Next Page: 10000

          Mr. Burns is a weirdly good show at MCC      Cache   Translate Page      
Mr. Burns, a post-electric play, an unusual show at McHenry County College’s Black Box Theatre through March 23, defies easy explanation.

In a nutshell, this off-Broadway dark comedy by Anne Washburn is rather weird, but you just might like it especially if you’re a fan of “The Simpsons” or of the idea of seeing three very different stories in one play.

Act I starts out with a small group of Americans who are among those who survived an apocalyptic event in which all U.S. nuclear power plants have been destroyed and the electric grid has collapsed. Gathered around a campfire in the present day, Matt (Jackson Nielsen), Jenny (Avery Harvey), Maria (Rachel Schneider), Sam (Charlie Sommers), and Colin (Derrick Wilson) are using their recollections of “The Simpsons” as a way to have a shared memory that can distract them from their real-life concerns, including “crazy rumors” about any ongoing danger.

The episode that is particularly memorable for this group is “Cape Feare,” the episode with a Sideshow-Bob-stalks-Bart-Simpson plot that parodies the Cape Fear thriller films (one starring Robert Mitchum, one with Robert De Niro). When this quintet is joined by Gibson (Joel Bennett), a wanderer who eventually says an ex-girlfriend was a big “Simpsons” fan and he’s a Gilbert & Sullivan society member, the group’s combined ability to recall the episode details increases exponentially.

Act II jumps ahead seven years to show how this group, now joined by another survivor, Quincy (Gianah Tomczak), has become a kind of theatre group, traveling to different cities to perform “Simpsons” episodes, TV commercials, and pop music medleys (e.g., “La Vida Loca,” “Fame,” “Eye of the Tiger,” and even the theme of “The Muppet Show”). Lines from “Simpsons” episodes have become a hot commodity, theatre groups buying the rights to use bits of dialogue from brokers and individuals.

Act III — 75 years later — is a mini-musical with rap, Gilbert & Sullivan, and other elements all coming together with other “Simpsons” characters (e.g., Edna [Spencer Alvarez]) and a revised “Cape Feare” plot. In this version, Springfield nuclear plant owner Mr. Burns (played with evil relish by Bennett) is now the villain of the piece, assisted by two “Simpsons” characters who used to hate each other, Itchy (Nielsen) and Scratchy (Sommers).

As these brief descriptions suggest, the three acts vary a lot in tone, each feeling like a different play. For instance, Act II is mostly humorous, with Bennett and Tomczak having a lot of fun as their characters (Gibson and Quincy) purposely overact in their rehearsal of a scene the theatre group is preparing. But when a character fears that his forgetting a decision the group made indicates he may have the onset of possible brain damage, and when violence occurs later, this comedy turns dark indeed. The main connector here — the power of storytelling as a civilization evolves — is a thought-provoking one.

Director Jay Geller and Musical Director Katie Meyers have ably shepherded the actors to some very good performances, even when they’re wearing brightly colored cartoon character masks and/or headpieces. (Sideshow Bob’s head and Marge Simpson’s towering blue hairstyle are especially memorable, thanks to costume designers Kathy Bruhnke and Kristi Geggie.)

I was also impressed by the increasingly more substantive set pieces by set designer Thomas Kesling and technical directors Susanne Powell and Kent Wilson.

Don’t bring the little ones to this play; despite the cartoon-based aspects, there’s a lot of adult subject matter (e.g., the safe distance from a nuclear plant that’s collapsed).

In summary, with a script this bizarre, very few theatre groups would tackle it. Kudos to Geller and MCC for taking a chance. It’s a show that sticks with you, so — despite my misgivings about the script — I’m giving this production of a post-nuclear-disaster play a “glowing” review.

• Paul Lockwood is a past president of TownSquare Players (TSP) and an occasional community theater actor, appearing in over 30 plays, musicals, and revues since he and his wife moved to Woodstock in 2001. Recent shows include 42nd Street, Once Upon a Mattress, On Golden Pond, 9 to 5: The Musical, A Christmas Carol (2014, 2016), and Into the Woods.

          Tech Tuesday: What Rich Guys Think About In Their Spare Time      Cache   Translate Page      
Photo by Justin Dickey on Unsplash
So Bill and Jeff are sitting around the fireplace at Bill's place one evening, sipping wine and chatting about this and that. Jeff is impressed that Bill has a 50-car garage, and a house full of windows. Bill is impressed by the valuation of Jeff's company stock.

The conversation bounces from theme to theme until finally Bill asks, "What are you doing to save the world?"

Jeff reflects on his childhood and recalls a game he used to play with a balloon in which he would keep tapping it upward toward the ceiling so as to keep it from touching the ground. If it hit the ground the world would blow up. In other words, it was a game with high stakes.

Of course high stakes is what made the game exhilarating.  Bill listens quietly as Jeff relates this childhood experience.

"Everything will end at one time or another," Bill says. "I just don't want to be there when it happens."

"Me neither," Jeff said. "That's why I called you tonight. I've had a really hot idea.. It's going to take some capital, but you know how it is. Nothing ventured, nothing gained."

Jeff shared his idea, and Bill liked it.

"Nuclear fusion," Bill said, pondering the sound of the words as he repeated the phrase. "I like it."

Will nuclear fusion be the energy of the future?

EdNote: Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates have thrown a few million tokens into the pot with a handful of others to invest in a startup called General Fusion. The goal is to provide energy for the one billion people in the world who do not yet have energy.

"Can you imagine? If we pull this off, your original dream for Microsoft can actually happen. Every home in the world will be able to have a personal computer."

"Yes," Bill added, "And Amazon will have one billion more potential customers."

"I'll drink to that," Jeff said, lifting his glass.

"Wait. I should fetch a bottle of Chateau Petrus 2015 red," Bill interrupted.

"Just a sec," Jeff said, setting his glass on an oak end table. "What about Heaven's Door? You wouldn't--"

"I do," said Bill. "Do you prefer the Tennessee Bourbon or the Double Barrel Whiskey?"

Jeff laughs. "I like the Straight Rye."

"Rye not," Bill says, chuckling at his wry humor.

There's no record of how the rest of the evening went.... for what it's worth, here's the rest of the story.

* * * *
Follow the link below to see what it's really all about.
Will Nuclear Fusion Be the Energy of the Future?

EdNote: Other than the links, this blog post is a work of fiction. Any resemblance to what really happened is purely coincidence.
* * * *
Related Links
Bob Dylan's Foray into the Whiskey Business
Heaven's Door Whiskey

          For America, WAR is LIFE      Cache   Translate Page      
I originally posted the following information and commentary onto my Facebook wall… Small Nuclear War Could Reverse Global Warming for Years: (Charles Q. Choi) Even a regional nuclear war could spark “unprecedented” global cooling and reduce rainfall for years, according to U.S. government computer models. Widespread famine and disease would … (Click Here to Continue Reading This Post)
          7 things to know about the World Wide Web as it celebrates 30 years      Cache   Translate Page      

March 12 marks a significant milestone in British technology with the 30th anniversary of the World Wide Web. In 1989, working at the European Organisation for Nuclear Research, known as CERN, Sir Tim Berners-Lee submitted a proposal for information management that would go on to transform the way people communicate and consume information. Here are some interesting facts about the World Wide Web: – The World Wide Web was developed out of frustration Sir Tim invented the World Wide Web because he was frustrated to have to constantly log on to a different computer every time he wanted to access different information not on his main computer. – ‘Vague but exciting’ Sir Tim’s boss at CERN, Mike Sendall, left three short but powerful words when he first received the proposal paper for the World Wide Web: “Vague but exciting.” At the end, he simply said: “And now?” – The World Wide Web is not the same as the internet The World Wide Web and the internet are wrongly confused as the same thing – something Sir Tim is quick to correct people on. The internet, which is a network of networks formed of computers, existed long before the World Wide Web. WWW is the transfer of information, whether it be text, documents or other rich content like videos. – The World Wide Web was almost called something completely different Sir Tim considered a number of name options before settling on World Wide Web. Among the contenders were Mine of Information, The Information Mine and Information Mesh. – The first website just explained what the World Wide Web was The first web page, defining what the Web is, did not go live until August 6, 1991. A copy of it can still be viewed today: – The first web browser was also called WorldWideWeb Years before the Internet Explorer, Sir Tim also created the first web browser, which went by the same name, WorldWideWeb. – You can still see how the Web looked originally Developers and designers at CERN recently rebuilt the original browser, allowing people to experience the World Wide Web as it was first intended. Anyone can try the browser out by visiting

The post 7 things to know about the World Wide Web as it celebrates 30 years appeared first on London Glossy Post.

          North Korea rocket launch ‘would be catastrophe for diplomacy’      Cache   Translate Page      

North Korea using a possible rocket launch as leverage in negotiations with the US would be catastrophic for global diplomacy, a South Korean presidential adviser has said. US-based websites recently released satellite photographs indicating North Korea has restored structures at its long-range rocket launch facility that it dismantled last year at the start of diplomacy with the United States. Other satellite images show increased vehicle activities at a separate North Korean facility used to manufacture missiles, and rockets for satellite launches. Some experts say these suggest North Korea may be assembling a long-range rocket to carry out a banned satellite launch in the wake of last month’s North Korea-US summit in Hanoi that ended without any agreement. Moon Chung-in, a retired university professor who is now a special adviser to President Moon Jae-in, told a panel discussion that North Korea using a rocket launch or other nuclear activities as leverage in negotiations would be a “bad move”. Mr Moon said such a North Korean move could eventually cause a “catastrophic” consequence or a “big disaster” in the US-North Korea diplomacy. “I wonder if North Korea should avoid” such an action, Mr Moon said. He said both North Korea and the US must restrain themselves to keep diplomacy alive and start unofficial contacts to resume talks. He said the Hanoi summit showed how “difficult” and “painful” it would be to achieve de-nuclearisation on the Korean Peninsula. The Hanoi summit fell apart due to disputes over how many sanctions reliefs North Korea could win in return for limited nuclear disarmament steps. Washington and Pyongyang accuse each other of causing the summit’s breakdown, but both sides have avoided harsh criticism against each other and expressed hopes for future negotiations. No official meeting between the countries has yet to be publicly scheduled. The February 27-28 summit was the second summit between North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and President Donald Trump since they met for the first time in Singapore last June.

The post North Korea rocket launch ‘would be catastrophe for diplomacy’ appeared first on London Glossy Post.

          U.S. defense budget favors Navy shipbuilding, fewer Boeing tanker jets      Cache   Translate Page      

U.S. defense budget favors Navy shipbuilding, fewer Boeing tanker jetsU.S. President Donald Trump's $750-billion defense budget includes more money to build ships, fulfilling a campaign promise to strengthen the Navy, but also cuts the number of Boeing Co KC-46 tanker jets, the Pentagon said on Tuesday. The defense spending request to Congress is the largest ever in dollar terms, but not after being adjusted for inflation, and is meant to counter the growing strength of the Chinese and Russian militaries. The Navy saw an increase of 5 percent, or $9.9 billion, in top-line funding to kick off a quicker pace of ship construction, including aircraft carriers made by Huntington Ingalls Industries, and Virginia and Columbia class nuclear submarines made by Huntington and General Dynamics.

          Microseismic Monitoring Technology Market Key Insights and Booming Factor Supporting Growth Till 2026      Cache   Translate Page      

Microseismic monitoring provides detailed information about the microseismicity of an area and how a rock is responding to mining or oil & gas production activities. It leads to increased efficiency and optimized operations. It is a valuable tool in understanding what a hydraulic fracture is doing in real time. Microseismic technology is significantly used in reservoir monitoring and domestic mining production monitoring abroad.

Albany, NY -- (SBWIRE) -- 03/12/2019 -- Looking at the current market trends as well as the promising demand status of the Microseismic Monitoring Technology Market, it can be projected that the future years will bring out positive outcomes. This research report added by MRRSE on its online portal delivers clear insight about the changing tendencies across the global Microseismic Monitoring Technology Market. Readers can gather prime facets connected to the target market which includes product, end-use and application; assisting them to draw conclusions out of this intelligent research report.

The report analyzes and forecasts the Microseismic monitoring technology market at the global and regional level. The report also comprises a detailed value chain analysis, which provides a comprehensive view of the global Microseismic monitoring technology market. Porter's Five Forces model has been included to help understand the competitive landscape in the market. The study encompasses market attractiveness analysis, wherein end-users are benchmarked based on their market size, growth rate, and general attractiveness.

Request Free Sample Report @

The global microseismic monitoring technology market is driven by an increase in use of the technology in environmental and geotechnical engineering as it helps in the evaluation of the real-time location of underground rock fractures. Furthermore, microseismic monitoring technology can be applied to the precursor-monitoring of a volcano or earthquake disaster as well as in rock burst monitoring in the process of exploitation of mineral resources. Furthermore, rise in the adoption of microseismic monitoring technologies in the oil & gas exploration industry is anticipated to drive the global microseismic monitoring technology market over the forecast period. Furthermore, significant use of this technology in hydraulic fracture mapping and reservoir monitoring is likely to have propel the global microseismic monitoring technology market. However, the uncertain nature of oil prices is estimated to hamper the global microseismic monitoring technology market.  Additionally, a number of companies are entering into collaborations with other companies in order to enhance the development of their business. For instance, in April 2017, Schlumberger Limited signed an agreement with Pemex for a multi-client seismic survey in the southern Gulf of Mexico. The agreement additionally incorporates coordinated effort with WesternGeco in the seismic handling period of the task and for future innovation joint efforts.

This research study on the global Microseismic monitoring technology market provides a detailed cross segment and cross country analysis based on segmentation categories such as process, component, end-use, and region. Based on process, the market has been divided into data processing, data acquisition, and data interpretation. In terms of component, the market has been segmented into hardware, software, and services. Based on end-use, the market has been categorized into oil & gas, mining, and others. The others segment includes geotechnical applications such as underground storage facilities, which include LPG sites and nuclear waste repositories; vibration thresholds and blasting; and monitoring of structures such as dams, high-speed rail tracks, bridges, and tunnels.

Secondary research sources that are typically referred to include, but are not limited to, company websites, annual reports, financial reports, broker reports, investor presentations, SEC filings, internal and external proprietary databases, relevant patent and regulatory databases, national government documents, statistical databases, market reports, news articles, press releases, webcasts specific to companies operating in the market, national government documents, statistical databases, market reports, Factiva, etc..

Primary research involves e-mail interactions, telephonic interviews, and face-to-face interviews for each market, category, segment, and sub-segment across geographies. We conduct primary interviews on an ongoing basis with industry participants and commentators in order to validate the data and analysis. Primary interviews provide first-hand information on the market size, market trends, growth trends, competitive landscape, outlook, etc.. These help us validate and strengthen secondary research findings. They also help develop the analysis team's market expertise and understanding.

Browse Complete Report with TOC @

The report highlights well-established players operating in the market such as Microseismic, Inc., Geospace Technologies Corporation, ESG Solutions, Halliburton Company, ION Geophysical Corporation, Landtech Geophysics Ltd, Schlumberger Limited, Weir-Jones Group, Guralp Systems Limited, and Fairfield Geotechnologies among others. Leading players are focused on alliances with other players to launch new projects across the globe. For instance, in October 2018, Schlumberger Limited and TGS announced a multi-client seismic project in the Gulf of Mexico, U.S.. Both companies will apply their full handling ability and deliver the project in first quarter 2020. Seismic data will be acquired with the use of Fairfield Geotechnologies. This project will enhance the company's current data coverage in the Gulf of Mexico. 

The global Microseismic monitoring technology market has been segmented as follows:

Global Microseismic Monitoring Technology Market, by Process

Data Acquisition

Data Processing

Data Interpretation

Global Microseismic Monitoring Technology Market, by Component




Global Microseismic Monitoring Technology Market, by End-use


Oil & Gas


Global Microseismic Monitoring Technology Market, by Geography

North America



Rest of North America



Rest of Europe

Asia Pacific



Rest of Asia Pacific

Middle East & Africa

GCC Countries

Rest of Middle East & Africa

South America


Rest of South America

Enquire about this Report @

About Market Research Reports Search Engine (MRRSE)
Market Research Reports Search Engine (MRRSE) is an industry-leading database of Market Research Reports. MRRSE is driven by a stellar team of research experts and advisors trained to offer objective advice. Our sophisticated search algorithm returns results based on the report title, geographical region, publisher, or other keywords.

MRRSE partners exclusively with leading global publishers to provide clients single-point access to top-of-the-line market research. MRRSE's repository is updated every day to keep its clients ahead of the next new trend in market research, be it competitive intelligence, product or service trends or strategic consulting.

Contact Us
State Tower
90, State Street
Suite 700
Albany, NY - 12207
United States Telephone: +1-518-730-0559

For more information on this press release visit:

Media Relations Contact

Telephone: 1-518-621-2074
Email: Click to Email Himanshu


          VADER divulga o tracklist do EP 'Thy Messenger' e também o título do seu novo álbum!      Cache   Translate Page      

A veterana banda polonesa VADER lançará um novo EP intitulado 'Thy Messenger' em 31 de maio de 2019 pela major Nuclear Blast. O EP contará com quatro das cinco músicas que foram gravadas no Hertz Studio em Białysto com os irmãos Wieslawski, a capa tem assinatura de Wes Benscoter, artista também responsável pela capa do álbum "De Profundis" (de 1995), e possui no currículo ainda Slayer, Kreator, Sinister, entre outras bandas.

Foi divulgado o tracklist de 'Thy Messenger', confira:

01. Grand Deceiver
02. Litany
03. Emptiness
04. Despair
05. Steeler [Judas Priest cover]

A banda comentou sobre o novo álbum: "Decidimos gravar um novo EP porque sabíamos que um novo full-length não seria lançado antes do final de 2019. Estamos de volta à estrada no mês de junho queríamos ter algumas novas músicas para os nossos fãs durante todo o Verão europeu. Estamos prestes a iniciar o processo de gravação do novo álbum em abril na Inglaterra. Por enquanto o título será '… And Then There Only Only Pain', devemos finalizar em maio, quando 'Thy Messenger' será lançado mundialmente."


          Incredible Remastered HD Footage Of The First-Ever Nuclear Bomb Test      Cache   Translate Page      
Here's July 1945's 22 kiloton Trinity test in all its horrifying power.
          Nuclear Option: Fake Scientist Bill Nye Joins Real Socialists To Push Green New Deal      Cache   Translate Page      
There are Holocaust deniers, most of whom are Democrats these days. Then there are climate deniers. These are usually teenagers who wear shorts outside when it is below freezing. Or old ladies who wear fur coats during summer months. And then there is the mix of the two — perhaps the dumbest of the lot: […]
          Remastered Video Shows the Terrifying Power of the Very First Nuclear Weapons Test      Cache   Translate Page      

Remastered Video Shows the Terrifying Power of the Very First Nuclear Weapons Test"Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."

          Lack of Options Forces US to Take ‘Nuclear' Path Against Germany Over Huawei      Cache   Translate Page      
The Trump administration's threats to withhold intelligence from Germany are rooted in the fact that Washington has no other means to bend Berlin to its will, Jude Woodward, author of "The US vs China: Asia's New Cold War?" tells Sputnik.
          NATO's Stoltenberg invited to address U.S. Congress April 3      Cache   Translate Page      

NATO's Stoltenberg invited to address U.S. Congress April 3House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi invited Stoltenberg to speak to a joint meeting of the House of Representatives and Senate on April 3, as the alliance celebrates its 70th anniversary. Trump has questioned the value to Washington of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and many lawmakers see honoring Stoltenberg as a chance to reaffirm the American commitment to the alliance. "During this critical time for the United States, NATO and the European Union, the U.S. Congress and the American people look forward to your message of friendship and partnership, as we work together to strengthen our critical alliance and advance a future of peace around the world," Pelosi said in a letter to Stoltenberg on Monday.

          A Modest Proposal: Don’t Start a Nuclear War      Cache   Translate Page      
In a matter of minutes, as easily as sending a tweet, a sitting U.S. president could decide to launch a nuclear attack, without anyone else’s approval or authorization. In a […]


          Russia to test Sarmat heavy ICBM      Cache   Translate Page      
March 11, 2019 -- #RussianMilitary #SarmatMissile #ICBM #Sarmat Russia’s new intercontinental-range ballistic missile (ICBM), the super-heavy thermonuclear-armed RS-28 Sarmat, is due to make its first test flight early this year. Interactive graphic shows specifications of the RS-28 Sarmat ICBM
          US will not accept 'incremental' disarmament, insists envoy to North Korea      Cache   Translate Page      

US will not accept 'incremental' disarmament, insists envoy to North KoreaStephen Biegun, the United States envoy to Pyongyang has stressed that Washington will not settle for the incremental disarmament of North Korea and that it is aiming for complete denuclearisation by the end of US President Donald Trump’s first term in 2021.  “We are not going to do denuclearisation incrementally,” Mr Biegun told a conference in Washington hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, in his first comments since the failed summit between Mr Trump and Kim Jong-un in Hanoi, Vietnam, last month.  Mr Biegun insisted that sanctions would not be lifted unless Pyongyang completely eliminated its nuclear weapons, stressing that it was Washington’s goal to achieve this within the current administration.  "We stand by the expectation that if we fully mobilise our resources ... we could align ourselves in a manner sufficient to achieve this in something approaching a year," he said. His statements marked a reversal from previous pronouncements emerging from the White House, with analysts warning that the hardening of the US position is an unrealistic strategy that will end in further stalemate with Pyongyang.  Stephen Biegun, the US envoy to North Korea Credit: Ed Jones/AFP Ahead of the Hanoi meeting, Mr Trump had declared that he had “no pressing schedule” on denuclearisation. “As long as there is no [missile] testing, I’m in no rush,” he said.  Mr Biegun, meanwhile, had indicated in an speech at Stanford University at the end of January that the US was willing to take a more stage by stage approach to the issue – a policy favoured by Pyongyang.  “We have communicated to our North Korean counterparts that we are prepared to pursue – simultaneously and in parallel – all of the commitments our two leaders made in their joint statement at Singapore last summer,” he said, referring to the two leaders’ first meeting in the city-state last June.  Their second summit in Hanoi in late February ended abruptly without any kind of deal.  The Hanoi summit started out well but ended abruptly with no deal Credit: Evan Vucci/AP Mr Trump said that Kim had insisted all economic sanctions were lifted before he agreed to give up his entire nuclear arsenal – a position he could not accept. “Sometimes you just have to walk,” he said. However, Ri Yong Ho, the North Korean foreign minister, countered that Pyongyang had only requested “partial relief” on sanctions enacted between 2016 and 2017, and had offered a “realistic proposal” to dismantle uranium enrichment facilities in return.   The talks ended on friendly terms, but North Korea has since shown frustration at the collapse of the summit, with the state-run Rodong Sinmun commenting that the public “are feeling regretful, blaming the US for the summit that ended without an agreement.” In a more alarming development, experts at California’s Middlebury Institute of International Studies, said last week that satellite images suggested that Pyongyang could be preparing to launch a missile or space rocket.  In response to questions about what the signs of activity at rocket launch facilities meant, Mr Biegun replied: “The short answer is: we don’t know.” He added that “the door remains open” for further negotiations. “Nothing can be agreed until everything’s agreed,” he said.  Nuclear and North Korea analysts expressed scepticism about his statements.  “Biegun: “Nothing can be agreed until everything can be agreed.” – a losing strategy,” tweeted Jenny Town, a Korea specialist at the Stimson Centre, a Washington think tank.  Others commented that the insistence on full denuclearisation before the lifting of any sanctions would create a bottleneck with Pyongyang, which has consistently argued for reciprocal concessions.  “If we don’t move off this position, we have nowhere to go,” Vipin Narang, a MIT nuclear expert, told Vox. “There’s no zone of agreement if we insist on everything — I mean everything, complete surrender — up front.”

          Permanent Cardiologists needed in Northern Georgia      Cache   Translate Page      
Posted on: 2019-03-12

Location: Northern Georgia

Duration: Permanent Position

Licensure: Georgia- Not Required

MPLT Healthcare is looking for physicians who Understand the Urgency, Never Give Up, and Have the Courage to Excel in the forever changing medical industry! We currently have a unique opportunity for an experienced cardiologist with highly competitive pay rates available in Georgia.

Position Details:

  • Join an existing, successful group
  • Beautiful area, mountain living
  • Shared call 1:5 or 1:6
  • Capability for nuclear, echo, TEE 

Position Benefits:

  • Competitive Pay
  • Guarantee + RVU
  • Student Loan Repayment

About MPLT Healthcare 

MPLT Healthcare specializes in placing well-qualified physicians and advanced practice clinicians in locum, locum-to-perm and direct hire staff and leadership positions while making this process as seamless as possible for our clinicians and client facilities. 

Don’t delay, apply today!

          3/12/2019: Middle East: Rouhani makes first official visit to Iraq      Cache   Translate Page      

■ Iran is looking for Iraq’s continued support as it faces a maximalist pressure campaign by President Donald Trump after his decision to withdraw America from Tehran’s nuclear deal with world powers. Rouhani, who is accompanied on the three-day visit...
          Entrevista con Ole y Raimund de NAILED TO OBSCURITY      Cache   Translate Page      

Una de las giras más importantes en la escena metal tuvo en sus filas a la banda alemana Nailed to Obscurity junto a Soilwork, Amorphis y Jinjer. TNT Radio Rock ha tenido la oportunidad de hablar con Ole y Raimund, guitarra y voz respectivamente. La banda lanzó su nuevo álbum “Black Frost“, el 11 de enero a través de Nuclear Blast. El álbum cuenta con 7 canciones a la altura de una continuación de aquel maravilloso “King Delusionb”, que absorben al oyente con su atmósfera impresionante, sin sacrificar el sonido extraordinario de la banda. Primero de todo, gracias por tener tiempo para TNT Radio Rock y […]

Contenido de TNT Radio Rock

          La falta de liderazgo y dirección en los Lakers dejará a LeBron James con la carga más pesada      Cache   Translate Page      

En el último repaso de esta temporada que ha sido como la de una fusión de un reactor nuclear, los Lakers no necesitaron a un salvador tanto como una resurrección.

Específicamente, la resurrección de Jerry Buss. 

Ellos tienen ahora al “Elegido” en LeBron James, pero eso no los salvó de la indignidad...

          Pentágono dice que producirá sistema de misiles prohibido por INF      Cache   Translate Page      

El Departamento de Defensa de EE.UU. dice que iniciará la fabricación de partes de sistemas de misiles de crucero lanzados desde tierra, prohibidos por el INF.

El anuncio fue realizado el lunes por la portavoz del Departamento estadounidense de Defensa, Michelle Baldanza, quien dijo que el Pentágono fabricará los componentes de nuevos misiles de crucero lanzados desde tierra (GLCM, por sus siglas en inglés), en línea con la decisión del Gobierno de Washington de retirarse del Tratado de Fuerzas Nucleares de Alcance Intermedio (INF, por sus siglas en inglés).

“Comenzaremos las actividades de fabricación de los componentes para apoyar las pruebas del desarrollo de estos sistemas: actividades que hasta el 2 de febrero habrían sido incompatibles con nuestras obligaciones en virtud del tratado”, indicó la vocera del Pentágono, en declaraciones recogidas por el diario local The Hill.

Se trata de armas “convencionales y no nucleares”, afirmó Baldanza, que también señaló que “el estudio y el desarrollo están diseñados para ser reversibles”, por si Rusia se aviene al cumplimiento completo y verificable (del Tratado INF) antes de que salgamos del tratado en agosto de 2019”, agregó.

El presidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, anunció el 1 de febrero el inicio de un proceso de retirada —que durará un total de seis meses— del Tratado INF, suscrito en 1987 entre la extinta Unión de Repúblicas Socialistas Soviéticas (URSS) y Washington, acusando a Moscú de violar los términos del mismo.

Las autoridades rusas han negado en reiteradas ocasiones haber incumplido el convenio y acusan, a su vez, a EE.UU. de “ignorar” todas sus propuestas “constructivas” para salvar el acuerdo.

Mientras tanto, el Ministerio ruso de Defensa ha revelado mediante imágenes satelitales que Washington empezó a violar el Tratado INF en 2017, al iniciar los preparativos para la fabricación de misiles prohibidos por el referido pacto.

Moscú ha censurado, en un sinfín de ocasiones, el desprecio de Washington hacia los compromisos bilaterales e internacionales, y ha advertido que las ilusiones de Estados Unidos de dominar militarmente el mundo hacen que este se vuelva inseguro y elevan el peligro de que se produzcan enfrentamientos.
          Simulaciones militares muestran que EEUU no puede con Rusia y China      Cache   Translate Page      
Estados Unidos fracasaría en caso de un conflicto militar contra Rusia y China sin el uso de armas nucleares, destacó el medio Breaking Defense al analizar simulaciones de escenarios de guerra.

La Corporación RAND, un centro estadounidense de investigación estratégica, realiza anualmente una simulación militar entre 'los azules' (EEUU) y 'los rojos' (sus oponentes potenciales). El ejercicio simula las posibles amenazas y analiza las estrategias de uso de los medios de combate, entre otras cosas.

De acuerdo con los resultados de la última simulación, los expertos llegaron a la conclusión de que Rusia y China destruirían a las fuerzas de Estados Unidos en el caso de un conflicto armado no nuclear, detalló el medio.

Según David Ochmanek, analista de RAND, EEUU tiene, pese a su enorme arsenal, muchos "talones de Aquiles". Además, la exitosa modernización de las armas ofensivas de los "oponentes" complicaría aún más la situación para el país norteamericano.

Asimismo, Ochmanek considera que las bases militares de EEUU son vulnerables a posibles ataques de los misiles de largo alcance rusos y chinos.

"El F-35 domina el cielo cuando está en el cielo, pero muere en el suelo en grandes cantidades", subrayó Robert Work, un exsubsecretario de Defensa con décadas de experiencia en simulaciones militares.

Además, según RAND, 'los rojos' pueden derrotar a los aliados de Washington en los países bálticos y en Taiwán.

Para los investigadores, EEUU necesitaría asignar unos 24.000 millones de dólares para resolver a los problemas mencionados y mejorar su preparación para el combate.

          ¿A quién arma la 'máquina de guerra' de Corea del Norte?      Cache   Translate Page      

A pesar de las sanciones y los escándalos nucleares consecutivos, Pyongyang es uno de los productores y suministradores de armas más grandes del mundo. El columnista Andréi Stanavov en su artículo para Sputnik desvela el oscuro secreto del 'reino juche'.

Como resultado de las sanciones impuestas contra Pyongyang, Corea del Norte no ha tenido otra opción, sino ir al mercado negro para poder vender sus armas.

Las medidas económicas impuestas contra Pyongyang no han influido sobre la determinación del país juche de seguir con su presencia en este mercado.

Las armas norcoreanas se destacan por su bajo precio, simplicidad y fiabilidad. Estas características son la mejor publicidad para el armamento de producción norcoreana.

Economía clandestina

Los armamentos, junto al carbón y los mariscos, son una de las fuentes principales de dinero para el presupuesto nacional de Corea del Norte. Si bien Pyongyang no tiene permiso para exportar sus armas a otros países, existen vías ilegales de hacerlo y el país asiático se aprovecha de ellas.

El columnista señala que las armas de producción norcoreana cuentan con una demanda enorme en los países del llamado 'tercer mundo', en particular, en los que también se encuentran sancionados y no tienen posibilidad de comprar armas de otros suministradores.

Stanavov sostiene que Estados Unidos de hecho ayuda a Pyongyang a ampliar la lista de sus clientes, cuando convierte a otro país en 'paria'. Según el autor de la nota, lo mismo le pasa a Pyongyang: el país se encuentra en una situación crítica tras privarlo de sus fuentes legales de ingresos.

Por ejemplo, Corea del Norte ya no puede vender su carbón a China, por lo tanto el Gobierno de 'Kim III' ha entrado en una batalla para conquistar el mercado negro, incluso el de las armas.

Aunque los expertos consideran que en un año Corea del Norte exporta armas por un valor de más de 100 millones de dólares, nadie conoce la magnitud real de estas ventas. Todos los acuerdos se firman en secreto entre Corea del Norte y una parte interesada.

Clones de los clones

"Corea del Norte vende casi todo lo que fabrica: de fusiles automáticos a lanzacohetes múltiples. La mayor parte de los armas largas son clones de los fusiles Kalashnikov soviéticos, o son clones de los clones chinos, que por su parte fueron copiados de las armas de la URSS", apuntó el vicedirector del Centro de Análisis de Estrategias y Tecnologías de Rusia, Konstantín Makienko, citado por Stanavov.

"Pyongyang produce una amplia gama de armas de infantería, entre ellos lanzacohetes múltiples, artillería pesada, sistemas de misiles antitanque, fusiles de asalto, lanzagranadas y municiones para todas las armas que acabo de mencionar", agregó.

Stanavov recuerda que Siria presuntamente compró municiones norcoreanas de calibre 130mm para su artillería.

Asimismo, el columnista enfatiza que los especialistas norcoreanos lograron hacer una copia del sistema de misil balístico táctico R-17 Elbrús —Scud-B, según la designación de la OTAN— ya en los años 1980. Pyongyang compró los prototipos de Egipto, elaboró uno propio y lo puso en venta. Según Stanavov, se dieron casos en los que el país juche vendió líneas enteras de ensamble para este tipo de misiles.

Las copias norcoreanos de los Scud fueron comprados por países como Irán, Siria y Yemen. El alcance de las primeras versiones no superaba los 300 kilómetros, pero luego los expertos en armas del país juche modernizaron sus copias para aumentar su alcance hasta 600 kilómetros.

Como consecuencia de las numerosas modernizaciones de su copia del misil soviético Scud, los norcoreanos crearon su propio misil, Rodong, capaz de transportar una ojiva a una distancia de hasta 1.300 kilómetros. Estas armas pueden ser equipadas con una ojiva convencional, nuclear o química.

El autor del artículo indicó que el 90% de los misiles de producción norcoreana lanzados por el Ejército persa durante la guerra contra Irak dio en el blanco. El porcentaje de fallos técnicos era mínimo, lo que comprueba que estas armas son de alta calidad.

Luego, Irán creó su propia copia del Rodong y la llamó Shahab-3, apunta el periodista. Gracias a la ayuda norcoreana, Teherán ahora es capaz de producir este tipo de misiles, por lo que dejó de adquirir los cohetes de Corea del Norte. Sin embargo, los países siguen cooperando a nivel tecnológico.

Según indica Stanavov, los mayores productores de los sistemas de misiles no pueden vender, de acuerdo con los tratados internacionales, armas cuyo alcance supere los 300 kilómetros. Pyongyang, por su parte, está libre de estas responsabilidades de ahí que se ha hecho con el monopolio en este campo.

El columnista afirma que los sistemas de misiles y de artillería, que supuestamente fueron producidos por Corea del Norte, han sido observados en los buques de guerra de Birmania. El autor señala que no hay ninguna información sobre los suministros de estas armas, pero su aspecto es igual a los que están instalados sobre lanchas norcoreanas.

Stanavov explica que el territorio norcoreano goza de una cantidad grande de yacimientos de carbón y de otros minerales, que son necesarios para producir aparatos electrónicos.

Esta también es la razón por la que Pyongyang puede seguir desarrollando su programa nuclear: el país juche cuenta con sus propios yacimientos de uranio, en cantidades que podrían despertar la envidia de muchos países.

La geografía de las ventas

La lista de los clientes de la 'máquina de guerra' norcoreana es larga e incluye a países de diferentes partes del mundo. Estos países a menudo prefieren realizar la compra sin mediadores y en privado.

Los compradores tradicionales de las armas norcoreanas son Irán, Siria, Cuba, Libia, Yemen, Egipto y Uganda. Asimismo, estas armas han sido vendidas a grupos armados como Hamás y Hizbulá, indica Stanavov.

El autor de la nota señala que las armas son transportadas mayormente por vía marítima. El uso de aviación no es adecuado para este tipo de suministros porque a menudo requiere recargar combustible en el territorio de un tercer país. Para Pyongyang no es una opción porque las autoridades de un país extranjero pueden detener la aeronave

          Senador ruso: "Reino Unido se arriesga a ser borrado del mapa con un ataque nuclear de respuesta"      Cache   Translate Page      
Según opina el parlamentario, no se pueden dejar sin respuesta las palabras del ministro de Defensa británico.

El Reino Unido, cuyo ministro de Defensa amenazó el lunes con lanzar un ataque nuclear preventivo "en las circunstancias más extremas", corre el riesgo de ser "borrado de la faz de la Tierra", ha señalado Franz Klintsévich, miembro del Consejo de la Federación del Parlamento ruso, en su cuenta de Facebook.

"La declaración del ministro de Defensa británico, Michael Fallon, necesita una respuesta dura y no tengo miedo a ir demasiado lejos. En el mejor de los casos, se puede considerar esa afirmación como un elemento de la guerra psicológica, que es repugnante en este contexto", ha escrito el parlamentario ruso en respuesta a las palabras de Fallon a la emisora BBC 4 Radio.

"Se plantea una pregunta pertinente: ¿contra quién está dispuesto a aplicar armas nucleares de manera preventiva el Reino Unido? ", ha preguntado el senador ruso. Si Londres ataca a una potencia nuclear, "el Reino Unido, cuyo territorio no es muy grande, será literalmente borrado de la faz de la Tierra con un ataque de respuesta", ha asegurado. Y si Londres ataca un país no nuclear hará lo mismo que hizo EE.UU. en Hiroshima y Nagasaki, ha añadido Klintsévich.

Los comentarios del senador llegan poco después de las declaraciones de Fallon, según las cuales el Reino Unido está dispuesto a llevar a cabo un ataque nuclear contra cualquier enemigo, incluso si el país no es víctima de un ataque nuclear.

          Google Doodle marks web’s 30th anniversary      Cache   Translate Page      

Google has dedicated its home page Doodle to the World Wide Web to mark the technology’s 30th anniversary. The animated illustration shows a 1980s-style computer – similar to the NeXT Cube Tim Berners-Lee used to create the online application which has since grown to encompass nearly two billion websites. Google Doodles are animations or images that replace the company’s traditional logo on the search engine’s home page, normally to mark milestone anniversaries or birthdays of high-profile people, places and inventions. On March 12 1989, Berners-Lee submitted his proposal for a “large hypertext database with typed links” as a means for his colleagues at nuclear physics lab Cern to better share information among multiple computers. A Google post accompanying the Doodle said: “By 1991, the external Web servers were up and running. “The Web would soon revolutionise life as we know it, ushering in the information age. Today, there are nearly 2 billion websites online. Whether you use it for email, homework, gaming, or checking out videos of cute puppies, chances are you can’t imagine life without the Web.” However, in an open letter to mark the 30th anniversary, Berners-Lee urged the public, government and other organisations to come together to ensure everyone has access to the technology, and called for changes to be made to protect users from rising incidents of hacking and data breaches. “The fight for the web is one of the most important causes of our time,” Sir Tim said. “Today, half of the world is online. It is more urgent than ever to ensure the other half are not left behind offline, and that everyone contributes to a web that drives equality, opportunity and creativity.”  

The post Google Doodle marks web’s 30th anniversary appeared first on London Glossy Post.

          ‘Chernobyl’ Trailer: HBO Has a Nuclear Meltdown in a New Five-Part Miniseries      Cache   Translate Page      

Chernobyl is the most famous nuclear disaster in history, so much that the name itself is used as a moniker to describe any prospective nuclear accident in order to stress the gravity of the situation. Now HBO is giving the 1986 disaster the miniseries treatment with Jared Harris, Stellan Skarsgard and Emily Watson starring, and […]

The post ‘Chernobyl’ Trailer: HBO Has a Nuclear Meltdown in a New Five-Part Miniseries appeared first on /Film.

          The Media's 6 Biggest Lies About North Korea      Cache   Translate Page      
The Trump delegation surprised Kim with a take-it-or-leave-it ultimatum that included the "elimination of the DPRK's "chemical and biological weapons, "their ballistic missile program" along with complete denuclearization.
          What happens when a treaty that's working is cancelled: The Insanity of a Hypersonic Nuclear Cruise Missile Arms Race      Cache   Translate Page      
Americans (and the people of the world) are paying for three presidents' decision (Bush II, Obama and Trump) to renege on promises made and treaties signed. Now we're in a hypersonic nuclear cruise missile rage that nobody wins and eveyone loses. Time for diplomacy and sanity writes TCBH! journalist Dave Lindorff
          How US Sanctions are Hurting Iran: A Firsthand Report      Cache   Translate Page      
In May 2018, President Trump unilaterally withdrew from the Iran nuclear agreement, followed by an imposition of draconian sanctions that not only prohibit U.S. companies from doing business in Iran, but threaten all foreign companies and international banks that trade with Iran. The sanctions also severely limit Iran's ability to sell its major sour ce of revenue: oil.
          North Korea Could Be Preparing New Missile Launch Just Weeks After Failed Trump Summit, Satellite Images Show      Cache   Translate Page      

Kim Jong-un with North Korean military leaders.

North Korea appears to be planning the new launch of a missile or satellite just weeks after a summit with Donald Trump about denuclearization came to an abrupt end with no deal in sight.

