AUKUS nations:
“… operate the Boeing-made maritime surveillance aircraft; the US operates 120, Australia 12, and the United Kingdom nine. A key part of the P-8 is its collection of sonobuoys, which are dropped into the water to hunt down submarines. (“Sonobuoys” is the preferred US-spelling of the English language “sonar buoys”.)
According to Horowitz, the Pentagon’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Development and Emerging Capabilities, a new “trilateral algorithm” will allow them to share information from P-8 sonar buoys between each other.
According to Breaking Defense, the trilateral algorithm requires a high level of trust between the three countries.
“Even among Five Eyes partners,” it says, “sonobuoy information is highly sensitive, as sharing that data not only makes clear what each country has the ability to gather and where those buoys are deployed, but because it clearly reveals what and where each country is tracking.”
Pillar 2 arrangements build on those of Pillar 1 which are solely concerned with Australia’s acquisition of the hugely expensive nuclear-powered submarines.
At a cost averaged out at $A33 million a day over 35 years, we are promised a fleet of 8 submarines with the apparent advantages of extended range and endurance, higher speed, increased payload capacity, and reduced refuelling needs.
But given our own use of sonar buoys and knowing that our own all-but-at-war with “enemy”, China, has the same or superior detection technologies, it is the claim that SSNs (nuclear-powered submarines) have greater stealth and reduced detectability that is the major sales pitch justifying our $368 billion spend.
SSNs are claimed to have reduced noise and to be able to operate at greater depths, thus making them harder to detect.
Reduced noise will affect passive sonar buoys which listen for sounds generated by submarines. These sounds can include engine noise, propeller cavitation, or other mechanical noises.
Greater depth will affect active sonar buoys, those that send out a sound wave which then bounces off the submarine, allowing the buoy to detect the “ping” that travels back to the buoy. That ping is weaker the greater distance it has to travel.
Former Senator and submariner Rex Patrick was critical of the AUKUS decision for Australia to begin its SSN acquisition with the purchase of three second-hand Virginia Class SSNs from the US.
“The first highly noticeable issue with the Virginia class is a problem that has surfaced with the submarine’s acoustic coating that’s designed to reduce the ‘target strength’ of the submarine (how much sound energy from an enemy active sonar bounces off the submarine, back to the enemy),” he said.
“The coating is prone to peeling off at high-speed leaving loose cladding that slaps against the hull, making dangerous noise, and causes turbulent water flow, which also causes dangerous hull resonance (where the hull sings at its resonant frequency, like a tuning fork) and extra propulsion noise. I know a bit about this as a former underwater acoustics specialist.”
Magnetic Anomaly Detection (MAD) is another method of detection. MAD detects disturbances in the Earth’s magnetic field caused by the metal hull of a submarine. MAD sensors are typically deployed on aircraft and can detect submarines at relatively close ranges. The signals weaken with distance.
However, the Chinese are developing the ability to detect extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic signal produced by speeding subs.
Researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Fujian Institute of Research on the Structure of Matter found an ultra-sensitive magnetic detector could pick up traces of the most advanced submarine from long distances away.
The researchers calculated that the extremely low frequency (ELF) signal produced by a submarine’s bubbles could be stronger than the sensitivities of advanced magnetic anomaly detectors by three to six orders of magnitude.
The bubbles are an inevitable consequence of the submarine’s cruising speed, which causes the water flowing around the hull to move faster as its kinetic energy increases and its potential energy – expressed as pressure – decreases. When the pressure decreases sufficiently, small bubbles form on the surface of the hull as some of the water vaporises. This process causes turbulence and can produce an electromagnetic signature, in a phenomenon known as the magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) effect.
Though faint, ELF signals can travel great distances, thanks to their ability to penetrate the water and reach the ionosphere, where they are reflected back to the Earth’s surface.
Detection by ELF turns the advantage of an SSNs higher speed into its opposite, namely the disadvantage of higher detectability.
This ability of science to increase the detection of SSNs led even the pro-US Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) to publish a warning that “the oceans of tomorrow may become ‘transparent’. The submarine era could follow the battleship era and fade into history.”
It titled its article on a study of submarine detection by Australian scientists and academics “Advances in detection technology could render AUKUS submarines useless by 2050.”
According to the authors:
“The results should ring alarm bells for the AUKUS program to equip Australia with nuclear-powered submarines. Our assessment suggests that there will only be a brief window of time between the deployment of the first SSN AUKUS boats and the onset of transparent oceans.”