As the BBC reported, satellite images of a facility near the North Korean capital of Pyongyang shows activity that suggest preparations for a launch from a site known as Sanumdong. This report comes just days after another suggested that North Korea had rebuilt another main rocket launch site at Sohae.

Donald Trump had been pushing for North Korea to dismantle its nuclear weapons operation and cease all weapons testing, at times bragging that North Korea had done both of these things. But on Friday, Trump struck a more uncertain tone as he expressed hope that North Korea would not go back to weapons testing.

Click here to continue and

          La falta de liderazgo y dirección en los Lakers dejará a LeBron James con la carga más pesada      Cache   Translate Page      

En el último repaso de esta temporada que ha sido como la de una fusión de un reactor nuclear, los Lakers no necesitaron a un salvador tanto como una resurrección.

Específicamente, la resurrección de Jerry Buss. 

Ellos tienen ahora al “Elegido” en LeBron James, pero eso no los salvó de la indignidad...

          Are you for or against building more nuclear power stations in the UK?      Cache   Translate Page      
Should the government be looking to renewable sources more? Are nuclear power stations really our only option? What are you views on this?
           Comment on Looks like Brexit delay, possibly no Brexit by RRM       Cache   Translate Page      
Sorry Jack5 I reported your comment by accident. GB is still one of very few countries that design and build their own nuclear submarines. I guess they are focusing their energy where it really counts, and outsourcing mundane stuff that might as well be outsourced? Rumour has it there are only two kinds of ships in modern navies: nuclear submarines, and targets. So much of the history of the RN is about crews making do with ships that weren't quite as good as the best, or as numerous as the best, and achieving good results despite it all. (From Cook exploring NZ in effectively a converted coal barge onwards...) At the time of the Washington treaty, the USN was a navy of shiny new ships with shiny new officers. Whereas the RN and the Japanese Navy had recently fought hard battles using current technology and tactics, and knew what they were doing. There were probably still U.S. leaders who remembered GB supplying and aiding the Confederate Navy also...?
          Entergy Mississippi announces new leadership      Cache   Translate Page      

Entergy Mississippi announced new members of its executive lead team. They are: Anesa Davis, manager of human resources—business partners. Prior to this role, Davis served as an organizational effectiveness consultant for Entergy’s nuclear business since 2017. Before joining Entergy, Davis held human resources management positions with Mississippi Power and Caesars Entertainment. Davis holds a Bachelor ...

The post Entergy Mississippi announces new leadership appeared first on Mississippi Business Journal.

          You Can't Blame The Science --Image ISU      Cache   Translate Page      

It's a sad but inescapable fact; some of science’s greatest advances have come from humanity's darkest moments. But this is not science's fault. Science and technology are not good or bad: it depends on how humanity chooses to use it.

"Baby Bomb Victim." Democracy Web. Democracy Web, 28 Aug. 2013. Web. 10 Dec. 
     2014. <> 
For example  nuclear technology; which has it's roots in the Manhattan project. The Manhattan project was a research and development project that made the first atomic bombs during world war two. These bombs were dropped in Japan and had catastrophic impacts. This is an image of a young child that was killed by one of these bombs. (The black on the kid is skin that was completely burnt by the bomb.) This bomb in total murdered 60 000 to 80 000 people. It is considered the world’s worst and most powerful weapon. It took 2 billion dollars (roughly 25.8 billion of today's dollars) and the world’s greatest minds to research and develop the technology behind them. But we used this technology to murder people, even innocent children. The child represents all of the innocent lives that were lost because of the bombs. The science itself did not choose to kill people, humans did.

cancer picture.jpg

A woman undergoing a nuclear medical examination to scan for cancer and metastases.

"Breast Cancer – Diagnostics – Localization of Metastases." Health Care.
    Siemens, 2011. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <
In contrast, we have nuclear technology to thank for the entire field of nuclear medicine, which is used in medical imaging, diagnosis and treatments of conditions like cancer. The left side of the image shows the scan from the patient showing they have cancer. This side of the image is black and red, the red indicating the growths.  The scan gives off the feeling of death and sickness because of its overall darkness. The right side of the image portrays a patient undergoing nuclear medical imaging to check for metastases or cancer. The image is mostly white, with very little dark colours. The image gives off a feeling liveliness  and health because of how bright it is. The image goes from the right dark image to the light left image, so death to life: sickness to health; meaning this technology is being used to save lives. Again the technology did not chose to do this, humans did. Humans decided to use the same technology that was used to kill, to cure people. So, this proves that the science and technology behind some of the world’s worst weapons is not bad by itself, its how humanity has chosen to use these discoveries.   

Until early 1945, Dresden was the only major German city largely spared by Allied air attacks. At the time of the attack, it was no longer of any great military or strategic importance; rather, it served chiefly as a reception point for Silesian refugees.  

"Dresden in the Aftermath of Allied Bombing (February 13-14, 1945)." German
    History Documents. German History docs, n.d. Web. 8 Jan. 2015.
Secondly, we have the technology behind Fritz Haber's ammonia synthesizers which is used for fertilizers and in making explosives such as TNT and Amatol. Amatol explosives were extensively used during the world wars in aerial bombs, depth charges, shells, and naval mines(Wikipedia). In this picture here we see the aftermath of the allied bombing of Dresden, Germany. Dresden was no longer of any a great military or strategic importance at the time of its bombing, and the majority of people who were in the city were innocent refugees.  The image portrays a city in ruins, with death and rubble shown everywhere in the picture by the tattered buildings, bodies, and a dark, dusty sky. This disaster was able to happen because of Haber’s ammonia synthesizing technology, which was used to create the ammonium nitrate in the bomb. This dark imagery supports the notion that all this destruction and death happened because of this technology, but this is not the case. The science behind this did not choose to be used to kill and destroy cities, humans did.

"Green Fields Wisconsin, Lush Rich Rural Farm Crop, Spring Agriculture."

    IStockphoto. iStockphoto LP, n.d. Web. 12 Jan. 2015.

On the other hand, Haber’s ammonia synthesizing technology helped revolutionize agriculture by enabling the creation of ammonia fertilizers. Today, nitrogen fertilizers are responsible for feeding 48% of the worlds population(International Nitrogen Initiative). In this picture we see a lush farm with steadily growing plants. This picture is opposite to the last, it portrays life with vegetation growing everywhere in the picture. There are upright buildings and the sky is rich with colour with no clouds. This imagery supports the belief that this technology is good because it is used to help grow food. The science and technology did not choose to be used for this purpose, humans did. The bombs and agriculture show two uses for the same technology, it was humans who decided how to use this technology. We used it to kill and feed people. This proves that science and technology are not good or bad, it depends on how humanity chooses to use it.

Ultimately, humans can use science and technology for good and bad purposes, but the science itself is not good or bad: its neutral.

Works Cited
"Amatol." Wikipedia. Wikipedia, 30 Oct. 2014. Web. 8 Jan. 2015. 

"Baby Bomb Victim." Democracy Web. Democracy Web, 28 Aug. 2013. Web. 10 Dec. 
     2014. <>. 

"Breast Cancer – Diagnostics – Localization of Metastases." Health Care
     Siemens, 2011. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. < 

"Dresden in the Aftermath of Allied Bombing (February 13-14, 1945)." German 
     History Documents. German History docs, n.d. Web. 8 Jan. 2015. 

"Green Fields Wisconsin, Lush Rich Rural Farm Crop, Spring Agriculture." 
     IStockphoto. iStockphoto LP, n.d. Web. 12 Jan. 2015. 

Theobald, Mark, trans. "Ammonia, The Substance That Changed The World." 
     International Nitrogen Initiative. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Jan. 2015. 

          3/13/2019: NEWS TRAVEL: UNEXPECTED GERMANY      Cache   Translate Page      

BERLIN 1. Story of Berlin This museum’s engaging multimedia trip through the city’s history culminates with a tour of a Cold War nuclear bomb shelter. Kurfürstendamm 207-208 +49 30 8872 0100 2. Tempelhof Park Tempelhof Airport, site of the first...
           Comment on Nicaraguans Try Talking: Venezuela, Not So Much by Paul Haeder       Cache   Translate Page      
James Petras: Conclusion Washington has succeeded in securing non-reciprocal agreements with weak countries. This was the case in post-war Europe, post-Gorbachev Russia and among Latin America’s current colonized regimes. In contrast, Washington’s rejection of reciprocal agreements with Russia, China, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela has been a failure. US trade wars with China have led to the loss of markets and allowed China to pursue global agreements through its massive billion-dollar ‘Belt and Road’ infrastructure projects. US one-sided hostile policies toward Russia have increased ties between the Kremlin and Beijing. Washington has lost opportunities to work with neo-liberal oligarchs in Russia in order to undermine President Putin. Washington has failed to negotiate reciprocal ties with North Korea which would ‘de-nuclearize’ the peninsula in exchange for lifting economic sanctions and opening the door for a capitalist restoration. Demanding unilateral concession and submission has led to uniform failures; whereas negotiated compromises could have led to greater market opportunities and long-term political advances. President Trump and his top policy makers and negotiators have failed to secure any agreements. The Democratic Congress has been as ineffective and even more bellicose – demanding greater military pressures on Russia, expanded trade wars with China and fewer negotiations with North Korea, Iran and Venezuela. In a word, failed negotiations and non-reciprocal diplomacy has become the hallmark of US foreign policy.
          Laserul de la Măgurele a atins cea mai mare putere din lume, 10 PetaWatts      Cache   Translate Page      
 Premieră mondială în proiectul  Sistemul laser de mare putere (HPLS) din cadrul Centrului Extrem Light Infrastructure – Nuclear Physics, în data de 7 martie, a fost atinsă puterea de 10 PetaWatts.
          Un usuario crea un laberinto mortal en Fallout 76 y atrae jugadores a él      Cache   Translate Page      
Fallout 76 nos lleva dejando muchas escenas curiosas desde que fue lanzado. Desde baneos extraños, bombas nucleares sincronizadas y que […]
          The back channel : a memoir of American diplomacy and the case for its renewal by Burns, William J. (William Joseph), 1956- author.      Cache   Translate Page      
"Ambassador William J. Burns is the most distinguished and admired American diplomat of the last half century. Over the course of four decades, he played a central role in the most consequential diplomatic episodes of his time--from the bloodless end of the Cold War to post-Cold War relations with Putin's Russia, from post-9/11 tumult in the Middle East to the secret nuclear talks with Iran. Upon his retirement, Secretary John Kerry said Burns belonged on "the short list of American diplomatic l
          The Persian gamble : a novel by Rosenberg, Joel C., 1967- author.      Cache   Translate Page      
From the New York Times bestselling author of The Kremlin Conspiracy comes this latest international thriller about a terrifying nuclear alliance among three world powers--Russia, Iran, and North Korea--and the man who must halt their deadly strategy. Shot out of the air in enemy territory in the middle of the greatest international crisis since the end of the Cold War, former U.S. Secret Service agent Marcus Ryker finds himself facing an impossible task. Not only does he have to somehow elude d
          Watch an HD restoration of the first detonation of a nuclear bomb      Cache   Translate Page      

On July 16, 1945, US Army detonated the first nuclear weapon in New Mexico's Jornada del Muerto desert. Codenamed Trinity, the test was part of the Manhattan Project. Three weeks later, the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. From the Atom Central page about Trinity:

The bomb was detonated, producing an intense flash and a fireball that expanded to 600 meters in two seconds. The explosive power was equivalent to 18.6 kilotons of TNT. It grew to a height of more than 12 kilometers, boiling up in the shape of a mushroom. Forty seconds later, the blast of air from the bomb reached the observation bunkers, along with a long and deafening roar of sound.

About this footage:

Original Trinity Footage restoration includes removing dirt and scratches and minimizing some defects in the processing of the original negative. Three shots include a wide shot, a medium shot and a close up.

Previously: "Nuclear explosion porn: watch newly declassified 1950s-1960s nuke test films"

Read the rest

          Johnstone: Pelosi Tacitly Admits That Russiagate Is Bullshit      Cache   Translate Page      

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via,

In an interview with the Washington Post yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that she opposed the impeachment of President Trump. This comes shortly before Mueller’s investigation into Trump-Russia collusion is expected to wrap up.

“I’m not for impeachment,” Pelosi told the Post.

“This is news. I’m going to give you some news right now because I haven’t said this to any press person before. But since you asked, and I’ve been thinking about this: Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.

The response to Pelosi’s remarks has been swift and strong.

“Wrong!” exclaimed MSNBC’s Russiagate con man Malcolm Nance via Twitter. “What the hell is wrong with the @SpeakerPelosi Congress that they absolve themselves of their duty! Nothing is criminal anymore?! Trump can do and say like a dictator as he pleases? All of his crimes are OK even if you see them? This requires a public outcry. #Disgraceful”

“I like Speaker Pelosi but this is NOT the right approach,” tweeted Michael Avenatti of Stormy Daniels fame. “If Trump has committed impeachable offenses, he must be charged and he must face a trial in the Senate. Would the Repubs take this approach? Hell no! And this is why we get outplayed.”

“Sorry, Madam Speaker,” tweeted Esquire’s Charles P Pierce. “If you really believe the president* is an unprecedented threat to the Constitution, your oath demands that you begin the process to remove him. It’s your job.”

The House’s most virulent Russiagater, however, sang a different tune.

“If the evidence isn’t sufficient to win bipartisan support for this, putting the country through a failed impeachment isn’t a good idea,” said Congressman Adam Schiff told CNN yesterday.

As you might expect, those voices in alternative media who’ve been voicing skepticism of the Russiagate narrative since the beginning have been having a ball with this one.

“BREAKING: The Democrats’ Congressional leadership is realizing that their two-year Russia conspiracy theory is not going to pan out,” tweeted journalist Aaron Maté, who has been in my opinion the single most lucid Russiagate critic for a long time now.

“If Trump is literally controlled by Putin to the point where Trump is forced to act in the best interests of Russia *at the expense of the US*  -  which has been the prevailing claim not of Dem fringes but its mainstream  -  how can it be morally justified not to impeach him???” tweeted journalist Glenn Greenwald in response to Pelosi’s comments.

How indeed? Pelosi’s comments go completely against the narrative that mainstream Democrats have been selling America for over two years now, and this close to the Mueller report amount to a rejection of that narrative. Her statement is a tacit admission that she knows Russiagate is bullshit, has always been bullshit, and will continue to be bullshit.

“Is it possible that Putin has something on Pelosi?” Greenwald joked.

Or perhaps Democratic politicians and their media allies have been knowingly feeding the party base and cable viewers unadulterated, deranged, unhinged bullshit that they now can’t carry through on with the power in their hands because it was all self-serving, manipulative dreck? Anyone who has ever believed Trump is controlled and blackmailed by Putin to the point that Putin makes Trump treasonously sacrifice America’s interests for Russia’s — and there are a lot of you — should be marching in fury in the streets over Pelosi’s refusal to impeach Trump.”

But, of course, they will not. There will be no protest against Pelosi’s opposition to impeachment because those who would lead it know there will never be any evidence that could possibly lead to a bipartisan willingness in the Senate to remove him from office.

Anyone who’s paid close and intellectually honest attention to the Russiagate circus has known since the beginning that Trump was never going to be impeached for a treasonous conspiracy with the Russian government, despite the endless fantasies inflicted upon the blinkered Maddow muppets day after day after day for over two years now. Back in 2017 I said that “Mueller will continue finding evidence of corruption throughout his investigation, since corruption is to DC insiders as water is to fish, but he will not find evidence of collusion to win the 2016 election that will lead to Trump’s impeachment,” because it was obvious to anyone who knew anything. And that has proven to be the case with uninterrupted consistency.

If those who have been driving the Russiagate conspiracy theory really believed what they’ve been pushing, they would be up in arms at Pelosi’s remarks. Instead, we see responses like Russiagate grifter Bill Palmer publishing a hilarious article titled “Nancy Pelosi is playing rope-a-dope with Donald Trump on impeachment”, explaining that her remarks were actually a brilliant 57-D chess maneuver designed to “play this Trump fool like fiddle.”

“Instead, by answering the question in this manner, Pelosi accomplishes two things,” says the Palmer Report, where sitting US senators and top Harvard law professors go for the important updates they need to continue fueling Russia hysteria in America.

“First, she manages to put off the question until she and her allies have managed to carve Donald Trump up. Second, she’s messing with him. She just insulted him by saying he’s not worth the trouble of impeachment. Pelosi is looking to bait Trump into publicly feuding with her over the question of impeachment. That way it’ll be Trump introducing the concept, not her. And that’ll serve to help put the impeachment process on the right track. Just don’t call it ‘impeachment’ quite yet.”

So that tells you a bit about where the Russiagaters are at today.

This all comes out, by the way, at the same time as a new Wall Street Journalreport that Trump once attempted to personally cajole German Chancellor Angela Merkel into ceasing to buy gas from Russia out of fear that “it will make Europe’s largest economy excessively reliant on Russian energy.” Hardly the behavior you’d expect from a Putin puppet, but then neither are the rest of the many, many other actions that this administration has taken against the interests of Moscow.

It is right and appropriate that those few voices on the left who’ve been sharply critical of Russiagate from the beginning are now taking some time to gloat at and mock its peddlers with increasing scorn. The centrists who chose to spend more than two years forcing everyone’s energy into this blatant psyop which escalated a cold war against a nuclear superpower were wrong, and the leftists who objected to it were right. Trump’s term is more than halfway over, and Russiagaters chose to suck all the oxygen out of the room for this brainless, fruitless, worthless endeavor instead of allowing space for progressive reform and for criticism of Trump’s actual pernicious policies from the left. And they did it on purpose.

Mock the Russiagaters. Mock them ruthlessly, and never, ever let them forget the horrible thing that they did. Never stop making fun of them and reminding them how stupid and crazy they acted during this humiliating period of American history. And never stop using it as a weapon against them. They were wrong, so they should not be leading the way on what passes for America’s political left today. Skepticism was the only appropriate response to Russiagate in a post-Iraq invasion world, and those on the left who made that appropriate response should be treated with infinitely more respect and deference than those who did not.

They were wrong, we were right, and now even Nancy Pelosi is all but admitting it. Never let them forget it.

*  *  *

Thanks for reading! My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

          Will humans survive the century?      Cache   Translate Page      
What is the chance of the human race surviving the 21st century? There are many dangers – climate change for example, or nuclear war, or a pandemic, or planet Earth being hit by a giant asteroid. Around the world a number of research centres have sprung up to investigate and mitigate what’s called existential risk. How precarious is our civilisation and can we all play a part in preventing global catastrophe? Contributors Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute. Phil Torres, Future of Life Institute. Karin Kuhlemann, University College London. Simon Beard, Centre for Existential Risk. Lalitha Sundaram, Centre for Existential Risk. Seth Baum, Global Catastrophic Risk Institute. Film clip: Armageddon, Touchstone Pictures (1998), Directed by Michael Bay. Presented (cheerily) by David Edmonds. Producer: Diane Richardson
          Kim Jong Un told Pompeo 'no less than half a dozen times' he'd denuclearize North Korea      Cache   Translate Page      
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un told Secretary of State Mike Pompeo "no less than half a dozen times" that he would denuclearize his nation, Pompeo said Tuesday on Fox's KRIV.
          Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - March 12, 2019      Cache   Translate Page      
Robert Palladino
Deputy Spokesperson
Department Press Briefing
Washington, DC
March 12, 2019

Index for Today's Briefing
  • IRAN
  • IRAQ
  • IRAN


    2:42 p.m. EDT

    MR PALLADINO: Good afternoon, everybody.

    QUESTION: Good afternoon.

    MR PALLADINO: Afternoon. At the top today, we are privileged to have with us our Special Representative for Venezuela Elliott Abrams. He’ll be – make a few remarks and be willing to take some questions. At the conclusion of the briefing, we also have some subject matter experts from our Bureau of Consular Affairs. If there are additional questions on matters pertaining to American citizens that you’d like to dive into a little bit, we’ll make them available as well.

    QUESTION: American citizens anywhere or in Venezuela?

    MR PALLADINO: We’re talking – that’s for Venezuela we’re talking about today. Okay? Great. Mr. Abrams, thanks.

    QUESTION: Then you’re going to --

    MR PALLADINO: We have a normal briefing as well.

    MR ABRAMS: Thank you. Happy to be here for my daily briefing. (Laughter.)

    QUESTION: You are becoming quite a fixture up there.

    QUESTION: You’re setting a good example.

    MR ABRAMS: Oh.

    QUESTION: There may be an opening for a spokesman. (Laughter.)

    MR ABRAMS: I wouldn’t touch that with a 20-foot pole. (Laughter.)

    On January 23rd and January 24th, we announced and began a process of bringing back to the United States the great majority of Americans who work at the U.S. embassy in Caracas. The decision announced yesterday is, in a sense, a follow-on to that initial decision and is the product of the same considerations for the conditions in Caracas, which make it so difficult to continue keeping the embassy staffed there, and for the general situation in Caracas.

    If you think back, it’s only six weeks ago, but the situation in Caracas has deteriorated very considerably in that period and especially in the last few days since the blackouts began on Friday. So the Secretary made that decision.

    You may have seen the interviews he did this morning. I’ll just read one paragraph: “We made the decision yesterday that it just was prudent to get these folks back. The situation there is deteriorating. The Maduro regime’s horrific leadership over the last year[s] has just made life there so difficult, it began to make it more difficult for the United States to take the actions that it needed to do to support the Venezuelan people. So we concluded this was simply the right step to take,” and it “was the right time to take it.”

    I should say that this does not represent any change in U.S. policy toward Venezuela nor does it represent any reduction in the commitment we have to the people of Venezuela and to their struggle for democracy. You will see very soon a significant number of additional visa revocations. You will see in the coming days some very significant additional sanctions and the international group, of which we are a part – that includes most EU countries, the Lima Group, Canada, the U.S. – continues to do its work.

    Why don’t I stop there and we’ll take some questions.

    MR PALLADINO: We’ll start with Associated Press.

    QUESTION: Thanks. I’m curious to know what the Secretary meant by saying that the presence of – continued presence of any American diplomats in Caracas was a constraint on policy. He didn’t quite explain. What exactly did their presence constrain, number one?

    Number two, you talked about the blackouts and all this kind of thing, but presumably there are no family members there. It was very, very – only a handful of staffers still at the embassy. Presumably, they have generators, right?

    MR ABRAMS: Generators require fuel, the embassy requires water.

    QUESTION: Okay.

    MR ABRAMS: The embassy’s own situation also had a – let’s say a finite number of days.

    QUESTION: Okay. All right. So can you explain what exactly the constraint was on – what kinds of policies were being constrained by the presence --

    MR ABRAMS: Well, I don’t --

    QUESTION: Especially because yesterday, the Secretary said that – when he was asked about support for – U.S. support for Juan Guaido, said that as long as our team is on the ground in Caracas, you’d continue to provide the same kinds of support that you do. Well, now that’s gone or very soon will be gone, so I don’t understand how these – those mesh.

    MR ABRAMS: Well, we will – we will – obviously it makes it more difficult to meet with all Venezuelans when the – we – when the team is not on the ground. I’m kind of reluctant to sort of try to parse the Secretary’s words, but let me just say that in every decision we made – every decision, decisions on diplomatic activities, on visas, on sanctions – the safety of that staff was a key consideration. And that was something that weighed very heavily on our mind every day, literally every day. So I think that’s – I think that was what the Secretary was referring to, and I’ll just leave it at that.

    QUESTION: Okay, but when you said it doesn’t reflect a change in policy --

    MR ABRAMS: No.

    QUESTION: -- it means that it was not intended to be some kind of hint or harbinger of military intervention or some kind of use of force?

    MR ABRAMS: Nothing has changed. We continue to say, because it is true, all options are on the table.

    QUESTION: But?

    MR ABRAMS: But they did not change yesterday.

    MR PALLADINO: There we go. Let’s go Michelle, CNN.

    QUESTION: So just hours before this statement came out from the Secretary we heard from the Secretary on Venezuela and he made no mention of the need to get people out. In fact, he really didn’t talk about U.S. people at the embassy there. So what changed between the time we spoke to him and close to midnight when he put this out?

    MR ABRAMS: He made his final decision. We have been talking about this literally – literally – every day. I’ve only been here six weeks, but that was right after the decision to move most of the people from the embassy back to the United States. We have had daily phone calls, daily meetings about this question, been before the Secretary, and he made his decision.

    QUESTION: And then that line that Matt mentioned, “constraint on U.S. policy” – that reads like a threat. I mean, it’s obviously curious. So should Maduro see that line as a threat?

    MR ABRAMS: I can only repeat what the President has said: All options are always on the table.

    MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to AFP.

    QUESTION: Yes. Just to – thank you. Just to follow on on this constraint thing, is there a link between the decision of withdrawing all the diplomats and some actions you might want to take to make sure the aid, which is at the border, come inside Venezuela?

    MR ABRAMS: No.

    MR PALLADINO: Reuters.

    QUESTION: Hello, Mr. Abrams. Two questions. One is: Who do you leave the embassy to? Do you appoint a protective power? What happens to the embassy, how do you ensure, number one.

    MR ABRAMS: Right.

    QUESTION: Number two: We understand that the decision was made because the talks with the Venezuelans collapsed late yesterday and that that – this is according to the Venezuelans – that’s what led to this. Did you – did the U.S. get any kind of direct threat from Maduro’s government that something was going to happen?

    MR ABRAMS: On the first part, normally we would get a protecting power, and that is, I think, what we’ll do here, and we are in discussions now about that. What will happen to the embassy grounds, the embassy physically, let’s say, is something that we then discuss with the protecting power, with potential protecting powers. So we don’t have a final answer on that, and when we do we’ll announce it.

    On the regime, you know on --

    QUESTION: Are you in discussions with other countries to – as to who will be the protecting power?

    MR ABRAMS: Yes. We are in discussions.

    QUESTION: But it hasn’t been decided who?

    MR ABRAMS: Right. About – we are trying to decide on a protecting power. January 23rd, the Secretary said the United States does not recognize the Maduro regime as the government of Venezuela. Accordingly, the United States does not consider former President Nicolas Maduro to have the legal authority to break diplomatic relations with the United States or to declare our diplomats persona non grata. So from our point of view, the regime cannot make a decision about whether we stay or go. And as a matter of fact, the National Assembly yesterday said we have the legal authority to stay, and they are the legitimate government of Venezuela. But the regime also cannot, in our view, provide security for the embassy, and the situation in Caracas is deteriorating. So our decision was made really fundamentally without regard to what the regime wants or thinks.

    MR PALLADINO: Let’s go with Los Angeles Times.

    QUESTION: Thank you. Just to follow on Lesley, so there were talks going on between the Venezuelans and you guys about creating an interest section or something like that and then the Venezuelans gave you 72 hours to leave. Is that not true?

    MR ABRAMS: No, we have had – as you know, we’ve talked about this before. I have – I had a couple of meetings with the de facto regime Foreign Minister Arreaza. And those meetings were essentially about exactly this. So this subject has been out there for a long time. But we made a decision at one point, and you talked about it here – I’ve certainly talked about it in public – that an interest section was really not appropriate. You do an interest section where there is no government that you consider legitimate. There is a legitimate government in Venezuela, from our point of view. Maybe that would have satisfied some demands of the regime, but it was not something that the Untied States was going to do. So that really was off the table.

    QUESTION: And 72 hours? The deadline?

    MR ABRAMS: Well, as I said, we do not believe the regime, on the one hand, has the ability to tell us when to leave, on the other hand, doesn’t have the ability to protect us if we stay.

    MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to Washington Post.

    QUESTION: Mr. Abrams, the Maduro government’s attorney general announced that Juan Guaido is going to be investigated for – on suspicion of sabotage in the blackout. Does the departure of the U.S. diplomats put him in a weaker position at all, at a time when he would seem to be under greater threat?

    MR ABRAMS: First, we’ve seen that as well, and it’s a threat against Interim President Guaido. They have made such threats before. They’ve talked about going after him on one basis or another, and we also know that the supreme court, the TSJ, has essentially been packed by the regime. So that’s a – that report is of real concern. I don’t think the regime is going to base its decision on that, on our presence or absence, any more than it made the decision on whether to arrest him upon his return on the basis of whether we were there or not there. I think it’s largely a matter of how they think the public, the Venezuelan public, will react.

    QUESTION: You have any warnings to the government or any message to them?

    MR ABRAMS: We have --

    QUESTION: Should they be contemplating arresting him on this?

    MR ABRAMS: I think – I hope they’re aware of the fact that there are 54 countries, some important countries, that consider Juan Guaido to be the legitimate interim president of Venezuela. And I think not only we but the other 53 will react immediately. There are a number of diplomatic and financial and economic steps that governments can take. We’ve taken many of them; other countries haven’t. I would think that the arrest, incarceration of Juan Guaido would lead a lot of countries to react very quickly.

    MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to EFE.

    QUESTION: Thank you. I want to ask you a question about the possible scenario of the Maduro government collapses. The Spain’s foreign minister today said that the U.S. asked Spain to receive Venezuelan ministers loyal to Maduro in case the Venezuelan Government collapses. So I wanted to ask you if the U.S. has actually made this petition to Spain, and what were the terms in which these petitions were made?

    MR ABRAMS: This is an old discussion. When I was assistant secretary of state for Latin America, and there were a lot of military regimes, the question of what to do with dictators arose, and it was actually Felipe Gonzalez, who was prime minister at the time, who said maybe Spain can help by taking some of these people. We’ve had some conversations with Spain. I wouldn’t say we made a request, they made an answer. We have certainly had conversations. We’ve had them with a couple of other places too, because this question may arise, and we have talked about off-ramps and we have talked about wanting some of the regime officials to leave the country as part of a transition.

    So the question therefore obviously arises: well, where would they go? And they may prefer to go to Cuba or Russia, but there are other places, and so that is a conversation we’ll continue to have. Unfortunately, none of the people at the top of the regime have yet made that decision, the decision that they should make. And as we’ve said before, we are willing to help them out in those circumstances.

    QUESTION: Can I ask a follow-up of – on that? You mentioned that they’re – the U.S. Government with Spain and a couple other places. Which ones are these other --

    MR ABRAMS: I’m not going to say, because it has not been as public as it has in the case of Spain.

    QUESTION: Thank you.

    MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to Washington Times.

    QUESTION: Thanks for coming out to talk with us. Big picture question regarding all the – all of the options on the table. Can you discuss the military option for a minute? And specifically, has the administration asked the Pentagon to draw up such an option? And assuming that it has, are you satisfied with the option that the Pentagon has, which is headed by an interim defense secretary, provided at this point?

    QUESTION: He’s a legitimate interim defense secretary. (Laughter.)

    MR ABRAMS: The President has said all options are the table. They are. Further than that it would be foolish for me to go, and I’m not going to do it.

    MR PALLADINO: Bloomberg.

    QUESTION: Mr. Abrams, can you talk a little bit more about the finite resources that the embassy is facing? I mean, it seems to be a suggestion that they’re running out of fuel and water. What were the constraints on the embassy?

    MR ABRAMS: It’s a difficult situation for the embassy. It’s a difficult situation for Venezuelans, of course, far more. I don’t believe the embassy is at this point connected to any water system. So there’s a question of how would you get fresh water. Obviously, there are continuing blackouts on and off. So the question then is: How are your generators working, and do you have enough fuel? There’s also a question of communications. If there’s no electricity, there are no communications, which obviously speaks immediately to the safety of our people.

    So the deterioration of the general situation in Caracas doesn’t affect the embassy exactly as it effects Venezuelans, but it does affect the embassy.

    QUESTION: But were you – was there any concern that there was some new or imminent security threat that the embassy might be overrun, that the Maduro regime was unable or unwilling to provide or to guarantee security?

    MR ABRAMS: We do not think that the regime is really able to provide security, and I would note that in his most recent public statement, former President Maduro spoke about calling upon the colectivos to come forward. Now, that – that’s calling for armed gangs to take over the streets, and it is obviously going to be a great worry to Venezuelans, but we noted it.

    QUESTION: I’m sorry, was that part of the – was that the deciding factor?

    MR ABRAMS: That – actually, that statement by Maduro came today. So it was not part of the decision. But the background was – and as you know, they’ve been using colectivos more in Caracas, along the borders. Perhaps it is a sign of Maduro’s lack of confidence in his own security forces. But it is by definition a breakdown of law and order.

    MR PALLADINO: Let’s go Wall Street Journal.

    QUESTION: Thank you. You said that the decision to remove embassy personnel doesn’t represent a policy change by the United States, but you have acknowledged that it would make it more difficult to meet with Venezuelans, both the Maduro regime and the Guaido government. So functionally, how is the U.S. going to proceed without an embassy staff on the ground? Are you just – are you going to remove them to nearby countries? Are they coming back to the States? What is the plan?

    MR ABRAMS: Who to nearby countries? The Americans?

    QUESTION: Yes.

    MR ABRAMS: The Americans will come back here to Washington, which is what the much larger group of Americans from the embassy in January did. I am very – I am one of the beneficiaries of this, because my team is made up in great part of people from Embassy Caracas, and the WHA team on Venezuela was also greatly enriched by their presence. Now, obviously people in the summer will go on to whatever forward assignments they had.

    We will – as I said, it’ll be harder, because we’re not going to be able to do the face-to-face meetings we were doing. Admittedly, we were not able to do a lot of face-to-face meetings because the embassy staff had become quite small. But it wasn’t – so it will be something that we’re going to have to try to accomplish outside of Venezuela or by telephone or by emails and other forms of communication.

    QUESTION: And are you able to give us even just rough estimates of the number of people we’re talking about?

    MR ABRAMS: No, we – I’m told we just – by the Diplomatic Security people we just don’t do that.

    MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to Fox.

    QUESTION: At the top you said that significant sanctions would be coming in the coming days. Can you elaborate a little bit on that? Are they targeting financial institutions or country-specific? The Secretary said yesterday a handful of nations are providing aid and comfort to the Maduro regime.

    MR ABRAMS: Well, we did, you know, Friday sanction a Russian-Venezuelan bank, one that was basically 50/50 owned by Russian and Venezuelan state institutions. There will be more sanctions of financial institutions – I think I would leave it at that – and more visa revocations coming very soon.

    QUESTION: Like today?

    MR ABRAMS: Possible. Possible.

    QUESTION: How about Turkey?

    MR PALLADINO: No, no Turkey. Voice of America, please.

    QUESTION: Well, Turkey and Venezuela is actually a thing.

    QUESTION: Yes.

    MR PALLADINO: Turkey and Venezuela. Okay.

    QUESTION: Yes, that’s what I – that’s what I mean.

    MR PALLADINO: Go ahead, Laurie. Okay, go ahead.

    QUESTION: Thank you. To follow up on this question, Turkey’s support for – is prominent among those countries supporting the Maduro regime, including through the gold trade. What – do you have a comment on that and are you considering the possibility of secondary sanctions?

    MR ABRAMS: Well, those are two different questions. We – Turkey’s support for the Maduro regime obviously is completely contrary to U.S. policy and very unhelpful, and we will continue to take a look at the ways in which that support takes place, and in the context of sanctions by Treasury. Maybe I should leave it at that.

    MR PALLADINO: Okay, fair enough. Voice of America.

    QUESTION: Thank you. So a follow-up on Nick’s question. Is yesterday’s sanction against the bank based in Russia a secondary sanction? And is it the beginning of more sanctions against foreign financial institutions? That’s number one, and number two: Can you please give us a sense if there is any diplomatic effort to bring China on board? Thank you.

    MR ABRAMS: The bank – the sanctions of Friday on the Russian-Venezuelan bank were not secondary sanctions. We have not done any secondary sanctions. The – we will continue to make efforts to bring China aboard. We have told – in various places have told the Chinese that we think if their concern is in essence getting their money back, they’ll never get it back from the bankrupt Maduro regime and from a basically destroyed Venezuelan economy. As the Secretary explained yesterday, the only way they’ll get it back is when Venezuela returns to prosperity, which it won’t do under Nicolas Maduro. Obviously they haven’t changed their policy yet, but we will continue to talk about that.

    QUESTION: Will they be subject to potential sanction?

    MR ABRAMS: Well, we have not done secondary sanctions. That’s always one of the options on the table.

    MR PALLADINO: Last one. Let’s – someone new. (Off-mike.)

    QUESTION: Really?

    QUESTION: NTN24, Emiliana Molina, Mr. Abrams. So removing U.S. diplomats and bringing them back to D.C., is this perhaps a show of lack of confidence from the U.S. in Juan Guaido’s government to restore democracy, and what does this mean for his government? Some experts are saying that this looks bad for Guaido.

    MR ABRAMS: It certainly is not a display of any lack of confidence in him. The fact is that today the regime has the guns. The National Assembly and Interim President Guaido are trying, through exclusively peaceful means, to bring democracy back to Venezuela, and that is obviously something we and dozens of other countries support. It is a reflection of the deterioration that we see on the ground in Venezuela, and it is in essence a follow-up to the major part of the decision, which was made on January 24th, to take most of the embassy staff. It’s – we left a few people there, not many, but it’s really the same logic. Our support for Interim President Guaido is absolutely undiminished, and I think, more importantly, the support of the Venezuelan people for him is undiminished.

    MR PALLADINO: Perfect. All right.

    MR ABRAMS: Okay.

    MR PALLADINO: Mr. Abrams, thank you very much.

    QUESTION: Thank you.

    MR ABRAMS: Thank you. Should I say see you tomorrow?

    MR PALLADINO: Yeah. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. (Laughter.)

    QUESTION: Or later this afternoon. (Laughter.)

    QUESTION: Robert, are some of these experts (inaudible)?

    MR PALLADINO: Some of our subject matter experts remain in the room, and so let’s get through some of our other issues today and then I’d be happy to make them available if you’ve got some specific questions that you’d like to ask on the subject of consular services in Venezuela, okay?

    QUESTION: You’re going to make them sit through the whole press briefing?

    MR PALLADINO: I’m going to apologize in advance. You are going to have to listen to some other things, it’s true, so all right. Thank you. All right.

    Let’s start with this: We are outraged to hear reports that the Iranian regime sentenced Iranian human rights defender and women’s rights activist Nasrin Sotoudeh to 38 years in prison and 148 lashes. This sentence is beyond barbaric. Her alleged crime was advocating for Iranian women’s rights and for defending other Iranian women who were arrested by the regime for peacefully protesting the mandatory hijab law. Nasrin was sentenced in absentia without a fair trial by the notorious revolutionary court, which is led by Judge Moghiseh, an accused human rights violator.

    In addition, just this week, the regime cynically announced that as they enter the fifth decade of the Iranian Revolution, they would appoint Ebrahim Raisi, a man involved in mass summary executions of prisoners of conscience, as the head of the regime’s judiciary. The Iranian regime makes a mockery of the entire legal system in Iran, placing innocent people at the mercy of accused human rights violators. We condemn Nasrin’s sentence in the strongest possible terms and call on all of our partners and allies to speak out and demand the release of this courageous human rights defender and all those arbitrarily detained immediately. The Iranian people deserve a government that respects their legitimate demands and the human rights of all in Iran, not one that subjects them to prosecution in a justice system led by accused human rights violators.

    And we are pleased to have a group of teachers and students from Oakton, Virginia with us today. They’re in the back row. Welcome. They’re visiting the State Department as part of their history course and they are here to learn about American foreign policy. So welcome, we’re happy that you could join us, and – yeah, don’t ask questions. Perfect, all right. (Laughter.)

    Great. Questions?

    QUESTION: Yeah. Robert, I mean, this is going to be for the end. I would just like to know from the consular – roughly how many Americans or people, dual American citizens they estimate – I know that there’s no exact figure. You can never be exact, but like, is it tens of thousands, hundreds of – I mean, what’s the population? And how much of a difference is this going to be mean with – it was only a handful of people at the embassy in Caracas anyway, so there couldn’t – must have been very limited what they could do for people who needed assistance. So I mean, is – what’s the actual impact on that?

    And then more broadly on Venezuela, not for the CA people, although maybe: What is the – what’s the current standing of this debate over TPS or some other kind of – if that’s determined not to be applicable in this Venezuela situation, some other mechanism that would allow Venezuelans to stay in the U.S. beyond what Special Representative Abrams has spoken about, the 74,000 who are already in this asylum pipeline?

    MR PALLADINO: Regarding American citizens, I will defer on some of the more specifics on what we’re able to do to some of the folks that we have with us today, but we – I can say at the top that we will hold the Maduro regime directly responsible for the safety and welfare of United States citizens that are in Venezuela, and like our travel advisory says, we – U.S. citizens – U.S. citizens residing in or traveling in Venezuela should strongly consider departing Venezuela. That’s something we’ve said previously and something that we reiterate. We’re pursuing all possible possibilities to secure travel options for U.S. citizens, and we will be announcing additional information for foreign government partners in the days that follow. We continue to advise American citizens to avoid demonstrations and large gatherings and to monitor local media for updates.

    To repeat, the travel advisory in Venezuela remains the same, and that is Level Four, do not travel. And I’ll leave it at that.