However, it is the expanding frontier of quantum computing that may be the ultimate nail in the AUKUS submarines coffin.
Quantum computing is the sexy new kid on the block – witness the Australian government’s investment of almost a billion dollars in a bid to build the world’s first commercially useful quantum computer in Brisbane. It’s bound to make the shareholders of US company PsiQuantum very happy, including notorious corporate investors such as Black Rock.
In July 2016, the Australia government awarded a contract to local company Q-CTRL to develop a quantum navigation system can use the motions of a single atom to precisely determine the course and position of a submarine and maintain accuracy to a remarkable degree. This overcomes two disadvantages of navigation by GPS: GPS is vulnerable to jamming by an adversary, and its signals cannot penetrate sea water to any appreciable depth.
That’s the good news story.
The bad news is that China has already funded its multi-billion-dollar National Quantum Laboratories to develop quantum-based technology applications for “immediate use to the Chinese armed forces”, possibly including targeting stealthy submarines.
According to Zhu Jin in The Conversation:
“New quantum sensing systems offer more sensitive detection and measurement of the physical environment. Existing stealth systems, including the latest generation of warplanes and ultra-quiet nuclear submarines, may no longer be so hard to spot.”
Using devices that measure and analyse the gravitational pull exercised by the mass of a submarine on the movement of sub-atomic particles in a sensor would overcome the disadvantages of sonar buoys and magnetometers, rendering any otherwise undetectable object with mass detectable.
The other area in which China is more advanced than its competitors is the use of quantum computing for encryption and decryption of communications.
In a 2022 paper on Quantum Computing and Cryptography, the authors that:
“China has set the pace for creating secure quantum communications that cannot be intercepted or manipulated. Further advances in Chinese quantum communication networks, especially networks designed for military use, will put the Navy at increased risk when deployed to the Indo-Pacific. If Chinese communications are virtually unbreakable and U.S. Navy communications can be exploited by Chinese quantum code-breaking technology, it will quickly lose its ability to safely operate among PLAN forces.”
All of this leaves one wondering about just what due diligence was done before Morrison, and the 24-hour copycat decision-maker Albanese, committed us to the folly of paying $A368 billion to purchase a subservient position embedded within the US war machine by means of a soon-to-be fully detectable and therefore likely to be destroyed fleet of nuclear-powered submarines.
Michael Williss is a member of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition (AAAC) and the Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN).
TODAY. Nuclear weapons? I am so tired of the silly little boys inside the “important” men who risk all our lives.
I can’t see any difference. It’s all the same preoccupation – “Mine Is Bigger Than Yours”. We wouldn’t think of letting small boys with undeveloped frontal lobes take silly risks with our lives.
But, when those mentally and morally undeveloped brains are now inside important-looking big men in suits, it is not really apparent – how silly they actually are.
It is well and truly time to “take the toys from the boys”.
What prompted me today, was the proud claim from UK Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer.
He claimed “his party has left behind Jeremy Corbyn’s opposition to the Trident nuclear weapons system. If elected, Sir Keir said he would increase defence spending and update the UK’s nuclear arsenal………….. and push for the UK to assume a “leading” role in Nato.”
So UK Labour has expelled that wimp previous Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn. I mean – Jeremy Corbyn-
supported the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons,
criticised Israel for its treatment of Palestinians,
was a strong advocate for environmentalism,
campaigned for animal rights,
campaigner against apartheid in South Africa………….
Obviously a sissy little wimp. With a properly developed frontal lobe
Obviously a sissy little wimp. With a properly developed frontal lobe
But wait a minute. If we can’t have the “weaker sex” really in charge of anything (they’re not to be trusted) – then maybe it’s time to give these wimpy-frontal-lobe men a go.
Before it’s too late.
TODAY. “Don’t let the people see what is happening” – the forgotten lesson from the Vietnam war.
Dear oh dear!. The USA had learned this lesson – too much TV coverage of US troops suffering and dying, and worse, what was being done to the Vietnamese, with abuses like napalm and the My Lai massacre in 1968. The American public was shocked – riots in cities and university campuses across the nation. What a mistake! – this coverage – regretfully, – the USA had to withdraw their troops in 1973, and lose this lovely war.
But the lesson was well learned. Next time – The Iraq war coverage was a marvel of distant fireworks exhibitions. Lovely coverage of pretty explosions across Iraq. Not a human casualty in sight.
The USA authorities were in control of the “home “media coverage in the Iraq war, and then the Afghanistan one. And indeed, now the Ukraine war is a model of “correct” coverage.
The USA is doing an effective job on Ukraine. In the Ukraine case, we are constantly reassured that of course Ukraine can beat Russia. There are TV visuals and radio podcasts constant reminders of brutality and atrocities by Russians, the brave sufferings of Ukrainians, and of their brave leader Zelensky, versus the tyrant Putin. And of course, lots of Russian soldiers are getting killed, which must be a good thing, mustn’t it?
All that is no doubt true. But we don’t see any atrocities by Ukrainians. We don’t see the sufferings of ethnic and Russian-language Ukrainians over the 10 years of struggle in the Donbass region. We don’t see any questioning of Zelensky’s wisdom in refusing to negotiate with Russia, any questioning of the massive slaughter of Ukrainian troops.
As is the tradition in wartime, in the Ukraine case, the Western media is very successfully brainwashing us . Any questioning of this narrative is immediately dismissed as “disinformation”. A good case in point is the Russian news outlet Rt.com. Yes. of course, much of Rt’s information is indeed propaganda. But some of it is indeed true – facts that are ignored or hidden by the Western media.
So – the Ukraine war drags on – and we all cheer for Zelensky.
The Gaza situation is something different.
It is a technology thing. In Vietnam, it was TV coverage. Even in Ukraine, there are carefully controlled images from Western journalists “embedded” in the Ukraine army. But now – there’s the mobile phone. And suddenly there is real life footage of the genocidal atrocity going on in Gaza.
It is laughable that emissaries like Antony Blinken can run around the world bleating about Israel’s “right to defend itself”, and Joe Biden can make pious statements about how Israel should behave nicely.
Sorry, warmongers, but people now see what Israel, backed by the USA, is doing to Palestinians – and for Gaza, people are not buying Western propaganda.
Do young people support nuclear power?
Jim Green 31 May 24
Earlier this year the Murdoch-Coalition echo-chamber was excited about younger poll respondents in a February Newspoll survey ‒ 65 percent support and 32 percent opposition among 18 to 34-year-olds to this survey question: ‘There is a proposal to build several small modular nuclear reactors around Australia to produce zero-emissions energy on the sites of existing coal-fired power stations once they are retired. Do you approve or disapprove of this proposal?’
However the Newspoll survey was a crude example of push-polling as discussed by polling experts Kevin Bonham and Murray Goot and by economist Professor John Quiggin. The question was loaded, the response options were mischievous (excluding a “neither approve nor disapprove” option, without which majority support (across all age groups) almost certainly would not have been achieved), and the Murdoch/Sky reporting on the poll was biased and dishonest.
Moreover, as Murray Goot notes, other polls reach different conclusions:
“But eighteen- to thirty-four-year-olds as the age group most favourably disposed to nuclear power is not what Essential shows, not what Savanta shows, and not what RedBridge shows.
“In October’s Essential poll, no more than 46 per cent of respondents aged eighteen to thirty-four supported “nuclear power plants” — the same proportion as those aged thirty-six to fifty-four but a smaller proportion than those aged fifty-five-plus (56 per cent); the proportion of “strong” supporters was actually lower among those aged eighteen to thirty-four than in either of the other age-groups.
“In the Savanta survey, those aged eighteen to thirty-four were the least likely to favour nuclear energy; only about 36 per cent were in favour, strongly or otherwise, not much more than half the number that Newspoll reported.
“And according to a report of the polling conducted in February by RedBridge, sourced to Tony Barry, a partner and former deputy state director of the Victorian Liberal Party, “[w]here there is support” for nuclear power “it is among only those who already vote Liberal or who are older than 65”.”
TODAY: What is criminal in Ukraine, is God’s righteousness in Gaza
RUSSIA. US President Joe Biden welcomed the International Criminal Court’s issuing of an arrest warrant against his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin.
The ICC accused President Putin of committing war crimes in Ukraine – something President Biden said the Russian leader had “clearly” done…… President Biden said that … the issuing of the warrant “makes a very strong point”. The claims focus on the unlawful deportation of children from Ukraine to Russia since Moscow’s invasion in 2022.
“He’s clearly committed war crimes,” he told reporters.
His administration had earlier “formally determined” that Russia had committed war crimes during the conflict in Ukraine, with Vice-President Kamala Harris saying in February that those involved would “be held to account”.