    QUESTION: TPS or some other --

    MR PALLADINO: I don’t have any updates on that issue today. I don’t want to get ahead. It’s something that’s being looked at, I know, but I don’t have any information to --

    QUESTION: But what exactly is being looked at? Some alternate mechanism? Has it been – has it actually been decided at some – by – has it actually – has the administration actually decided that TPS in the case of Venezuela is not the right – is not the applicable vehicle or mechanism for --

    MR PALLADINO: I don’t have any policy announcements to make on that. It’s just something – I don’t have any policy announcements to make.

    QUESTION: I have a follow-up just – I don’t know if I didn’t hear properly. Are you saying you’re pursuing all options as to get U.S. citizens out of Venezuela?

    MR PALLADINO: No, no. That’s something we do to help facilitate, not --

    QUESTION: To facilitate.

    MR PALLADINO: Yes, there’s no – yes.

    QUESTION: Okay.

    MR PALLADINO: Okay. Correct.


    QUESTION: So with the situation deteriorating enough to now pull everybody out of the embassy, do you feel it necessary to put out additional information to all American citizens there, or do you feel like the “do not travel” sort of stands for itself?

    MR PALLADINO: Well, we routinely look at our travel information, and given that circumstances are changing, I would not think it – I would think – I would expect that additional information would be updated and provided in short order. I don’t think it’s going to change from Travel Four, that said, okay – from Level Four.

    QUESTION: Yeah, the advice that you – the advice that you last gave to – that you strongly, whatever that exact wording is, urge them to --

    MR PALLADINO: Yeah, “do not travel” was our – that’s our advice, okay?

    QUESTION: That’s – okay, that’s – but for those who are already there, I mean, the current language you said is, like, strongly suggest that they leave or something to that effect. Is that language from the alert going to be updated to, like, get out now?

    MR PALLADINO: That’s – I don’t want to preview what’s being done. It’s being looked at and reviewed, and in short order – safety of American citizens is one of the highest priorities of the State Department. It’s something that we are constantly reviewing, and as situations on the ground change, we review these things regularly and update them.


    QUESTION: Robert, after the American diplomats leave, will the local staff remain or will they – will they still be going into work and maybe protecting the property? And if not, will you be giving things like any remaining food and water that you have to them to take home, or can you tell me what --

    MR PALLADINO: I don’t have any additional information on that topic.

    (Inaudible.) Please, go ahead, Christina.

    QUESTION: Thanks. Can you give us – can you give us some guidance on when we might see the evacuation start? I’m hearing the end of the week. Does that sound about right? Is there an evacuation plan in the works? Can you give us, like, an update on where that is? Commercial? Are we going to send transports down?

    MR PALLADINO: We’re not going to get – the Secretary last night in his statement and tweet indicated this week, and we’re not going to get into details on when exactly or how exactly that will be transpiring.

    QUESTION: And just a follow-up, my colleagues asked a couple times but it wasn’t quite answered – Mr. Abrams didn’t quite answer the question when he was asked whether there had been some sort of new specific threat from the Maduro regime. He kept saying we don’t trust them to protect our diplomats, but can you say definitively, yes or no, if there had been some sort of new threat in the last couple hours that prompted this decision by the Secretary?

    MR PALLADINO: I have nothing beyond what Mr. Abrams said. I don’t.


    QUESTION: Did you accept the premise of her first question, which was that this is an evacuation, or did you just not --

    MR PALLADINO: This is – no. This is – I did not. This is – we’re withdrawing U.S. personnel.

    QUESTION: Right, but do you consider it to be an evacuation?


    QUESTION: Are you going in – is this Saigon ’75?

    MR PALLADINO: We’re withdrawing our personnel in an orderly fashion. The security of our people is paramount.

    Please. Said, please.

    QUESTION: Robert, thank you. Change topics. Okay.

    QUESTION: Could I just have one real quick question? Will the embassy be closed? Will that be the way to describe it? How would you describe --

    MR PALLADINO: I would not say it’s closed, no.

    QUESTION: How – when --

    MR PALLADINO: I would say – the legal status of the embassy – I would say we’re withdrawing from the embassy, but I believe closure is a matter of legality, and that’s not something that we have decided. So this is interim, I would say.

    QUESTION: One more on Venezuela?

    MR PALLADINO: Said, please go ahead.

    QUESTION: Yes, thank you. Changing topics, very quickly, Israel is set to deport the Human Rights Watch director for the West Bank because of a tweet, I guess. He’s a U.S. citizen. Are you aware of that? And what will you do to help him stay and conduct his job?

    MR PALLADINO: We are aware of those reports, and yes, the answer is --

    QUESTION: And what are you offering him? Aid? Help? Has he come – has he gone to the – not the consulate but the embassy?

    MR PALLADINO: I’m not aware of anything like that, Said.

    QUESTION: Okay. All right. Let me move on to another --

    QUESTION: Well, wait a second. Let’s stay.


    QUESTION: Just are you talking to the Israelis about this? Would you – or is it – is it that you come to the defense of American citizens any – in all countries except Israel?

    MR PALLADINO: That is not true. The United States has no greater --

    QUESTION: Okay. Well --

    MR PALLADINO: Let me finish – has no greater responsibility, priority than the safety of American citizens, the welfare of our citizens overseas. In this particular case, I’m not going to talk about specifics. But I can say, as a matter of general principle, we value freedom of expression, even in cases where we do not agree with the political views espoused, and I’ll stop there.

    QUESTION: Thank you.

    QUESTION: But did he --

    QUESTION: Okay, let me just follow-up --

    MR PALLADINO: Go ahead.

    QUESTION: -- on another issue on the Palestinian-Israeli issue. The government signed agreement, the Israeli Government, to build 23,000 housing units in occupied East Jerusalem. And also, there’s been such an uptick in settlements and so on. I know that you stick to your policy, but has there been – I mean, past administrations would issue concern from time to time, say, “We’re concerned about the acceleration of settlement building,” and so on. What is your position on this latest thing, since we haven’t heard anything from this administration on settlements?

    MR PALLADINO: The President has made his position on settlements clear. This is something we’ve talked about before. The Israeli Government has also made clear that its intent is to adopt a policy regarding settlement activity that takes into account the President’s concerns, that takes those into consideration. And that’s something that we welcome.

    QUESTION: And do you think that they have – I mean since this President’s been in office for the past two years, that they took his concern into consideration?

    MR PALLADINO: We welcome the Israeli Government’s decision to take the President’s views into consideration, and I would just reiterate what the President has said repeatedly, that the administration is committed to pursuing a comprehensive peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

    QUESTION: Robert?

    MR PALLADINO: Laurie.

    QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

    QUESTION: The Western press yesterday ran headlines like, “Iran’s Rouhani in Iraq for His Third Visit to Offset U.S. Sanctions.” Is it still your position that Iraq has to abide by the Iran sanctions?

    MR PALLADINO: As far as sanctions go, as you know, a waiver was granted to Iraq to allow it to continue to pay for its electricity imports from Iran. And that has helped Iraq limit electricity shortages in the south since the re-imposition of sanctions that took place in November. And we’re going to continue to discuss Iran-related sanctions with our partners in Iraq to ensure continued compliance. And finally, any decisions related to those sanctions waivers, they’re at the discretion of the Secretary of State, and I would leave it there.

    QUESTION: Robert?

    QUESTION: And there are two issues in specific. One has to do with banking and reports that Iraq and Iran will establish a joint bank, which will allow Iran to circumvent sanctions. And the second has to do with a railroad from Iran to Basra, which would allow Iran to send military supplies to its proxies in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria. Is that compatible with your understanding of sanctions?

    MR PALLADINO: Laurie, I don’t have any information on these proposals that you’re identifying today, so I’m going to refrain from talking on them.

    QUESTION: Robert --

    QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

    MR PALLADINO: Yep. Let’s go --

    QUESTION: Could you give us your reaction, the U.S. reaction, on President Bouteflika of Algeria not to seek a fifth term but to stay – to postpone the election and to stay in power, at least until the end of the year and probably after that?

    MR PALLADINO: We support efforts in Algeria to chart a new path forward based on dialogue that reflects the will of all Algerians and their aspirations for a peaceful and prosperous future.

    QUESTION: That’s all?

    MR PALLADINO: Well, we respect the rights of the Algerians to assemble and peacefully express their views, and we’re closely monitoring reports that Algeria’s elections have been postponed. We support the right of the Algerian people to vote in a free and fair election, as we do around the world.

    QUESTION: You think it’s a good thing that he’s not seeking a fifth term?

    MR PALLADINO: We support efforts in Algeria to chart a new path forward, and I’ll leave it at that.

    QUESTION: Robert?

    QUESTION: Robert?

    MR PALLADINO: Please. Afghanistan.

    QUESTION: Ambassador Khalilzad tweeted a short while ago that they’re – the – the two parties agreed in – in draft to some sort of proposal on the U.S. withdrawal as well as the Taliban providing safe haven in Afghanistan to terror groups. Can you share any more details on what that draft looks like, whether it’s – there’s a timetable now on U.S. withdrawal?

    MR PALLADINO: I did see those tweets. Special Representative Khalilzad and a team representing agencies across the United States Government concluded today talks with the Taliban delegation in Doha, and that’s what he was tweeting about. These have been the most substantive talks with the Taliban to date. We’ve received reports back from Special Representative Khalilzad that they’ve had meaningful progress. The Taliban have agreed that peace will require both sides to fully address four core issues, and they are: counterterrorism assurances, troop withdrawal, intra-Afghan dialogue, and a comprehensive ceasefire.

    In this round of talks, we were able to move to agreement in draft on the first two principles – counterterrorism assurances and troop withdrawal. And when that agreement, in draft, is finalized, the Taliban and an inclusive Afghan negotiating team that includes the Afghan Government and other Afghans will begin intra-Afghan negotiations of a political settlement and comprehensive ceasefire.

    And I’d also add that Special Representative Khalilzad will be returning to Washington. He’ll be consulting with Secretary Pompeo as well as the interagency and also partner countries in this process. Much work remains to be done. As Special Representative Khalilzad has said before, “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.”

    QUESTION: So you can’t share any details then of what was agreed to in that draft?

    MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to be able to go into details on the results of the just concluded and ongoing talks.

    QUESTION: Robert?

    QUESTION: Robert?

    QUESTION: Second part of this though, as you said and as the ambassador tweeted, once this agreement in draft is finalized, then those intra-Afghan party talks will begin. Is that a commitment from the Taliban that they will engage, once this agreement is finalized, with the Afghan Government?

    MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to be able to go into more details on the agreement itself, because they’re private conversations, and we want to give the parties time to work things out and to work out these issues in private. But intra-Afghan dialogue that includes the Afghan Government as well as the Taliban and other Afghans encourages – is something that we’re very much focused on and remains part of what we’re pursuing.

    QUESTION: Can I ask you, on a separate topic, your statement at the beginning on Iran and the sentencing of a women’s rights activist: Why didn’t you issue a similar statement when Saudi Arabia arrested women rights activists there, including a State Department International Women of Courage Award winner, Samar Badawi?

    MR PALLADINO: We’ve – I mean, this particular case really was barbaric. Many others have spoken out on this as well. Thirty-eight – this is a – basically, a lawyer representing women clients that’s been sentenced to 38 years and 148 lashes. That kind of barbarism is something that must be called out.

    In regards to other countries, Secretary Pompeo – we’ve spoken about – we speak about human rights, frankly, when we engage – when we travel the world engaging partners, allies. We do this regularly. It’s something that we stand for. It’s something that we’ll continue to do.

    QUESTION: But why not do it from the podium in a similar fashion?

    MR PALLADINO: I’m not sure what specific case you’re referring to. We choose different ways to communicate our – to promote the value – human rights values. It’s something we’re going to continue to be outspoken about and we raise this regularly with all partners.

    Sure, Janne. Please, go ahead.

    QUESTION: Thank you very much, Robert. On South Korea, not North Korea this time.


    QUESTION: Okay. The – reported by the South Korean Channel A News, the former unification minister of South Korea, Jeong Se-hyun, said that the United States National Security Advisor John Bolton is a very unlucky person. I think the insulting language about John Bolton is a (inaudible) about – against the American people. How do U.S. react diplomatically?

    MR PALLADINO: Yeah, I haven’t seen that report and I’m – I have no reaction. Okay.

    QUESTION: Because he blaming about Hanoi talks, so John Bolton made the decisions break down this U.S.-North Korea summit. Can you find that out?

    MR PALLADINO: I would just say that the lead negotiator for the United States of America is the President of the United States, and that’s the President’s decision.

    QUESTION: Robert --

    QUESTION: That’s President’s decision. Okay. Thank you.

    QUESTION: Can I ask about the Ethiopian Airlines crash? It’s my understanding that Ethiopia has a lot of control over the investigation, at least at this point. Is the State Department working with Ethiopian authorities to make sure U.S. investigators have access to black boxes?

    MR PALLADINO: In response to the Government of Ethiopia’s request, we have sent a team from the United States National Transportation Safety Board. That includes the Federal Aviation Administration personnel as well. And they’re assisting in the investigation to determine the cause of death. Officials from the United States are also coordinating with INTERPOL and Ethiopian authorities in support of efforts to identify the remains of victims. These are some of the steps that the United States Government is taking to assist, and we – again, we extend our deepest condolences to all those families and the friends of those that lost their lives on that tragic accident.

    QUESTION: On Syria, Robert --

    MR PALLADINO: Please, right there.

    QUESTION: Thank you. If we can move to North Korea. Given the UN panel of experts’ findings on North Korea and sanctions, is the administration concerned that North – that the sanctions regime is not being enforced?

    MR PALLADINO: We made progress in Hanoi at the summit, and although we did not reach an agreement with North Korea, we were able to exchange detailed positions and to narrow the gap on a number of issues. Also made clear the United States expects complete denuclearization before sanctions relief. So I’d say that in response to your question, the United States and the international community have a shared understanding of what final, fully verified denuclearization entails, as well as meaningful progress, what that will constitute, what that goal looks like. And we remain ready to move forward. And I’ll leave it at that.

    QUESTION: Can I just follow quickly? Does the administration believe that there should be more economic pressure applied on North Korea?

    MR PALLADINO: We remain ready to engage North Korea. We are looking – I’m sorry, what was your question again? Increased? So we – our policy’s been explained many times; the President explained that these sanctions are the world’s sanctions and that they will be maintained until denuclearization is achieved. And I’ll leave it at that for now.

    Let’s go – last question. Michel, please.

    QUESTION: Yeah. You tweeted on Syria and building a statue of Hafez Assad in Daraa. Can you make the statement on camera, please?

    MR PALLADINO: I’m sorry, can you say it one more time, Michel?

    QUESTION: On Syria. You tweeted on building a statue of Hafez Assad in Daraa. Do you remember?

    MR PALLADINO: When was this?

    QUESTION: Before noon today.

    MR PALLADINO: Before noon. Of course. (Laughter.)

    QUESTION: If you can make the statement on camera, please.

    MR PALLADINO: (Laughter.) And what is your question? Help me establish --

    QUESTION: If you can make the statement on camera, please.

    MR PALLADINO: I need the tweet in front of me. (Laughter.)

    QUESTION: Okay. I will retweet it. You can --

    MR PALLADINO: All right, I’ll do it afterwards. If you want me to read the tweet, I’d be happy to do that. All right. All right.

    QUESTION: Quick question on Israel?

    MR PALLADINO: Shri, go ahead. Oh, I’m sorry, not Shri. Shri, go ahead. There’s your hand there.

    QUESTION: I wanted to know if you have an update on the exemption from Iran sanctions for India on oil purchases. It’s been six months since they were granted, and I think the foreign secretary is – Gokhale is scheduled to discuss them with his U.S. counterparts.

    And a second question: Is the U.S. concerned that China might block the UNSC 1267 listing request for Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar? Because Beijing made some comments yesterday that would suggest that China was potentially going to put a hold on it or block it.

    MR PALLADINO: As you point out, Foreign Secretary Gokhale is in town for high-level meetings this week at the State Department. He met with Secretary Pompeo yesterday. He’s got meetings at the White House, Department of Defense, as well as on Capitol Hill on a range of diplomatic and security issues.

    Regarding Masood Azhar, the United States and India work closely together on counterterrorism efforts, and that includes at the United Nations. And our views on Jaish-e-Mohammed and its founder are well known. JEM is a United Nations-designated terrorist group. Azhar is the founder and the leader of JEM, and he meets the criteria for designation by the United Nations. JEM has been responsible for numerous terrorist attacks and is a threat to regional stability and peace.

    Now, the United Nations sanctions committee, their deliberations are confidential, and as such we don’t comment on specific matters, but we’ll continue to work with the sanctions committee to ensure that the designation list is updated and accurate.

    Regarding your specific question on China, I would say that the United States and China share a mutual interest in achieving regional stability and peace, and that a failure to designate Azhar would run counter to this goal.

    And with that, we’ll end.

    QUESTION: The National Security Advisor John Bolton welcomed the foreign – Pakistani Foreign Minister Qureshi. Do you have any readout of that?

    MR PALLADINO: The national security advisor works at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and I’d have to refer you to the White House for a readout on his call, but thanks. I don’t have a readout for you.

    (The briefing was concluded at 3:38 p.m.)

    The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
    External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

          The Persian gamble / Joel C. Rosenberg.      Cache   Translate Page      
cover imageFrom the New York Times bestselling author of The Kremlin Conspiracy comes this latest international thriller about a terrifying nuclear alliance among three world powers--Russia, Iran, and North Korea--and the man who must halt their deadly strategy. Shot out of the air in enemy territory in the middle of the greatest international crisis since the end of the Cold War, former U.S. Secret Service agent Marcus Ryker finds himself facing an impossible task. Not only does he have to somehow elude detection and capture by Russian special forces, but he must convince his own government to grant safe harbor to the one man responsible for the global mayhem--Russian double agent and assassin Oleg Kraskin. While frantically negotiating with his contacts in the White House, Marcus learns that the unstable North Korean regime plans to use the international chaos as a smokescreen to sell nuclear weapons to Iran. With the fate of the entire free world on the line, Marcus makes a deal with the U.S. government--he will go back to work as an international operative and track down the WMDs before they end up in the hands of those with the determination and the means to use them. Marcus and Oleg worked together once before to avert a world war. Can they now find a way to stop world destruction?-- Publisher's description.
          وزیر خارجه پاکستان از پیشرفت در مذاکرات صلح افغانستان خبر داد      Cache   Translate Page      
شاه محمود قریشی خاطر نشان کرد که «پاکستان همه جناح‌های افغانستان را تشویق می‌کند تا با هم به مذاکره بنشینند.»

          Comment on Is Russia Planning A Nuclear War? by Dale      Cache   Translate Page      
I must correct one, potentially deadly mistake you made in the article. Using fire to heat a greenhouse will, indeed, produce carbon monoxide. But plants do not use carbon monoxide, they use carbon DIOXIDE. Big difference! If you fill your greenhouse with carbon monoxide you've just created a death trap. Carbon Monoxide is odorless and colorless, meaning that you won't know it's there. However, it bonds with the hemoglobin in your blood 30 time more readily than oxygen bonds with your blood. Your body will absorb carbon monoxide instead of oxygen and you will die. That's why firefighters wear air packs when fighting fires. We want to avoid the carbon monoxide. Don't use an open fire to heat your greenhouse, especially not a charcoal fire. If you must use fire, make certain that the greenhouse is well-vented to allow the carbon monoxide to escape and fresh oxygen to enter.
          Nuclear Medicine Technologist - UW Health - Madison, WI      Cache   Translate Page      
(ED, ICU, NICU, PICU, Intraoperative Neuro MR, OR). Join our team and be part of the talent that makes UW Health the best work and academic environments....
From UW Health - Tue, 05 Feb 2019 20:22:43 GMT - View all Madison, WI jobs
          Google celebrates the World Wide Web’s 30th birthday with retro Search Doodle      Cache   Translate Page      

Thirty years ago today in 1989, computer scientist Tim Berners Lee submitted his idea for the World Wide Web to the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN). To celebrate the occasion, which in many ways marks the beginning of the internet, Google has shared a new Search doodle. If you open the Google Search home...

The post Google celebrates the World Wide Web’s 30th birthday with retro Search Doodle appeared first on MobileSyrup.

          [$$$] Nuclear Job Board - Electrical Design Engineer (4 needed) - Savannah River - HukariAscendent      Cache   Translate Page      
HukariAscendent is a Service-Disabled, Veteran-Owned, Small Business specializing in comprehensive engineering and technical support services associated with commercial nuclear power and other Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear activities. We are looking for...(click link to see full post)
          [$$$] Nuclear Job Board - I&C Design Engineer (449501) - Multiple Positions - Aiken, SC - OLH, Inc      Cache   Translate Page      
I & C Design Engineer Great opportunity to join a talented team with an outstanding company that values their employees and their career. OLH offers competitive salaries, benefit packages, holidays and paid time off. Responsibilities: Provide design engineering...(click link to see full post)
          [$$$] Nuclear Job Board - Electrical Design Engineer (449404) - Multiple Positions - Aiken, SC - OLH, Inc      Cache   Translate Page      
Electrical Design Engineer Great opportunity to join a talented team with an outstanding company that values their employees and their career. OLH offers competitive salaries, benefit packages, holidays and paid time off. Responsibilities: Provide design...(click link to see full post)

          Russia to ‘unveil secret submarine in 2020 which is armed with SIX nuclear devices and can spark radioactive tsunamis’      Cache   Translate Page      
RUSSIA will deploy underwater submarines armed with nuclear drones capable of causing a 300ft radioactive tsunami, state media reports The so-called Poseidon strategic missiles, carrying up to 200 megaton warheads, will be deployed by 2020 and could wipe out the likes of Los Angeles, according to reports. Putin’s military plans to deploy the weapons on […]
          Blog Post: Pa. Lawmaker Offers $500M Plan For Nuclear Power Credits      Cache   Translate Page more
          La falta de liderazgo y dirección en los Lakers dejará a LeBron James con la carga más pesada      Cache   Translate Page      

En el último repaso de esta temporada que ha sido como la de una fusión de un reactor nuclear, los Lakers no necesitaron a un salvador tanto como una resurrección.

Específicamente, la resurrección de Jerry Buss. 

Ellos tienen ahora al “Elegido” en LeBron James, pero eso no los salvó de la indignidad...

          Date Announcement Trailer For HBO Miniseries ‘Chernobyl’ Released      Cache   Translate Page      

Chernobyl Trailer HBO

HBO has released a teaser trailer for Chernobyl, a miniseries about the 1986 nuclear disaster.

The brief trailer announces a premiere date for the miniseries, which stars Jared Harris, Stellan Skarsgård, and Emily Watson. You can find more information on Chernobyl and watch the teaser trailer below [...]

The post Date Announcement Trailer For HBO Miniseries ‘Chernobyl’ Released appeared first on Geeks of Doom.

          Nuclear Conflict and Political Scandal Eclipse Climate Change as Existential Threat      Cache   Translate Page      
Despite their incessant drumbeat about global warming, mainstream media knows climate doomsday is not imminent and are probably uncomfortable when doomsayers like Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) say, “The world will end in 12 years” unless we do something, drastic, now.But they are well aware that political catastrophes could cause much greater harm to humanity—not in the far distant future, but within months, weeks, or even a single day.That’s why climate change and the “Green New Deal” finally disappeared from headlines this week, trumped by news of more immediate threats.The Return of Nuclear War as an Imminent ThreatWith the end of...
          NKorea’s Denuclearization Must Not Be Incremental      Cache   Translate Page      

UPDATE: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo Says Chairman Kim Told Him Several Times that He will Denuclearize US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo said NKorea’s Chairman Kim Jong Un has promised to eliminate his nuclear weapons program on at least 6 occasions and that now “we need to figure out how to do it.” “The […]

The post NKorea’s Denuclearization Must Not Be Incremental appeared first on Live Trading News.

          Energy Stories of Interest: Tue, Mar 12, 2019      Cache   Translate Page      
MARCELLUS/UTICA REGION: $500 million Pennsylvania nuclear rescue plan triggers fierce battle from rival power producers; NATIONAL: More than 60% of... Continue reading
          [ASAP] Trinuclear and Hexanuclear Lanthanide(III) Complexes of the Chiral 3+3 Macrocycle: X-ray Crystal Structures and Magnetic Properties      Cache   Translate Page      

TOC Graphic

Inorganic Chemistry
DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.8b03266

          [ASAP] Polynuclear Iron(II) Complexes with 2,6-Bis(pyrazol-1-yl)pyridine-anthracene Ligands Exhibiting Highly Distorted High-Spin Centers      Cache   Translate Page      

TOC Graphic

Inorganic Chemistry
DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.8b03432

          IT'LL NEVER FLY, ORVILLE:      Cache   Translate Page      

          La falta de liderazgo y dirección en los Lakers dejará a LeBron James con la carga más pesada      Cache   Translate Page      

En el último repaso de esta temporada que ha sido como la de una fusión de un reactor nuclear, los Lakers no necesitaron a un salvador tanto como una resurrección.

Específicamente, la resurrección de Jerry Buss. 

Ellos tienen ahora al “Elegido” en LeBron James, pero eso no los salvó de la indignidad...

          LABORATORI A CURA DI INFN      Cache   Translate Page      

da 08/04/19 a 14/04/19

Auditorium Parco della Musica

L'Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN) è l'ente italiano di ricerca dedicato allo studio dei costituenti fondamentali della materia e delle leggi che li governano. Sotto la supervisione del Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della Ricerca (MIUR), l’INFN promuove e svolge attività di ricerca teorica e sperimentale nel campo della fisica nucleare, subnucleare e delle astroparticelle.
La realtà virtuale nella fisica delle particelle
Target 14 - 18 anni
 Un modo per indagare l’universo è quello di “scomporlo” in mattoni fondamentali, osservando e studiando le particelle prodotte nei grandi acceleratori e rivelate grazie a immense “macchine fotografiche”. Per analizzare i dati dell’esperimento Belle II - un rivelatore costruito nell’acceleratore SuperKEKB, a Tsukuba, in Giappone - è stato sviluppato un software che permette all’utente di immaginarsi all’interno della sala sperimentale che ospita il rivelatore dell’esperimento e di seguire gli elettroni e i positroni accelerati. 
A cura di Antonio Budano, INFN
          Japan Business News: Ex-TEPCO execs plead not guilty in Fukushima case      Cache   Translate Page      
Three former executives of Tokyo Electric Power Company have pleaded not guilty to professional negligence in connection with the 2011 nuclear crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant. (NHK)
          CNN Travel features the abandoned Duga Radar site near Chernobyl      Cache   Translate Page      
(Source: CNN Travel via Heath Hall) (CNN) — The peaceful untouched forest north of Ukraine’s capital, Kiev, is a perfect spot to enjoy the outdoors — save for one fact. It contains the radiation-contaminated Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, established in 1986 after the world’s worst nuclear disaster sent a wave of radiation fallout across Europe. Since […]
          A III Guerra Mundial      Cache   Translate Page      
Cerveja: Dog in the Fog
Cervejeira: Kompania Piwowarska, Poznań, Polónia

A Dog in the Fog, apesar do nome inglês que ostenta, é uma cerveja polaca, criada pela Kompania Piwowarska em 2005. Com cerca de 15 milhões de hectolitros de cerveja produzidos em 2009 este gigante polaco, detido pela SABMiller, é o maior grupo cervejeiro nacional, detendo no seu portfolio as duas marcas mais vendidas no país (Tyskie e Zubr), bem como as habituais cervejas "internacionais" do grupo: Pilsner Urquell, Peroni, Grolsch e Miller.

Esta foi, no entanto, uma cerveja de fugaz presença na Polónia. Lançada em 2005 e tendo como alvo os consumidores mais jovens tinha como características um sabor frutado e uma graduação de 5,1% ABV. Em 2007, tendo em conta os resultados pouco animadores nas vendas, a cerveja foi completamente reformulada trazendo um maior amargor e um reforço na graduação alcoólica para 5,5%. Aparentemente, este esforço não foi suficiente e a cerveja desapareceu em 2009.

É, no entanto, curioso verificar uma estratégia que muitos fabricantes de cerveja utilizam para melhor escoar o seu produto: o aumento do nível alcoólico. Existem vários casos clássicos que vão da Tuborg Royal Danish Strong Beer da minha juventude (que se bebia porque tinha 7,2%) ou à Belzebuth que, graças ao seus 13º, vendia-se mais do que uma Orval ou uma Triple Karmeliet numa casa da especialidade ali para os lados de Benfica.

É certo que uma boa cerveja não se mede pelo teor de álcool mas, olhando para o top 10 das melhores cervejas do Ratebeer, certamente podemos tirar algumas ilações: a média de graduação é de 11,7% tendo a menos alcoólica uns "meros" 9,5% ABV. Em resumo, desde que haja uma base sólida (malte e lúpulo) e bicharada adequada para a transformar, tipicamente mais álcool poderá querer dizer maior complexidade, melhor cerveja.

Isto não serve, no entanto, de explicação para a guerra em curso para o título de "cerveja mais forte do mundo". Em 1999, Jim Koch criou a Samuel Adams Millennium Ale e foi transposta a "barreira psicológica" dos 20º. Desde a Millenium que a Boston Beer Company, tem-nos dado a conhecer, através das Utopias, novos patamares na exploração do teor alcoólico possível de ser atingido, cifrando-se a versão de 2007 em 27% ABV.

Mas eis que em 2009, algures na Baviera, uma pequena cervejeira artesanal, a Schorschbräu, decide pôr em prática a velha fórmula da Eisbock de uma forma extrema. Este estilo de cerveja, reza a lenda, deve o seu nascimento ao acaso. Dois barris de Bock a fermentar passaram, por engano, o Inverno à mercê do gelo. Quando os cervejeiros provaram o seu conteúdo chegaram à conclusão que a cerveja que estava no centro do gelo era mais saborosa e forte. A explicação é simples, como a água congela mais rapidamente do que o álcool aquela parte concentrou a maioria do sabor e do álcool. Assim, graças à múltipla exposição da cerveja a este processo, a Schorschbräu Schorschbock, nasceu com 31% ABV.

Mais para o Norte, em terras normalmente mais conhecidas por outras bebidas de malte, a BrewDog, uma cervejeira artesanal muito pouco convencional em todos os aspectos, estava a ter a vida dificultada pelo governo escocês. Um dos pomos da discórdia foi a BrewDog Tokyo* uma cerveja que, com os seus 18,2º não agradou a vários iniciativas anti-álcool em curso. A resposta da BrewDog não se fez esperar e veio em duas partes: a criação da Nanny State (uma "Imperial Mild" com 1,1%) e da Tactical Nuclear Penguin, a cerveja mais forte do mundo à altura com 32º. E foi aqui que começou a guerra…

Uma pequena cervejeira italiana, a Revelation Cat, conhecida pelas suas ligações com nomes insuspeitos como a Mikkeller, De Molen ou De Proef, entra em campo com a Revelation Cat Freeze the Penguin, um "Ice Roasted Barley Wine" com 35º, decidido a congelar o pinguim escocês.

Entretanto, na Alemanha, a Schorschbräu contra-atacou com uma nova versão da Schorschbock. Resultado: a fasquia subiu para 40% ABV.

Tocados no seu orgulho, a BrewDog retaliou com a Sink the Bismarck, uma referência nada subtil ao afundamento do cruzador alemão Bismarck na 2ª Guerra Mundial. Para ajudar ao politicamente incorrecto ainda fizeram um vídeo promocional que pode ser visto em

No meio disto tudo sobrou uma Imperial IPA com 41º e alguns alemães irados que não esperam muito tempo para se desforrar. Passados 3 meses, em Maio de 2010, a 3ª versão da Schorschbock está novamente no topo. 43º é a marca a bater e desta vez com dedicatória para a Escócia: " Schorschbock 43% Vol, porque os homens da Franconia não se vestem como raparigas".

Resta-nos aguardar pelos próximos episódios desta guerra, sendo que já há boatos que apontam para o envolvimento de outra grande potência, a Bélgica. Eu, pelo meu lado, só estranho os Estados Unidos estarem tão quietos. Mais dia, menos dia, aparece aí o Tio Sam a meter ordem na Europa.

Editado originalmente em 15/06/2010 em
          Eight Years on, Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Still Poses Health Risks      Cache   Translate Page      
On March 11, we commemorate the 8th anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. The Japanese government has not figured out how to touch or test the irradiated cores in the three crippled reactors, which continue to contaminate water around the site of the melt down. The government does not know where it will put that radioactive material once it can find a way to move it.
          Cut Wasteful Spending on the Obsolete Conventional Military      Cache   Translate Page      
What possible reason could there be to increase spending on the mostly obsolete conventional military? The days of wars ending with one country marching into the capital of another are over, other than when DC invades some destitute, virtually defenseless Third World backwater. No nuclear power is going to surrender without firing its nukes. No […]
          Civil Technologist - CAP Engineering - Whitehorse, YT      Cache   Translate Page      
Performing field nuclear density compaction testing. CAP Engineering is currently seeking Civil Technologists to join our Team in performing quality control...
From Indeed - Fri, 08 Feb 2019 23:14:33 GMT - View all Whitehorse, YT jobs
          Materials Tester, Highways & Roads - WSP - Saskatoon, SK      Cache   Translate Page      
Density testing using Nuclear Gauge. Experience in the safe use and handling of nuclear gauges. WSP is one of the world's leading professional engineering...
From WSP - Thu, 14 Feb 2019 19:30:08 GMT - View all Saskatoon, SK jobs
          Technician (Medical Imaging) - University of Saskatchewan - Saskatoon, SK      Cache   Translate Page      
Radiography/fluoroscopy, ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), optical coherence tomography (OCT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), nuclear medicine... $19.73 - $23.68 an hour
From University of Saskatchewan - Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:19:30 GMT - View all Saskatoon, SK jobs
          Intern - Field Engineering Technologist (Student) - SNC-Lavalin - Saskatoon, SK      Cache   Translate Page      
Density testing in-place using a nuclear densometer; We are currently seeking an intern to join the team in May 2019 for a 16 month term from the following...
From SNC-Lavalin - Tue, 02 Oct 2018 21:21:48 GMT - View all Saskatoon, SK jobs
          Field Engineering Technician - SNC-Lavalin - Regina, SK      Cache   Translate Page      
Density testing in-place using a nuclear densometer; This position will be performing field work for heavy civil construction and transportation projects that...
From SNC-Lavalin - Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:22:20 GMT - View all Regina, SK jobs
          Engineering Physics - Professor - Polytechnique Montréal - Québec City, QC      Cache   Translate Page      
In engineering physics as well as graduate programs in engineering physics, nuclear engineering, and energy engineering....
From University Affairs - Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:30:54 GMT - View all Québec City, QC jobs
          Researcher – Nuclear Magnetic resonance - Employeur : Hydro-Québec – Centre d’excellence en électrification des transports et stockage d’énergie - Varennes, QC      Cache   Translate Page      
Phd majoring in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance or instrumental analysis. Experience in Fourier Transform InfraRed spectroscopy (FTIR) and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance...
From Indeed - Thu, 31 Jan 2019 18:44:22 GMT - View all Varennes, QC jobs
          Operator/Mechanic - Nordion - Laval, QC      Cache   Translate Page      
This position is deemed a Nuclear Energy Worker (NEW). A Nuclear Energy Worker (NEW) is defined by the Nuclear Safety and Control Act as a person who is...
From Nordion - Tue, 08 Jan 2019 21:41:34 GMT - View all Laval, QC jobs
          Manager, Medical Imaging, Nuclear Medecine, Cardiology, Cardiac Catherization and Neurophysiology - Centre universitaire de santé McGill - Montréal, QC      Cache   Translate Page      
These activities include general X-ray, fluoroscopy, bone densitometry, ultrasound, CT Scan, MRI, angiography/ interventional radiology, nuclear medicine,... $73,417 - $95,090 a year
From Centre universitaire de santé McGill - Fri, 08 Mar 2019 21:28:52 GMT - View all Montréal, QC jobs
          Manager, Medical Imaging, Nuclear Medecine, Cardiology, Cardiac Catherization and Neurophysiology - McGill University Health Centre - Montréal, QC      Cache   Translate Page      
Manager, Medical Imaging, Nuclear Medecine, Cardiology, Cardiac Catherization and Neurophysiology. These activities include general X-ray, fluoroscopy, bone...
From McGill University Health Centre - Wed, 27 Feb 2019 19:56:30 GMT - View all Montréal, QC jobs
          RussiaGate As Organised Distraction      Cache   Translate Page      

Authored by Prof. Oliver Boyd-Barrett, via Organisation for Propaganda Studies,

For over two years RussiaGate has accounted for a substantial proportion of all mainstream US media political journalism and, because US media have significant agenda-setting propulsion, of global media coverage as well. The timing has been catastrophic.

The Trump Administration has shredded environmental protections, jettisoned nuclear agreements, exacerbated tensions with US rivals, and pandered to the rich.

In place of sustained media attention to the end of the human species from global warming, its even more imminent demise in nuclear warfare, or the further evisceration of democratic discourse in a society riven by historically unprecedented wealth inequalities and unbridled capitalistic greed, corporate media suffocate their publics with a puerile narrative of alleged collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.

The RussiaGate discourse is profoundly mendacious and hypocritical. It presumes that the US is a State whose electoral system enjoys a high degree of public trust and security. Nothing could be further from the truth. The US democratic system is deeply entrenched in a dystopian two-party system dominated by the rich and largely answerable to corporate oligopolies; it is ideologically beholden to the values of extreme capitalism and imperialist domination. Problems with the US electoral system and media are extensive and well documented.

US electoral procedures are profoundly compromised by an electoral college that detaches votes counted from votes that count. The composition of electoral districts have been gerrymandered to minimize the possibility of electoral surprises. Voting is dependent on easily hackable corporate-manufactured electronic voting systems.

Right-wing administrations reach into a tool-box of voter-suppression tactics that run the gamut from minimizing available voting centers and voting machines through to excessive voter identification requirements and the elimination of swathes of the voting lists (e.g. groups such as people who have committed felonies or people whose names are similar to those of felons, or people who have not voted in previous elections).

Even the results of campaigns are corrupted when outgoing regimes abuse their remaining weeks in power to push through regulations or legislation that will scuttle the efforts of their successors.

Democratic theory presupposes the formal equivalence of voice in the battlefield of ideas. Nothing could be further from the reality of the US “democratic” system in which a small number of powerful interests enjoy ear-splitting megaphonic advantage on the basis of often anonymous “dark” money donations filtered through SuperPacs and their ilk, operating outside the confines of (the somewhat more transparently monitored) ten-week electoral campaigns.

Regarding media, democratic theory presupposes a public communications infrastructure that facilities the free and open exchange of ideas. No such infrastructure exists.  Mainstream media are owned and controlled by a small number of large, multi-media and multi-industrial conglomerates that lie at the very heart of US oligopoly capitalism and much of whose advertising revenue and content is furnished from other conglomerates.

The inability of mainstream media to sustain an information environment that can encompass histories, perspectives and vocabularies that are free of the shackles of US plutocratic self-regard is also well documented.

Current US media coverage of the US-gestated crisis in Venezuela is a case in point. The much celebrated revolutionary potential of social media is illusory. The principal suppliers of social media architecture are even more corporatized than their legacy predecessors. They depend not just on corporate advertising but on the sale of big data that they pilfer from users and sell to corporate and political propagandists often for non-transparent AI-assisted micro-targeting during ‘persuasion’ campaigns.

Like their legacy counterparts, social media are imbricated within, collaborate with, and are vulnerable to the machinations of the military-industry-surveillance establishment. So-called election meddling across the world has been an outstanding feature of the exploitation of social and legacy media by companies linked to political, defense and intelligence such as – but by no means limited to – the former Cambridge Analytica and its British parent SCL.

Against this backdrop of electoral and media failures, it makes little sense to elevate discussion of and attention to the alleged social media activities of, say, Russia’s Internet Research Agency. Attention is being directed away from substantial, and substantiated, problems and onto trivial, and unsubstantiated, problems.

Moreover, in a climate of manufactured McCarthyite hysteria, RussiaGate further presupposes that any communication between a presidential campaign and Russia is in itself a deplorable thing. Even if one were to confine this conversation only to communication between ruling oligarchs of both the US and Russia, however, the opposite would surely be the case. This is not simply because of the benefits that accrue from a broader understanding of the world, identification of shared interests and opportunities, and their promise for peaceful relations.

real politik analysis might advise the insertion of wedges between China and Russia so as to head off the perceived threat to the USA of a hybrid big-power control over a region of the world that has long been considered indispensable for truly global hegemony.

Even if we address RussiaGate as a problem worthy of our attention, the evidentiary basis for the major claims is weak. The ultimate unfolding of RussiaGate discourse now awaits the much-anticipated report of Special Counsel and former FBI director Robert Mueller. Mueller’s indictments and investigations have to date implicated several individuals for activities that in some cases have no connection whatsoever to the 2016 Presidential campaign.  In some other instances they appear to have been more about lies and obstructions to his investigation rather than material illegal acts, or amount to charges that are unlikely ever to be contested in a court of law.

The investigation itself is traceable back to two significant but extremely problematic reports made public in January 2017. One was the “Steele dossier” by former MI6 officer Christopher Steele. This is principally of interest for its largely unsupported allegations that in some sense or another Trump was in cahoots with Russia. Steele’s company, Orbis, was commissioned to write the report by Fusion GPS which in turn was contracted by attorneys working for the Democratic National Campaign.