****************************
ISRAEL. President Joe Biden denounced the chief prosecutor of the world’s top war crimes court for seeking arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas leaders.
“What’s happening in Gaza is not genocide. We reject that,” Mr Biden said at a Jewish American Heritage Month event at the White House.
He said American support for the safety and security of Israelis is “ironclad”.
Biden administration presents its policies to overcome legal and political questions about its unconditional support for Israel, and continues to send weapons to Israel.
The US has vetoed three separate ceasefire draft resolutions at the United Nations Security Council and voted against two at the General Assembly.
Rights groups have documented numerous violations of international humanitarian law by the Israeli military, which extensively uses US weapons. Those reports include evidence of indiscriminate bombing, torture and targeting civilians.
TODAY. Turning Point, The Cold War and the Bomb. Episode 3- Institutional Insanity
This begins with Volodymyr Zelensky in 2022 and Russian attacks on Ukraine, and Ukraine’s strong resistance. Author Garret Graff calls this first successful resistance “probably the turning point of the entire war.” So – it became a full scale war.
Now back to the 1950s. In the early years of the cold war, the USA treated nuclear war as something that could be survived. Public education programs. The message was that the Soviet Union was an existential threat, but that you could survive, with school training, with fallout shelters.
Fear of communism led to developing bigger bombs against the communists.
The movement to the hydrogen bomb, the thermonuclear device. Scary film of testing this on Elugelab Island in 1952, horrifying many, including Robert Oppenheimer. Albert Einstein wrote “General annihilation beckons“. Eisenhower shocked and shaken – “the power to erase human life from this planet“. The Soviets feel that they must equal this – their first hydrogen bomb test August 1953. So the USA responds in 1954 with the super-large Castle Bravo hydrogen bomb test on Bikini Atoll – making a 4-mile wide fireball. The island populations were affected by the radiation – horrifying personal stories. A Japanese ship affected by the “death ash“. The fisherman’s dying message – “let me be the last person killed by this awful weapon”.
A series of nuclear tests in the USA and across the world. Daniel Ellsberg recalls how he worked with the very clever test designers – “It turns out that intelligence is not a very good guarantee of wisdom“. The movie Dr Strangelove has words directly taken from them, and Ellsberg describes that film as a documentary. “Everything in that film could have happened“. People other than the President could launch an attack. Ellsberg saw the war plans – “they were strange and horrible“. The plan was to hit every city in Russia and China with thermonuclear weapons- with 600 million deaths – one fifth of the world population then. The Soviets then followed with a similar policy. It opened up the world as the playground of the two powers.
Covert operations all around the world. The CIA was created in 1947 modelled on Britain’s MI6. The Soviets had the KGB, very repressive under Stalin. In the USA intelligence and operational planning, and action, were combined in the CIA. By 1949 the CIA were doing paramilitary operations against the nations of Central Europe that were Soviet satellites. They started with Ukraine, training Ukrainian exiles (graphic film here), creating and funding “Ukrainian resistance cells” from 1949 – 1953 . These were suicide missions, because the British counter-spy Kim Philby was informing the Soviets. Subsequent operations to Poland, Romania – were also disasters.
From 1953, U.S. foreign policy , as run by the Allen Dulles and John Foster Dulles, brothers, saw communism behind every nationalist movement, happy to spread American democracy via any government, however vicious brutal and corrupt. The Dulles brothers also were dedicated to furthering the interests of multinational corporations, which meant controlling the countries that supplied resources.
They started with Iran and Guatemala, overthrowing the elected governments. The CIA used money and propaganda, controlling the Iranian media, flooding it with “fake news”, and created “communist thuggery”. They succeeded in reinstalling the Shah. Western oil companies now ran the oil business. Guatemala followed the same pattern, a highly repressive regime was set up.
The cold war was a battle for minds and hearts. The CIA from the late 40s to the early 60s had hundreds of “influence operations”, co-opting overseas and some American media.
The Soviet Union’s KGB used “Active measures” – set up to use disinformation, planting major stories in overseas news media to cause disruption and confusion, forging documents slipped to journalists. These were often accepted especially in developing countries as genuine proof of American conspiracies. In the Soviet Union, Stalin had complete control of the media.
Stalin’s death in 1953. Nikita Kruschev ushered in a new period – the Thaw. His story here told by his great-granddaughter. Kruschev released many innocent victims of Stalin’s gulags, revealed Stalin’s crimes, set the Soviet Union on a different course, opened up the possibility of liberal reform, lessened censorship. But Kruschev also believed that the Soviet Union must show its strength to the USA, boasted of its military strength, with a disinformation campaign to scare Americans about a 100 megaton bomb, and the number and reach of its missiles.
USA’s military thinking moved to plans to evacuate high-ranking officials, expecting that in a coming nuclear war most of America will die, but the government will survive in a mountain bunker.
Daniel Ellsberg reported on the secret doomsday machines, in the Pentagon Papers, and copied all his nuclear reports, published “Confessions of a nuclear war planner”. Now in 2022 we see him urging for cutting the defense budget, getting rid of ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) – to avoid armageddon.
The episode ends with the warning of how suddenly a crisis can arise, with the greatest danger to the world, as happened in 1962 – when the Russians placed intermediate range nuclear missiles on the island of Cuba.
The Slow-Motion Execution of Julian Assange Continues .
Free speech is a key issue. If Julian is granted First Amendment rights in a U.S. court it will be very difficult for the U.S. to build a criminal case against him, since other news organizations, including The New York Times and The Guardian, published the material he released.
The ruling by the High Court in London permitting Julian Assange to appeal his extradition order leaves him languishing in precarious health in a high-security prison. That is the point.
CHRIS HEDGES, MAY 24, 2024, https://chrishedges.substack.com/p/the-slow-motion-execution-of-julian-986?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=778851&post_id=144930141&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
The decision by the High Court in London to grant Julian Assange the right to appeal the order to extradite him to the United States may prove to be a Pyrrhic victory. It does not mean Julian will elude extradition. It does not mean the court has ruled, as it should, that he is a journalist whose only “crime” was providing evidence of war crimes and lies by the U.S. government to the public. It does not mean he will be released from the high-security HMS Belmarsh prison where, as Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, after visiting Julian there, said he was undergoing a “slow-motion execution.”
It does not mean that journalism is any less imperiled. Editors and publishers of five international media outlets —– The New York Times, the Guardian, Le Monde, El Pais and DER SPIEGEL —– which published stories based on documents released by WikiLeaks, have urged that the U.S. charges be dropped and Julian be released. None of these media executives were charged with espionage. It does not dismiss the ludicrous ploy by the U.S. government to extradite an Australian citizen whose publication is not based in the U.S. and charge him under the Espionage Act. It continues the long Dickensian farce that mocks the most basic concepts of due process.
This ruling is based on the grounds that the U.S. government did not offer sufficient assurances that Julian would be granted the same First Amendment protections afforded to a U.S. citizen, should he stand trial. The appeal process is one more legal hurdle in the persecution of a journalist who should not only be free, but feted and honored as the most courageous of our generation.
Yes. He can file an appeal. But this means another year, perhaps longer, in harsh prison conditions as his physical and psychological health deteriorates. He has spent over five years in HMS Belmarsh without being charged. He spent seven years in the Ecuadorian Embassy because the U.K. and Swedish governments refused to guarantee that he wouldn’t be extradited to the U.S., even though he agreed to return to Sweden to aid a preliminary investigation that was eventually dropped.
The judicial lynching of Julian was never about justice. The plethora of legal irregularities, including the recording of his meetings with attorneys by the Spanish security firm UC Global at the embassy on behalf of the CIA, alone should have seen the case thrown out of court as it eviscerates attorney-client privilege.
The U.S. has charged Julian with 17 counts under the Espionage Act and one count of computer misuse, for an alleged conspiracy to take possession of and then publish national defense information. If found guilty on all of these charges he faces 175 years in a U.S. prison.
The extradition request is based on the 2010 release by WikiLeaks of the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs — hundreds of thousands of classified documents, leaked to the site by Chelsea Manning, then an Army intelligence analyst, which exposed numerous U.S. war crimes including video images of the gunning down of two Reuters journalists and 10 other unarmed civilians in the Collateral Murder video, the routine torture of Iraqi prisoners, the covering up of thousands of civilian deaths and the killing of nearly 700 civilians that had approached too closely to U.S. checkpoints.
In February, lawyers for Julian submitted nine separate grounds for a possible appeal.
A two-day hearing in March, which I attended, was Julian’s last chance to request an appeal of the extradition decision made in 2022 by the then British home secretary, Priti Patel, and of many of the rulings of District Judge Baraitser in 2021.