Passage of earlier drafts of the Steele report through sources close to British intelligence, and accounts by Trump adviser George Papadopoulos concerning conversations he had concerning possible Russian possession of Clinton emails with a character who may as likely have been a British as a Russian spy, were instrumental in stimulating FBI interest in and spying on the Trump campaign.

There are indirect links between Christopher Steele, another former MI6 agent, Pablo Miller (who also worked for Orbis) and Sergei Skripal, a Russian agent who had been recruited as informer to MI6 by Miller and who was the target of an attempted assassination in 2018. This event has occasioned controversial, not to say highly implausible and mischievous British government claims and accusations against Russia.

The  most significant matter raised by a second report, issued by the Intelligence Community Assessment and representing the conclusions of a small team picked from the Director of Intelligence office, CIA, FBI and NSA, was its claim that Russian intelligence was responsible for the hacking of the computer systems of the DNC and its chairman John Podesta in summer 2016 and that the hacked documents had been passed to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. No evidence for this was supplied.

Although the hacking allegations have become largely uncontested articles of faith in the RussiaGate discourse they are significantly reliant on the problematic findings of a small private company hired by the DNC. There is also robust evidence that the documents may have been leaked rather than hacked, and by US-based sources.

The fact that the documents revealed that the DNC, a supposedly neutral agent in the primary campaign, had in fact been biased in favor of the candidature of Hillary Clinton, and that Clinton’s private statements to industry were not in keeping with her public positions, has long been obscured in media memory in favor a preferred narrative of Russian villainy.

Why then does the RussiaGate discourse have so much traction? Who benefits?

First, RussiaGate serves the interest of a (1)corrupted Democratic Party, whose biased and arguably incompetent campaign management lost it the 2016 election, in alliance with with (2)powerful factions of the US industrial-military-surveillance establishment that for the past 19 years, through NATO and other malleable international agencies, has sought to undermine Putin’s leadership, dismember Russia and the Russian Federation (undoubtedly for the benefit of western capital) and, more latterly, further contain China in a perpetual and titanic struggle for the heart of EurAsia.

In so far as Trump had indicated (for whatever reasons) in the course of his campaign that he disagreed with at least some aspects of this long-term strategy, he came to be viewed as unreliable by the US security state. While serving the immediate purpose of containing Trump, US accusations of Russian meddling in US elections were farcical in the context of a well-chronicled history of US “meddling” in the elections and politics of nations for over 100 years. This meddling across  all hemispheres has included the staging of coups, invasions and occupations on false pretext in addition to numerous instances of “color revolution” strategies involving the financing of opposition parties and provoking uprisings, frequently coupled with economic warfare (sanctions).

A further beneficiary (3)is the sum of all those interests that favor a narrowing of public expression to a framework supportive of neoliberal imperialism. Paradoxically exploiting the moral panic associated with both Trump’s plaintive wailing about “fake news” whenever mainstream media coverage is critical of him, and social media embarrassment over exposure of their big data sales to powerful corporate customers, these interests have called for more regulation of, as well as self-censorship by, social media.

Social media responses increasingly involve more restrictive algorithms and what are often partisan “fact-checkers” (illustrated by Facebook financial support for and dependence on the pro-NATO “think tank,” the Atlantic Council). The net impact has been devastating for many information organizations in the arena of social media whose only “sin” is analysis and opinion that runs counter to elite neoliberal propaganda. The standard justification of such attacks on free expression is to insinuate ties to Russia and/or to terrorism.

Given these heavy handed and censorious responses by powerful actors, it would appear perhaps that the RussiaGate narrative is increasingly implausible to many and the only hope now for its proponents is to stifle questioning. These are dark days indeed for democracy.

          La Francia mette un tetto al nucleare: dal 75 al 50% della produzione di energia entro il 2025      Cache   Translate Page      

Nucleare, adieu, la Francia volta pagina. Riduce il nucleare e punta sull'auto elettrica. La sorprendente svolta francese è stata annunciata a sorpresa da Segolène Royal, attuale ministro dell'Ambiente, ex moglie del presidente francese François Hollande ed ex sfidante all'Eliseo per il partito socialista contro Nicolas Sarkozy.
La Francia vuole mettere un "tetto" alla produzione di energia atomica, in cui è leader in Europa, riducendolo dall'attaule 75% al 50% entro il 2025.
Il governo francese ha presentato il ddl sulla transizione energetica, descritto da Hollande come «uno dei più importanti del quinquennato», dopo mesi di intensi dibattiti, in particolare con gli ambientalisti.
Un piano (i francesi amano i progetti di lungo termine che prevedono tutto fin nel dettaglio) che rappresenta «una grande sfida per il Paese» e «l'occasione di abbassare la bolletta energetica» della Francia, ha sottolineato il ministro socialista per l'Ambiente, Segolène Royal, al termine di un consiglio dei ministri. Sarà «l'occasione di valorizzare nuove tecnologie per l'efficienza energetica e di migliorare la competitività delle imprese», ha affermato in conferenza stampa.

Uno dei punti più controversi è stato quello della governance sul nucleare (in mano al colosso pubblico Edf), con gli ambientalisti che volevano garanzie concrete sul fatto che lo stato sia convincente nel "pilotare" una sua progressiva riduzione nel "mix" energetico nazionale francese. L'obiettivo è ridurre la componente di nucleare alla metà della produzione di elettricità nel 2025 rispetto all'attuale 75%, numeri che hanno reso la Francia uno dei Paesi al mondo più dipendenti da questo tipo di energia che alcuni paesi vicini, su tutti la Germania, stanno per abbandonare dopo le pressioni dei Verdi in seguito all'incidente alla centrale nucleare giapponese di Fukushima. Un incidente che ha convinto anche la cancelliera Merkel ad abbandonare il nucleare e a puntare sulle rinnovabili. Anche l'Italia ha fatto progressi enormi sulle rinnovabili, al punto che recentemente più della metà della produzione italiana è stata prodotta dalle rinnovabili (energia idroelettrica, eolico, solare).
Il disegno di legge di Parigi è composto da 80 articoli che spaziano dall'auto elettrica alla ristrutturazione di edifici, passando per l'inquinamento dell'aria e lo sviluppo delle energie rinnovabili. Tra le misure principali: un «assegno energetico» per le famiglie più povere, l'obbligo di rinnovamento energetico in caso di ristrutturazione, nuovi incentivi fiscali (tra cui 10mila euro a chi passa dal diesel all'auto elettrica) o ancora l'ambizione di installare sette milioni di punti di ricarica per veicoli elettrici entro il 2030. Il settore pubblico sarebbe impegnato ad acquistare auto elettriche al 50% dei nuovi acquisti di auto in caso di rinnovamento della flotta. La Renault, uno dei due costruttori di auto francesi con una quota in mano allo Stato, ha pesantemente investito nella costruzione di auto elettriche.
Il testo di legge si prefigge obiettivi ambiziosi: dimezzamento del consumo energetico finale nel 2050 in rapporto al 2012, riduzione del 30% nel 2030 del consumo delle energie fossili in rapporto al 2012 o ancora una parte di energie rinnovabili nel consumo finale energetico del 32 per cento nel 2030, ha indicato l'entourage del ministro dell'Ambiente Segolène Royal.

Il disegno di legge è all'inizio di un lungo iter legislativo che in Parlamento troverà numerosi ostacoli, visto che l'uso del nucleare ha garantito alle imprese transalpine e alle famiglie prezzi dell'energia altamente competitivi in Europa.
           Comment on The AI Revolution: Our Immortality or Extinction by mondosinistro       Cache   Translate Page      
To think that having infinite information processing capability (a subset of which, we'll assume, is ASI) confers infinite power is exactly how I would expect a person who is highly involved with IT to think. Of course, it pleases us to see things this way. The conditions of today's world are such that it certainly tends to look as if information can get you anything you want. But it isn't necessarily so. It's not hard to think of things that are not possible, no matter how much intelligence you have. You cannot predict the weather a month in advance. You cannot travel faster than light (as far as we know). You cannot travel to the Earth's core. You cannot predict what the stock market will do, in detail, next week. You cannot make a nuclear bomb (or a power reactor) the size of an Oreo. The laws of Nature set limits that IT cannot violate just by flipping more logic gates. In fact, there may be limits on intelligence itself. I've never heard anyone suggest this, but we don't know that there are no limits. At a certain level of intelligence, a sentient being may be able to think every kind of thought that can be thought, and from there it's only a question of speed, reliability, and other conventional attributes of performance. A somewhat parallel matter that also strikes me as a geek conceit is the nightmare scenario of "grey goo." Evolution has been honing life for billions of years, constantly trying vast numbers of experiments. And in all that time, it has not even gone am appreciable distance toward a species that can eat EVERYTHING. On the contrary, every form of life is adapted to a specific range of environments. It is by no means clear that creating a Grey Goo is possible at all. Am I suggesting that everything is all right, and we can just relax and proceed with BAU? Not at all. But let's try to map out the possibility space with some careful analysis, rather than getting caught up in hysteria.
          New airport terminal to feature historic plane at Orlando Sanford International Airport      Cache   Translate Page      

A piece of history was brought back to life and is set to be on permanent display at the Orlando Sanford International Airport. 

Crews spent hours to carefully move and place a restored PV-1 Ventura plane. The twin-engine bomber will be housed and put on display inside the airport's newest terminal when it opens. 

"It was the first plane based here after the commissioning of the base," said Orlando Sanford International Airport Executive Vice PResident and Chief Operating Officer George Speak."This is a moment for us to honor the aircraft and the people who were based here during World War II." 


{"author_name":"Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB)","author_url":"","provider_url":"","provider_name":"Facebook","success":true,"height":281,"html":"&#lt;div id=\"fb-root\"&#gt;&#lt;/div&#gt;\n&#lt;script async=\"1\" defer=\"1\" crossorigin=\"anonymous\" src=\"\"&#gt;&#lt;/script&#gt;&#lt;div class=\"fb-video\" data-href=\"[0]=68.ARBApjYCcuy-NuhvFYwj25bNm-xCiaeDVszRhqikZkVJ_URR6-LKN4zfbtlLUkOTmixILGFkn64Z-wBm4Q2qt1YZKHhNTt5AbUoe-51OksFlgCJwVvLItT-s0wOxdxeqCActcGWGyT4j17v_eXuVxdmYZLWIPbaqtz3u4ydFO9HiBz4JQpQcKhNacfzVJ7q1iPlHt-90_WNSESZJD9VjJPTTzubp1QYBvsFLperCr4_Xq-RmwkxPZtt4JhNS6p4zpXuzBbwc99OtZwWe8VcsAJljI5VgEgohQcvoNV_APkNnhga-L_zJwXki83WaKuM0y4JNgvzE4vnop7bJ9X-oday8\"&#gt;&#lt;blockquote cite=\"\" class=\"fb-xfbml-parse-ignore\"&#gt;&#lt;a href=\"\"&#gt;&#lt;/a&#gt;&#lt;p&#gt;The PV1 Ventura WW 2 Bomber getting ready to be lifted into position on a ledge inside the new terminal!&#lt;/p&#gt;Posted by &#lt;a href=\"\"&#gt;Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB)&#lt;/a&#gt; on Tuesday, March 12, 2019&#lt;/blockquote&#gt;&#lt;/div&#gt;","type":"video","version":"1.0","url":"","width":500}


"There are other airports with airplanes," Speake said. "This will just be the largest we believe in the world." 

The plane is on loan from the U.S. Navy Aviation Museum and needed a little work. 

"It was billed as an easy restoration," Speake said. "That was in 2003 and here we are 15 years later, 16 years later and it's done." 

Bob Curboy started on the restoration committee in his 70s and is now in his 90s. 

"It was kind of sad when we [first] saw it here because of corrosion over many years," Curboy said. "At the end of 15 years, it's beautiful." 

Airport leaders hope to have a dedication ceremony for the plane and new terminal in about nine months. 

The airport also put on display and restored a RA-5C Vigilante, which was initially designed as a nuclear bomber and was the last aircraft to operate at NAS Sanford. 

To learn more about the restoration efforts, click here

          If We Blow Up an Asteroid, It Might Put Itself Back Together      Cache   Translate Page      
By Robin George Andrews Faced with the prospect of a sizable asteroid heading toward Earth and causing doomsday, humanity has come up with various responses. Hollywood may reckon that the best way to destroy an errant space rock is with nuclear weapons. This is rarely the preferred option of experts, but using some sort of spacecraft system …
          Time Line - Invading Iraq for Oil and Power      Cache   Translate Page      

Healing from Unjust War

They wanted war and lied to have it – The Mother Jones Time Line

January 20, 2001  - George W. Bush is Inagurated as President of the United States. We now know he was not legally elected.
February 3, 2001 - National Security Council (NSC) directed NSC staff to cooperate fully with the Energy Task Force as it considered the “melding” of two seemingly unrelated areas of policy:

The review of operational policies towards rogue states,” such as Iraq, and “actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields”.
It is confirmed that these oil companies attending the meeting.  Officials from Exxon Mobil Corp., Conoco (before its merger with Phillips), Shell Oil Co. and BP America Inc. From:  Washingtons Blog and Washington Post.

Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts  Part One – Judicial Watch
Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts Part Two –  Judicial Watch

CNN interviews former Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neill, who says, "From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go," O'Neill told CBS, according to excerpts released Saturday by the network. "For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap."

September 11, 2001 – The World Trade Center in NY and the Pentagon are hit, sending shock waves around the Globe.  The world reaches out to American in sympathy. 

Published: Wednesday May 2, 2007

September 28, 2001 – Osama ben Laden catagorically denies having any part of the attack on NY and the Pentagon in an interview published in Ummat, a Pakistani daily published in Karachi on September 28, 2001. The interview was translated into English by the BBC World Monitoring Service and made public on September 29, 2001. 
During the interview ben Laden said, “I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people.  From: Global Research

Such a practice is forbidden ever in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children, and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel.”

October 7, 2001- The United States and a coalition force launch Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.   which, under Taliban control, had provided a safe haven for Osama bin Laden while he and other al-Qaeda leaders plotted attacks against the Western world. President Bush declares a war on terrorism and vows to hold states responsible for harboring terrorist organizations.4

October 8, 2001 - The Office of Homeland Security, later to become the Department of Homeland Security, is established.

October 9, 2001 - Letters containing anthrax were sent to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle. 1   Both senators had been attempting to slow the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act. Just seven days before the incident, Leahy accused the Bush administration of reneging on an agreement on the bill. 2   9/11 Research   

October 26, 2001 – Patriot Act - President Bush signs into law the USA Patriot Act, which greatly expands domestic law enforcement capacity to conduct surveillance and wiretaps, increases presidential powers during a terrorist attack and tightens federal oversight of financial activities. Concerns soon arise over restriction of civil liberties.

November 8, 2001 - The New York Times and the PBS program “Frontline” report that an Iraqi defector, an army general, claims that the Iraqi military trained Arab fighters to hijack airplanes. These claims could not be substantiated and one of the defectors is later exposed by Mother Jones to be using a false identity. 

December 3, 2001 – Bush denounces Saddam Hussein as evil.

December 5, 2001 - Interim government placed in Afghanistan

December 9, 2001 The city of Kandaharis surrendered by the Taliban.  Osama ben Laden is traced to the Tora Bora caves. Al-Qaeda leaders continue hiding in the mountains, 

August 26, 2002 -  Dick Cheney publicly states, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.”
September 16, 2002 - Iraq agrees unconditionally to the return of inspectors. CNN

September 19, 2002 - Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri delivers a letter to the United Nations from Saddam Hussein stating that Iraq has no chemical, nuclear or biological weapons. CNN

October 1, 2002 - The United Nations and Iraq agree on terms they say are consistent with existing U.N. resolutions. The United States threatens to veto unless a U.S. resolution is approved that would allow military action for non-compliance by Iraq. CNN

November 8, 2002 - The U.N. Security Council passes Resolution 1441. CNN

November 13, 2002 - Iraq delivers a letter to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, accepting the terms set forth in resolution 1441. CNN

November 27, 2002 - Inspections resume in Iraq. CNN

December 7, 2002 - Iraq submits a 12,000 page report on its WMD programs. CNN

January 16, 2003 - Inspectors discover 12 chemical warheads, 11 of them empty, at the Ukhaider ammunition storage area. CNN

January 20, 2003 - After two days of negotiation, Hans Blix, Mohamed ElBaradei, and Iraqi officials reach an agreement about Iraqi cooperation and concessions regarding the inspections. CNN

February 5, 2003 -Secretary of State Colin Powell briefs the U.N. Security Council on inspections. He presents evidence that the United States says proves Iraq has misled inspectors and hid proscribed weapons and equipment. CNN

February 14, 2003 -Blix and ElBaradei brief the U.N. Security Council. Blix reports that the inspectors have not yet found any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Blix also reports that Iraq is in violation of U.N. resolutions concerning its al Samoud 2 missile program. CNN

February 19, 2003 - Inspectors visit the Ibn al Haytham factory northwest of Baghdad and tag 32 al Samoud II missiles. CNN

February 27, 2003 -Iraq agrees to destroy the country's al Samoud II missile stock. However, the letter doesn't specify a date that the missile destruction will begin.

March 10, 2003 - It is revealed that Iraq possesses drone aircraft that could have been used to launch a chemical or biological attack against other countries. The plane has a wingspan of 24 feet five inches, which suggests that it could fly further than 150km/93 miles, which is the limit imposed by U.N. resolutions.

March 16, 2003 – Dick Cheney publicly states,  “And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.”  Statement made just three days before the invasion.
March 18, 2003 - Inspectors withdraw from Iraq.

March 20, 2003 – Bush announces the start of a war against Iraq. Allied forces begin the campaign with strikes on military targets, including an attempt to kill Saddam Hussein.

April 9, 2003 - Saddam Hussein's rule collapses in a matter of hours as much of Baghdad comes under American control. Across much of the capital, Iraqis take to the streets to topple statues of Mr. Hussein, loot government ministries and interrogation centers, and give a cheering, often tearful welcome to advancing American troops. 

Published: Wednesday May 2, 2007
According to NBC's chief Pentagon correspondent, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that his "interest is to hit Saddam Hussein" just hours after the attacks on September 11, 2001, "even though all indications pointed at al-Qaida as the guilty party," a Rhode Island newspaper reports.
At the annual Business Expo at the Rhode Island Convention Center Tuesday, NBC's Jim Miklaszewski "advanced a theme garnering attention since former CIA director George J. Tenet made his public revelations last week," writes Tom Mooney for the Providence Journal.
"Some things are right on the mark, when he says the Bush administration appeared predisposed to attack Iraq," Miklaszewski says of Tenet's book At the Center of the Storm.”

Quote from Dick Cheney from RightWeb  - “During the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, for example, he said that there was “no doubt” that the Saddam Hussein regime had “weapons of mass destruction” and predicted that Iraqis would greet U.S. troops as “liberators.” In 2005, Cheney insisted that the Iraqi insurgency was in its final stages. Faced with criticism for his mistaken views, Cheney has been unrepentant, arguing in July 2014: “I look back on it now, [the invasion of Iraq] was absolutely the right thing to do.”[1]

Letter from Washington   February 16, 2004 Issue

What did the Vice-President do for Halliburton?
By Jane Mayer
The list of cronies and how they used war for their own benefit is frightening.  The asserted, self-serving meme that America is, according to daughter, Elizabeth Cheney, “We know that America is the exceptional nation, and that there is no substitute for American leadership around the world.”[4]  is a chilling reminder of the  constructed reality these people have built, which allows them to ignore the swimming pools of blood draining from their victims. 

As the Invasion forces from America left, for what proved to be a temporary hiatus, the oil companies who had signed on with Cheney before 9/11 remained to steal the natural resource of this devestated nation.  Aljezeera - Western oil firms remain as US exits Iraq  by Dahr Jamail

          Time Line - Healing from Unjust War      Cache   Translate Page      

They wanted war and lied to have it – The Mother Jones Time Line

January 20, 2001  - George W. Bush is Inagurated as President of the United States. We now know he was not legally elected.
February 3, 2001 - National Security Council (NSC) directed NSC staff to cooperate fully with the Energy Task Force as it considered the “melding” of two seemingly unrelated areas of policy:

The review of operational policies towards rogue states,” such as Iraq, and “actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields”.
It is confirmed that these oil companies attending the meeting.  Officials from Exxon Mobil Corp., Conoco (before its merger with Phillips), Shell Oil Co. and BP America Inc. From:  Washingtons Blog and Washington Post.

Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts  Part One – Judicial Watch
Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts Part Two –  Judicial Watch

CNN interviews former Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neill, who says, "From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go," O'Neill told CBS, according to excerpts released Saturday by the network. "For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap."

September 11, 2001 – The World Trade Center in NY and the Pentagon are hit, sending shock waves around the Globe.  The world reaches out to American in sympathy. 

Published: Wednesday May 2, 2007

September 28, 2001 – Osama ben Laden catagorically denies having any part of the attack on NY and the Pentagon in an interview published in Ummat, a Pakistani daily published in Karachi on September 28, 2001. The interview was translated into English by the BBC World Monitoring Service and made public on September 29, 2001. 

During the interview ben Laden said, “I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people.  From: Global Research

Such a practice is forbidden ever in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children, and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel.”

October 7, 2001- The United States and a coalition force launch Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.   which, under Taliban control, had provided a safe haven for Osama bin Laden while he and other al-Qaeda leaders plotted attacks against the Western world. President Bush declares a war on terrorism and vows to hold states responsible for harboring terrorist organizations.4

October 8, 2001 - The Office of Homeland Security, later to become the Department of Homeland Security, is established.

October 9, 2001 - Letters containing anthrax were sent to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle. 1   Both senators had been attempting to slow the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act. Just seven days before the incident, Leahy accused the Bush administration of reneging on an agreement on the bill. 2   9/11 Research   

October 26, 2001 – Patriot Act - President Bush signs into law the USA Patriot Act, which greatly expands domestic law enforcement capacity to conduct surveillance and wiretaps, increases presidential powers during a terrorist attack and tightens federal oversight of financial activities. Concerns soon arise over restriction of civil liberties.

November 8, 2001 - The New York Times and the PBS program “Frontline” report that an Iraqi defector, an army general, claims that the Iraqi military trained Arab fighters to hijack airplanes. These claims could not be substantiated and one of the defectors is later exposed by Mother Jones to be using a false identity. 

December 3, 2001 – Bush denounces Saddam Hussein as evil.

December 5, 2001 - Interim government placed in Afghanistan

December 9, 2001 The city of Kandaharis surrendered by the Taliban.  Osama ben Laden is traced to the Tora Bora caves. Al-Qaeda leaders continue hiding in the mountains, 
April 4, 2002 - “I made up my mind that Saddam needs to go.” - Bush
April 18, 2002 - Democratically elected Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is removed from power in a military coup. The Bush Administration blames Chavez for his own downfall and recognizes the interim government of businessman Pedro Carmona. Officials from the Organization of American States tell the London Observer that the United States sanctioned the coup and that Carmona and his fellow plotters had been received at the White House by Bush's key Latin America policy maker. Carmona dissolves the Venezuelan congress and suspends the constitution. Governments across the Western Hemisphere condemn the coup. Chavez is reinstalled 48 hours later. Mother Jones Time Line

August 26, 2002 -  Dick Cheney publicly states, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.”
September 16, 2002 - Iraq agrees unconditionally to the return of inspectors. CNN

September 19, 2002 - Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri delivers a letter to the United Nations from Saddam Hussein stating that Iraq has no chemical, nuclear or biological weapons. CNN

October 1, 2002 - The United Nations and Iraq agree on terms they say are consistent with existing U.N. resolutions. The United States threatens to veto unless a U.S. resolution is approved that would allow military action for non-compliance by Iraq. CNN

November 1, 2002 - High-level CIA operatives stationed in the Middle East gather in London for a secret meeting. They are told war is inevitable, and just a few months away, according to James Risen's book, "State of War." Lie by Lie: The Mother Jones Iraq War Timeline

November 8, 2002 - The U.N. Security Council passes Resolution 1441. CNN

November 9, 2002 – An ordinary American becomes aware of events which point to a conspiracy for invasion.  “Articles appeared from NBCNewsthrough Associated Press, in the Daily Mail, and Washington Post,  reporting offers from Saddam Hussein to leave Iraq before the invasion began either weeks before the date of the invasion or within days of the beginning of hostilities. This is followed by a demand issued by George Bush that Saddam and his sons leave within 48 hours before the scheduled invasion. A letter to this effect was issued from the White House and remains online today.
If Saddam was willing to leave and be paid to do so we should have let him or just left him alone.  One Billion dollars is much less than we are in the hole for today. 
War is expensive in every way imaginable. Paying Saddam to leave struck me as the better choice. Then no war would be necessary and we could return to focusing on our own country and the many problems confronting us. Then,  I trusted the good judgement of those in government to see this. 
Saddam Hussein would leave, being paid as he exited. But I also expected an announcement which never came. This was an investigation of Bill and Hillary Clinton for entering into a dialog with Saddam the previous November and telling him no invasion was seriously planned. It was clear we were getting ready for war – why would the Clintons lie?
I saw the correspondence between Saddam and the Clintons only partially, but these included one or two of the ongoing emails between traveling from Sidney Blumenthal, to his son Max, and then to Uday Hussein. I was told by the person who had hacked Blumenthal's computer the previous summer that Saddam was negotiating through this backdoor so he could leave Iraq and be paid for doing so. The hacker was my daughter.  I found out when she forwarded me a draft chapter of the book Blumenthal was then writing.  I advised her to stop - but she felt justified because Blumenthal had done the same to her earlier.  To told her to stop sending me his correspondence and the draft chapters of Sidney's book, "Clinton's War."
As for Saddam, leaving sounded like his best option.  But why would the Clintons tell him no invasion was imminent? You could tell it was going to happen.
As soon as I had realized what was happening, that shocking day in November, 2002, I informed someone well known to me at the CIA expecting any necessary action would be taken. The Clintons with Blumenthal, I believed, were acting without the knowledge of the White House.
Now, it appeared I had been very mistaken in trusting anyone within the U.S. Government.
It now appears this unexpected breech in a confidential back door had revealed information already well known to the Bush Administration. The assurances delivered by the Clinton via the Blumenthals, father and son, were orchestrated to lull Saddam into believing a deal had been cut, apparently. The only problem was the existence of a few people who had blundered into the scene playing out. That would be myself, the hacker-daughter, and two other people we had trusted with the information.
Now, we know the Bushes and Clintons were friendly after the end of the Clinton Administration. Hillary was receiving generous donations from Bush's 'Associates,'   If Saddam thought they had the power to negotiate he probably had reasons for believing this was authorized.
The stories about Saddam leaving and being paid were cover to stall any statement by Saddam, inconvenient to the Bush Administration and overwhelm any possible action on his part before the invasion began.
This is why these four additional names are included.  If they helped Bush they are also guilty.” 

November 13, 2002 - Iraq delivers a letter to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, accepting the terms set forth in resolution 1441. CNN

November 27, 2002 - Inspections resume in Iraq. CNN

December 7, 2002 - Iraq submits a 12,000 page report on its WMD programs. CNN

January 16, 2003 - Inspectors discover 12 chemical warheads, 11 of them empty, at the Ukhaider ammunition storage area. CNN

January 20, 2003 - After two days of negotiation, Hans Blix, Mohamed ElBaradei, and Iraqi officials reach an agreement about Iraqi cooperation and concessions regarding the inspections. CNN

February 5, 2003 - Secretary of State Colin Powell briefs the U.N. Security Council on inspections. He presents evidence that the United States says proves Iraq has misled inspectors and hid proscribed weapons and equipment. CNN

February 14, 2003 - Blix and ElBaradei brief the U.N. Security Council. Blix reports that the inspectors have not yet found any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Blix also reports that Iraq is in violation of U.N. resolutions concerning its al Samoud 2 missile program. CNN

February 19, 2003 - Inspectors visit the Ibn al Haytham factory northwest of Baghdad and tag 32 al Samoud II missiles. CNN

February 27, 2003 - Iraq agrees to destroy the country's al Samoud II missile stock. However, the letter doesn't specify a date that the missile destruction will begin.

March 10, 2003 - It is revealed that Iraq possesses drone aircraft that could have been used to launch a chemical or biological attack against other countries. The plane has a wingspan of 24 feet five inches, which suggests that it could fly further than 150km/93 miles, which is the limit imposed by U.N. resolutions.

March 16, 2003 – Dick Cheney publicly states,  “And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.”  Statement made just three days before the invasion.
March 18, 2003 - Inspectors withdraw from Iraq.

March 20, 2003 – Bush announces the start of a war against Iraq. Allied forces begin the campaign with strikes on military targets, including an attempt to kill Saddam Hussein.

April 9, 2003 - Saddam Hussein's rule collapses in a matter of hours as much of Baghdad comes under American control. Across much of the capital, Iraqis take to the streets to topple statues of Mr. Hussein, loot government ministries and interrogation centers, and give a cheering, often tearful welcome to advancing American troops. 

Published: Wednesday May 2, 2007
“According to NBC's chief Pentagon correspondent, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that his "interest is to hit Saddam Hussein" just hours after the attacks on September 11, 2001, "even though all indications pointed at al-Qaida as the guilty party," a Rhode Island newspaper reports.
At the annual Business Expo at the Rhode Island Convention Center Tuesday, NBC's Jim Miklaszewski "advanced a theme garnering attention since former CIA director George J. Tenet made his public revelations last week," writes Tom Mooney for the Providence Journal.
"Some things are right on the mark, when he says the Bush administration appeared predisposed to attack Iraq," Miklaszewski says of Tenet's book At the Center of the Storm.”

Quote from Dick Cheney from RightWeb  - “During the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, for example, he said that there was “no doubt” that the Saddam Hussein regime had “weapons of mass destruction” and predicted that Iraqis would greet U.S. troops as “liberators.” In 2005, Cheney insisted that the Iraqi insurgency was in its final stages. Faced with criticism for his mistaken views, Cheney has been unrepentant, arguing in July 2014: “I look back on it now, [the invasion of Iraq] was absolutely the right thing to do.”[1]

Letter from Washington   February 16, 2004 Issue

What did the Vice-President do for Halliburton?
By Jane Mayer
The list of cronies and how they used war for their own benefit is frightening.  The asserted, self-serving meme that America is, according to daughter, Elizabeth Cheney, “We know that America is the exceptional nation, and that there is no substitute for American leadership around the world.”[4]  is a chilling reminder of the  constructed reality these people have built, which allows them to ignore the swimming pools of blood draining from their victims. 

As the Invasion forces from America left, for what proved to be a temporary hiatus, the oil companies who had signed on with Cheney before 9/11 remained to steal the natural resource of this devestated nation.  Aljezeera - Western oil firms remain as US exits Iraq

          In 1959 Dad took me to hear something he thought was important.      Cache   Translate Page      
He was right.  Dr. Arthur F. Pillsbury, my father, was a life-long Conservative who understood the problems we still face today with pollution, water, air and land.  Dad was named to the first EPA in 1969.

This is a transcription of this speech made for the convenience of readers and researchers. A copy of the text of this speech exists in the Senate Speech file of the John F. Kennedy Pre-Presidential Papers here at the John F. Kennedy Library.
No change in a fast-changing world presents a greater challenge 2– no problem in a world full of problems calls for greater leadership and vision – than the control of nuclear weapons, the utter destruction which would result from their use in war, and the radioactive pollution of our atmosphere by their continued testing in peace-time.
It is not a simple problem with simple answers. The experts disagree – the evidence is in conflict – the obstacles to an international solution are large and many. But the issue of nuclear tests and their effects is one which should be discussed in the coming months – not as a purely partisan matter, but as one of the great issues on the American scene.
It was well, therefore, that this issue was raised last Sunday in a constructive way by the Governor of New York. His statement contributed to the dialogue on this basic issue – it represented the position of a leading figure in the Republican Party – and he did not attempt to evade the question. So I commend Governor Rockefeller for stating his views, and I hope they will be considered and debated by interested citizens everywhere.
But I must also express my own emphatic disagreement with his statement, which called for this country to resume nuclear test explosions. Such a proposal, it seems to me, is unwise when it is suggested just prior to the reopening of negotiations with the British and Russians at Geneva on this very question. It is damaging to the American image abroad at a time when the Russians have unilaterally suspended their testing and the peoples of the world are fearful of continued fall-out.  And, while Mr. Rockefeller did suggest that the testing take place underground to prevent fall-out, he also – according to press reports – “discounted” the harmful effects of fall-out – which I am unwilling to do.
While many competent scientists agree that there has been no great harm done to mankind as a whole from the amount of radiation created by bomb tests so far, it is also true that there is no amount of radiation so small that it has no ill effects at all on anybody. There is actually no such thing as a minimum permissible dose. Perhaps we are talking about only a very small number of individual tragedies – the number of atomic age children with cancer, the new victims of leukemia, the damage to skin tissues here and reproductive systems there – perhaps these are too small to measure with statistics. But they nevertheless loom very large indeed in human and moral terms. Moreover, there is still much that we do not know – and too often in the past we have minimized these perils and shrugged aside these dangers, only to find that our estimates were faulty and the real dangers were worse than we knew.
Let us remember also that our resumption of tests would bring Russian resumption of tests – it would make negotiations even more strained – it would spur other nations seeking entry into the “atomic club”, with their own tests polluting the atmosphere – and, in short, it could precede the kind of long, feverish testing period which all scientists agree would threaten the very existence of man himself.  And, perhaps even more importantly the ability of other nations to test, develop and stockpile atomic weapons will alter drastically the whole balance of power, and put us all at the mercy of inadvertent, irresponsible or deliberate atomic attacks from many corners of the globe. This problem – called the nth country problem, because we do not know how many nations may soon possess these weapons – is at the real heart of the Geneva negotiations. For once China, or France, or Sweden, or half a dozen other nations successfully test an atomic bomb, then the security of both Russians and Americans is dangerously weakened.
The arguments advanced in favor of a test resumption are not unreasonable. The emphasis is on weapons development – the necessity to move ahead “in the advanced techniques of the use of nuclear material.” This reason is not to be dismissed lightly. Our basic posture in world affairs relies on technical military superiority. We need to develop small tactical nuclear weapons and so-called “clean” nuclear weapons, in order to deter their use or other forms of limited aggression by the enemy, and in order to facilitate a decision to respond in good conscience with atomic weapons when necessary. We need to increase the flexibility and range of weapons in our arsenal in order to increase the flexibility and range of diplomatic possibilities. This is not, I might add, justification for cutting back our ground forces and our ability to wage conventional warfare – but it is nevertheless important. Certainly the destruction rained upon us all by a small nuclear battle – and this our weapons development program is intended to deter – would be many times the damage caused by all the test fall-out in the future. But such a weapons development program cannot be suspended indefinitely in a free country without our scientists and technicians scattering to other positions in other laboratories.  In addition, France and other nations on the verge of becoming nuclear powers will resent a ban – and their goodwill is also important.
But it is even more important that we find a way out the present menacing military situation.  And let us remember that our present test suspension is implicitly conditional on a continued Russian test suspension. If we are not developing new weapons in the absence of tests, so, in all probability, will they. And the facts of the matter are that, generally speaking, we are ahead of the Russians in the development of atomic warheads of all sizes but behind in the development of delivery systems. Until this lag can be overcome, there is a lesser value for us in testing and developing further “techniques in the use of nuclear material.” In short, for both sides to resume atomic tests today might well turn out to be more of a disadvantage to the West militarily than a help. The Soviet Union – which apparently made great progress in it 1958 tests – is quite as likely as we in any new tests to score a break-through with some new means of destruction which will make all the more delicate the present balance of terror.
I would suggest, therefore, the following alternative position:
1. First, that the United State announce that it will continue its unilateral suspension of all nuclear tests as long as serious negotiations for a permanent ban with enforceable inspections are proceeding with tangibly demonstrated good faith, provided that the Russians do not meanwhile resume their own tests. The latest extension of our test suspension announcement expires on December 31 – and we cannot take the chance of continuing it indefinitely without an inspection system – or afford the cost of extending a temporary suspension so long that our scientists disperse and our laboratories break down. But neither can we afford to undercut negotiations close to success – to resume polluting the atmosphere while the Russians pose as moral leaders. As long as serious, good faith negotiations continue into the early month of 1960 – and are not prolonged indefinitely beyond that – we must continue our suspension beyond December 31.
2. Secondly, the United States must redouble its efforts to achieve a comprehensive and effective agreement to ban all nuclear tests under international control and inspection – and this means developing a single, clear-cut, well 2– defined, realistic inspection proposal of our own. We do not have this today. We have not made as concentrated and effort on techniques for preserving mankind as we have on techniques of destruction. Nor do we have a clear, concrete policy for the general arms control of disarmament program which must necessarily follow an agreement on testing if it is to be meaningful. But the whole international climate could benefit from this demonstration that East and West can reach significant, enforceable agreements. At least a part of the burdensome arms race would come to a halt. The danger of new nuclear powers emerging would be lessened. For the first time the Russians would have accepted effective international controls operating within their own territory. The hazards of health would be over. Such an agreement, in short even if not perfect – even, for example, if it looks to further modification regarding inspection systems for underground or outer-space tests – would nevertheless be worth far more effort than we are presently exerting. And it would be far more valuable than the military benefits to be gained from test resumption.
3. Third – if our best efforts do not succeed, the negotiations collapse, the Russians resume testing and it becomes necessary for our test to resume, even then they should be confined to underground and outer-space explosions, and to the testing of only certain small weapons in the upper atmosphere, in order to prevent a further increase in the fall-out menace – and in hope, moreover, that the Russians and others will be forced by world opinion to follow our example.
4. Fourth and finally, we must step up our studies of the impact of radioactive fall-out and how to control it, through the Public Health Service here at home and a special United Nations monitoring commission abroad. Let us not discover the precise point of danger after we have passed it. Let us not again reject these warnings peril as “catastrophic nonsense” (to quote Mr. Nixon), as they were rejected in 1956 when put forward by a great Democratic standard-bearer, Adlai E. Stevenson. There is every indication that had a test ban been accomplished then, it would have been far more useful, far more easily accomplished and far more beneficial to our national security than it would today, now that the missile gap had widened so far.
These four policy positions that I have stated are no magic solution – nor can they be achieved overnight without effort. The course which I am suggesting is full or risks. It will require more effort, more leadership, more moral courage than merely “running scared.” But the new and terrible dangers which man has created can only be controlled by man. And if we can master this danger and meet this challenge, we will have earned the deep and lasting gratitude, not only of all men, but of all yet to be born – even to the farthest generation.

          Trump’s Foreign Policy: More Nukes and Less Diplomacy      Cache   Translate Page      
His budget increases spending on nuclear weapons by $12.4 billion and cuts the State Department by $13 billion.
          Enlightenment Now      Cache   Translate Page      


'''''Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress''''' is a 2018 book written by Canadian-American cognitive scientist [[Steven Pinker]]. It argues that the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] values of reason, science, and [[humanism]] have brought progress; shows our progress with data that health, prosperity, safety, peace, and happiness have tended to rise worldwide; and explains the cognitive science of why this progress should be appreciated. It is a follow-up to Pinker's 2011 book, ''[[The Better Angels of Our Nature]].''

A commonly-held lay public perception holds that the world is in terrible shape; for some, 2016 was the "worst year ever" and the death of [[liberalism]]. In contrast, Pinker argues that life has been getting better for most people. He sets out 15 different measures of human wellbeing to support this argument, with the most obvious being the uncontroversial fact that, statistically, people live longer and healthier lives on average than ever before. As another example, while fears of terrorism are often voiced in U.S. opinion polls, Pinker shows that an American is 3,000 times more likely to die in an accident than in a terrorist attack. As in Pinker's previous ''[[The Better Angels of Our Nature]]'', Pinker ascribes modern improvements to trends of liberal humanism and scientific rationality that first took root in Europe around the 17th and 18th centuries.

Pinker argues that [[economic inequality]] "is not itself a dimension of human [[well-being|wellbeing]]" and cites a study that finds inequality is not linked to unhappiness, at least in poorer societies. He also points out that the world as a whole is becoming more equal, and states that even within increasingly unequal areas, the poor are still getting wealth and benefit from technological innovations. For example, it is clear to Pinker that an innovation that makes the poor slightly richer and the rich massively richer is a positive rather than a negative achievement. In contrast, critics hold that enhancing social mobility and combating "inequality as a result of unfairness" are important legitimate ends in and of themselves, beyond any effects of reducing poverty.

On topics such as [[nuclear weaponry]], Pinker places the blame on [[anti-Enlightenment]] forces. Scientists working on the [[Manhattan Project]] to develop the first nuclear weapons did so because they needed to beat Hitler; Pinker states "Quite possibly, had there been no Nazis, there would be no nukes." In contrast, critics point out that science lacks any ethical logic of its own. They argue that scientific progress is liberating but also threatening, and can present dangers precisely because of how hugely it expands human power. Pinker expresses concerns about potential human extinction from nuclear weapons or from global warming, but categorizes existential risks overall as a "useless category", stating that "Sowing fear about hypothetical disasters, far from safeguarding the future of humanity, can endanger it". In particular, Pinker departs from scholars such as [[Nick Bostrom]] regarding the possibility of accidental [[existential risk from artificial general intelligence]], and makes a controversial ''[[reductio ad absurdum]]'' argument that self-driving cars provide evidence that artificial general intelligence will pose no accidental existential risk.