The two High Court judges, Dame Victoria Sharp and Justice Jeremy Johnson, in March rejected most of Julian’s grounds of appeal. These included his lawyers’ contention that the UK-US extradition treaty bars extradition for political offenses; that the extradition request was made for the purpose of prosecuting him for his political opinions; that extradition would amount to retroactive application of the law — because it was not foreseeable that a century-old espionage law would be used against a foreign publisher; and that he would not receive a fair trial in the Eastern District of Virginia. The judges also refused to hear new evidence that the CIA plotted to kidnap and assassinate Julian, concluding — both perversely and incorrectly — that the CIA only considered these options because they believed Julian was planning to flee to Russia.
But the two judges determined Monday that it is “arguable” that a U.S. court might not grant Julian protection under the First Amendment, violating his rights to free speech as enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights.
The judges in March asked the U.S. to provide written assurances that Julian would be protected under the First Amendment and that he would be exempt from a death penalty verdict. The U.S. assured the court that Julian would not be subjected to the death penalty, which Julian’s lawyers ultimately accepted. But the Department of Justice was unable to provide an assurance that Julian could mount a First Amendment defense in a U.S. court. Such a decision is made in a U.S. federal court, their lawyers explained.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon Kromberg, who is prosecuting Julian, has argued that only U.S. citizens are guaranteed First Amendment rights in U.S. courts. Kromberg has stated that what Julian published was “not in the public interest” and that the U.S. was not seeking his extradition on political grounds.
Free speech is a key issue. If Julian is granted First Amendment rights in a U.S. court it will be very difficult for the U.S. to build a criminal case against him, since other news organizations, including The New York Times and The Guardian, published the material he released.
The extradition request is based on the contention that Julian is not a journalist and not protected under the First Amendment.
Julian’s attorneys and those representing the U.S. government have until May 24 to submit a draft order, which will determine when the appeal will be heard.
Julian committed the empire’s greatest sin — he exposed it as a criminal enterprise. He documented its lies, routine violation of human rights, wanton killing of innocent civilians, rampant corruption and war crimes. Republican or Democrat, Conservative or Labour, Trump or Biden — it does not matter. Those who manage the empire use the same dirty playbook.
The publication of classified documents is not a crime in the United States, but if Julian is extradited and convicted, it will become one.
Julian is in precarious physical and psychological health. His physical and psychological deterioration has resulted in a minor stroke, hallucinations and depression. He takes antidepressant medication and the antipsychotic quetiapine. He has been observed pacing his cell until he collapses, punching himself in the face and banging his head against the wall. He has spent weeks in the medical wing of Belmarsh, nicknamed “hell wing.” Prison authorities found “half of a razor blade” hidden under his socks. He has repeatedly called the suicide hotline run by the Samaritans because he thought about killing himself “hundreds of times a day.”
These slow-motion executioners have not yet completed their work. Toussaint L’Ouverture, who led the Haitian independence movement, the only successful slave revolt in human history, was physically destroyed in the same manner. He was locked by the French in an unheated and cramped prison cell and left to die of exhaustion, malnutrition, apoplexy, pneumonia and probably tuberculosis.
Prolonged imprisonment, which the granting of this appeal perpetuates, is the point. The 12 years Julian has been detained — seven in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and over five in high-security Belmarsh Prison — have been accompanied by a lack of sunlight and exercise, as well as unrelenting threats, pressure, prolonged isolation, anxiety and constant stress. The goal is to destroy him.
We must free Julian. We must keep him out of the hands of the U.S. government. Given all he did for us, we owe him an unrelenting fight.
If there is no freedom of speech for Julian, there will be no freedom of speech for us.
TODAY. UK’s political omnishambles – a damper on the nuclear lobby
Oh dear, oh dear! What can UK PM Rishi Sunak be thinking of? Calling an election when his Conservative Party’s polling numbers are abysmal? And when the global nuclear lobby is boasting away about Britain’s splendid commitment to nuclear power!
Rishi is letting down his military-industrial-nuclear-media complex funders of the Tories.
But then, if this absolute basket-case of a UK government hangs on any longer – its credibility would no doubt go further down the toilet. A later election – even more of a Tory sensational disgusting morass. (Not that Rishi would care too much- would move on to a more lucrative job in private enterprise, as they all do)
Tory Energy secretary Claire Coutinho said: : “We intend to take a final investment decision on Sizewell C nuclear before the end of this Parliament.”