The book concludes with three chapters defending what Pinker sees as Enlightenment values: [[reason]], [[science]], and [[humanism]]. Pinker argues that these values are under threat from modern trends such as [[religious fundamentalism]], [[political correctness]], and [[postmodernism]]. In an interview about the book published in ''[[Scientific American]]'', Pinker has clarified that his book is not merely an expression of hope—it is a documentation of how much we have gained as a result of Enlightenment values, and how much we have to lose if those values are abandoned.


          The sun is the solution to climate problem      Cache   Translate Page      

Solar panels
If all of the world used the sun as an energy source, it would solve many climate problems!
Solar panels absorb the sunlight as a source of energy to generate electricity or heat. Wiki

The history of the solar cell info:
The first solar cell was constructed in the 1950s. The first solar cells were used to generate electricity in places where it was not. Mountain streams, lonely islands or other unavailable places. During the 1960s, solar technology developed in space technology to gain access to electricity in space. Over the next decades, technology has evolved further and more and more facilities have been connected to the grid. Better efficiency of solar cells and falling prices have made solar electricity more competitive with fossil fuels and nuclear power.

During the 21st century, the installation rate of solar cells has been almost explosive and solar energy is the fastest growing energy source in the world

90 percent of the world's photovoltaic plants consist of silicon cells. There are also second generation solar cells with thin film cells. They came onto the market in the early 2000s, but are more expensive to manufacture. Third-generation solar cells based on nanotechnology are still at the research stage, but will soon be on the market
          Radioactive pollution      Cache   Translate Page      
It seem the destruction to our nature and planet earth get worse and worse. First was Air pollution that i posted about in previous blog post here and now it's Radioactive pollution.
Recently Nuclear accident sends radioactive cloud over Europe is posted by The Guardian link. Also Radioactive material from the Fukushima nuclear accident is still leaking into the ocean after the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, Anonymous Video.

If you care about other people and the planet earth and don't want get sick or get death by pollution, then all people need to take their responsibility!

Some simple thing that can help reduce pollution:
- Governments need to take their responsibility and replace to clean energy
-  The sun is the solution to climate problem Use Solar Panels!
- People need to avoid diesel engine cars & trucks they have higher air pollution
- When you buy a car go for the electric vs motor it is better for environment
- Take the Train or Bus when you travel short distance and why not use a bicycle
- In some large city's transports and gods can be done with Trains 
- Plant many trees and forest, because tress clean the air in city's and removes pollution!

Remember everything we do have consequence!

          How long can we keep dodging nuclear war?      Cache   Translate Page      

The recent military clash between India and Pakistan underscores the need for the major nuclear powers—the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, and France— finally to move toward fulfilling their obligations under the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The treaty’s purpose was not simply to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, but to serve as a temporary […]
          3/13/2019: World: H      Cache   Translate Page      
e likes one and admits to falling in love with the other. He treasures letters from each of them. And he believes the personal rapport he built with both could clear the way to historic agreements on trade and nuclear arms that have eluded his...
          Press Releases: Interview With Jason Miles of KHOU-11 News      Cache   Translate Page      
Michael R. Pompeo
Secretary of State
Houston, Texas
March 12, 2019

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, thanks for sitting down with us. Let’s start with kind of the news of the day, and that is the decision to withdraw personnel from Venezuela. What can you tell us about that?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So Jason, it’s great to be with you, thanks for your time today. We made the decision last night that the situation in Venezuela changed, that the risk to American diplomats was too great. And so we’ve decided that we’ll have them all return to the United States. Keeping them safe is our first priority. We also found that it was constraining some of the things that we think we’re going to need to work on over the next weeks. We wanted to make sure we had the capacity to do that, so they’ll be coming home the next couple or three days.

QUESTION: What’s the biggest challenge in regards to Venezuela?

SECRETARY POMPEO: The devastation that Maduro has wrought on the Venezuelan people is truly horrific. They’ve got food and water shortages. We’ve seen over the past days the electrical outages that they can’t get fixed. This is really horrible. The American people have been very generous, have delivered over 200 metric tons of food aid into the region, but the Maduro regime won’t let it in. They won’t allow food for starving people or medicine for the sick to come in and take care of their people. And it’s what we, along with our partners in the region – Brazil, Colombia, all the neighbors of Venezuela – are working on to try and fix. We want a better life, we want democracy restored in Venezuela.

QUESTION: Obviously you travel the globe from country to country, crisis to crisis – North Korea, China, Venezuela, name it. As far as the Trump administration is concerned right now, what’s the most concerning or biggest global issue for you personally and/or the administration?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So it’s always hard to pick the top issue. We’ve certainly focused on North Korea, trying to convince Chairman Kim to honor the commitment he made this past June to denuclearize. The President’s focused on the border as well; that matters here in Texas. It’s a national security issue, too. The long-term threat that China poses to the United States is real, and we continue to work on that each and every day. And then I’m here, I’m here in Texas this week to talk about energy and American energy security. So the things we do domestically, the fact that we’re going to become the world’s largest producer and exporter of crude oil, is a big deal globally. It helps us make friends around the world and take pressure off some of those countries who have been relying on energy from countries they’d frankly rather not do business with.

QUESTION: There’s a new poll out this morning – Monmouth, I think – 57 percent of Americans supposedly wanting a new president in 2020. What is the Secretary of State’s role on the political side? Is there one?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, I’m in charge of working to be America’s senior diplomat and keep Americans safe. I suppose if we do that, the American people will be more likely to be happy, but it’s not what I’m focused on. What I’m focused on is making sure that each and every day, my team – that numbers in the tens of thousands that’s all around the world – is doing its job to project American values, the rule of law, the intrinsic greatness of the United States of America that helps keep Americans safe. I think we’re winning; I think we’re making real progress there. And I’m very proud of the work that this administration has done around the world.

QUESTION: A lot of Americans may not realize all the rank and file people who are doing day in and day out jobs in your department, many other departments, no matter what political crisis or drama is going on, right?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Everyone who gets a passport is interacting with an employee of the United States Department of State. We have a big task around the world. President Trump has enabled us to do really remarkable work. I’m very proud of our team, and I’m glad to be in Texas today to talk about what it is we do, how we recruit young people to come be American diplomats, and why I want Texans to come be part of the State Department as well.

QUESTION: The new budget proposal has a big chunk of money, obviously, for the border wall. You mentioned it a little earlier. What are the chances of that happening?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Sorry, I don’t do political predictions. I’m kind of out of that business. But I think there’s a bipartisan consensus that there’s real risk, that there’s a crisis down at our border. I hope they will provide the resources, that Congress will provide the resources that Americans are demanding along that border so that we can keep Americans safe. It’s not only about keeping people – and knowing who’s coming in, but we need to know what contraband’s passing along that border as well. I’ve seen this. We need to know who and what is coming across our southern border, and President Trump is firmly committed to achieving that.

QUESTION: CERAWeek, a lot of people realize it’s a big energy conference. What is the main message you’re going to deliver today?

SECRETARY POMPEO: The greatness of America and the importance of American energy to America’s national security, how it is the case that if we get it right at home, if we keep winning in the energy world here at home, that folks that live in San Antonio or Houston or Longview – I know Texas well – that the people of Texas will be safer and more secure, and that we’ll do a good turn for the rest of the world as well.

QUESTION: That it? Thank you, sir.

SECRETARY POMPEO: All right, Jason, thank you very much. It’s great to be with you.

QUESTION: Pleasure to meet you.

The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

          Press Releases: United States Welcomes the UN Panel of Experts Annual Report on the D.P.R.K.      Cache   Translate Page      
Press Statement
Robert Palladino
Deputy Spokesperson
Washington, DC
March 12, 2019

The United States welcomes the release today of a report by the UN’s independent Panel of Experts on the implementation of UN sanctions on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (D.P.R.K.) and commends the panel for its hard work. The report provides timely, relevant, and impartial analysis that helps governments around the world to take decisive action and demonstrates the need for continued vigilance against entities involved in D.P.R.K. sanctions evasion activity. The United States takes allegations of UN sanctions violations seriously, and all Member States are expected to fully implement UN Security Council resolutions. International unity in implementing these sanctions continues to hamper the D.P.R.K.’s ability to further its illegal weapons of mass destruction programs and sends the message that the D.P.R.K. will be economically and diplomatically isolated until it denuclearizes.

The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

          Press Releases: Interview With Laura Rice of Texas Standard      Cache   Translate Page      
Michael R. Pompeo
Secretary of State
Via Teleconference
March 12, 2019

QUESTION: U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo joins us now. Secretary Pompeo, thank you for your time.

SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you, Laura. It’s great to be with you.

QUESTION: The U.S. has recently become the world’s largest oil producer and new reports say it could soon be the largest oil exporter. I understand your address today will focus on how this strengthens our national security. How is that?

SECRETARY POMPEO: I wanted to come to Texas today to talk about that very fact. This is a game-changer for American national security. As America’s most senior diplomat, I travel the world, and boy, there’s not a country I go to where energy isn’t at the top of their list, and what this does – what all of this success here in American domestic energy production does for me and for Americans, to keep them safe – is it permits us to share with those countries our wealth, our resources, to cut deals that support their energy security in places as far off as Vietnam and the Philippines and Europe.

And it permits them too to wean themselves from energy that they’re taking from adversaries, countries that want to do their country harm. This is a big deal for American national security. It gives us lots of power throughout the world, and our capacity has increased during the Trump administration. We intend to – intend to continue to do that, not only to create wealth for and jobs here in the United States, but to enhance America’s national security posture around the world as well.

QUESTION: The big news today again is Venezuela. One statistic you mentioned in a press conference yesterday is that Venezuela’s oil production is down by half since Nicolas Maduro took power. You accuse Cuba’s involvement as being about oil. Is oil also at the center of U.S. interest in Venezuela?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Only in the sense that we want the Venezuelan people to have access to their own wealth and not the corruption – the corruption that has followed the Maduro regime, this oil wealth being stripped away by the kleptocrats of the Maduro regime, taken for their personal benefit and not shared with the Venezuelan people. The Cubans have done the same. This isn’t what the Venezuelan people deserve, it’s not what they want, and America’s efforts to restore democracy and the rule of law, and to help feed and have medicine for the Venezuelan people – that’s the purpose of our efforts in Venezuela. And when we get this right, when Maduro is gone and there’s fair and free elections and democracy is restored, the oil wealth of Venezuela will be returned to its people.

QUESTION: Along with Cuba, you point to Russia as helping to support Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro. You just announced you’re withdrawing all diplomatic staff in Venezuela. In a tweet, you said, “The presence of U.S. diplomatic staff at the embassy has become a constraint on U.S. policy.” How do you mean?

SECRETARY POMPEO: We decided yesterday that it was important that we keep American diplomats safe, and so we made the decision that we would withdraw the remaining personnel there in Caracas and bring them back to the United States. So we’ll do that over the days ahead. Anytime you’re dealing with a situation that is deteriorating as fast that it is – as it is in Venezuela today, decisions you make are always encumbered by the fact that you know there’s real risk to your own people, people that you’ve sent into harm’s way. We wanted to get them back, we wanted to get them out of the country so that we could move forward in a way that provided that opportunity.

We have 200 metric tons of food sitting in the region, trying to deliver into Venezuela to feed the hungry and to provide medicine for the sick. We want to make sure that as we continue to work in the region alongside of our partners, we don’t have any constraints on action that we might need to take in order to achieve that.

QUESTION: That food that is waiting to support Venezuelan people, I assume part of the State Department budget goes out to pay for programs and food like that. What do you do with the Trump administration’s new budget proposal, which includes $13 billion in proposed cuts? Does that mean that support like this for places like Venezuela is lessened?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Oh, in fact just the opposite. Contained in the President’s budget request is up to $500 million, an enormous amount of resources that the Trump budget is proposing to provide to assist the Venezuelan people when the time is right. This budget will serve America well, America’s national security interests, because we’re prepared to help the Venezuelan people with real resources. The American taxpayers have been most generous, and President Trump has led that charge.

QUESTION: So as Trump’s budget decreases the spending for the State Department and also includes more military spending, should Americans be worried about policy shifting from diplomacy to boots on the ground?

SECRETARY POMPEO: You can take a look at the first two years of the Trump administration to see the effectiveness of our foreign policy. Our capacity to deliver really solid, really sound diplomatic outcomes – to build coalitions in a way that, frankly, the previous administration just chose not to do – a global coalition to put sanctions on North Korea, to hopefully get them to denuclearize. The world has come together – 50-plus nations – to recognize that Maduro’s time had come. A big, global coalition to take down the caliphate – over 80 countries in the Defeat-ISIS Coalition. We have worked diplomatic – incredibly successfully in the President’s first two years, and I’m very confident that we’ll have the resources, and I know we have the talent to deliver good outcomes for the American people in the days and weeks and months ahead as well.

QUESTION: You mentioned North Korea. The proposed cuts to the State Department come soon after a second summit between President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, where no agreement was made. Where do we stand now in that situation?

SECRETARY POMPEO: I’ve personally been working on this alongside the President for my entire time as the Secretary of State, and in fact even just a bit before. In Singapore, in June of last year, Chairman Kim made a historic commitment to denuclearize his country, and in exchange the United States and President Trump made a commitment to provide peace and security and stability on the Korean Peninsula and a brighter future for the North Korean people. Our Japanese partners, our South Korean partners are working alongside us to achieve each of those goals from Singapore.

We didn’t make as much progress as we would have hoped in Hanoi, but the conversations continue. And meanwhile, there are not missile tests being conducted, there aren’t nuclear tests being conducted. We’ve made progress. Obviously more needs to be done. This has been a problem of a long standing, and we continue to march down the path, hopefully leading to a place where the threat of nuclear weapons from North Korea will be enormously diminished.

QUESTION: U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Houston today for the energy conference known as CERAWeek. Secretary Pompeo, thanks again for your time.

SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you, Laura. You have a great day.

QUESTION: You too.

The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

          Press Releases: Interview With Hal Jay and Brian Estridge of WBAP Morning News      Cache   Translate Page      
Michael R. Pompeo
Secretary of State
Via Teleconference
March 12, 2019

QUESTION: Yes, and Secretary Mike Pompeo joins us (inaudible) Secretary of State, kind enough to carve out a couple of moments for us. He’s headed to Houston for a – to deliver a keynote to – at a big energy conference, Hal.

QUESTION: All right.

QUESTION: And we’ve got a lot to get into. Secretary, thanks for the time this morning. Let’s dive right into the news that came out this week that all of the sudden, the U.S. is the number one exporter of energy in the world, and this really strengthens our standing internationally, doesn’t it?

SECRETATRY POMPEO: Well great, it’s thanks to be with you. And it does, that’s why I’m down here. I wanted to talk about what U.S. energy production does for American national security, how it keeps people from Dallas and San Antonio and Houston and all across Texas safer, lets us work more closely with our friends and puts real pressure on those who want to do harm to the United States. So this energy production really matters. I wanted to come down here and talk about how, as American’s most senior diplomat, we use that to advantage to keep America safe.

QUESTION: Yeah, is that leverage for you when it comes to negotiating around the world?

SECRETATRY POMPEO: There are very few countries I travel to – I was in the Philippines last week and Vietnam, I’ll be in Europe in a couple of days and the Middle East. Everywhere I go, energy is at the top of the list. Demand for energy is only growing, and those who can produce and provide it have an enormous advantage when it comes to security around the world.

QUESTION: Are we at the point now where America can say we don’t have to worry about other countries anymore, Middle East oil, anything like that, we’re – we are on our own?

SECRETATRY POMPEO: So we’re getting close to where we’ll have true American energy dominance. It’s a global market; it’s a complicated market. But the more energy that we produce here in America, so the more we can do – and the Trump administration’s done a lot of this, reduce regulations, create opportunities for jobs and wealth creation in the energy industry in America – the safer Americans will be around the world as well.

QUESTION: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is with us right now. That leverage that we talk about when it comes to energy doesn’t just play in the Middle East. Does it factor into the negotiations that are ongoing with North Korea at all?

SECRETATRY POMPEO: North Korea presents a special situation for sure, but nobody can escape the truth. The truth is to grow an economy you need energy. Their electrical infrastructure needs work. They need refined petroleum products. One of the ways that we’ve convinced North Korea to move towards denuclearization is to reduce the amount of energy that they can import, and those sanctions that the United Nations put in place alongside of us have made a material difference. It’s made it harder for the North Koreans to do the things they need to do, and I think that’s at least in part why Chairman Kim made the commitment to denuclearize, and we’re hopeful that even though we didn’t get as far as we would have liked when the President and I were in Hanoi last week, we still have a path forward there.

QUESTION: Is North Korea – are we paying too much attention to it? Is there – is there a real true threat?

SECRETATRY POMPEO: So the – any time you have a nation that has nuclear weapons and the capacity to either sell those weapons to those that would want to present risk to the United States or the capacity to use a missile system for delivery, there’s a threat to the United States. Nuclear weapons are unique and especially risky, as you all well know, so I think it’s important, important that we get this right, important that we take down that threat to the United States.

QUESTION: A different kind of threat in South America with Venezuela that I know has your attention as well.

SECRETATRY POMPEO: It does. Last night we made the decision that we would withdraw the last of our diplomats from Caracas, so they’ll all be coming home. The calamity, the chaos that is engulfing Venezuela today is a direct result of socialism, of the Maduro regime and the Cubans and the Russians all destroying a once proud economy. The United States, the neighboring regions in South America, Central America, they want to have a better life, democracy restored in Venezuela. And America is prepared to play its part, an important part I believe, in helping that happen.

QUESTION: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is with us. What keeps you up at night?

SECRETATRY POMPEO: Oh goodness. Lots of things to focus on in the world, but just like you all, right, you just keep focused, you set priorities. I work for a President that understands the incredible importance of American national security, and you get up each day, put your helmet on, and get to work.

QUESTION: Just so you’ll know, I voted for Donald Trump, so I’ll ask you this: Fill in the blank. I wish the President would stop --

SECRETATRY POMPEO: I’m not going to answer that one for you this morning. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: How about this one then: I wish the President would start --

SECRETATRY POMPEO: (Laughter.) You’re not going to draw me into that.



QUESTION: That’s why --

SECRETATRY POMPEO: I think we’re getting it right most days.

QUESTION: That’s why I said I voted for him, and I didn’t mind asking those questions, so – well, thanks for playing along.

QUESTION: Yeah, and your timing is perfect. You’re there for the last week of the Houston radio – rodeo. The Kings of Leon are playing tonight. Enjoy the concert.

SECRETATRY POMPEO: I would love to get to that, and Susan and I – my wife – we’re from Kansas. We love rodeo too.

QUESTION: Yeah. Mike Pompeo --

QUESTION: There you go.

QUESTION: -- the Secretary of State, thanks for the time today.

SECRETATRY POMPEO: Thank you very much. You all have a good day.

QUESTION: Yeah, you too.

QUESTION: And keep up the good work by the way, too.


QUESTION: Thanks for serving us.

SECRETATRY POMPEO: Thank you very much. Very nice, thank you.

The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

          IT Project Manager      Cache   Translate Page      
NC-Charlotte, IT Project Manager Charlotte, NC My client is searching for an IT Project Manager to lead multiple IT Projects within a nuclear/transmission center of excellence. This is a long-term initiative offering between $45-50hr W2 (based on experience) as well as medical, dental, vision and life insurance. Your responsibilities will include: Leading data focused end to end projects Gathering requirements,
          Press Releases: Interview With Jimmy Barrett and Shara Fryer of KTRH Houston's Morning News      Cache   Translate Page      
Michael R. Pompeo
Secretary of State
Via Teleconference
March 12, 2019

QUESTION: Joining us from our Secretary of State Department – the State Department, is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.


QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, welcome to Houston and thank you for joining us here this morning.

SECRETARY POMPEO: It’s great to be with you this morning.

QUESTION: Tell us a little bit about what’s going on in Venezuela and why we’re removing the last of our diplomats there.

SECRETARY POMPEO: We made the decision yesterday that it just was prudent to get these folks back. The situation there is deteriorating. The Maduro regime’s horrific leadership over the last years has just made life there so difficult, it began to make it more difficult for the United States to take the actions that it needed to do to support the Venezuelan people. So we concluded this was simply the right step to take and this was the right time to take it.

QUESTION: Now you’re more or less going around the country right now speaking to people. I understand we’re second on your tour. You’re here talking about energy policy. In Texas, energy security, border security, these are the foremost of Texans’ minds. How can you address both of those?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So that’s the reason I wanted to come down here. I – before I entered government service for the second time in my life, I was in that industry. I ran a company that made pumping units and sold (inaudible) equipment. I know the Permian Basin, I know East Texas well, and as the Secretary of State, energy turns out to be at the very center of what I do many, many days, whether I’m in the Philippines or in Europe. The issue of American energy, the ability of us to deliver that energy around the world, helps keep American safe. It’s an important diplomatic tool for the United States and the production boom that’s taken place over the past years is enormously important for American national security. I wanted to come to Texas today and share those thoughts with the people of Texas.

QUESTION: Okay. Do you have any thoughts on the border while you’re here as well? That’s an area that’s very, very important to the President is to secure more border wall funding to get that job done. Is there anything further we – that can be done in order to advance that agenda?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So you saw yesterday the President’s request for additional funding for the border wall and additional security measures as well. As the chief diplomat for the United States of America, I understand that we need to know who’s coming into our country. We need to make sure we can control the flow of not only people but drugs and other contraband across the border. So securing that border’s important. President Trump has made it an enormous priority and he is asking Congress to provide our administration the resources to achieve that goal.

QUESTION: We – how much cooperation are you able to get from these other countries? I mean, Mexico I know has been taking steps to try to help this blow-through that we’re getting from Central America, but how much influence can you really exert?

SECRETARY POMPEO: My relationship with the new Mexican Government has been fantastic. My counterpart Foreign Minister Ebrard has truly done a number of things which I think will, over time, have a real benefit, but we need them to do more. The number of folks crossing over the past weeks has increased. This isn’t good for Mexico to have these folks traversing. It’s not good for the people who are having to make this dangerous trek through Mexico as well. We need to do this collectively. We’re working closely with President Obrador and my foreign minister counterpart to come up with a comprehensive solution that will secure our border and also ensure that there’s less risk to the people who are sometimes living very desperate situations.

QUESTION: This is maybe a nonquitter here, but Europe, the EU is going to start requiring visas from Americans who want to head over to Europe. What’s that all about?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So I’ve seen those reports. I think we need to just learn a little bit more before we jump to too many conclusions.

QUESTION: All right, again, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is with us here on NewsRadio 740, KTRH. Obviously the President met not that long ago with Kim Jong-un in an attempt to try to move things a little bit forward in our dealings with North Korea. There’s been all sorts of reports about whether or not the North Koreans are restarting up some of their nuclear program. Is there anything you can tell us about that and bring us up to date on that story?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So the most important thing, I think, for folks to know is that the progress that we’ve made with North Korea over the past – goodness, year and change – has been real. They haven’t conducted any further missile tests, no more nuclear testing, two important tools for advancing their program. I was with the President in Hanoi. We didn’t make as much progress as we would’ve hoped achieving what Chairman Kim told us he would do. I’ve been with Chairman Kim I think now four or five times. He has promised to denuclearize. He did not arrive there prepared to do as much as we need him to do, and we’re going to continue to work to achieve that outcome. It is a real threat to the United States of America and we want to get North Korea to honor its commitment to denuclearize, and then there can be a brighter future for the North Korean people as well.

QUESTION: Stopping the war exercises or the naval exercises with South Korea, good idea you think?

SECRETARY POMPEO: The Department of Defense is confident it can maintain the readiness it needs to take whatever action it might need to take at some point to work with our allies, Japan and South Korea, and to keep the American people safe. President concluded that this made sense as we’re trying to develop a relationship with the North Koreans such that we can get this ultimate objective, something that frankly America has been trying to do for decades now without success. He concluded it made sense and I’m confident we can still protect American interests while reducing the number of major war games that take place there on the peninsula.

QUESTION: All right, Mr. Secretary, enjoy your time here with us in Houston.

QUESTION: We don’t have time to get to China, but thank you so much for --

SECRETARY POMPEO: Good enough. Good to talk to you. Thanks for having me on the show. It’s great to be here in Houston.

QUESTION: It’s good to have you here, sir. Thank you again.

The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

          Press Releases: Interview With Deneige Broom of KRIV Fox 26 Houston Morning News      Cache   Translate Page      
Michael R. Pompeo
Secretary of State
Houston, Texas
March 12, 2019

QUESTION: Good morning. And the Secretary of State does have a packed schedule, but he was able to squeeze us in for a few minutes here. So thank you so much for being here this morning. Welcome to Houston.

SECRETARY POMPEO: Great to be here.

QUESTION: Now, in your keynote address tonight, right around 6 o’clock, you’ll be talking to people about – the title of your speech is the role of energy in this 21st century political system. So what do you plan to tell or talk to those American businesses about their role in this political ecosystem?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So what we’re doing in America with respect to energy is incredibly important to what I do every day, working to keep Americans safe through diplomacy. Our capacity to produce energy to convince adversary countries that we don’t rely on them for energy and to tell our friends that we can assist them by providing energy to their country to take leverage away from their adversaries has proven incredibly important. So the boom, the American energy boom is important. Our administration’s worked hard to make that happen, and it’s keeping Americans safe.

QUESTION: In talking about those foreign affairs, we do have to switch gears to Venezuela. Yesterday you announced that you’ll be removing all the diplomats from the embassy there, in part because of that deteriorating situation, but I want to also quote part of your tweet. You said, in part, “the conclusion that the presence of U.S. diplomatic staff at the embassy has become a constraint on U.S. policy.” Are you willing to elaborate on what constraint on U.S. policy is and where you see things going after this?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Oh, sure. So the conditions on the ground have deteriorated over the last days and weeks. The Maduro regime has wreaked a real tragedy on the nation, the people of Venezuela. Our mission has been to restore democracy and help the Venezuelan people. Our embassy was an important part of that; the people there have done great work. But it was time for them to come back. Their security is always paramount. And it’s just gotten very difficult.

It’s also the case that when you’re making decisions about how to proceed, you have to consider the fact that there are still many Americans there on the ground. We wanted to get our diplomatic team back so that our capacity to work with Brazil and Colombia, and all the countries who have joined this enormous coalition to try to benefit the people of Venezuela, can be made in a way that doesn’t create further risk to American diplomats.

QUESTION: And you were talking about the humanitarian crisis. There’s already been a lot of money for aid going there. What else moving forward, since it has really only gotten worse?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So the American taxpayers have been very generous. We’ve delivered a couple hundred metric tons of assistance, medicine, food, hygiene kits. We haven’t been able to get it in; the Maduro regime has prevented us from delivering that. It’s horrific to deny food to starving people or medicine to the sick, but that’s what Maduro has chosen to do.

We’re going to keep at that. We’re going to continue to work with coalition partners. We’re going to try to help build up democratic institutions in a way that will ultimately convince Maduro that his days are numbered, that he ought to leave, and he ought to allow the duly elected Interim President Juan Guaido to begin to take charge to start the process of rebuilding this country that can be such a tremendous place.

QUESTION: And switching gears to North Korea, with the last – I know you know that it was coming – with the last summit with President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, it was essentially a stalemate. At least that’s what it seems to us, because Kim Jong-un was saying he doesn’t – he hasn’t released a plan yet, at least, for denuclearization. President Trump says that he isn’t willing to lift the U.S. sanctions to make that happen. So it seems like a stalemate, but you’ve actually been on record saying you don’t see it like that. Why is that?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Look, this is a long journey. We’ve been at this for a couple decades in the United States. What President Trump has done is he has built a global coalition. These are UN Security Council resolutions; they’re not American sanctions, they’re global sanctions. The whole world understands the threat that Chairman Kim’s nuclear weapons present to the world. Chairman Kim’s now committed to giving them up. He said he would denuclearize. He’s told me that face to face, personally, no less than half a dozen times. Now we need to figure out how to do it, how to achieve it. Our goal is to keep America safe, to keep South Korea and Japan from being under this threat. And when we do, we hope we can make a brighter future for the North Korean people as well. That’s the deal we’re trying to get to. President Trump understood that what was offered wasn’t sufficient, so more work to do.

QUESTION: And you having talked to him directly, Kim Jong-un, what is it about his statements that you actually believe?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Well, we only will value action. We all – talk is cheap. It’s important that we actually begin to deliver on the commitments. The two presidents back in June of last year were in Singapore. Each made serious commitments to the other. Chairman Kim committed to denuclearize; we committed to working to make North Korea have a brighter future and to stability and security arrangements on the peninsula. Our allies, South Korea and Japan, are prepared to work alongside of us. What we’ll need to see is action, and that’s what we’re counting on, and it’s what I’m hopeful we’ll get in the months ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you so much --


QUESTION: -- Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. And we’ll send it on back to you, Jose and Melissa.

The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

          Russia, China sign general contract on construction of two units of Tianwan NPP      Cache   Translate Page      
Earlier Russia’s state-run nuclear corporation Rosatom and China signed a protocol on cooperation and a framework agreement on serial construction of power units for the Xudabao NPP in China
          Comment on The Samson Option: The Biggest Mass Murderers In History Have A Huge Nuclear Arsenal, Just How Dangerous Is Israel? by Bizarre Oddities: Zionist Chuck Schumer Gets To Point The Finger At Saudi Arabia Instead Of Israel For 9/11 | SOMICOM      Cache   Translate Page      
[…] The Samson Option: The Biggest Mass Murderers In History Have A Huge Nuclear Arsenal, Just How Dange… […]
          IN FLAMES Singer Says CHRIS BRODERICK Is Doing A 'Great' Job Filling In For NICLAS ENGELIN      Cache   Translate Page      
IN FLAMES' singer Anders Fridén says that Chris Broderick is doing a "great" job filling in for guitarist Niclas Engelin on the band's current North American tour. "Niclas had to stay home and deal with some personal things," the singer told Sticks For Stones in a new interview (hear audio below). "We've known [Chris] for 17 years. He was in a band called JAG PANZER, and they opened up for us back then, so we've been friends since. And when Niclas called us, like 48 hours before we had to leave, and he went to the hospital — he had to. So we didn't wanna cancel. Our music is made for two guitars, and we didn't wanna have one guitar playing and everything else on a backing track — we wanted to have someone playing it. We happily found out that Chris was free and he came out and we had a couple of days' rehearsal in Austin before the tour started in Houston. And, yeah, it's going great. We've known him, as I said, for a long time, so we knew it would work on a social level. And [his] guitar [playing] is obviously phenomenal." Fan-filmed video footage of IN FLAMES' first concert with Chris, which took place on February 2 at the House Of Blues in Houston, Texas, can be seen below. IN FLAMES recently completed a short tour with ALL THAT REMAINS and ALL HAIL THE YETI and is currently on the road in North America with WITHIN TEMPTATION. IN FLAMES' new album, "I, The Mask", was released on March 1 via Nuclear Blast (worldwide, excluding North America) and Eleven Seven Music (North America). The 12-track disc reunites IN FLAMES with Grammy-nominated producer Howard Benson (MY CHEMICAL ROMANCE, MOTÖRHEAD) who also produced 2016's "Battles". Additionally, the album was mixed by Grammy Award winner Chris Lord-Alge (CHEAP TRICK, LINKIN PARK) and mastered by Grammy-winning mastering engeneer Ted Jensen (PANTERA, EAGLES, GUNS N' ROSES).

          ‘Talk Is Cheap,’ Pompeo Says of Kim’s Nuclear Pledges      Cache   Translate Page      
“He said he would denuclearize...,” Pompeo said. “Now we need to figure out how to do it.”
          Southern Nuclear: Refueling activities underway at Plant Vogtle Unit 2       Cache   Translate Page      
See the rest of the story here. provides the latest financial news as it breaks. Known as a leader in market intelligence, The Fly's real-time, streaming news feed keeps individual investors, professional money managers, active traders, and corporate executives informed on what's moving stocks. Sign up for a free trial at to see what Wall Street is buzzing about.
          Venezuela-Siria, Tav- Eastmed, secessione dei ricchi-reddito di cittadinanza… o si muore. ----- AL CROCEVIA DEL DESTINO      Cache   Translate Page      

Potevano essere indotti ad accettare le più flagranti violazioni della realtà, poiché non hanno mai pienamente compreso l’enormità di quanto da loro si pretendeva e non erano abbastanza interessati ai fatti pubblici per accorgersi di cosa stava succedendo”. (George Orwell)

Di questioni che ci impongono a scegliere fra due o più strade in direzioni divergenti, perché sono in grado di determinare il nostro presente e futuro, dopo che è stato alterato e travisato il nostro passato, ce ne sono molte. Mi sono limitato a considerarne, a volo d’uccello, alcune, quelle che mi paiono al momento le più pressanti.

Siria e Venezuela: non è fatta!
Vedo buontemponi che si fregano le mani  convinti che in Siria, se non alla vittoria completa di quel popolo, dei suoi alleati e della sua dirigenza, con relativo riequilibrio geopolitico, si sia quanto meno alla sconfitta di assalitori e loro mercenari. Quando gli assalitori covano progetti elaborati nei decenni, in buona parte realizzati, dotati di forza militare (nucleare) e mediatica senza pari, decisivi per il loro ruolo e i loro obiettivi nel mondo, e dunque irrinunciabili, nessuna partita si può dire vinta, anche se nemmeno persa. E di mercenariato, tra masse alienate e alla canna del gas, ce n’è una fonte inesauribile.  Colonialismo e neoliberismo ne sono prodighi.

La stessa schiatta di fiduciosi nelle “magnifiche sorti e progressive”, ma ignari del pessimismo cosmico leopardiano, passato un mese dalla grottesca epifania di un teppistello da angiporto, però addestrato da Otpor a Belgrado e dalla National Endowment for Democracy (leggi CIA) a Washington, sottovalutando la psicopatologia dei mandanti e la determinazione dei banchieri sulle loro spalle, crede che basti la mancata defezione dei militari e il sostegno popolare maggioritario per affermare la vittoria di Nicola Maduro e della resistenza bolivariana. Magari restando un tantino interdetti per i tre micidiali colpi cibernetici che hanno annientato il funzionamento energetico del paese.

Il primo dei quali subito smascherato come atto bellico Usa dalla rivista “Forbes”, ma, prima ancora, in quanto annunciato, a 2’40” dal suo verificarsi, dal vaticinatore per il presidente venezuelano della stessa fine di Gheddafi, Marco Rubio, uno di cui andrebbe messa in discussione la natura umana. Con ogni evidenza, la guerra per cancellare dalla faccia della Terra la realtà bolivariana e l’intera emancipazione latinoamericana è appena iniziata. E se il moloch ripete con accanimento “tutte le opzioni sono sul tavolo”, sa quel che si dice e il blackout in atto si può definire l’inizio della guerra (economica) totale.

Chi vince prende tutto

Di crocevia della Storia, in entrambi i casi si tratta. Qui (ma anche in Afghanistan, Yemen, Libia, Iraq, Iran, Ucraina, Corea del Nord, Europa) alcuni miliardi di esseri umani sono coinvolti in un processo che li pone al bivio tra la fine dell’uomo voltairiano e socratico, e l’uomo del consumo-autoconsumo, abbarbicato alla slotmachine, o affogato nello smartphone, con zero altre opzioni o diritti. Ma anche tra esproprio totale e fine dell’uomo tout court. E, meglio ancora, tra mafia e padrini, definitivamente elevati al rango di governo globale, e quanto ci resta di sovranità dell’individuo, sublimata in sovranità di popolo e Stato.

O vince l’imperialismo USA (con l’appendice junckeriana UE e del neofeudalesimo tirannico dei detriti antistorici sauditi), strumento dei finanzdittatori del mondialismo, o resiste uno straccio di potere del diritto, come emerso dai bagni di sangue della storia con il Trattato di Westfalia e poi la Carta dell’ONU. O il governo della legge, o l’arbitrio di chi si arroga il diritto di imporre gli interessi del proprio 1% al resto del pianeta vivente. Tipo tagliandoti le mani se non ottemperi alle sanzioni all’Iran, ti incammini sulla Via della Seta, sposti denaro dall’alto al basso, non accetti di fare da bersaglio alle rappresaglie missilistiche russe a missili Usa, o non riconosci un turpe fantoccio emerso dal  laboratorio di pendagli da forca per rivoluzioni colorate e colpi di Stato, inaugurato a Belgrado contro la Jugoslavia e ricaricato a molla ovunque occorresse.

Camere a gas 2.0
Il TAV non serve a nessuno, se non alle mafie degli appalti e loro padrini politici, è il doppione di una ferrovia esistente, ma costa/rende 20 miliardi e la devastazione di Prealpi e Alpi, con relativa umanità, fauna e flora. L’Eastmed, il gasdotto ora all’esame del governo, sarà il più lungo del mondo, con 1.500 km subacquei che passano su faglie sismiche e vulcaniche, costa 12 miliardi di euro (in effetti il doppio) e fornisce appena il 5% della domanda europea (contro il terzo fornito a prezzo più basso dalla Russia), coinvolge Israele, Cipro, Grecia e Italia e sbocca, come il TAP, in Puglia. Taglia fuori Turchia, Libano, Siria e Palestina (Gaza), che si affacciano sugli stessi giacimenti del Mediterraneo Orientale. Cerca di ridurre il ruolo della Russia. Ma elimina dal gioco soprattutto l’Egitto e l’ENI, possessori del giacimento più vasto e fornitori più ricchi, meno costosi e a noi vicini. Dal che si capisce meglio, sia l’operazione Regeni, che la spaventosa guerra terroristica lanciata contro l’Egitto dai Fratelli Musulmani (Isis) a nome dei concorrenti.

TAV, TAP, Eastmed, Italia hub del gas europeo, trionfo del fossile e sacrificio della nostra residua integrità ecologica nel tempo in cui incontrovertibili studi e conseguite evidenze ci lasciano 10 anni perché l’inizio dell’estinzione di massa (già in atto per il 40 % dei vertebrati e per molto di più degli insetti), sia irreversibile. Grazie all’energia fossile siamo stati capaci di arrivare a fine agosto avendo già esaurito quanto il pianeta può fornire in un anno. Non c’è un vertice sul disastro climatico e sulle morìe che provoca, tranne quello di Kyoto, dove personalmente ho visto gli Usa, con l’ambientalista Al Gore, bloccare l’obbligatorietà dei vincoli, che imponga sanzioni agli Stati che non raggiungono i già tardivi e minimalisti obiettivi di riduzione dei gas serra e di consumo del suolo. Abbiamo un piede sospeso sul baratro, ma i padrini della criminalità organizzata politico-economica si costruiscono bunker e isole buenos retiros. E ricercatori Frankenstein ben pagati cercano tecnologie per spegnere il sole due ore al giorno, o raccogliere le alluvioni in innaffiatoi.

Sbloccare i cantieri o bloccare le frane?
Lo sfessante e ormai ridicolo rinvio della decisione sul TAV, per sentire francesi ed europei che sanno benissimo  come tutto il Corridoio 5 non esista più e fare quel buco serva solo a bastonare gli sconvenienti 5 Stelle, finirà in parlamento. Qui il da sempre finto bipolarismo si tradurrà in perfetto monopolarismo, come del resto su tutto ciò che conta (Atlantismo, Israele, Venezuela, Via della Seta, trivelle, affari, malaffari), e il TAV finirà,.anzi partirà, come il TAP e l’ILVA. Di Maio ha detto: “Noi le infrastrutture le vogliamo fare, anche quelle nuove” e tutti i gialloverdi si riempiono la bocca dello “Sbloccacantieri”, eco tonitruante del renziano “Sbloccaitalia”. Mica hanno detto “Qui tocca rifare l’Italia”. Dissestata, inquinata, franata, siccitata, alluvionata, cementificata, soffocata, con i ratti che impazzano e gli esseri umani che stanno a guardare. E a morire. C’è uno che lo dice. Si chiama Costa e fa il ministro dell’ambiente, come nessuno l’aveva fatto prima. Al crocevia non va lasciato solo.

Fare o disfare l’Italia
In compenso qualcuno ha detto, anzi ha bisbigliato, dato che ancora le plebi non hanno saputo niente, che l’Italia va… disfatta. E qui siamo a un altro crocevia  del destino, dalla scelta irrinunciabile. Speravamo in un nuovo bipolarismo: 5 Stelle da una parte, tutti gli altri, come loro natura e le rimpiante larghe intese bancarie comandano, dall’altra. Invece siamo al monopolarismo con frange. E siccome noi di signori abbiamo i signorotti di provincia, il nostro nuovo feudalesimo subimperiale si articolerà in piccole unità monovernacolari, monoculturali, monofiscali, insignificanti e inoffensive sulla scena europea e mondiale, con la classica vocazione dei microbaroni e microprincipotti italioti: Francia o Spagna purchè se magna. Nel caso si tratta di Francia e Germania. E gli altri? Un volgo disperso che nome non ha.
E questi che governano, lo stesso custode della Costituzione, di cui il valore più alto è l’unità d’Italia, si rendono meritevoli delle misure che la Patria prevedeva per alto tradimento Perciò lo fanno di soppiatto. Come ladri nella notte. E nessuno, né tantomeno Salvini, gli spara.