Sizewell nuclear station is planned for Wylfa, in Wales – “the best site in Europe for a big nuclear project”. Only problem is – they can’t seem to get investors for this project, into which the government has already poured £2.5bn of the needed circa £20bn.
Of course UK Labour is supposedly committed to the nuclear folly. The UK already faces a likely £48 billion cost for Hinkley Point C nuclear station. So, on paper, a Labour government is supposed to somehow cough up the finance for both of these gargantuan money-guzzlers.
The Tory government’s mess has stimulated a new word “omnishambles”.
It is quite possible that the coming Labour (or hung) government might want to show a bit of fiscal sanity and move away from this financially suicidal nuclear power push.
‘Bring Julian home’: the Australian campaign to free Assange
Assange’s supporters say what Wikileaks revealed about power and access to information is as relevant today as ever.
Aljazeera, By Lyndal Rowlands 19 May 2024
Melbourne, Australia – At home in Australia, Julian Assange’s family and friends are preparing for his possible extradition to the United States, ahead of what could be his final hearing in the United Kingdom on Monday.
Assange’s half-brother Gabriel Shipton, who spoke to Al Jazeera from Melbourne before flying to London, said he had already booked a flight to the US.
A filmmaker who worked on blockbusters like Mad Max before producing a documentary on his brother, Shipton has travelled the world advocating for Assange’s release, from Mexico City to London and Washington, DC.
Earlier this year, he was a guest of cross-bench supporters of Assange at US President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address.
The invitation reflected interest in his brother’s case both in Washington, DC and back home in Australia. Biden told journalists last month he was “considering” a request from Australia to drop the US prosecution.
Assange rose to prominence with the launch of Wikileaks in 2006, creating an online whistleblower platform for people to submit classified material such as documents and videos anonymously. Footage of a US Apache helicopter attack in Baghdad, which killed a dozen people, including two journalists, raised the platform’s profile, while the 2010 release of thousands of classified US documents on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as a trove of diplomatic cables, cemented its reputation.
Shipton told Al Jazeera the recent attention from Washington, DC had been notable, even as his brother’s options to fight extradition in the UK appeared close to running out.
“To get attention there on a case of a single person is very significant, particularly after Julian’s been fighting this extradition for five years,” Shipton told Al Jazeera, adding that he hoped the Australian prime minister was following up with Biden.
We’re always trying to encourage the Australian government to do more.”
A test for US democracy
Assange’s possible extradition to the US could see freedom of expression thrown into the spotlight during an election year that has already seen mass arrests at student antiwar protests.
Shipton told Al Jazeera the pro-Palestinian protests had helped bring “freedom of speech, freedom to assembly, particularly in the United States, front of mind again”, issues he notes have parallels with his brother’s story.
While Wikileaks published material about many countries, it was the administration of former US President Donald Trump that charged Assange in 2019 with 17 counts of violating the Espionage Act.
US lawyers argue Assange is guilty of conspiring with Chelsea Manning, a former army intelligence analyst, who spent seven years in prison for leaking material to WikiLeaks before former US President Barack Obama commuted her sentence.
“It’s an invaluable resource that remains utterly essential to understand how power works, not just US power, but global power,” Antony Loewenstein, an independent Australian journalist and author, said of the Wikileaks archive.
“I always quote and detail [Wikileaks’s] work on a range of issues from the drug war, to Israel/Palestine, to the US war on terror, to Afghanistan,” Loewenstein said, noting that Wikileaks also published materials on Bashar al-Assad’s Syria and Vladimir Putin’s Russia.
“It’s just an incredible historical resource,” he said.
Loewenstein’s most recent book, the Palestine Laboratory, explores Israel’s role in spreading mass surveillance around the world, another issue Loewenstein notes, that Assange often spoke about.
“One thing that Julian has often said, and he’s correct, is that the internet is on the one hand an incredibly powerful information tool… but it’s also the biggest mass surveillance tool ever designed in history,” said Loewenstein……………………………………………. more https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2024/5/19/bring-julian-home-the-australian-campaign-to-free-assange
Going nuclear on power and wages may not be the election winner Peter Dutton thinks it is
Guardian, Paul Karp, 20 May 24
Opposition leader has laid fertile ground for progressive attack ads to grow in policy-lite budget reply
Peter Dutton’s budget reply sets the Coalition up for an election campaign focused on migration and law and order. At least, that’s the election he wants because it’s one he thinks he could win.
But Dutton’s policy-lite speech contains the seeds of campaigns that will inevitably be deployed by the progressive side of politics: on nuclear and wages.