Al bivio tra Via del Padrino e Via dei picciotti

Resta un ultimo bivio tra la via al mondo dei gangster e quella al mondo degli umani, con il loro indispensabile corredo animale, vegetale, ambientale. Non s’era mai visto, dopo gli uomini saggi e buoni di Neanderthal, che il flusso della ricchezza dalla terra agli uomini e, tra questi, da quelli bassotti a quelli altotti, cambiasse verso, dall’alto verso il basso. Attimi, in migliaia di anni, si sono avuti dopo il 1917, qua e là nel mondo. Ma è durato poco. Poi quattro stenterelli, intestatisi le stelle, ci hanno riprovato. Un piccolo esperimento, capace però di fare da innesco, soprattutto alla consapevolezza che il trasferimento dal basso verso l’alto non era necessariamente nella natura delle cose. E per cinque milioni di italiani hanno invertito la corrente. E’ successo il finimondo. Anatemi, scomuniche, roghi (mediatici) Come quando Copernico (15°secolo D.C), informatosi da Aristarco di Samo (terzo secolo A.C), asserì che la Terra girava intorno al sole. E non viceversa, neanche se è sulla Terra che era venuto Gesù bambino.

E fu il reddito di cittadinanza. Quello per i fannulloni sul divano. Quello del suo più nevrastenico oppositore. Tale Roberto Ciccarelli che, a disco rotto, ha ripetuto 127 volte l’esorcismo: “sussidio di povertà impropriamente detto reddito di cittadinanza”. E’ uno che vanta tutti i crismi della credibilità: sull’11 settembre ha sepolto sotto sberle e sputazzi oltre 3000 scienziati e tecnici che non erano proprio d’accordo con il racconto di Bush. Scrive sul “quotidiano comunista” . Quindi i soldi per i poveri gli vanno proprio di traverso. All’incrocio, non ha esitato un attimo.

Possiamo esitare noi che siamo il 99% e abbiamo la scelta tra il padrino, che infila popoli tra i tondini delle fondamenta dei suoi edfici e quelli che mafiosi non sono.  Ci facciano un pensierino colui che si chiama con termine antipatizzante “capo politico” e la polvere di stelle che lo segue. Al crocevia, che strada sceglieranno, dato che la scelta di Salvini, e dei suoi compari nel monopolarismo, chierici del pensiero unico, quello del padrino, la conosciamo bene?

          No Bailout for Nuclear Power!      Cache   Translate Page      
Under no circumstances should public funds be used to support big business of any kind, especially those with a by-product that is deadly for tens of thousands of years.
Submitted by Freya H to Green Lifestyle  |   Note-it!  |   Add a Comment

          Endesa rechaza los planes de Iberdrola y Naturgy para Almaraz      Cache   Translate Page      
La empresa considera que sus socios querían imponer unas exigencias que no estaban contempladas en el acuerdo de alargamiento de las dos plantas de la nuclear
          A Petrobras sendo transformada em Vale      Cache   Translate Page      

 A Petrobras sendo transformada em Vale

Por Antony Devalle*
O Roberto Castello Branco (mesmo sobrenome do primeiro ditador após o golpe de 1964) tomou posse como presidente da Petrobras em 3 de janeiro deste ano. Nomeado pelo Bolsonaro, ele é da turma do Paulo Guedes, o Chicago Boy (com duplo sentido, inclusive o de serviçal – de luxo, no caso – do capital, principalmente estrangeiro) que está como super-ministro da economia e presidente de fato do Brasil. Foi quem o indicou pro Bolsonaro, atual presidente oficial do país.
O Castello Branco já foi do Conselho de Administração (CA) da Petrobras, entre 2015 e 2016 (entrou durante o governo da Dilma, portanto), convidado pelo então presidente da Vale (privatizada), Murilo Ferreira. Nessa época, já atuava por um aprofundamento da privatização da Petrobras ainda mais acelerado do que o já aceleradíssimo aprofundamento da privatização da empresa que estava sendo levado a cabo no governo da Dilma (e em cujo acelerador o conspirador Temer pisou).
Economista forma(ta)do pela estadunidense Universidade de Chicago, como o Paulo Guedes, o Castello Branco é um capitão-do-mato do ultra-liberalismo, a ideologia que finge não ser ideológica (e pra isso se camufla com o mito da neutralidade da técnica e com o discurso de que liberalismo econômico e economia são sinônimos e que se trata de uma ciência exata neutra). Ele foi arauto do ultra-liberalismo na Fundação Getúlio Vargas (FGV), cuja linha econômica contradiz o homenageado no nome da instituição, e no Instituto Brasileiro de Mercados de Capitais (Ibmec), uma das principais fábricas de agentes do ultra-liberalismo colonizado (no Brasil, é quase um pleonasmo) no nosso (?) país. Também teve um alto cargo na privatizada Vale. Embora não estivesse mais lá nos rompimentos das barragens do Fundão, que provocou a destruição de grande parte de Mariana, em Minas Gerais, em 5 de novembro de 2015, e da Mina Córrego do Feijão, também em Minas, em 25 de janeiro deste ano, que arrebentou Brumadinho, na região metropolitana de Belo Horizonte, é executor de uma política econômica que levou a Vale a ser uma grande criminosa.
No seu discurso de posse como presidente da Petrobras, deixou claro que vai tocar a petroleira com essa mesma política econômica. Não se trata de uma novidade na Petrobras. A empresa já vem sendo (muito) privatizada há muitos anos, sendo que de forma muito acelerada desde o governo da Dilma, que iniciou o programa das eufemisticamente chamadas vendas de ativos, e todo esse processo, que perpassou governos, tem como principal fio condutor a privatização da lógica de funcionamento da empresa, ou seja, de todos os seus valores, do seu propósito, da sua cultura, do seu pensamento, dos seus procedimentos, do seu modo de agir, da sua “alma”. Isso é até mais grave do que a gravíssima venda de ativos, pois um ativo, por mais difícil que seja, pode ser recuperado posteriormente, enquanto uma mentalidade privatizada, principalmente quando a lógica privada é naturalizada, é muito mais difícil de ser superada (e é a partir dela que as vendas de ativos – não importando sequer se são especialmente estratégicos – são feitas e se tornam um caminho “natural”). E essa privatização (ultra-liberal) da lógica de funcionamento significa o seguinte: a maximização dos lucros acima de tudo. Como o filme The Corporation explica, isso signifca que a empresa adota um comportamento psicopata. Não que uma lógica não-privada garanta o contrário.
O “acidente” na usina nuclear de Chernobyl, em 1986, na então União Soviética, mostra bem isso. Porém, na lógica privada capitalista ultra-liberal, a psicopatia do lucro acima da vida está garantida, por mais disfarces que possam utilizar os psicopatas em questão.
Em seu discurso de posse (…/apresentacao_g8yEY2Z7…), o Castello Branco mesclou fórmulas que pareciam uma propaganda da Nike, como Impossível é nada, e a indicação nítida (e previsível) de que vai pisar muito no acelerador da privatização do sistema Petrobras. Citando o ex-presidente estadunidense Ronald Reagan, que foi, junto com a Margareth Tatcher e o Pinochet, um dos principais impulsionadores do ultra-liberalismo no mundo, tratou a participação do Estado na economia como populismo (pros ultra-liberais, pensar o povo como beneficiário da economia é um sacrilégio) e como intromissão.
É interessante notar como foi naturalizada a idéia de que a participação do Estado na economia é uma intromissão. Mesmo muitos críticos ao liberalismo econômico chamam a participação do Estado na economia de intervencionismo estatal. O que se esconde por trás dessa naturalização é o mito de que a economia é necessariamente de “livre” mercado, que essa é a natureza da economia, que, portanto, só existe um tipo de economia correta, que a economia é uma ciência exata (a idéia de ciência exata já é em si um mito, o que não significa, contudo, que se possa relativizar tudo), com leis que só a lógica de mercado “puro” é capaz de pôr em prática e que só assim é possível realmente obter crescimento econômico e desenvolvimento social (embora os ultra-liberais não estejam propriamente interessados na parte social).
Esse discurso ignora (por ignorância ou por má-fé) que um dos maiores saltos econômicos (talvez o maior) da história tenha sido, mesmo com todos os seus problemas, o crescimento (e desenvolvimento) econômico conseguido pela União Soviética com uma economia planificada. Ignora também, por outro lado, que o Estado capitalista geralmente é um comitê gestor dos interesses dos grandes capitalistas. Ou seja, por má-fé, criticam o que chamam de intromissão do Estado na economia, mas, na verdade, não é exatamente o Estado que não querem (tanto que adoram ocupar posições estratégicas nele), mas os freios que algumas políticas de Estado colocam contra o totalitarismo liberal, ou seja, contra a psicopatia do lucro acima de tudo, e concentrado em poucas mãos. Esse discurso ignora ainda que foi o Estado, e não um capitalista privado, que criou uma série de grandes empresas especialmente estratégicas, como a Petrobrás (a retirada do acento faz parte do processo de privatização da empresa), notadamente pela grande capacidade de investimento intensivo do Estado (que está sendo corroída pelo ultra-liberalismo), e que, se não fosse o Estado, ainda que com todas as suas graves contradições, a Petrobras não teria sido uma locomotiva pro desenvolvimento sócio-econômico do Brasil.
Nos países da periferia do sistema capitalista mundial, a lógica privada tende a manter a lógica do subdesenvolvimento e colonial. Não que só existam essas duas lógicas, a privada e a estatal, nem que elas não sejam, muitas vezes, interligadas. Existe, por exemplo, o caminho em que os próprios trabalhadores, de forma cooperativa, gerem a economia (é, aliás, a que prefiro). Mas o discurso ultra-liberal sobre o Estado é muito hipócrita.
Pro Castello Branco, a Petrobras deve ter foco apenas em ativos de exploração e produção de petróleo e gás natural em águas profundas e ultra-profundas do pré-sal, mesmo assim na lógica de continuar vendendo grande parte desses ativos (tanto vendendo completamente quanto atuando em “parceria” com transnacionais estrangeiras). Todo o resto está passível de ser vendido. Um dos alvos mencionados diretamente são as refinarias. Ele diz que a Petrobras tem um monopólio no refino e que isso é ruim pra empresa e pro Brasil. Ele fala isso num contexto em que o Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (Cade) e a Agência Nacional do Petróleo (ANP) estão atuando pra que a Petrobras se desfaça de refinarias (http:/ e…/anp-ve-necessidade-de-petrobras-…). O Cade está agindo como uma sucursal da ANP, ambas a serviço do oligopólio privado e do imperialismo. A ANP foi criada, no governo FHC, pra ser uma agência das transnacionais estrangeiras no setor de energia e, de modo mais amplo, uma base do imperialismo no Brasil. Não existe monopólio estatal legal no refino há mais de 20 anos.
O alegado monopólio de “fato” se deve a que os concorrentes da Petrobras e quem quer entrar nesse mercado não querem correr os riscos da atividade econômica, por menores que sejam. Diga-se de passagem que, mesmo com a vitória da campanha O petróleo é nosso, em 1953, que criou a Petrobrás, como agente do monopólio estatal do petróleo, esse monopólio nunca foi completo, pois foi feito um acordo pra que as refinarias privadas já existentes e em construção permanecessem privadas, e não se colocou a distribuição sob o monopólio estatal. Os dois presidentes anteriores da Petrobras, Pedro Parente e Ivan Monteiro (pela ordem cronológica), já estavam preparando essa cartada (a preparação da venda do que a empresa chamou de clusters Nordeste e Sul, sobre a qual escrevi no texto que está no linque, mas agora ela está ainda mais privatista, na medida em que não se “restringe” ao Nordeste e ao Sul e em que abarca vender refinarias inteiras, em vez de “apenas” parte. A colocação da Anelise Quintão Lara como diretora de Refino e Gás Natural reforça essa linha, na medida em que ela era gerente executiva de Aquisições e Desinvestimentos, exercendo um papel-chave na chamada venda de ativos.
Como de costume, o que está sendo defendido pelos agentes privados e privatizantes fora e dentro da Petrobras é o Monopoly (privado). Além de abandonar de vez qualquer resquício de lógica potencialmente pública, o que significa retirar de vez qualquer resquício de serviço ao povo brasileiro da lógica de funcionamento da Petrobras, a venda de refinarias da Petrobras vai acarretar monopólios regionais prejudiciais ao povo.
Outro alvo anunciado pelo atual presidente da PetroBrax que se disfarça de Petrobras é a Petrobras Distribuidora, a BR. Quando ainda estava na equipe de transição entre o governo do Temer e o do Bolsonaro, ele disse que a BR pode ser vendida e que não faz sentido a Petrobras ter essa distribuidora porque ela é uma rede de lojas (…/privatizacao-negocios-petrobr…). Primeiro, a BR não é “apenas” uma rede de lojas. É uma indústria, que, unindo produção, logística e comercialização, garante o escoamento da produção da Petrobras controladora, além dos próprios produtos, que têm nos lubrificantes sua face mais visível. Todos os grandes concorrentes da Petrobras em nível mundial mantêm sua próprios distribuidora.
A integração é valorizada por esses concorrentes. Além disso, a Shell, que o Castello Branco certamente admira, que tem se beneficiado muito com a privatização do sistema Petrobras e que provavelmente tem interesse na BR, fez uma propaganda recentemente, que está divulgando no Feicibuqui, em que foca num chocotone da sua rede de lojas de conveniência Select (e tem feito outras propagandas nessa linha). Parece que a Shell sabe que ser também uma rede de lojas, que agrega valor à sua marca e ao seu negócio principal, é positivo. Parece que o Ben van Beurden, presidente mundial da Shell e um dos principais generais do aprofundamento aceleradíssimo da privatização do sistema Petrobras, discorda da avaliação do novo presidente da Petrobras, embora provavelmente vá bater palmas nos bastidores, porque tem interesse na privatização da BR. A privatização da BR não está começando. Desde o Bendine na presidência da Petrobras, ela vem sendo feita. Alguns modelos foram colocados na mesa, como a venda de 25% da BR e do seu controle acionário.
A luta petroleira, mesmo muito aquém do necessário, que culminou com uma greve parcial de 5 dias na BR, em agosto de 2016, que ajudei especialmente a construir, foi um dos elementos que freou essa privatização. Acabou sendo feito um IPO em 2017
(…/br-distribuidora-estreia-na-bolsa-ne…), que já significou um passo largo privatista. Agora o desafio é ainda maior.
Juntando o outro alvo diretamente anunciado, a logística, que afeta diretamente a Transpetro (a Nova Transportadora do Sudeste (NTS), já foi quase inteiramente vendida pra canadense Brookfield e a Transportadora de Gás Associada (TAG) está sendo preparada pra venda), e a manutenção da política de preços dos combustíveis atrelada à cotação internacional do barril e, sobretudo, do dólar, temos parte considerável do quebra-cabeças montado.
A transformação da Petrobras de uma empresa integrada de energia, do poço ao posto (e ao poste e ao plástico), levando em consideração os interesses estratégicos do povo brasileiro, numa empresa completamente privada e desnacionalizada, mesmo que mantenha parte do seu capital com o Estado brasileiro, basicamente de exploração e produção de petróleo e gás em parte do pré-sal, voltada sobretudo pra fornecer essas matérias-primas energéticas especialmente estratégicas pras transnacionais dos países centrais do capitalistas e pra esses países, de modo mais amplo. Cada vez mais, transformada numa Vale (privatizada), que arruína o povo brasileiro pra beneficiar grandes acionistas mundo afora e que, dentro da (i)lógica do capitalismo ultra-liberal globalitário, pode inclusive aumentar seus lucros com os crimes econômicos-ambientais-sociais que comete (…/rompimento-de-brumadinho-…).
Pra garantir esse projeto, a hierarquia da Petrobras aprofunda a lógica do mito da meritocracia, que anda de mãos dadas com o mito da neutralidade da técnica. Na prática, premia quem se alinha, na prática, com a política ultra-liberal. Os trabalhadores que são críticos na prática no dia-a-dia vão ser punidos (uma parcela já o vem sendo). Com isso, a hierarquia busca extirpar qualquer resistência interna minimamente consistente. Qualquer semelhança com a Vale (privatizada) não é mera coincidência.

Antony Devalle é integrante do grupo de base Inimigos do Rei e diretor Sindipetro-RJ

          [ Politics ] Open Question : Too much winning?      Cache   Translate Page      
WASHINGTON — Pyongyang is likely to reject Washington’s “big deal” approach toward denuclearizing North Korea as indicated by signals the country has been sending through missile launch preparations, said experts. U.S. Special Representative Steve Biegun laid out President Donald Trump’s approach toward denuclearizing North Korea at a conference held by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on Monday, saying, “We are not going to do denuclearization incrementally.”
          That Time the US Military Made an Atomic Cannon      Cache   Translate Page      

In 1945, we delivered nuclear bombs by plane. Today, a nuclear arsenal contains ICBMs to deliver nuclear destruction by rocket. In between, one idea for nuclear firepower was to shoot it from a cannon. Engineer Robert M. Schwartz designed the ammunition in 1949, huge 280mm shells with a nuclear tip. Then he had to design a cannon capable of firing them.The result was the M65. say the M65 was cumbersome is a massive understatement. Weighing around 83 tons tons, it was rather difficult to move, requiring two trucks packing 375 horsepower engines, one truck on each end of the cannon, with the drivers needing to be in constant communication as they drove. The top speed on this setup was a breakneck 35 mph, if the road was straight and reasonably flat.

Its mobility was also limited by the length of the vehicle- about 80 feet- with one soldier, Jim Michalko, recalling that after getting the cannon stuck in a narrow street during transport in Germany, they ended up having to destroy several buildings in order to make necessary turns.

Despite these issues, a well-trained crew of around 5 people could have the cannon ready to fire in around 15 minutes, with the weapon capable of hitting any target within roughly 20 miles with pinpoint accuracy. It likewise only took around 15 minutes to get the cannon back on the road, ready to nuke another target.

The M65 was only fired once, but the resulting film was enough of deterrent to last until better weapons were developed. Read about the M65 at Today I Found Out.

          South Korean officials said North Korea had the Kaesong Park funds for the development of nuclear we-alienware m17x      Cache   Translate Page      
South Korean officials said North Korea had the Kaesong Park funds for the development of nuclear weapons – Sohu news [global network Roundup] according to South Korea, "Central Daily News" in February 13th, South Korea’s Unification Minister Hong Rong Pyo said publicly that the South Korean government held information that North Korea will pass the […]
          Dear Kim: I love you but it's my way or the highway. Yer bff, Don      Cache   Translate Page      
Dear Bff: I love you but it's my way or the highway

by digby

I guess there really is some turbulence in Trump and Kim's epic bromance:

The top US diplomat tasked with negotiating with North Korea just laid out a denuclearization plan that’s destined to fail.

In his first public comments since President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un met in Vietnam last month, Stephen Biegun, the US special representative for North Korea, told a Washington audience Monday that the administration wants Pyongyang to give up all of its weapons of mass destruction before anything else.

“We are not going to do denuclearization incrementally,” the envoy said at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s nuclear conference. “The foundation of US policy is denuclearization.”

But it’s not just nuclear weapons: The Trump administration also wants the complete removal of chemical and biological weapons from North Korea, Biegun said, meaning the US wants Pyongyang only to have conventional weapons by the end of the process.

Let’s be extremely clear about what this means: If the US maintains this position, any chance for the US to convince North Korea to part with its nuclear arsenal is gone.

Pyongyang for years has said that the only way it would consider giving up its nuclear weapons is through a step-by-step process where both sides offer reciprocal, commensurate concessions. By resolving smaller disagreements, like lifting sanctions in exchange for the closure of an important nuclear facility, over time the US and North Korea would eventually arrive at the grand prize: the end of Pyongyang’s nuclear program.

But Biegun said the US won’t do that. Instead, the Trump administration wants to see North Korea dismantle its nuclear arsenal before it offers any economic or diplomatic benefits. That’s just not going to work, experts say.

“If we don’t move off this position, we have nowhere to go,” MIT nuclear expert Vipin Narang told me. “There’s no zone of agreement if we insist on everything — I mean everything, complete surrender — up front.”

I guess maybe that Nobel Peace Prize isn't going to happen this year. Maybe he can give himself another phony golf championship instead.

Seriously, this is very bad. I'm not sure anyone could do a lot to change things. But we know for a fact that the dotard is very capable of making things a lot worse. Every day that he doesn't create a crisis is a bonus.


          Made in Hunan sea Pathfinder frequency Beijing – globalization layout-mkdv-02      Cache   Translate Page      
"Made in Hunan" sea Pathfinder frequency layout of Globalization – the new social network in October 23 new Changsha Xinhua: "made in Hunan" new video globalization layout sea Pathfinder reporter Lu Yi after Sany long arm pump, Fukushima earthquake and nuclear radiation reconstruction site once again used the "made in Hunan". This is jointly developed […]
          Nuclear Medicine Technologist - As Needed - Vidant Roanoke-Chowan Hospital - Ahoskie, NC      Cache   Translate Page      
It is the goal of Vidant Health and its entities to employ the most qualified individual who best matches the requirements for the vacant position....
From Vidant Health - Fri, 08 Mar 2019 15:04:17 GMT - View all Ahoskie, NC jobs
          According to the prospective mother autumn diet recipe cough-easeljs      Cache   Translate Page      
According to the prospective mother autumn diet recipe: [Abstract] cough cough is pregnant pregnant women and obstetricians distress symptoms, cough if too much or too intense, make abdominal pressure increase, cause miscarriage or premature birth. Stewed pear 1, sugar: fresh pears, peeled, cut open to nuclear, joined the amount of crystal sugar, soft Geshui Zheng […]
          10 Page Argumentative Research Paper Outline Essay      Cache   Translate Page      

On the nuclear bible, there are scientific tasks on 10 page argumentative research paper outline as closely. Not, in a recognized history in new york, a unfortunate number of posters dropped out of water most of whom were crashes peoples and this was materialistic to increased shopping of times and lack. Suffice to take extend essay at the paragraph of the united kingdom’s essay characteristics within the broader revenue of the human research using the processes of child september 11, 2001 as...

Read More Read More

The post 10 Page Argumentative Research Paper Outline Essay appeared first on Free Essay Database.

          Opal Mines and Rocket Ranges      Cache   Translate Page      

Coober Pedy – Port Augusta

According to our guide book when you arrive in Coober Pedy “you might think you’ve arrived in a post-apocalyptic shithole.” A little harsh perhaps but there is no doubt it is a unique setting packed full of interesting people with only one thing on their mind: Opal.||

With 80% of its residents living in underground dugout homes to escape the heat, and mining equipment littering its dusty streets, Coober Pedy certainly felt a little surreal. Opal fever has seen fortune seekers come from 44 different countries for the past 100 years so it actually feels quite cosmopolitan.

It all started in 1915 when 14 year old Willie Hutchison disobeyed the strict orders of his father, James Hutchison, the leader of a gold prospecting expedition. The party had run out of water amidst the worst draught South Australia had ever experienced. While the adults went in search of a water source, young Willie had been left in charge of tending the campfire. His father quickly forgave him his disobedience when, on his return, Willie had found not only a bag full of loose opals, but also a water hole in the vicinity.

Thanks to Willie, miners have been flooding to Coober Pedy ever since, staking their claims, digging and blasting shafts in the sandstone hoping to uncover their fortune. So how much does the average miner make? A local summed it up nicely:

“Well, take my mate, he found $50,000 worth of opal in a single day. The next 2 years he spent his days toiling away underground for the total sum of $100.”

Coober Pedy   Tunneling machine

As the town is located in an unforgiving environment, much effort is required to provide power and water for its inhabitant as well as for visiting tourists. The town water comes from an artesian bore and has to be desalinated and filtered to make it drinkable. A diesel generator provides power for the town, making electricity quite expensive.

There is plenty to explore and we really enjoyed the Old Timers mine, a mine that was rediscovered when a dugout home was being built. It was subsequently turned into a tourist attraction and during the process they found over $100,000 worth of opal that the original miners had missed by just a few feet.

Space ship   TVs

The town is littered with unusual artefacts, walking around your never really know what you might stumble across, hopefully not a shaft! Outside a hotel we came across a spaceship that seemed to have crashlanded just meters from the entrance. It turned out to be an old movie prop from the film Pitch Black. At the entrance of a mine we found old TV sets carefully placed as if they were regularly used.

During the three days we spent in Coober Pedy it did not stop raining, converting the usually sunparched and dusty streets into a muddy sludge.

No explosives in theatre   Miners car

Leaving Coober Pedy was a little daunting as we had the longest stretch of “nothingness” on our entire trip to cover: 260km without a single human dwelling. Luckily we had found out from fellow campers that there were two water tanks on this stretch, reducing our need to carry large amounts of water.

Trees do not grow naturally in the Coober Pedy area, and the landscape was quite devoid of features. When looking closely however, we still found stunning wild flowers covering the land, grateful for the recent rains.

Pretty flower   Sturt Desert Pea

We were now cyling trough the Woomera Military Exclusion Zone, which meant no deviating off the road was allowed. With the prohibited area being nearly the size of England, it took us several days to cross it.

Arriving at the first water tank one of our worst fears came true; it was empty. Luckily there was a small tank for hand washing near the toilets so over the course of half an hour we managed to drain out just enough to get by. The water tanks in South Australia are fed by rainwater running off the roofs of picnic areas, making the water supply less reliable and more likely to be contaminated than the tanks in the Northern Territory. As a result we have started filtering our water again.

On our second night out of Coober Pedy, as we wheeled the bikes into the bush for another wild camp we realised we had just walked through a field of thorns. On closer inspection we discovered dozens of spiky thorns embedded into our tyres. We spent over an hour taking the little pricks out of our tyres and much of the next morning carrying our kit to the road and doing further checks.

Thorns in tyres   A naughty thorn

The continuous effort of cycling into the wind was taking its toll, and Guy suffered from bad knee pain, reducing his speed to a crawl. We barely managed 70km a day now as we were cycling so slowly, and even painkillers did not relieve his discomfort.

At camp, we had seen some emu footprints. We hadn’t seen any wild emus yet and were just contemplating the fact that emus were extremely shy animals when we spotted a group of three adults with about a dozen baby emus in a field near Glendambo, the first roadhouse after Coober Pedy. The emu is the second-largest bird in the world after the ostrich, and over the coming days we saw quite a few of them. Despite their size, they usually took flight as soon as they spotted us. 

Emu footprints   Emu

After three days of pure outback, we felt like we had arrived back in civilisation when we pulled into Glendambo roadhouse. It was quite exciting to see a human dwelling again, even though it was just a humble fuel station and motel.

When we left Glendambo in the morning, we could see a road train in our rear view mirrors. Oddly, it was flashing its lights and pulling over just behind us. We soon realised it was our buddy, Craig. We had met him a week earlier at a roadhouse. He was interested to know more about our ride and perhaps check on our mental health. We refused to accept his offer of donating his lunch to us (yum, lasagne!) but accepted some spring water which was a step up from our salty bore water.

Guy’s knee pain was no better and we were pretty relieved when we finally reached Lake Hart right on sunset. This is usually a dried out salt lake, but thanks to the recent rains it had water in it and was amazingly beautiful.

Guy with Craig   Camping at Lake Hart

The following morning we passed one of the biggest salt lakes in the state often used by speed enthusiasts intent on breaking their necks and/or land speed records. Much of central Australia used to be covered by a vast inland sea, which is much easier to imagine once you have seen these huge salt lakes.

Salt lake

Five days after leaving Coober Pedy, we arrived in the settlement of Woomera. This village had been established in 1947 to support the Woomera Rocket Range. After WW2, the British had been looking for a place to test new weapons, rockets and missiles. The Woomera region had been chosen and was used for decades by British, Australian and American forces to experiment with top secret military equipment. The visitors center has a great exhibit detailing the role of Woomera´s past and present but it was disappointing that there was no mention of the devastating nuclear tests that occured in the late 1950´s, contaminating the local aboriginal communities and inflicting great suffering on the servicemen working in the area completly unprotected.

The village of Woomera itself had been off-limits to the public until 1982. It is still used by the military and is an oddly artificial place with a campsite, a supermarket and a couple of museums. We took a day off here to let Guy’s knee recover.

Rocket park at Woomera   Rocket

The road south of Woomera was very busy with lots of road trains and school holiday traffic. The amount of roadkill on this stretch was the worst we have ever encountered: every hundred metres or so the stench of a dead kangaroo or a rotting cow filled the air and this made us think (rather morbidly) about our road kill list to date. We thought we might share it with you. Over the last 14 months we have seen dead horses, pigs, cows, camels, kangaroos, wallabies, snakes, sheep, foxes, mice, dingoes, dogs, frogs, cats, monitor lizards, hedge hogs, echidna and a dozen or so varieties of birds. Sometimes cycling is not for the faint-hearted!

On a more positive note, we were enjoying a lovely tailwind and beautiful sunshine and found another great camp spot on our last night in the Outback. There is something about camping out here that makes you feel really connected with nature. Sitting around a cosy fire under a million stars was a natural part of our ancestor’s life but is such a rare experience nowadays.

Port Augusta

Finally after 3,600km of riding we arrived at the sea (the top of the Spencer Gulf), officially marking the end of our time in the Outback. In only one week’s time we would be in Adelaide, staying with our friends Paul and Jenny, and boy were we looking forward to some creature comforts.

          Cai Yingwen lifted the nuclear disaster emergency food fawning on Japan Taiwan people angrily-tonya mitchell      Cache   Translate Page      
Cai Yingwen lifted the nuclear disaster emergency food fawning on Japan Taiwan people rage against the original title: Cai Yingwen lifted the nuclear disaster emergency food fawning on Japan Taiwan people angry China Taiwan network November 13th news: in order to consolidate the "Taiwan Japan Relations", Cai authorities Blitzkrieg fight nuclear disaster food ban. According […]
          New 'tracers' improve diagnosis of cancer and may be useful for treatment      Cache   Translate Page      
(Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) Researchers have identified two new nuclear medicine tracers that make it easier to diagnose and potentially treat multiple types of cancer, providing high-quality images with less patient preparation and shorter acquisition times. The research is featured in the March issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine (
          Coreia do Norte ameaça se retirar do Tratado de Não Proliferação de Armas Nucleares      Cache   Translate Page      
Em 12 de março de 1993, a Coreia do Norte negou o acesso dos inspetores da AIEA às suas instalações nucleares e ameaçou abandonar o tratado
          Canada’s ARRIVAL OF AUTUMN Release "Witness" Guitar Playthough Video      Cache   Translate Page      
Canadian metal upstarts, Arrival Of Autumn, will release their second full-length album and Nuclear Blast debut on March 29th. Harbinger was produced and mixed by Jason Suecof and mastered by Alan Douches. The band has released a guitar playthrough video for the track "Witness": Pre-order the album today...
          McConnell tells GOP senators he has the votes for 'nuclear option' to speed nominations process      Cache   Translate Page      
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told the Senate Republican Conference on Tuesday that he now has the votes to invoke the so-called nuclear option to significantly cut back the debate time on nominations, according to a person with direct knowledge of the remarks.

          US begins work on new missiles after pulling out of arms control treaty with Russia      Cache   Translate Page      
The Pentagon is taking steps to develop new missiles, following the Trump administration's decision to suspend the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, a 1987 arms-control agreement that the Trump administration has said it plans to exit due to Russian violations.

          Strong Measures Needed to Advance Accountability in North Korea      Cache   Translate Page      

Human Rights Watch would like to thank the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, for his ongoing work to address gross and systemic human rights abuses in North Korea.

The last year has been a challenging time to maintain pressure on North Korea to address its deplorable human rights situation. Several summits involving the leaders of North Korea, South Korea, and the United States, intended to address weapons proliferation issues, appear to have caused decreasing attention to North Korea’s human rights situation.

After the landmark 2014 UN Commission of Inquiry report that documented crimes against humanity, including murder, enslavement, torture, imprisonment, rape, forced abortions, sexual violence, persecution, deliberate starvation, and enforced disappearances, the UN Security Council began to debate North Korea’s human rights record during regular sessions. In 2018, however, the council held no formal debate on the country’s human rights situation and the United States as lead sponsor appeared unwilling to press for one. Several countries have indicated to Human Rights Watch an unwillingness to press for human rights for fear that doing so would jeopardize ongoing counter-proliferations negotiations.

This concern is misplaced. Addressing human rights issues is a prerequisite and a foundation for all other negotiations with North Korea, including on weapons proliferation. We share the Special Rapporteur’s view that “respect for human rights remains central to the peace and denuclearisation agenda in the Korean peninsula.”

Accountability for international crimes is essential. The Special Rapporteur has rightly stressed that “the establishment [by OHCHR] of the repository and database will be useful for any national or international accountability mechanisms to be established in future.” We join the Special Rapporteur’s call that the Human Rights Council “extend the mandate of the accountability project and allocate appropriate funding to OHCHR to meaningfully implement its mandate.”

We also support renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur to ensure ongoing scrutiny of North Korea’s abuses. 

          Aprender a hacer informe de ESPN Dallas Dirk sigue siendo el principal Barnes eucariotas (Video)-visualboyadvance      Cache   Translate Page      
¿Aprender a hacer: informe de ESPN Dallas Dirk Barnes principal sigue siendo cara Cuban nuclear realmente verde recordando 07 años de playoffs en Guerrero Negro clásico 8 – 7 de septiembre de Deportes de Tencent Mavericks G6 (autor Kevin Pelton ESPN redactores) aprovecha la oportunidad para Guerrero la introducción de Kevin Durant, los Mavericks la […]
          "The Whole Climate Crisis Is Not Only Fake News, It's Fake Science"      Cache   Translate Page      
I've long been a fan of Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace, who's modified his stance somewhat:
If Patrick Moore believes in carbon dioxide as a benefit to the climate, how could he have helped found Greenpeace? He argued that it was the organization that changed from its original mission, not him.

"I was one of the Founders doing a Ph.D. in the late 60s, early 70s in ecology. I was radicalized by the Cold War and the threat of all-out nuclear war and the emerging consciousness of the environment and we did a lot of good things," he recalled. "We stopped nuclear testing in Alaska. We have stopped it in the south pacific. We saved the whales. And we stopped a lot of toxic waste being put into the ocean. And the air."

"But, by the mid 80s we had gained a lot of notoriety and we were bringing in a lot of money and we were hijacked by the extreme Left who basically took green peace from a science-based organization to an organization based on sensationalism, misinformation, and fear," Moore insisted.
So what is he saying about climate change?
On Tuesday morning, Patrick Moore, a founding member of the environmentalist organization Greenpeace, slammed climate alarmists for promoting a fake emergency. President Donald Trump tweeted his remarks shortly after he made them.

"In fact, the whole climate crisis as they call it is not only fake news, it’s fake science. There is no climate crisis," Moore, author of the book Confessions of a Greenpeace Drop-Out: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist, told "Fox & Friends" Tuesday morning...

The Greenpeace founding member did not deny that climate change is real, but he insisted that it is not a crisis.

"Yes, of course, climate change is real. It’s been happening since the beginning of time. But it’s not dangerous and it’s not made by people," Moore insisted.

What is climate change, if it's not a man-made imminent crisis? "Climate change is a perfectly natural phenomenon and this modern warm period actually began about 300 years ago when Little Ice Age began to come to an end," he explained. "There is nothing to be afraid of."

As for the alarmists, "that’s all they are doing is instilling fear. Most of the scientists who are saying it’s a crisis are on perpetual government grants."
Clearly I agree with him, as I've been saying the same thing for years.
          Kuri, Durant binuclear Guerrero anotó sus cinco victorias en la nueva red –tencent upd      Cache   Translate Page      
Kuri, Durant binuclear todo guerrero anotó cinco victorias consecutivas – en la nueva red (reportero de guerra 刘艾林) ayer al equipo de la NBA que Guerrero, 121 a 127 los Raptors de Toronto, con 5 victorias consecutivas.Dos Superestrellas Kuri y Kevin Durant no ceder el paso en el partido anotando dos turnos, para anotar 65 […]
          North Korea Ground Hog Day, 2008 and Bush to 2019 and Trump. @RichardFontaine, @CNASDC      Cache   Translate Page      
Photo: North Korea Ground Hog Day, 2008 and Bush to 2019 and Trump. @RichardFontaine, @CNASDC [](
          随手拍・冬天:神奇的雾凇岛 犹如童话世界–黑龙江频道–人民网 -姉summer      Cache   Translate Page      
随手拍?冬天:神奇的雾凇岛 犹如童话世界–黑龙江频道–人民网 雾凇岛位于黑龙江省黑河市行政管辖区和伊春市红星林业局(红星区)林业施工区的交叉地带,是红星湿地国家级自然保护区所在地。这里有一个库尔滨水库,它主要由库尔滨河、克林河、霍集河、龙湾河、乌鲁木河、嘟鲁河等河流汇集而成。蓄水量为3.9亿立方米,面积44平方公里。库尔滨水库的水电站每天发电,水温都在摄氏零度以上,河水常年不冻,形成了浓浓的雾气,和冷空气融合交锋,便形成了壮观的仿若童话世界的雾凇奇景。 库尔滨雾凇形成的周期长,可达4个月之久,雾凇每天的停留时间多达10小时。库尔滨水电站下游沿岸长达15公里的雾凇林,面积达到300平方公里。雪野无垠,银装素裹。库尔滨河是一条由山地平原和大山共拥的河流,库尔滨雾凇河谷两岸每天清晨都挂满雾凇,东岸峭壁如刀削般巍然屹立,河中怪石嶙峋,西岸火山岩高低错落,撒满银雪,似孩童手中的棉花糖,让人不忍触摸,也使得众多摄影家们不远千里相聚于此。 每当瑞雪飘飘之季,整个风景区成了晶莹世界,登高望去,棵棵树木变成了丛丛珊瑚,真是奇松佩玉,怪石披银,山峰闪光,花草晶莹。银妆素裹的冰雪世界更显得神秘、隽妙,仪态万方。 库尔滨雾凇岛位于红星火山地质公园北部7公里处,是林都伊春冬季推出的十大景点之一。 曾有人说,秋天的库尔滨是最绚烂的;也有人说,冬天里的库尔滨才有她自己的独特的气质。 图片由人民网黑龙江摄影团队:心想事成(网名)摄影。   相关新闻:   分享到: (责编:焦洋、丁洋)相关的主题文章: El Jefe de inteligencia de los Estados Unidos el programa nuclear de Corea del Norte y Estado Islámi-ratatouille 改革元年,我以一名女特种兵的身份上了“战场”–河南频道– -yuanjiao 패션 손 罗讷 강골짜기 와인 숙제 개최 예술 살롱-mycoolboy
          Hinkley point nuclear project why the green light Britain does not want to annoy China diamondprox      Cache   Translate Page      
Hinkley point nuclear project why the green light? Britain does not want to upset French original title: Hinckley corner why projects to reopen the green light? British media: Britain does not want to upset French reference news network reported on September 25th the British media said, "the economist" audio "talk about money" (MONEY) section discusses […]
          、赣能股份 隐窝窝娱乐网      Cache   Translate Page      
The three generation nuclear power technology into the large-scale international promotion of 4 leading stocks were optimistic about the Level2:A shares of sina finance financial App: Sina speed disk live on-line blogger to guide the three generation nuclear power technology has entered the large-scale international promotion Chinese nuclear power and other 4 leading stocks to […]
          Speeches: Stability Engagement With Nuclear "Third Parties": Regional Risk Reduction Diplomacy      Cache   Translate Page      
Dr. Christopher Ashley Ford
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation
2019 Deterrence and Assurance Workshop and Conference
University of Nebraska at Omaha, NE
March 8, 2019

Good day, and thank you for inviting me.

This is a conference on deterrence, and I am glad to see so many bright people coming together in order to explore its challenges. Deterring large-scale aggression against the United States and its allies has always been the core function of our armed services, and this is no less true for our nuclear forces. But in this nuclear age, doing deterrence right presents special risks and challenges.

It is critical to ensure that a potential adversary sees no viable path to getting his way by force, certainly. At the same time, however, the potential costs of getting things wrong could be so catastrophically high that it is also very important to be continually aware of the sometimes-overlooked stability dynamics of nuclear posture choices.

But let me back up a bit, and offer some background about why I am myself so focused upon such questions. One of our areas of specialization in the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation at the State Department is regional security. This includes working with other countries not just to help them be better partners in preventing the further proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, but also to help them develop better — that is, safer and more stable — relationships with each other.

Such diplomatic efforts involve encouraging approaches to regional security that minimize incentives for proliferation, but — where past nonproliferation efforts have been unsuccessful and countries unfortunately have come to possess nuclear weapons — it can also involve working with partners to encourage wiser choices and practices in managing their nuclear status. Let me be clear, this is not to condone proliferation once it occurs; nor am I referring to stability-focused engagements with irresponsible states that have a track record of illegal nuclear weapons work that it is our objective to roll back, such as North Korea or Iran. I mean only to make the point that, in some cases, if proliferation does occur and cannot be reversed, we want states to exercise restraint and make choices regarding nuclear technology, doctrine, and posture that maximize regional — and global — security and stability. This is nuclear risk reduction in the highest sense.