The nuclear debate has been a train wreck in slow motion for months now.
So many front page stories in the Australian promised the policy before the budget with such juicy details as the type of technology, the number of reactors, their putative location.
Then, a deferral. All in good time.
In Thursday’s speech, Dutton made the case that nuclear is popular. Bob Hawke supported it, so does John Howard, the Australian Workers Union and “65% of Australians aged 18 to 34 years of age”.
One couldn’t help but wonder: if it’s so popular, why not make it the centrepiece of the speech and actually announce the policy?
Perhaps because it’s so expensive that it completely fails the Coalition’s new test for Future Made in Australia projects – that they must be commercially viable without taxpayer support. Perhaps because the friendlier-sounding small modular reactors are not commercially available.
Or perhaps because it is not, in fact, that popular.
Labor are increasingly cocky that the nuclear thought-bubble is an exploding cigar for the opposition. On Thursday the energy minister, Chris Bowen, gleefully cited choice anonymous quotes from Coalition backbenchers in question time that the policy is “madness on steroids” and within the ranks there is “a sudden sense of bewilderment” about the idea.
A few months ago I wrote a slightly trolling column about the possibility of a plebiscite on nuclear power to accompany the next election. Labor see Dutton doing everything in his power to turn the next election into a straw poll on his big bad idea anyway.
The attack ads write themselves. I can see the bunting wrapped around schools on election day already, with nuclear cooling towers, yellowcake, plutonium rods and Dutton’s face.
In his post budget reply press conference the education minister, Jason Clare, said simply: “If he won’t tell you where he’s going to put all the nuclear reactors, why would you vote for him?”
This is the obvious scare campaign. Let’s also look at the slower burn issue: wages.
An easy win – but not for him
In his speech Dutton promised to “remove the complexity and hostility of Labor’s industrial relations agenda, which is putting unreasonable burdens on businesses”…………………
It’s absolutely fine for Dutton to create some policy differentiation with Labor, but if he doesn’t set out chapter and verse what’s in and what’s out, the unions will paint him as against all of it………………………………………………………………
The minor themes of the speech have the greatest potential to develop into major problems for him https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/may/20/going-nuclear-on-power-and-wages-may-not-be-the-election-winner-peter-dutton-thinks-it-is
The president of the ACTU, Michele O’Neil, said: “Dutton committed to getting rid of the workplace laws that are finally seeing real wages grow, after 10 years of wage stagnation by the last Coalition government.”
Dutton “told workers that if he is elected, he will again commit the Coalition to running an economy based on low wages” and “turn secure jobs into casual jobs”.
TODAY. “The empire” – an exaggerated, emotive, term?
Well, I always thought that “Empire” was a dramatic, over-stated, term. And it annoyed me that writers kept using it, in relation to the USA. I thought that criticism of America was warranted – but don’t weaken your case by using such an emotive word.
“Empire” brings up thoughts of the murderous regimes of history – the murderous Mongol Empire, the quite punishing Roman Empire, the cruel Empire of Japan, the rapacious British Empire
Oh no – America’s not like that!
Yes, it is.
And in today’s world, the USA government has access to weapons undreamt of in earlier regimes. Not just its smorgasbord of every possible kind of killing tool, but also its economic weaponry, and its media weaponry.
Not that I think that Americans are bad people. They are good, kind people, who value their families highly. So highly that hanging on to their income – their lucrative weapons-company shares, or their jobs, in deceptive and even killer industries is their top priority. And if they have any doubts – well – the magic term “our national security” justifies all government action.
Americans have bought the idea of American exceptionalism. America is good and always right, and can justly interfere in any country, because they know best. So – they’ve got military bases worldwide:
If you didn’t notice America’s interference – South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia – in Chile, Nicaragua, – Libya, wars in Afghanstan, Iraq, – you’d have to be noticing what’s going on now in Ukraine, and in Israel’s massacres in Gaza.
The military bases in increase, the belligerent propaganda increases, and the ‘Western world steels itself to faithfully be the patsies for USA’s next big intervention – Taiwan.
Ukraine, Taiwan , Gaza – all wonderful laboratories for testing the bestest American weapons, enriching American corporations, and no risks to American lives.
When you see articles by Caitlin Johnstone , Chris Hedges, Ralph Nader, Robert Kennedy Jr, Patterson Deppen, and more – talking about “The Empire” – don’t be too hasty to brush them off as way-out radicals.
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 