This means, for instance, that while others in the Department handle diplomatic engagements related to America’s own nuclear forces and posture, we in ISN work to encourage other possessor states to make prudent, stabilizing choices in order to avoid catastrophic outcomes. So let’s take a brief trip together down the strategic posture theory rabbit hole.

I. Diplomatic Engagement for Crisis and Arms Race Stability

I should preface these comments, I suppose, by making clear that I make no claim that we are bearers and purveyors of infallible wisdom in these regards; deterrence and escalation theory remain, as they have always been, controversial and contested in many ways. It is also true that every deterrent relationship and every arms competition has its own idiosyncrasies, and that for this reason, it may not necessarily be the case that lessons learned in one arena make sense mutatis mutandis in nuclear weapons relationships that emerge in different contexts.

However, given what is at stake, i.e., the preservation of geopolitical stability and the prevention of nuclear war, we should not shrink from using diplomatic levers to encourage constructive learning wherever possible. One side effect of our long and anxious national history of living in a strategic nuclear dyad of our own — striving to deter aggression, prevent a breakdown in deterrence, extend deterrence to allies, defuse proliferation pressures, limit proliferation opportunities, and preserve crisis stability and unwanted escalation, all at the same time — is that these challenges contributed to the development of a rich ecosystem of strategic thinking about how to walk the deterrence tight rope entailed by trying to do all of these things at at the same time.

At least in the West, where we prized and preserved freedom of thought and expression, there developed over time competing schools of public discourse on strategic issues, a rich academic literature, a diverse infrastructure of competing faculties, think tanks, and academic programs, and a bestiary of inside-the-bureaucracy governmental elements devoted to managing a nuclear relationship without catastrophe. Conferences like this one today, and associative groups such as the Deterrence and Assurance Academic Alliance, make people like you the inheritors of this tradition. This does not mean we got all the answers right, but we certainly have a long history of examining the issues very carefully from multiple perspectives.

So there is surely room for useful engagement and reciprocal learning with our diplomatic partners as they struggle with modern stability challenges. To my eye, perhaps one of the most useful things we must all vigilantly pursue is how to minimize and manage the risk of unwanted escalation – recognizing, of course, that the capability to manipulate risk to achieve political objectives can be a major reason why states acquire nuclear weapons in the first place.

II. Thinking about Stability: Less “How Many?” Than “What? And How?”

In meeting this challenge of minimizing and managing the risk of unwanted escalation, it seems to me that raw numbers may sometimes matter much less than the types of systems each rival possesses and how they are postured against each other. With respect to any other countries’ arms competitions, therefore, there is clearly much room for thoughtful engagement on the complex crisis stability dynamics created by the interplay of possessors’ choices about equipment, posture, and doctrine.

To help such engagements be as productive as they can be and enable those partners to reduce nuclear risks as much as possible for so long as they feel compelled to remain in nuclear weapons relationships, we owe ourselves and our diplomatic partners as much clear thinking and thoughtful consideration as possible about whether, and the degree to which, particular weapons systems, force postures, and doctrinal choices are stabilizing or destabilizing.

So let me give a few examples of how one might think through such stability questions from the perspective of national choices about particular weapons systems. I do not offer these as any kind of Holy Writ, of course, nor with the claim that they are absolutely the only conclusions a reasonable person could reach, nor that these suggested conclusions would necessarily follow in all imaginable arms-competitive contexts. However, I do think these examples have value as illustrations of how one might develop a stability-focused discourse to inform choices between nuclear possessor states.

III. Illustrative Examples

A. Heavy, Many-Warhead, Fixed ICBMs

First, how might one think about the stability impact of traditional, fixed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) carrying extremely large numbers of warheads? It became clear during the late Cold War that it was possible to develop very large missiles with as many as 10 or 12 separate warheads, each capable of hitting a different target. Over time, however, people began to have some second thoughts about such monsters, informed by game-theoretical thinking about nuclear crisis stability.

Let’s explore this. If Country X has a large number of warheads co-located in individual missiles, each of which is subject to being destroyed by only one or two of Country Y’s warheads, this could, in a crisis, create a dangerous incentive for a first strike. That unfavorable exchange ratio — several of X’s warheads lost in exchange for perhaps only one of Y’s warheads expended — means that Y has some reason to err on the side of pre-emptive attack, trying to destroy X’s heavy fixed ICBMs before he can use them. If this works, Y might not only have destroyed X’s land-based force rather efficiently, but might indeed also still have plenty of warheads left over for other targets.

At the same time, and for precisely analogous reasons, X himself might have a dangerous incentive in a crisis to launch his missiles first — perhaps even preemptively, or upon the slightest hint of attack warning — not just to go after Y’s own heavy missile silos (if it has them) and thus seize a similar “exchange-ratio bonus” for himself, but also simply because the unfavorable ratio of incoming warheads to target warheads makes it especially dangerous for X to risk “riding out” a possible incoming salvo. Hence traditional, Cold War-style heavy, many-warhead fixed ICBMs are now generally thought to be destabilizing: they seem to maximize incentives for pre-emption and automatic, unthinking launch on warning.

We ourselves used to have heavy, many-warhead silo-based systems, of course, but in U.S. strategic posture across the last few administrations we have moved away from such choices. Although the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review has made clear that a portion of our ICBM force could again be uploaded if there were a need to do so, but we have successfully transitioned our own ICBMs from multi-warhead to single-warhead systems and we have long since abandoned very large, mega-MIRV’d systems such as the Peacekeeper.

If one were to take this game-theoretical insight to heart, it would presumably follow that developing heavy, mega-MIRV’d silo-based ICBMs — such as Russia’s forthcoming Sarmat ICBM — would be a poor strategic choice almost tailor-made to promote crisis instability. Sound and thoughtful diplomacy with countries having their own nuclear arsenals should thus encourage better, more stability-focused approaches.

B. Forward-deployed Battlefield Weapons

As a second example, consider the challenges potentially presented by large numbers of and diversity in small, battlefield nuclear weapons. Such things were deployed in some numbers during much of the Cold War — including some notoriously small, portable systems such as the “Davy Crockett” battlefield rocket that could be mounted on a Jeep, a nuclear artillery shell for an 8-inch Army howitzer, and a man-portable atomic demolition mine. The stability impact of such very short-range (or zero-range!) systems — and the degree to which their use could be reliably controlled in a conflict — has long been questioned, and after careful consideration we ourselves moved emphatically away from them years ago. Many observers fear that such devices deployed close to the anticipated front line in a conflict between nuclear rivals — particularly if authorization for their use is devolved to battlefield commanders, since reliable, centralized command-and-control is usually thought to be essential to crisis management — might lead to inadvertent or dangerously precipitous escalation and early nuclear use.

These dangers arise because such easily-usable weapons deployed very far forward could be targeted preemptively or quickly overrun, the imminence of which might lead to precipitous use. In that case, the result could have strategic consequences (in the form of nuclear combat) triggered by strategically unimportant minor or inconclusive fluctuations in the contours of that front line. Some observers might speculate this could strengthen deterrence, on the theory that such amazing dangers might make an invasion less attractive to an aggressor in the first place.

However, even if such worrying brinksmanship did have value, there would still be huge dangers of losing control. To the degree that control of easily-portable devices were delegated far down the chain of command, this would greatly challenge crisis management and warfighting command and control by national-level authorities. Catastrophically consequential decisions being made under stress by ill-informed junior battlefield commanders who lack the big picture does not bode well for crisis stability.

Stability considerations thus make large numbers of and diversity in small, easily-portable battlefield devices such as nuclear artillery shells or demolition mines seem highly problematic. Such reasoning contributed to decisions by both of the nuclear superpowers to pull non-strategic weapons significantly back from the control of unit commands. This is a compelling logic that other nuclear possessors might also wish to consider.

I would also urge other possessing states to follow the U.S. model of highly centralized and rigorous command and control practices, which promote stability and predictability even in times of crisis — and to avoid either devolved, uncontrollable use controls or mindlessly automated release procedures such as the Dr. Strangelove-style “Perimeter” system for automatically initiating nuclear war. Methods of dispersion in a crisis should also be scrutinized, since such small, portable devices a susceptible to threats from guerrilla or terrorist groups within one’s borders. The implications of deployment modalities and command-and-control questions are not the sort of “sexy” nuclear weapons matters that get much attention from armchair strategists, but they are critical questions for the real professionals, and we should encourage countries with nuclear weapons to think these things through carefully.

C. Context Matters

Third, nuclear powers might also bear in mind that what makes sense in one nuclear context may not make sense in another. I have noted how the risks associated with large numbers of or diversity in small, forward-deployed weapons increase tremendously if they are deployed where guerrillas or terrorists might seize them in the field – which is, if you ask me, a pretty important context-specific factor – but difficulties can also arise with other systems.

If you are a nuclear power engaged in a nuclear weapons relationship with an adversary many thousands of miles away, there’s obviously some logic in acquiring delivery systems with intercontinental range. Participants in a regional dyad, however, should carefully consider limiting the range of their systems to avoid having too much range, which could end up drawing them into deeply problematic provocation dynamics with nuclear powers outside the core deterrence dyad. Such a dynamic would carry with it potentially catastrophic risks of inadvertent escalation, miscalculation, or unlooked-for intervention or pre-emption.

These various challenges are difficult and problematic enough when a relationship remains dyadic, so stumbling into escalatory problems with extra-regional players could be notably unwise, especially if those additional players are very powerful and one does not actually have any particular antecedent strategic-level problem with them in the first place. Nuclear possessors need to think through such dynamics, for it matters whether, and how, one’s own regional nuclear dynamics are connected to, or entangled with, broader ones.

D. Unlimited-range Cruise Missiles

Fourth, I would suggest that exotic new technologies and methods need careful attention as well — because what might initially seem to be an attractive “feature” of a new weapons system could turn out to be, from a stability perspective, very much a dangerous “bug.” As an example, take something as seemingly simple as a weapon system’s range. More range seems like it would always be better, right? Well, not always.

It is at least theoretically possible to develop a nuclear-powered cruise missile that could have an essentially unlimited range. In the late 1950s, for example, U.S. and Soviet researchers both worked on designs for a nuclear-powered airplane, the advantage of which was thought to be its ability to remain “continuously airborne.” The U.S. program was rather sensibly terminated in 1961, and the Soviet concept apparently never even got off the drawing board, but one could at least imagine a cruise missile loosely based upon such technology today. To say that such a thing might be possible, however, is not to say that it would be in any way wise.

For one thing, there might be alarming technical, safety, and humanitarian issues associated with a nuclear reactor flying through the air across intercontinental distances — especially a reactor running hot enough to superheat ingested atmospheric gases for propulsion and probably of necessity lacking much by way of radiation shielding. What would the implications be if it were to crash or be shot down, moreover, especially if its flight route took it for thousands of miles through the airspace of any number of countries? Yet even leaving those obvious concerns aside, it is far from clear that such a system would make any sense whatsoever from a stability perspective. Quite the contrary.

Some strategists might perhaps value such a missile as a strategic delivery system because of its potential ability to arrive over enemy territory at low level and from an unexpected or even unwatched point of the compass after a long and craftily circuitous transit. The extreme range that could make this possible might indeed make defending against such a missile difficult, but that’s hardly the end of the story, and such an apparent advantage would likely be offset by other problems. The possibility of an “infinite-range” cruise device might well be quite destabilizing, and could create a major risk of inadvertent nuclear war — not least because of the weird, but hardly hypothetical, possibility that such a missile could be launched into indefinite-duration “holding pattern” flight paths that might be intended to maximize perceptions of imminent threat in order to facilitate an aggressor’s coercive diplomacy, but that in fact would likely elicit unpredictably escalatory responses and escalation dynamics.

I would think that the moral of this story about the stability externalities of unlimited range is simple: it is foolish to plunge forward in nuclear weapons and delivery system development rashly. Considerations of stability cannot be ignored, and the fact that one can build something does not always mean that one should. Some choices are just bad ones.

E. Transparency and Clarity

Sixth, and finally, I believe there is intrinsic value in offering the kind of transparency that helps provide one’s potential clarity about how one thinks about nuclear weapons. I don’t mean the kind of “transparency” that relates to exactly how many one has, specific details about exactly when one would (or would not) actually use a nuclear weapon, or sensitive details about their deployment. Instead, I’m referring to insight into the basic concepts that underlie one’s nuclear posture and doctrine. Providing reasonable clarity about posture and doctrine can serve the interests both of deterrence and of crisis stability and escalation management, by helping increase predictability and reducing the kinds of uncertainty that may fuel dangerously mistaken assumptions.

This is a kind of transparency that we in the United States provide very publicly with every edition of our Nuclear Posture Review, as well as in periodic public statements, reports, and documents of various varieties. We are, in fact, by far the most transparent of any nuclear weapons possessor in this respect. We make such information public, we explain it to adversaries and onlookers alike, and we defend it in public so that we are as clear as we can be about the role that nuclear weapons play in our defense planning and the reasons for the posture choices we have made.

Nobody else does it like this, but I would argue that they should: the more transparency of this sort, the better. As I noted last year in an event at the Preparatory Committee meeting for the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in Geneva — at which two of us from the U.S. State Department joined representatives from the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff in explaining the latest Nuclear Posture Review — we Americans are deeply transparent about these fundamental conceptual and doctrinal issues, and we challenge other possessors to follow our lead in being that way too.

IV. Conclusion

As I said earlier, I hope no one takes the arguments I have suggested as entirely conclusive. I offer them not as hard and fast conclusions, but as illustrations of a stability-focused thought process. We in the United States engaged in a good deal of such thinking for decades, and we must not forget how to do it. Such ways of thinking may also be worth fostering with and among nuclear powers engaged in their own nuclear weapons relationships.


At any rate, I hope this gets you thinking. To that end, I hope the scholarly and think tank communities can work with us to encourage the development of stability-mindful strategic thinking — and hence real nuclear risk reduction — wherever national leaders find themselves in enduring nuclear weapons relationships. We must all endeavor to prevent our relationships from collapsing into conflict during the presumably still lengthy era still ahead of humanity until – in the phrasing of Article VI of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty – we can ease international tension and strengthen trust between states enough to permit the stable and sustainable elimination of all such weapons.

Thank you.

The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

          Did WWIII Just Ignite? If Not, Then Why Is This Happening? U.S. To Be Wiped Out?!      Cache   Translate Page      
For More Information See:………………………………    
          Photoproduction of axion-like particles      Cache   Translate Page      
We explore the sensitivity of photon-beam experiments to axion-like particles (ALPs) with QCD-scale masses whose dominant coupling to the Standard Model is either to photons or gluons. We introduce a novel data-driven method that eliminates the need for knowledge of nuclear form factors or the photon-beam flux when considering coherent Primakoff production off a nuclear target, and show that data collected by the PrimEx experiment in 2004 could improve the sensitivity to ALPs with $0.03 \lesssim m_a \lesssim 0.3$ GeV by an order of magnitude. Furthermore, we explore the potential sensitivity of running the GlueX experiment with a nuclear target and its planned PrimEx-like calorimeter. For the case where the dominant coupling is to gluons, we study photoproduction for the first time, and predict the future sensitivity of the GlueX experiment using its nominal proton target. Finally, we set world-leading limits for both the ALP-gluon coupling and the ALP-photon coupling based on public mass plots.
          Psychiatrist: Trump Pre-Dementia & Cognitive Decline Getting Worse      Cache   Translate Page      
Dr. John Gartner, psychiatrist, founder of Duty to Warn, and co-editor of the book "Rocket Man: Nuclear Madness and the Mind of Donald Trump," joins David to update us on what he sees are the accelerating cognitive decline and mental state of Donald Trump
          The Persian gamble by Rosenberg, Joel C., 1967- author.      Cache   Translate Page      
From the New York Times bestselling author of The Kremlin Conspiracy comes this latest international thriller about a terrifying nuclear alliance among three world powers--Russia, Iran, and North Korea--and the man who must halt their deadly strategy. Shot out of the air in enemy territory in the middle of the greatest international crisis since the end of the Cold War, former U.S. Secret Service agent Marcus Ryker finds himself facing an impossible task. Not only does he have to somehow elude d
          Ex-TEPCO execs make final plea for acquittal over Fukushima nuclear crisis      Cache   Translate Page      
Lawyers for three former executives of Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc called for their acquittal over the Fukushima nuclear crisis that erupted in 2011 in their final…
          Experts See Washington’s 'Big Deal' Approach to Denuclearizing N. Korea Facing Rejection      Cache   Translate Page      
Pyongyang is likely to reject Washington’s “big deal” approach toward denuclearizing North Korea as indicated by signals the country has been sending through missile launch preparations, said experts. U.S. Special Representative Steve Biegun laid out President Donald Trump’s approach toward denuclearizing North Korea at a conference held by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on Monday, saying, “We are not going to do denuclearization incrementally.” Biegun also said sanctions imposed on North Korea will not be lifted until North Korea achieves complete denuclearization.  Washington took an all-or-nothing approach or “big deal” approach toward North Korea’s denuclearization when it began its negotiations last year but gradually shifted to a phased, incremental approach, which is favored by Pyongyang, until the Hanoi summit between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. And weeks before the Hanoi summit, Biegun seemed to suggest in a speech at Stanford University that the U.S. would pursue a step-by-step approach toward achieving agreements made at the Singapore summit last June. ​Now, the U.S. has resumed its initial “big deal” position, and Biegun said last month’s Hanoi summit faltered because North Korea asked the U.S. to lift “basically all the sanctions” while offering to dismantle “a portion of their nuclear program.” Scott Snyder, director of the U.S.-Korea policy program at the Council of Foreign Relations, said the Hanoi summit revealed the U.S. has reverted to its original position. “It turns out that going for a ‘big deal’ almost brought the U.S. back to its initial negotiating position,” said Snyder. “And it raised the bar in terms of what both the U.S. was willing to give to Kim Jong Un, but also in terms of what the U.S. was expecting from Kim Jong Un.” Biegun also said that North Korea’s chemical and biological weapons “would be unacceptable” at the Carnegie conference. Robert Manning, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, said North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will not accept the U.S. position. “Kim has been clear and consistent from his first meeting with (Chinese President) Xi (Jinping) in Beijing that North Korea wants to move forward in a ‘phased synchronous process,’” said Manning. The leaders first met in March 2018 before the first inter-Korean summit was held in April. ​“Pyongyang will not accept the idea they give up everything, trust the U.S. and then they get some benefit,” Manning said. “It is too asymmetrical.” Evans Revere, acting assistant secretary at the State Department’s Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs during the George W. Bush administration, said, “Pyongyang will reject U.S. efforts to pursue a ‘big deal’ requiring North Korea to give up the entirety of its nuclear weapons and related weapons of mass destruction program” because it considers them “the key to the survival of the regime.” Revere said North Korea will consider giving up its nuclear weapons only when the current level of pressure increases to an “existentially overwhelming array of sanctions and pressure.”  He continued, “The current sanctions and other measures have not reached the level necessary to compel the shift we seek. It remains to be seen whether the Trump administration will be able to muster the diplomatic, political and moral leadership necessary to achieve the end it seeks.” Since the Hanoi summit breakdown, movements have been detected around North Korea’s missile facilities suggesting the country is not living up to its commitments made at the first summit and possibly preparing to launch a missile.  Commercial satellite images showed North Korea rebuilding the Sohae Satellite Launching Station at Tongchang-ri, which Pyongyang began to dismantle after the first summit with the U.S. in Singapore. ​There were also movements around the Samundong facility that suggest preparations may be underway for a test missile launch.  Experts see these activities as North Korea signaling its refusal to accept the U.S. position. “Kim Jong Un is sending a warning to Washington that he’s prepared to resume satellite launches if there’s no agreement on lifting sanctions in exchange for some measures toward denuclearization,” said Gary Samore, the White House coordinator for arms control and weapons of mass destruction during the Obama administration. Robert Gallucci, chief U.S. negotiator during the 1994 North Korean nuclear crisis, said North Korea is expressing “its unhappiness over the position taken by the U.S. at the Hanoi summit” which was rejecting its offer to dismantle the Yongbyon nuclear facility in exchange for receiving sanctions relief from the U.S.  Christopher Hill, a chief negotiator with North Korea during the George W. Bush administration, said he would be surprised if North Korea would fire a missile, but because “all the president’s men are getting less patient,” firing a missile would be “the end of this diplomatic phase.” Lee Jo-eun, Ahn So-young contributed to this report which originated with the VOA Korean Service. 
          The histone methyltransferase G9a regulates tolerance to oxidative stress–induced energy consumption      Cache   Translate Page      
by Human Riahi, Carlijn Brekelmans, Sarah Foriel, Sarah H. Merkling, Taylor A. Lyons, Pavel M. Itskov, Tjitske Kleefstra, Carlos Ribeiro, Ronald P. van Rij, Jamie M. Kramer, Annette Schenck Stress responses are crucial processes that require activation of genetic programs that protect from the stressor. Stress responses are also energy consuming and can thus be … Continua la lettura di The histone methyltransferase G9a regulates tolerance to oxidative stress–induced energy consumption
          Putin Now Thinks Western Elites Are "Swine"      Cache   Translate Page      

Authored by Dmitry Orlov via Russia Insider,

An article I published close to five years ago, “Putin to Western elites: Play-time is over”, turned out to be the most popular thing I’ve written so far, having garnered over 200,000 reads over the intervening years. In it I wrote about Putin’s speech at the 2014 Valdai Club conference. In that speech he defined the new rules by which Russia conducts its foreign policy: out in the open, in full public view, as a sovereign nation among other sovereign nations, asserting its national interests and demanding to be treated as an equal. Yet again, Western elites failed to listen to him.

Instead of mutually beneficial cooperation they continued to speak the language of empty accusations and counterproductive yet toothless sanctions.

And so, in last month’s address to Russia’s National Assembly Putin sounded note of complete and utter disdain and contempt for his “Western partners,” as he has usually called them. This time he called them “swine.”

The president’s annual address to the National Assembly is a rather big deal. Russia’s National Assembly is quite unlike that of, say, Venezuela, which really just consists of some obscure nonentity named Juan recording Youtube videos in his apartment. In Russia, the gathering is a who’s-who of Russian politics, including cabinet ministers, Kremlin staffers, the parliament (State Duma), regional governors, business leaders and political experts, along with a huge crowd of journalists. One thing that stood out at this year’s address was the very high level of tension in the hall: the atmosphere seemed charged with electricity.

It quickly became obvious why the upper echelon of Russia’s state bureaucracy was nervous: Putin’s speech was part marching orders part harangue. His plans for the next couple of years are extremely ambitious, as he himself admitted. The plank is set very high, he said, and those who are not up to the challenge have no business going near it. Very hard work lies ahead for almost everyone who was gathered in that hall, and those of them who fail at their tasks are unlikely to be in attendance the next time around because their careers will have ended in disgrace.

The address contained almost no bad news and quite a lot of very good news. Russia’s financial reserves are more than sufficient to cover its entire external debt, both public and private. Non-energy-resource exports are booming to such an extent that Russia no longer needs oil and gas exports to maintain a positive balance of trade. It has become largely immune to Western sanctions. Eurasian integration projects are going extremely well. Russian government’s investments in industry are paying dividends.

The government has amassed vast amounts of capital which it will now spend on domestic programs designed to benefit the people, to help Russians live longer, healthier lives and have more children. “More children—lower taxes” was one of the catchier slogans.

This was what most of the address was about: eradication of remaining poverty; low, subsidized mortgage rates for families with two or more children; pensions indexed to inflation above and beyond the official minimal income levels (corrected and paid out retroactively); high-speed internet for each and every school; universal access to health care through a network of rural clinics; several new world-class oncology clinics; support for tech start-ups; a “social contract” program that helps people start small businesses; another program called “ticket to the future” that allows sixth-graders to choose a career path that includes directed study programs, mentorships and apprenticeships; lots of new infrastructure projects such as the soon-to-be-opened Autobahn between Moscow and St. Petersburg, revamped trash collection and recycling and major air pollution reductions in a dozen major cities; the list goes on and on.

No opposition to these proposals worth mentioning was voiced in any of the commentary that followed on news programs and talk shows; after all, who could possibly be against spending amassed capital on projects that help the population?

Perhaps the most ambitious goal set by Putin was to redo the entire system of Russia’s government regulations, both federal and regional, in every sphere of public life and commerce. Over the next two years every bit of regulation will be examined in order to determine whether it is necessary and whether it responds to contemporary needs and if it isn’t or doesn’t it will be eliminated. This will significantly ease the burden of regulatory compliance, lowering the cost of doing business.

Another goal was to continue growing the already booming agricultural export sector. Last year Russia achieved self-sufficiency in wheat seed stock, but the overall goal is to achieve complete self-sufficiency in food and to become the world’s provider of ecologically clean foodstuffs. (As Putin pointed out, Russia remains the only major agricultural producer in the world that hasn’t been contaminated by American-made GMO poisons.) Yet another goal is to further grow Russia’s tourism industry, which is already booming, by introducing electronic tourist visas that will be much easier to obtain.

Last year’s address surprised the world with its second part, in which Putin unveiled a whole set of new Russian weapons systems that effectively negate every last bit of US military superiority. This year, he added just one new system: a supersonic cruise missile called “Zirkon” with a 1000 km range that flies at Mach 9. But he also provided a progress report on all the others: everything is going according to plan; some new armaments have already been delivered, others are going into mass production, the rest are being tested. He spoke in favor of normalized relations with the EU, but accused the US of “hostility,” adding that Russia does not threaten anyone and is not interested in confrontation.

Putin’s sharpest words were reserved for the US decision to abandon the INF treaty. He said that the US acted in bad faith, accusing Russia of violating the treaty while they themselves violated it, specifically articles 5 and 6, by deploying dual-use launch systems in Romania and Poland which can be used for both air defense and for offensive nuclear weapons which the treaty specifically prohibits. Nuclear-tipped Tomahawk cruise missiles, which the US could deploy in Poland and Romania, would of course pose a risk, but would not provide the US with anything like a first-strike advantage, since these cruise missiles are obsolete to the point where even Syria’s Soviet-era air defenses were able to shoot down most of the ones the US lobbed at them as punishment for the fake chemical weapons attack in Douma.

Speaking of the American dream of a global air defense system, Putin called on the US to “abandon these illusions.” The Americans can think whatever they want, he said, but the question is, “can they do math?” This needs unfolding.

First, the Americans can think whatever they want because... they are Americans. Russians do not allow themselves the luxury of thinking complete and utter nonsense. Those who are not grounded in fact and logic tend to get the Russian term “likbez” thrown in their faces rather promptly. It literally decodes as “liquidation of illiteracy” and is generally used to shut down ignoramuses. But in the US shocking displays of ignorance are quite acceptable. For an example, you need to look no further than the astonishingly idiotic “Green New Deal” being touted by the freshman congresstwit (how’s that for a gender-neutral appellation?) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. If she were Russian she’d have been laughed right out of town by now.

“But can they do math?” Apparently not! There is another Russian term—“matchast”—which literally decodes as “material part” but stands for the understanding that can only be achieved through the knowledge of mathematics, the hard sciences and engineering. In Russia, ignoramuses like Ocasio-Cortez, who think that transportation needs can be provided by electric vehicles powered by wind and solar, get shut down by being told to go and study “matchast” while in the US they are allowed to run wild in the halls of congress.

In this case, if Americans could “do math,” they would quickly figure out that there is no conceivable defensive system that would be effective against the new Russian weapons, that there are no conceivable offensive weapons that would prevent Russia from launching an unstoppable retaliatory strike, and that therefore the “new arms race” (which some Americans have been daft enough to announce) is effectively over and Russia has won. See above: Russia is not spending its money on weapons; it is spending it on helping its people. The US can squander arbitrary amounts of money on weapons but this won’t make an iota of difference: an attack on Russia will be the last thing it ever does.

Russia does not plan to be the first to violate the ABM treaty, but if the US deploys intermediate-range nuclear weapons against Russia, then Russia will respond in kind, by targeting not just the territories from which it is threatened but the locations where the decisions to threaten it are taken. Washington, Brussels and other NATO capitals would, clearly, be on that list. This shouldn’t be news; Russia has already announced that in the next war, should there be one, will not be fought on Russian soil. Russia plans to take the fight to the enemy immediately. Of course, there won’t be a war—provided the Americans are sane enough to realize that attacking Russia is functionally equivalent to blowing themselves up with nuclear weapons. Are they sane enough? That is the question that is holding the world hostage.

It is in speaking of them that Putin used the most withering word in his entire address. Speaking of Americans’ dishonesty and bad faith in accusing Russia of violating the ABM treaty while it was they themselves who were violating it, he added: “…and the American satellites oink along with them.” It is rather difficult to come up with an adequate translation for the Russian verb “подхрюкивать”; “oink along with” is as close as I am able to get. The mental image is of a chorus of little pigs accompanying a big swine. The implication is obvious: Putin thinks that the Americans are swine, and that their NATO satellites are swine too.

Therefore, they shouldn’t expect Putin to scatter any pearls before them and, in any case, he’ll be too busy helping Russians live better lives to pay any attention to them.

          Upscale Security Officer - G4S - Cheyenne, WY      Cache   Translate Page      
G4S is a security provider for the United States government, fortune 500 companies, nuclear power plants, oil and gas companies, airport, ports, banks,... $15 an hour
From G4S - Wed, 06 Mar 2019 05:01:50 GMT - View all Cheyenne, WY jobs
          Multiple Site Security Officer - G4S - Belmont, WV      Cache   Translate Page      
G4S is a security provider for the United States government, fortune 500 companies, nuclear power plants, oil and gas companies, airport, ports, banks,... $11.25 an hour
From G4S - Mon, 25 Feb 2019 21:01:29 GMT - View all Belmont, WV jobs
          Security Officer - G4S - Clarksburg, WV      Cache   Translate Page      
G4S is a security provider for the United States government, fortune 500 companies, nuclear power plants, oil and gas companies, airport, ports, banks,... $9.75 an hour
From G4S - Wed, 27 Feb 2019 21:02:27 GMT - View all Clarksburg, WV jobs
          Context matter – What the Israeli elections should be about      Cache   Translate Page      
Truth be told Benjamin Netanyahu has scored some major victories as Israeli premier. Netanyahu with his friend Donald Trump succeeded against all odds to torpedo the nuclear deal between the western powers and Iran which would have secured a new nuclear power. Netanyahu succeeded breaking...
          India and Pakistan take note: the ‘Madman Theory’ of using tactical nuclear weapons lives up to its name      Cache   Translate Page      
Last month, when much of the world was distracted by the US-North Korea summit in Hanoi, one of the most dangerous crises in the post-cold-war era quietly unfolded.  When Indian warplanes conducted air strikes against a terrorist training camp in Pakistan on February 26, it marked the first time in history that a nuclear-weapons state has conducted air strikes against another. The stand-off quickly spiralled out of control. Pakistan responded to India’s air-assault with heavy artillery…
          Sustaining Engineering Manager - Baker Hughes - Twinsburg, OH      Cache   Translate Page      
In the role of Sustaining Engineering Manager, you will manage a team of engineers and physicists to help the business execute on commitments to our Nuclear...
From Baker Hughes - Mon, 04 Mar 2019 18:55:14 GMT - View all Twinsburg, OH jobs
          to consider 2019 "the BIG list" (no replies)      Cache   Translate Page      
New adds: Dogface (may), Mike Machine (apr), 7 Miles To Pittsburgh (apr), Pretty Wild (may), Nebula (jun)

In bold, the last updates.

MAR 2019
Backyard Babies: Silver and gold 1.3 Century Media
Blaze Bayley: Live in France 1.3
Bryan Adams: Shine a light 1.3 Polydor Records
Demon Hunter: War 1.3
Demon Hunter: Peace 1.3
DeVicious: Reflections 1.3 Metalapolis Records
In Flames: I, the mask 1.3 Nuclear Blast
Mike Tramp: Stray from the flock 1.3 Mighty Music
Morano: Incognito 1.3
Queensryche: The verdict 1.3 Century Media Records
Rock Goddess: This time 1.3
Ron Keel Band: Fight like a band 1.3 EMP Outlaw Records
Sisters Of Suffocation: Humans are broken 1.3 Napalm Records
Tim Bowness: Flowers at the scene 1.3 InsideOutMusic
While She Sleeps: So what? 1.3 Sleeps Brothers Records
Buckcherry: Warpaint 8.3 Century Media/RED Music
Cats in Space: Daytrip to Narnia 8.3
Children Of Bodom: Hexed 8.3 Nuclear Blast Records
Damon Johnson: Memoirs of an uprising 8.3 Double Dragon Records
Indestructible Noise Command (I.N.C.): Terrible things 8.3
Iron Savior: Kill or get killed 8.3 AFM Records
Temple Ball: Untamed 8.3
Tesla: Shock 8.3 Frontiers Records
TÝR: Hel 8.3 Metal Blade Records
Athanasia: The order of the silver compass 15.3 Seeing Red Records
Crossfade: Carousel 15.3
Foreigner: Live At The Rainbow ‘78 15.3 Eagle Vision
Gary Hoey: Neon highway Blues 15.3 Provogue Records
Martie Peters Group: Unfinished business 15.3 MelodicRock Records
Michael Jessen: Bulletproof 15.3 MelodicRock Records
Rossi/Rickard: We talk too much 15.3 earMUSIC
Appearance Of Nothing: In times of darkness 22.3 Escape Music
Battle Beast: No more Hollywood endings 22.3 Nuclear Blast Records
Burning Rain: Face the music 22,3 Frontiers Records
Cellar Darling: The spell 22.3 Nuclear Blast Records
The End Machine: The end machine 22.3 Frontiers Records
Harem Scarem: The Ultimate Collection Box Set 22.3 Frontiers Records
Megadeth: Warheads on foreheads (Best of...) 22.3
Meridian: Margin of error 22.3 Mighty Music
Motley Crue: The dirt Soundtrack 22.3
The Mute Gods: Atheists and believers 22.3 InsideOut Music
Roulette: Now 22.3 Black Lodge Records
RPWL: Tales from outer space 22.3 Gentle Art Of Music
TNT: Encore - Live in Milano 22.3 Frontiers Records
Toto: 40 Tours around the sun 22.3
The Treatment: Power crazy 22.3 Frontiers Records
Trishula: Scared to breathe 22.3 AOR Heaven Records
Usurper: Lords of the permafrost 22.3 Soulseller Records
Whitesnake: Slide it in 35 Annv. 22.3 Rhino Records
7HY: No going back 29.3 Lions Pride Music
A New Revenge: Enemies & Lovers 29.3 Golden Robot Records
Alchemy: Dyadic 29.3 Street Symphonies Records
Anthem: Nucleus 29.3 Nuclear Blast Records
Devin Townsend: Empath 29.3 InsideOut Music
I Prevail: Trauma 29.3 Fearless Records
Journey: Escape & Frontiers Live in Japan 2017 29.3 Eagle Rock Entertainment
L.A Guns: The devil you know 29.3 Frontiers Records
N.Ex.U.S: N.Ex.U.S 29.3 Logic Il Logic Records
Nightrage: Wolf to man 29.3 Despotz Records
Sergeant Steel: Best Of 29.3
Suzi Quatro: No control 29.3 SPV/Steamhammer
Vltimas: Something wicked marches in 29.3 Season Of Mist Records
Whitechapel: The valley 29.3 Metal Blade Records
Yngwie Malmsteen: Blue lightning 29.3 Mascot Records
Venom INC: new album

APR 2019
Tyketto: We’ve got tomorrow, we’ve got tonight 1.4 Frontiers Records
7 Miles To Pittsburgh: Revolution on hold 5.4
Brant Bjork: Jacoozzi 5.4 Heavy Psych Sounds Records
Eluveitie: Ategnatos 5.4 Nuclear Blast Records
Fugitive: The awakening 5.4 CAT Records
Mike & The Mechanics: Out of the blue 5.4
Periphery: Periphery IV: Hail stan 5.4 3DOT Recordings
The Quireboys: Amazing disgrace 5.4 Off Yer Rocka
Squares: Best of the early '80s demos 5.4 Strange Beautiful Music
Andy Black: The ghost of Ohio 12.4 Lava/Republic
Electric Boys: Gone Gone Gone ep 12.4 Record Store Day den
Grand Magus: Wolf god 19.4 Nuclear Blast Records
Jordan Rudess: Wired for madness 19.4 Mascot Records
Sunroad: Heatstrokes 21.4
Alan Parsons: The secret 26.4 Frontiers Records
Astral Doors: Worship or die 26.4
BBMak: new album 26.4 PledgeMusic
The Damned Things: High crimes 26.4 Nuclear Blast Records
Danko Jones: Rock Supreme 26.4 AFM Records
Enforcer: Zenith 26.4 Nuclear Blast Records
Fair Warning: Two nights to remember 26.4
Fortune: II 26.4 Frontiers Records
Gypsy Rose: Reloaded 26.4 ScandiRock Records
Hardline: Life 26.4 Frontiers Records
Jim Peterik´s World Stage: Winds of change 26.4 Frontiers Records
Leverage: Determinus 26.4 Frontiers Records
Lonerider: Attitude 26.4 Escape Music
Michael Thompson Band: Love & beyond 26.4 Frontiers Records
Mike Machine: Alive 26.4 AOR Heaven
Steel Prophet: The god machine 26.4
Tank: Re-Ignition 26.4 Cleopatra Records
Ten: Opera omnia (The complete works) 26.4 Frontiers Records
Total Stranger: Total stranger 29.4 Lions Pride Music
Fiction Syxx: The alternate me MelodicRock Records
Rammstein: new album

MAY 2019
L7: Scatter the rats 3.5 Blackheart Records
Bad Religion: Age of unreason 3.4 Epitaph Records
Corey Hart: Dreaming time again"ep" 3.5
The Wildhearts: Renaissance men 3.5
The Circle: Space between 10.5 BMG Music
Pretty Wild: Interstate 13 10.5
Whitesnake: Flesh & blood 10.5 Frontiers Records
The Brink: Nowhere to run 17.5 Frontiers Records
Crazy Lixx: Forever wild 17.5 Frontiers Records
Dogface: From the end to the beginning 17.5 Scandirock Records
Entombed: Clandestine - Live 17.5 Threeman Recordings
First Signal: Line of fire 17.5 Frontiers Records
Restless Spirits: Restless Spirits 17.5 Frontiers Records
Saint Vitus: Saint Vitus 17.5 Season Of Mist Records
Warrior Soul: Rock 'N' Roll disease 19.5
Diamond Head: The coffin train 24.5 Silver Lining Music
Bai Bang: Best Of 4 Lions 31.5 Pride Music
Venom: In nomine Satanas 31.5 BMG Records
Rob Moratti: new album Escape Music

JUN 2019
Nebula: new album Heavy Psych Sounds
Reality Suite: Awaken 28.6 Lions Pride Music

AUG 2019
Saxon: The Eagle Has Landed 4 2.8 Silver Lining Music
Hammerfall: Dominion 16.8
Destruction: new album Nuclear Blast Records
Michael Schenker Fest: new album Nuclear Blast Records
The Rembrandts: Via satellite Blue Elan Records

SEP 2019
Hideaway: Hideaway 30.9 Lions Pride Music
Agent Steel: 8 Lights protocol
Diamond Dogs: Recall Rock&roll Cargo Records
Dragonforce: new album

OCT 2019
Silked & Stained: GOes Up 2 Eleven 31.10 Lions Pride Music
Alter Bridge: New album

NOV 2019
Adellaide: New horizons 29.11 Lions Pride Music

220 Volt
Åge Sten Nilsen: new album
Angel: new album
Armored Saint: new album
Art Nation: Transition Sony Music
Assassin: new album Massacre Records
Avenged Sevenfold:
Axe: The final offering Escape Music
Biff Byford: School of hard knocks
Black Rose Maze: debut album Frontiers Records
Black Star Riders: new album
Block Buster: debut album Frontiers Records
Body Count: Carnivore
Brother Firetribe: new album
Carcass: new album Nuclear Blast Records
Chris Ousey:
Danny Vaughn: Myths, legends and lies
Dante Fox: new album
Danzig: Danzig sings Elvis
Dare: Best of
Death Angel:
Decarlo: Debut album Frontiers Records
Def Leppard:
Demons & Wizards
Dennis DeYoung
Desmond Child & Rouge: new album
Dokken: new album Silver Lining Music
Down 'N' Outz
Duff McKagan: new solo album
The Duskfall: The everlasting shadows
Eclipse: new album
Exumer: new album Metal Blade Records
Fair Warning: new album
Fear Factory: Monolith Nuclear Blast Records
The Ferrymen: new album
First Night: First Night
Fit For An Autopsy: album debut Nuclear Blast
Flying Colors: new album
The Ghost Next Door: A feast for the sixth sense Ripple Music
Greta Van Fleet: new album
H.E.A.T: Live album
Healer: Heading for the storm
Heavy Pettin:
Helloween: live album Nuclear Blast
Infernal Majesty: Secrets
Johan Kihlberg´s Impera: new album AOR Heaven Records
John 5 And The Creatures: Invasion
John Norum
John Parr:
Joseph Williams:
Killer Dwarfs: new album EMP Label Group
Killswitch Engage: New album Metal Blade Records
King Of Hearts: California
King's X: new album Golden Robot Records
Lava: new album
Life Of Agony:
The Magpie Salute: High water II Mascot/Eagle Rock
Mark Spiro: Box + new album Frontiers Records
Michael Monroe: One man gang
Michael Sweet: new album Rat Pak Records
Neal Morse Project: Jesus Christ - The Exorcist Frontiers Records
Outlasted: Waiting for daybreak MelodicRock Records
Panorama: new album
Pearl Jam:
Perry Farrell: Kind heaven BMG
Pinnacle Point:
Possessed: new album Nuclear Blast Records
Pretty Maids: new album
Revolution Saints: new album
Richie Sambora: solo album
Rob Zombie:
Robert Hart: new album Escape Music
Room Experience: Another time and place
Roxy Blue: new album Frontiers Records
Running Wild:
Sacred Reich: Awakening Metal Blade Records
Sascha Paeth:
Septicflesh: new album Nuclear Blast
Shark Island: Bloodline Manifest Music
Shortino: new album
Sons Of Apollo: new live dvd/BluRay
Sons Of Apollo: new album
Soto: Origami Inside Out Records
Spread Eagle: new album Frontiers Records
St James: new album
Stardust: debut album Frontiers Records
Static-X: Project regeneration
Steelcity: M A C H II Kivel Records
Steel Panther: new album
Stratovarius: new album
Stryper: new album
Symphony X:
Tarja Turunen: new album
Ted Poley: new album Frontiers Records
Tony Mills: Beyond the law
Tool: new album
Torben Enevoldsen: s/t Perris Records
Toseland: new album Frontiers Records
Transport League: A million volt scream Mighty Music
Unruly Child: Big blue world
Vision Divine: new album Scarlet Records
Volbeat: new album
Waiting For Monday: debut album Frontiers Records
Wednesday 13: Necrophaze Nuclear Blast
Wheels Of Fire: Begin again Art Melody Music
Work Of Art:
X-Romance: debut album AOR Heaven Records
XYZ: new album

AC/DC: new album
Cradle Of Filth
Dare: new album
Deep Purple: new album
Eden´s Curse: new album AFM Records
Fates Warning: new album Metal Blade Records
Firewind: new album
Frank Vestry: My collection Lions Pride Music
Ghost: new album
Helloween: new album Nuclear Blast
Kansas: new album
Nightwish: new album
Scorpions: new album
Sepultura: new album
Sons Of Apollo: new album
Trivium: new album
                Cache   Translate Page      
"El cambio climático es un engaño": Expresidente de Greenpeace arremete contra las campañas ambientales
El activista asegura que la supuesta catástrofe climática está creada para infundir miedo y controlar la mente de las personas. La organización responde que su discurso es "pagado" por la industria nuclear.

Patrick Moore, expresidente de Greenpeace, ha afirmado que "el cambio climático es un completo engaño y una estafa" impulsada por científicos corruptos que están enganchados a subvenciones públicas que los benefician. Las declaraciones fueron realizadas en una entrevista ofrecida este miércoles en la radio Breitbart.  

Moore, doctor en ecología, cree que las campañas ambientales están relacionadas con los "negocios verdes" que se aprovechan de subsidios masivos, enormes amortizaciones de impuestos y mandatos gubernamentales para acrecentar su fortuna. "Mientras tanto, disfrutan de una protección propagandística de los medios de comunicación", agregó.

"Se está involucrando a la ciencia con la superstición, y hay una especie de combinación tóxica entre religión e ideología política", sostuvo el activista, tras señalar que la catástrofe climática está creada para infundir miedo y controlar la mente de las personas.

Durante la entrevista, Moore comentó que antes Greenpeace se preocupaba por la gente y tenía una orientación humanitaria y ambiental. Sin embargo, considera que en la actualidad se impulsa un nuevo acuerdo ecológico "contra los humanos", criticando fuertemente a la organización.

Además, el exdirectivo declaró que el dióxido de carbono es "alimento para la vida, no contaminación", alegando que el uso de combustibles fósiles en realidad "salvó la vida de una desaparición temprana", porque el CO2 estaba disminuyendo desde la última era glacial, y apenas quedaba lo suficiente para que una planta de la Tierra pudiera sostenerse.
La respuesta de Greenpeace
La organización mundial de campañas ambientalistas ha expresado que en realidad Moore no fue cofundador de Greenpeace como él afirma, y que su discurso responde a un "cabildeo pagado" por la industria nuclear, maderera y genética, beneficiándose de millonarios contratos.
Además, aseguran que con frecuencia cita su pasada afiliación al grupo, únicamente para "obtener legitimidad en los medios" y que ha trabajado para los contaminadores corporativos durante mucho más tiempo del que trabajó para Greenpeace.

La organización reitera que el cambio climático es la mayor amenaza ambiental que la humanidad ha enfrentado, y a su vez, el mayor desafío. Sostienen que el problema es causado por la acumulación de gases de efecto invernadero por la quema de combustibles fósiles y la destrucción de áreas que almacenan grandes cantidades de carbono, como las selvas tropicales del mundo.

La postura de la ONU

Institutos de investigación junto a entidades internacionales también han demostrado las transformaciones del entorno en base a evidencias científicas. Recientemente, las Naciones Unidas confirmaron la continuidad del cambio climático, instaron a los líderes mundiales a tomar medidas urgentes para mitigar sus efectos, y advirtieron que los últimos cuatro años han sido los más cálidos desde que se tienen

          U.S. will only value action on North Korea’s denuclearization: Pompeo      Cache   Translate Page      
U.S. Secretary of State says 'talk is cheap' and it's time for both sides to live up to commitments
          Conmemora Google a Tim Berners-Lee con un doodle      Cache   Translate Page      

Lo anterior, señala Google, con el objetivo de ayudar a sus colegas del CERN, un gran laboratorio de física nuclear en Suiza, a compartir información entre varias computadoras.

The post Conmemora Google a Tim Berners-Lee con un doodle appeared first on Oronoticias.

          Winterlook - Shelter - Version 0.4 + Incest Patch      Cache   Translate Page      

Win64 Version
Download from (139.41 MB)
Download from (139.41 MB)

Mac Version
Download from (92.29 MB)
Download from (92.29 MB)

Incest Patch
Download from (740.65 KB)
Download from (740.65 KB)

The day everyone feared, the day everyone hoped would never come, arrived in the form of a nuclear cloud. The government shelters, built to save and protect the lives of its citizens soon crumbled from overpopulation and lack of food.
With no other choice, many tried to find another life by returning to the surface. Unfortunately for them, they traded a slow death from starvation for the painful death from radiation. These were the only options for those who survived so far... but not for you.
          Director, Major Bids and Strategy - SNC-Lavalin - Mississauga, ON      Cache   Translate Page      
Reporting to the Vice-President, Bids and Strategy, Nuclear, the Director of Major Bids and Strategy has as a primary responsibility to lead and prepare major...
From SNC-Lavalin - Mon, 28 Jan 2019 15:23:33 GMT - View all Mississauga, ON jobs
          Vice President Bids & Strategy - SNC-Lavalin - Mississauga, ON      Cache   Translate Page      
Reporting to the Senior Vice-President, Marketing and Business Development, Nuclear, the VP of Bids and Strategy has as a primary responsibility to ensure the...
From SNC-Lavalin - Fri, 25 Jan 2019 21:21:49 GMT - View all Mississauga, ON jobs
          România-Bucureşti: Servicii de transport aerian      Cache   Translate Page      
Societatea Națională Nuclearelectrica S.A. 10874881 Str. Polonă nr. 65, sector 1 Bucureşti 010494 Elena Ionescu — Departament Achiziții +40 212038282, +40 212031315 Servicii de transport aerian pentru deplasările în interes de serviciu ale angajaților SN Nuclearelectrica S.A. 10874881/2018/1109.01 Achizitia are ca obiect servicii de transport aerian, constand in bilete de avion, necesare pentru deplasarile in afara Romaniei, in interes de serviciu, ale conducerii si angajatilor SNN. Principalele destinatii vor fi statele membre ale Uniunii Europene, SUA si Canada, existand insa si posibilitatea efectuarii de deplasari in alte tari decat cele anterior enumerate. Cantitatile minime si respectiv maxime estimate pe durata acordului-cadru/unui contract subsecvent sunt urmatoarele: — Pe durata acordului cadru: minim 50 de bilete, maxim 850 de bilete, — Pe durata unui contract subsecvent: minim 1 bilet, maxim 20 bilete. Serviciile de transport aerian vor consta in principal in efectuarea de rezervari si emiterea de bilete de avion. Clarificarile sau informatiile suplimentare în legatura cu documentatia de atribuire vor fi transmise cu cel putin 15 zile inainte de data limita de depunere a ofertelor, iar raspunsul entitatii contractante la aceste solicitari [...] detalii pe 0.50 15 SNN S.A. Serviciile de transport aerian vor consta in principal in efectuarea de rezervari si emiterea de bilete de avion, cu respectarea urmatoarelor conditii: — Se vor utiliza curse directe regulate, cu sau fara escala, pe cele mai rapide rute, — In cazul in care, pentru anumite destinatii nu exista curse directe, se vor alege cursele indirecte cele mai eficiente, cu nu mai mult de 3 zboruri in total, efectuate cu aceeasi companie aeriana sau companii diferite, — Prestatorul de servicii va aloca pentru relatia contractuala cu SNN un numar de minim 2 persoane atestate IATA si cu o vechime de minim 2 ani in activitatea de ticketing, — Prestatorul de servicii va pune la dispozitia achizitorului un serviciu de tip „call center”, de asistenta pentru pasageri, disponibil 24 de ore din 24, 7 zile din 7, printr-un departament de asistenta dedicat al operatorului economic, — La solicitarea achizitorului, prestatorul de servicii va intreprinde toate masurile necesare schimbarii, fara costuri suplimentare, a datei de calatorie sau a numelui persoanei anuntate initial. In cazul anularii calatoriei din diferite motive (inclusiv neobtinerea vizei, daca va fi cazul), prestatorul va lua toate masurile in vederea minimizarii costurilor, pentru a servi in cel mai bun mod posibil interesele achizitorului, — Prestatorul nu va percepe achizitorului tariful de servicii pentru rezervarile de bilete care nu se finalizeaza cu un contract subsecvent, — La solicitarea expresa a achizitorului operatorii economici vor include în ofertele înaintate cu ocazia reofertării informaţii cu privire la legăturile aeriene şi terestre (dacă este cazul) din ţara de destinaţie (cale ferată/auto), informaţii necesare pentru ca delegaţii autorităţii contractante să ajungă la destinaţia finală a deplasării la data solicitată. Prin „experienta personalului” se intelege numarul de ani de experienta dovedita in activitatea de agent de ticketing acreditat IATA (Asociatia Internationala de Trans [...] detalii pe 5 95 143 Servicii de transport aerian pentru deplasările în interes de serviciu ale angajaților SN Nuclearelectrica S.A. 2019-02-28 6 5 6 Danco Pro Communication S.R.L. RO 9482566 Str. Maior Ion Coravu nr. 29C București 021972 +40 212500221 +40 212503312 Travel Time D&R S.R.L. 17926970 Str. Trestiana nr. 13, sector 4 București 040374 +40 213121252 +40 213121272 Eximtur RO 3553943 Str. Nichita Stănescu nr. 16 Cluj-Napoca 400366 +40 364803803,, +40 364803804 BBook Bed and Breakfast S.R.L. RO 30394080 Str. Maxim Gorki nr. 2 București 010991 +40 733123534 Olimpic International Turism S.R.L. RO 6519768 Str. Vişana nr. 5, sector 4 București 040392 +40 213305658 +40 213305123 4650000 0.50 15 Consiliul Naţional de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor Str. Stavropoleos nr. 6, sector 3 București 030084 +40 213104641 +40 213104642 / +40 218900745 S.N. Nuclearelectrica S.A. — Departament Achiziții Str. Polonă nr. 65, sector 1 București 010494 +40 212031304 +40 212031315 2019-03-06
          România-Măgurele: Servicii de transport aerian      Cache   Translate Page      
Institutul Național de Cercetare-Dezvoltare pentru Fizică și Inginerie Nucleară „Horia Hulubei” RO 3321234 Str. Reactorului nr. 30 Măgurele 077125 Compartimentul Aprovizionare, Achiziții +40 214042300, +40 214574440 Cercetare Cercetare-dezvoltare Servicii de transport aerian intern și internațional COD UNIC DE IDENTIFICARE: 3221234/2018/883P Numar dosar de achizitie: 25/ELI/AP/P/08.10.2018 Achiziționarea serviciilor de transport aerian intern si international de pasageri, în funcție de necesități și în limita bugetului alocat, după caz, pentru demnitarii, salariații și/sau delegații autorității contractante — de regula la clasa economic, ocazional la clasa business. Autoritatea contractanta va raspunde in mod clar si complet tuturor solicitarilor de clarificare/informatii suplimentare adresate de catre operatorii economici, in a 10-a zi inainte de termenul limita de depunere a ofertelor, conform art. 161 din Legea nr. 98/2016, cu modificarile si completarile ulterioare, coroborat cu art. 27 alin. (3) din HG 395/2016, cu modificarile si completarile ulterioare, in masura in care aceste solicitari vor fi adresate pana la termenul limita de 17 zile inainte de data limita de depunere a ofertelor. 6172.40 IFIN-HH, Str. Reactorului nr. 30, Magurele, Ilfov. Achiziționarea serviciilor de transport aerian intern si international de pasageri, în funcție de necesități și în limita bugetului alocat, după caz, pentru demnitarii, salariații și/sau delegații autorității contractante — de regula la clasa economic, ocazional la clasa business. Valoarea maxima estimata a celui mai mare contract subsecvent: 48 000 RON, fara TVA. Surse de finantare: Regie generala + regii departamente + proiecte + Contract 1/2016-POC — Program Operational Competitivitate. 1 Servicii de transport aerian intern și internațional 2019-02-19 1 1 BBook Bed and Breakfast S.R.L. RO 30394080 Str. Maxim Gorki nr. 2 București 010991 +40 733123534 48000 6172.40 31/ELI/AP/CTR Servicii de transport aerian intern și internațional 2019-02-18 5 5 Olimpic Internațional Turism S.R.L. RO 6519768 Str. Vişana nr. 5, sector 4 București 040392 +40 213305658 +40 213305123 Eximtur RO 3553943 Str. Nichita Stănescu nr. 16 Cluj-Napoca 400366 +40 364803803,, +40 364803804 BBook Bed and Breakfast S.R.L. RO 30394080 Str. Maxim Gorki nr. 2 București 010991 +40 733123534 14400000 45 116 Consiliul Național de Soluționare a Contestațiilor Str. Stavropoleos nr. 6, sector 3 București 030084 +40 213104641 +40 213104642 / +40 218900745 Oficiul Juridic IFIN-HH Str. Reactorului nr. 30, jud. Ilfov Măgurele 077125 +40 214042300 +40 214574440 2019-03-07
          Light Novel 'Choujin Koukousei-tachi wa Isekai demo Yoyuu de Ikinuku you desu!' Gets TV Anime      Cache   Translate Page      
A teaser website launched and announced a TV anime adaptation of the light novel series Choujin Koukousei-tachi wa Isekai demo Yoyuu de Ikinuku you desu!. The anime is slated for this year. Synopsis Seven high school students caught in an airplane accident wake up in a different, middle-age, fantasy-like world where magic and beast-men (juujin) exist. Instead of panicking at the current situation, however, the students stay calm. The students then build a nuclear plant in a world without electri...
          Happy 30th birthday, World Wide Web! 🎉      Cache   Translate Page      

Sir Tim Berners-Lee, in 1989, invented what would be one of the most revolutionary tools for humanity, the World Wide Web.

Berners-Lee envisioned "a large hypertext database with typed links,"named “Mesh,” to help his colleagues at CERN (a large nuclear physics laboratory in Switzerland) share information amongst multiple computers. By 1991, web servers were running.

It soon revolutionized life, bringing forward the Information Age.

Source 1
          Watch incredible restored footage of the first nuclear bomb detonation      Cache   Translate Page      

On July 16, 1945, US Army detonated the first nuclear weapon in New Mexico's Jornada del Muerto desert. Codenamed Trinity, the test was part of the Manhattan Project. Three weeks later, the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. From the Atom Central page about Trinity:

The bomb was detonated, producing an intense flash and a fireball that expanded to 600 meters in two seconds. The explosive power was equivalent to 18.6 kilotons of TNT. It grew to a height of more than 12 kilometers, boiling up in the shape of a mushroom. Forty seconds later, the blast of air from the bomb reached the observation bunkers, along with a long and deafening roar of sound.

About this footage:

Original Trinity Footage restoration includes removing dirt and scratches and minimizing some defects in the processing of the original negative. Three shots include a wide shot, a medium shot and a close up.

Previously: "Nuclear explosion porn: watch newly declassified 1950s-1960s nuke test films"

Read the rest

           Comment on First Look: New Dewalt ATOMIC 20V Max Compact Cordless Power Tools by Toolfreak       Cache   Translate Page      
The use of the word Atomic is a terrible idea. The first thing I thought when I saw the name was that DeWalt somehow had nuclear-powered cordless tools. If they wanted to use it as a name for ULTRA-ultra-compact 12V tools to rival the Bosch/Milwaukee offerings, that might have worked. It would also be awesome since there aren't many useful big brand tools that are super small. On bulky 18-20V tools that are barely smaller than what's already available? Dumb. I really do think they are going to hear it from at least some customers/laywers about the name. Not a smart choice.
          The David Pakman Show - March 12, 2019      Cache   Translate Page      

--On the Show:

--Dr. John Gartner, psychiatrist, founder of Duty to Warn, and co-editor of the book "Rocket Man: Nuclear Madness and the Mind of Donald Trump," joins David to update us on what he sees are the accelerating cognitive decline and mental state of Donald Trump

--Donald Trump's newest White House budget is the biggest ever at $4.75 trillion, and is an absolute embarrassment on all fronts

--Fox News host Tucker Carlson is right now to apologize for his recent disgusting comments given his audience's wholesale agreement with the ideas espoused

--Even more free and half price memberships are available thanks for all star TDPS supporter Joshua

--Bernie Sanders closes in on Joe Biden in the latest Iowa 2020 Democratic primary poll, now within the margin of error

--Shirley Phelps-Roper from the Westboro Baptist Church is confronted in person by David Pakman Show Producer Noah Ferguson at a protest in Virginia

--Donald Trump denies having called Apple CEO Tim Cook "Tim Apple," despite it being on recorded on video

--The Kansas troll calls in after years of antagonism and takes credit for the success of the David Pakman Show

--On the Bonus Show: Justin Trudeau scandal, Trump on daylight savings time, Milo Yiannopoulos banned from Australia, much more...

--Become a Supporter:

--Follow us on Twitter:

--Subscribe on YouTube:

--Like us on Facebook:

--Leave us a message at The David Pakman Show Voicemail Line (219)-2DAVIDP

          Why Do We Need An Increase in Defense Spending?      Cache   Translate Page      

I thought we were pulling out of Syria and Afghanistan? I thought we were getting NATO to pay more of their fair share? I thought we were saving money by cancelling maneuvers in South Korea? I thought we would save money by negotiating a non-nuclear agreement with North Korea? I thought we were bullying our [...]

          3/13/2019: Editorial & Letters: Student strike      Cache   Translate Page      
It would seem Brian Main only went to school to eat his lunch. Depending on his exact age, many of his contemporaries would have been protesting in favour of or against New Zealand’s involvement in Vietnam, French nuclear testing in the Pacific,...
          Wed, 13 Mar 7:00pm - Caithness Galore!      Cache   Translate Page      
Garance Warburton of Nucleus; the Caithness and Nuclear Archive, will bring along some fascinating items from the collection of public and private records held at Nucleus. The 19th century Police Records may show your ancestor who was arrested for driving a cart too fast - they do mine!! Come along and see for yourself and have a chat and a cuppa afterwards.. ...
          Dear Jewish-American Leftists: It’s Time For a Talk      Cache   Translate Page      

From one Jew to another. From one parent/grandparent to another. From one who utters “Never Again!” to another. From one witnessing the vile anti-Semitic floats in Belgian parades to another. From one in horror watching the U.K. descend into 100 monthly anti-Semitic incidents to another. And from one seeing, in disbelief, the rise of anti-Semitism in the U.S. to another. We may not agree on much else, but this outrage we have in common.

You are the resounding 72-74% majority of the 5.4 Million American Jewry who have backed the Democratic Party since the sun has risen in the East. We get it; you’re for minority rights because you will forever identify as a minority. You’re forever for JFK , even though his brand of liberalism is long gone and has actually morphed into modern conservatism. You’re forever for FDR, even though it was the Republican Ronald Reagan who delivered approximately 3,000,000 Soviet Jews from bondage of Anti-Semitic leftist oppression.

The Democratic Party of the 1950s was the party of the underdog, and you’re forever the underdog, in your mind, in your memory and by virtue of our tiny demographic. Your parents and grandparents have been married to the Democratic party since before you were born, and you can’t let go of what has been engrained in you with mother’s milk. Understandable.

Today is 2019, not the 1950s. And after the devastating failure of your Party to stand with you (as Jews) unequivocally against the rabid Nazi-era anti-Semitism of Democratic Congresswoman Omar, you stand in the final hour of a critical decision, depleted of all excuses for your political loyalty. And you know it.

We’re in the Situation Room of the 11th hour. Let’s connect all the dots together.

First, your history:

• At the UN, your favorite President Barack Obama, famously called for Israel to return to 1967 Borders. You said nothing and continued to exalt his virtue. 
• The same man orchestrated UN’s resolution #2334, de facto proclaiming most of Israel illegitimate in Jewish hands. You said nothing and continued to exalt his virtue. 
• On his way out of office, the same Democratic POTUS released a whopping $150 Billion to the mullahs of Iran who have a single clearly stated goal; washing Israel out to sea with their nukes. You said nothing and continued to sing the 44th praises. 
• You watched as Obama whispered to French President Sarkozy “…You are sick of him, but I have to work with him every day.”, mocking PM Benjamin Netenyahu of Israel. You said nothing and continued to applaud Obama. 
• You watched the spiraling souring of America-Israel relations under Obama’s leadership. You said nothing and continued the love affair with Obama. 
• You knew of Obama’s $350,000 interference in Israel’s national election to subvert the democratic process. You looked the other way and said nothing. 
• You never once heard the word “Jihad” leave Obama’s lips when describing Islamic terror attacks against Jews in France. You said nothing and continued to praise him in your liberal synagogues.

…Because Obama is your guy. Because he had the visible color of the underdog. Because the Democratic party is the perceived home of your ancestors.

Those ancestors are dead, but here is your record:

• President Donald Trump, by virtue of the American Embassy move, underscores Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel. You instantly end your supine silence and find your voice in loud opposition to the most logical, lawful, courageous and Israel-loving politic. With trembling knees, you proclaim “he’s angering the Arabs” in your posturing speeches on Shul Bimahs, in schools, social media and in endless editorials. When WW3 failed to occur, you retreat back to your silence, having sufficiently defamed the President. 
• President Trump reaffirms a record-setting annual budget of $4 Billion to Israel, including a $200M increase in 2019, for the next 10 years for a total of $40 Billion. What do you do? You bash the President in choir with CNN. 
• President Trump defunds Israel-denying UNRWA. You continue to bash the President.
• President Trump defunds murderous Mahmoud Abbas to the tune of $250 Million per year. You continue to bash the President. 
• You watch Trump’s appointee Nikki Haley staunchly defend Israel at the UN, time and time again. Speaking against UN’s anti-Israel biases & infinite resolutions of condemnation, like no one has ever before, Trump’s envoy to the UN stuns the world with her courage. Yet you continue to bash the President. 
• President Trump stands alone against feckless Europe in ending the disastrous Obama era of Nuclear Appeasement with Iran, undoing the damage done by the your favorite ex-President. Ignoring this courageous unpopular move and Iran’s devotion to the annihilation of the Jewish people as its number one cause, you continue to bash the President. 
• In every State of the Union and UN address, you hear President Trump exalt Israel, condemn the Holocaust, and explicitdly exclaim the non-negotiated American support for Israel under his administration. Backed not by his words, but by his deeds! ….You? You continue to bash the President. 
Holocaust Survivors and American religious Jewry unreservedly embrace the President with warm support and voter presence. Speaking at Trump’s commemorations of Jewish events & important dates, celebrating Hannukah with singing and candle lighting by Trump grandchildren and children, in full view to the world from the White House. First occurrences ever in history! And you? You continue to bash the President. 
• You know of Trump Family long-standing personal financial support for Israel, Fred Trump’s designation of NY buildings for subsidization of Post-Holocaust Jews, complete with a funded synagogue inside. But you continue to bash the President. 
• In August of 2015, Donald Trump's own private jet carried a critically ill 3-year-old Jewish boy from California to New York for medical treatment, when commercial airline refused to fly him. You? You continue to bash the President. 
• You’ve even watched the First Daughter, The First observantly Jewish Daughter of the Oval Office (another first in history!) pray at Jerusalem’s Wailing Wall, along with her father, the grandfather of this, de facto, First Jewish Family that every Friday night observes Shabbat. Amazingly, you continue to bash the President to the sound of the CNN drum. 
• You, the liberal Jews of America, continue to bash the man who has never once said, let alone done, anything remotely anti-Semitic. You go as far as partaking in discussions and events that compare Trump to Hitler and the KKK. You sign petitions and you echo the cherry-picked sound-bytes of MSNBC’s three-year smear campaign.

How you vote and what you do:

• You vote for the party of Louis Farrakhan, who only months ago called you “termites”! 
• You vote for the party whose elected politicians announce that you have duel loyalty, the oldest most vilifying anti-Semitic charge of genocidal racism.
• You vote for the party that can’t remove a repeatedly outspoken rabid anti-Semite from membership in the Foreign Affairs Committee, which sets policy with Israel and its friendly neighbors. 
• You vote for the party that dilutes and shoves its unhinged pre-Holocaust brand of anti-Semitism under the table, unable to pass a simple resolution against their hate of YOU. 
• While chanting anti-Trump slogans, you march with anti-Israel activitist Linda Sarsour and Tamika Mallory, women who rub shoulders with Farakkhan & Al Sharpton, men who proclaim your children to be “Satanic Jews”. 
• You vote for the party of Bernie Sanders, the man who defends Omar’s anti-Semitism and Palestinian militancy against Israel’s citizens. The same Socialist Sanders who once falsely accused Israel of a 10,000 dead-Palestinians genocide. The same Sanders who thinks your children “standing in queues for food is a good idea”. 
• Astonishingly, you lend your vote to the party of BDS advocacy against Israel...!
• You stand shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who praises Jeremy Corbyn, accuses Israel of occupation, and now stands in official support of Congresswoman Omar. 
• You even vote for the party whose elected officials tell you (the Jews) that you and your ilk have “hypnotized the world”...! 
• You vote with the party whose elected official may be in violation of a federal statute for fundraising for two Muslim Brotherhood charities and its affiliates. Same officials who participate as keynote speakers at events for the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated groups IRUSA and CAIR. 
• You vote for the party whose loyal College Campus Academia ubiquitously advances anti-Israel positions & Israel Apartheid weeks, and writes endless editorial pages against Israel’s “aggression”. The piously liberal Academia that prevents Israeli speakers from speaking on campuses. The Academia that poisonously convinced your children that bashing Israel does not amount to anti-Semitism. 
• You vote for the party that morally equates Israel to terror groups and Islamic countries of horrendous human rights abuses. 
• You vote for the party whose right arm, the media, exalts the Palestinian cause vis-à-vis Hamas terror on Israeli borders and streets. 
• You vote “democrat” alongside anti-Israel groups like Jewish Voices for Peace, J-Street and George Soros. 
• You vote for the party, whose members tried to shamelessly tie the Pittsburgh murders to President Trump and even tried to prevent him from visiting the aftermath. 
• You voted for Hillary Clinton, Democratic Presidential for 2016, who by her own admission, was mentored by KKK member Senator Byrd. Photographed and videoed kissing the man while he was alive and proudly eulogizing him at his funeral. 
• You vote for the party that gave us the KKK, David Duke and white supremacy. All the while, relentlessly brainwashing the public to tie this Democrat evil to the Republicans. 
• You vote for the party that continues to ridicule and defame President Trump in order to keep the hate in you alive. 
• You vote for the party that unanimously voted against Lincoln’s abolishment of slavery, championed by the Republicans. 
• You vote for the party that stood against the 1964 Act for Civil Rights aimed to benefit American blacks. 
• You vote against the party (GOP) who elected first ever African American Senators. 
• You vote against the Republican Party that just championed and passed the anti-BDS measure with notable Democrats in dissent.

Going back to its Ku Klux Klan and Jim Crow days, the beloved Democrat Party of your ancestors has always been a hotbed of antisemitism — a party that has, for decades, tolerated and feted Louis Farrakhan while embracing Rev. Al Sharpton. A Party that is now in the firm grip of Congresswomen Tlaib, Omar and AOC. A party that is breaking free from the hiding of its genetic antisemitism.

So it isn’t the disenfranchised, marginalized-by-all 10,000 white supremacists (your party’s own embryo) you should be worried about. It’s the sweeping reach of the politically “correct” anti-Semitic Democratic Party into our collective psyche, our culture, our schools, our social norms, and our public opinion you should be disturbed about. Millions of malleable minds ingesting normalized anti-Semitism is a far greater threat to your children’s future than a one-time march of a unanimously hated group of thugs.

Your Party has failed you. It failed everyone it pretends to champion with its empty but loud rhetoric: the middle class, the minorities and the poor. It has conditioned you to see yourself not as proud Jews, but as underdogs only, indoctrinated to believe in the Democratic Party’s deliverance, irrespective of its dismal track record. Like you, this is the brainwash much of Soviet Jewish citizenry under the Proletariat of the old Soviet Union bought into, only a few decades earlier.

“Divisive” is not the work of the most Jewish President U.S. of A. has ever elected, but the push of Democratic Party’s agenda that thrives on three wings of hate: “Blame it on the Evangelicals”, “Blame it on the Russians” and “Blame it on Trump”. The party which now officially and proudly adds the 4th wing of hate to their platform, the one that you can’t run from or double-talk against; “Blame it on the Jews”.

Your visceral hate has been meticulously cultivated by the daily brainwash of the Democratic Party’s liberal media. In 2016, the Democratic Party received a total donation of $1,020,816, given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks (NBC, CBS, ABC), while the Republican Party received only $142,863 via 193 donations from employees of these same organizations. And that's before we mention CNN and its boss who is toying with the idea of running for Democratic leadership. Are we tying the dots yet?

You stand with the party that has exhumed every hatred & division across racial & identity lines known to man. All to secure your loyalty and obedience as the perpetual underdog.

Today, in March 2019, you stand with the party that’s incapable of taking the smallest symbolic stand against anti-Semitism, let alone eradicate it from its ranks.

You stand with the party that stands against you.

You stand with the party that continues to elect Islamic and anti-Semitic politicians who propagate anti-Semitism proudly, even though your voter ballots are too few to matter to them in any election.

Yet, you stand against the party who takes up your cause and shows unequivocal support for Israel, and whose President wakes up to daily abuse for his pro-Israel, pro-Jewish stance, all despite your hate of him and your utterly insignificant voter power.

You’ve been duped. But believing a lie is easier than admitting you’ve been lied to. There’s no longer any ambiguity or defensibility of the Democratic Party and we all know it. They have sold you out, because your numbers are insignificant in the voting booth. And because another minority they can’t upset provides them with a much bigger voting block. You have a choice to continue on this path of self-desecration, dragging the rest of us to 1930s Germany with you, or you can walk away now, before the next election.

Your other option, to comfortably retreat right back into the lazy boy of your trembling Jewish knees and once again vote Democrat in 2020, still remains. Telling yourself the same old lie “Everyone is anti-Semitic. Why change?”

Just remember this; When you’re no longer at the dinner table, you’re on the menu. And you’re certainly no longer at the dinner table with the Democratic Party, Islam is.

What legacy are you leaving your grandchildren? The legacy of the new but all-too-familiar German Jews with heads in the sand? Or the legacy of the 21st Century American Maccabees? Your clock is running out.

As the majority block of the collective American Jewish vote, you have the power to determine how history and all our children judge us. Make the right choice.

          Quel pericoloso “terrorista” di Al Bano da contropiano      Cache   Translate Page      

Chi sarà questo nostro concittadino così pericoloso?, un terrorista convertito all’islam ed arruolatosi con l’ISIS?, un broker della droga per conto di una delle nostre tante mafie?, un trafficante di armi o di scorie nucleari?… No, è il signor Albano Carrisi, in arte Al Bano, pacifico cantante di italiche canzonette con ammiratori in tutto il mondo e svariate decine di milioni di dischi venduti.

Cosa avrà mai combinato per meritare tanto?, ha semplicemente sostenuto, più volte e pubblicamente, che a suo parere le sanzioni economiche dell’Unione Europea nei confronti della Russia per le questioni ucraine sono sbagliate e dannose per la nostra economia, e non ha mai nascosto la propria ammirazione per Vladimir Putin.

Il sig. Carrisi parla con una certa cognizione di causa, infatti oltre ad essere un cantante con fans in tutto il mondo, compresa la Russia e l’Ucraina, è anche un imprenditore agricolo, ha una grande tenuta nel suo paese natale, Cellino San Marco (BR), dove produce vino, olio ecc. E quindi sa benissimo che la mancata vendita dei nostri prodotti agricoli sul mercato russo ha portato a perdite economiche importanti nel nostro settore agricolo.

Quanto alle sue opinioni in merito a Putin, ognuno la vede a modo suo, ma il sig. Carrisi ha tutto il diritto di esprimerle senza dover temere ripercussioni da parte di chicchessia, lui come ogni cittadino italiano.

Esprimere una pacata opinione dissenziente dal coro pro NATO/USA/UE – magari solo per ragioni commerciali – mette dunque a rischio anche un pacifico cantante/agricoltore di essere trattato come un pericolosissimo delinquente.

Si consoli il sig. Carrisi, è in buona compagnia. Infatti il 10 dicembre 2018 un altro nostro concittadino è stato iscritto nella medesima lista dalle autorità ucraine, al numero progressivo 103. Ma se sperate che almeno questo sia veramente un “pericoloso terrorista”, anche questa volta vi sbagliate: si tratta del sig. Michele Placido, attore e regista cinematografico e teatrale noto in tutto il mondo, che si è visto inserito nella lista perché durante una sua tourneè a Mosca, sulla Divina Commedia e Dante Alighieri, ha pubblicamente apprezzato Vladimir Putin e la sua politica estera.

Non credo sia tollerabile che un governo straniero inserisca pacifici cittadini italiani, che sono anche artisti universalmente riconosciuti, in una simile lista. Cosa fa il nostro governo? Quali passi ha mosso la nostra Ambasciata a Kiev perché questa demenza sia subito rimossa?

Ci piacerebbe saperlo, ma crediamo di conoscere la risposta: non è stato fatto nulla, in quanto il nostro governo, in questo perfettamente allineato con i governi precedenti, è succube totalmente della triade NATO/USA/UE e non tutela certamente i nostri interessi nazionali.

          طفح كيل الفاسدين والسُرّاق: من جمع أموال السُّحْتَ إلى إستعدادهم للتضحية بأرواح الأبرياء لجمعها      Cache   Translate Page      
مُخيمات اللاجئين
11 آذار 2019 (7 دقائق)

كامل الحلقة: صراع في نينوى؟ أم عليها؟  (55 دقيقة)

إستقبل الاعلامي عماد العبادي في هذه الحلقة من برنامج ’على الطاولة‘ ثابت بشار نائب عن تحالف المحور وقصي عباس نائب مستقل عن كوتا الشبك

مشروع ماء البصرة
 (3 دقائق)    كارثة اسمها مشروع ماء البصرة - بداية الحلقة

جزء مهم من الحلقة (8 دقائق)

27 شباط 2019

          Foreign Influence Operations      Cache   Translate Page      
 In  Defying the Oddswe discuss  Trump's record of scandal The update  -- just published --includes a chapter on the 2018 midterms.

Li Yang, the Florida massage parlor entrepreneur who created and operated a business that sold Chinese business executives access to President Donald Trump and his family at Mar-a-Lago, has yet another intriguing line of work. She is an officer of two groups with ties to China’s Communist government. And she founded a Miami-based nonprofit that promotes “economic and cultural exchange” between China and the West in coordination with “senior…Chinese leaders” in the United States, according to a profile of Yang posted on a Chinese social media platform.
Jon Swaine at The Guardian:
Donald Trump’s inauguration received tens of thousands of dollars from shell companies that masked the involvement of a foreign contributor or others with foreign ties.
The Guardian has identified the creators of three obscure firms that contributed money to Trump’s inaugural committee, which collected a record $107m as he entered the White House in 2017.
The three companies each gave $25,000 to Trump’s inaugural fund. At least one of the contributions was made for a foreign national who appears ineligible to make political donations in the US.
One of the $25,000 donations to Trump’s inauguration was made through a Delaware shell company for a wealthy Indian financier based in London, who appears to not hold US citizenship or residency.
Another was made by a company formed in Georgia by a lobbyist with connections to the Taiwanese government. His wife said the firm was funded by Chinese investors. One of their daughters was later given an internship in Trump’s White House, which they said was unrelated to the donation.

A third $25,000 contribution was made through a company formed anonymously in New York by an Israeli real estate developer who has helped other foreign developers with legal issues in the US. The Israeli developer said he held US residency, commonly known as a “green card”, which permitted him to contribute legally.

          Answering: top reasons I hate living in Brazil      Cache   Translate Page      
Yes, some guys shared a teasing topic about “Top reasons why I hate living in Brazil”:

What is the point here? The whole text is loaded of cliclés, people that you will hardly find, etc most of time just pissing people off.  

I don’t think Brazil is the best country in the world. Also, I don’t think Brazilians don’t make mistakes. Actually we do all the time but most of us really care about our mistakes specially those were pointed out. Some feel like an expatriate, alien in own country. Others reflect about how we could improve. Others  simply don’t accept teases from John Does.

So, I’m actually truly bothered with people believing in a bunch of false statements (specially Brazilians) or supporting some cynical arguments disguised “sincere” criticisms.

Yes, I make mistakes all the time, and as most of Brazilians, I don’t speak English. However, I will try my best to explain which points I consider valid and which not:  for those who want to know better about Brazil, for those who want to avoid the Brazil and for those interested to know what could/should be improved.

Unfortunately, the list of criticisms is a total mess with some repetitions and mix of arguments aiming Sao Paulo and others Brazil. So, I took the liberty to get only the first twenty and sorting according with my criteria of what is reasonable in such way that should be easier to talk about.

Here it is:

Valid points, somehow exaggerated, but nothing to say

Brazilians have no respect for their environment. They dump big loads of trash anywhere and everywhere, and the littering is unbelievable. The streets are really dirty.

Brazilians constantly interrupt and talk over each other. Trying to have a conversation is like a competition to be heard, a shouting match.

Brazilians are super social and rarely spend any time alone, especially meals and weekends. This is not necessarily a bad quality but personally I hate it because I enjoy my space and privacy, but the cultural expectation is that you will attend (or worse, invite) friends and family to every single meal and you are criticized for not behaving "normally" if you choose to be alone.

Brazilians stay very close, emotionally and geographically, to their families of origin their whole lives. Like the previous point, this is not necessarily a bad quality but personally I hate it because it makes me uncomfortable and affects my marriage. Brazilian adults never "cut the cord" emotionally and their family of origin (especially their mothers) continue to be involved in their daily lives, problems, decisions, activities, etc. As you can imagine, this is extra difficult for a spouse from another culture where we generally live in nuclear families and have a different dynamic with our families of origin.

The mosquitoes from HELL.

And finally, Brazilians only have 1 kind of beer (a watery pilsner) and it really sucks, and of course, imported beers are expensive.

True points, somehow exaggerated, and some observations

The food may be fresher, less processed and generally healthier than American or European food, but it is bland, repetitive and very inconvenient. Processed, frozen or ready-made foods in the supermarket are few, expensive and generally terrible. Most foods are made from scratch and if you can't afford a maid to do it for you, you'll spend a lot of time in the kitchen. Restaurants abound but there are few convenient options, as Brazilians favor sit-down meals and there are almost no drive-thrus except crappy fast food.
Is this guy considering that exist any healthy/gourmet fast food? It is sad that good and healthy food are well-valued in some countries. (sigh!) Fortunately (and unfortunately for Americans) Brazilians favor sit-down well prepared meals.   

Brazilians have a very prominent class system. The rich have a sense of entitlement that is beyond a caricature. They think the rules do not apply to them, that they are above the system, and are very arrogant and inconsiderate, especially with each other. The poor, meanwhile, are paid so little that they never have an opportunity to lift themselves out of poverty and therefore often turn to crime or simply become lazy and indignant regarding their jobs because they see no hope for the future and no point in trying to do a good job.