

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, (240) 462-3216;
Derek Coronado, Citizens Environment Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, (519) 973-1116;
Michael Keegan, Don’t Waste Michigan, (734) 770-1441;
Joe DeMare, Green Party of Ohio, (419) 973-5841.
Digging out from this winter's intense snow storms has proven challenging enough for area residents and municipalities. But imagine the chaos of evacuating the entire region if a catastrophic radioactivity release were to occur at the aged and degraded Davis-Besse nuclear power plant on the Lake Erie shore east of Toledo. Unthinkable as it is, evacuation preparedness -- as well as post-accident cleanup lines of authority and funding sources -- are sorely lacking at best, or entirely non-existent. Notification is not necessarily required in such an event, not even for Canadians living within just 50 miles of the problem-plagued atomic reactor. These hypothetical, yet all too real, risks are at the heart of contentions being raised by citizen groups opposing the 20 year license extension of Davis-Besse.
Last Friday, an environmental coalition defended its intervention against First Energy Nuclear Operating Company's (FENOC) license renewal application. Both the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and FENOC have moved to have the contentions dismissed and groups' standing denied. The joint petitioners - Beyond Nuclear, Citizens Environment Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, Don't Waste Michigan, and the Green Party of Ohio - allege that wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) power, and certainly a combination of the two renewable energy sources, can readily replace Davis-Besse's electricity by the end of its 40 year operating license in 2017. The December 27, 2010 intervention petition and request for a hearing to NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), as well as its January 28, 2011 defense against NRC staff and FENOC counter challenges, is posted at the top of Beyond Nuclear's homepage, www.beyondnuclear.org. The ASLB empaneled for this proceeding has announced that it will hold an oral pre-hearing on March 1, 2011 at the Ottawa County Common Pleas Court in Port Clinton, Ohio to review the environmental coalition's intervention, NRC staff's and FENOC's objections to the intervention, and the Intervenors' "Combined Reply" in defense of its environmental contentions.
In addition to its renewable energy alternatives to Davis-Besse's 20 year license extension, the environmental coalition also asserts that the potential casualties and economic costs that could be caused by a severe radioactivity release from Davis-Besse have been grossly underestimated. Outrageously, the NRC staff and FENOC have moved to exclude the involvement of any Southwestern Ontario residents from this proceeding, because representatives from Citizens Environment Alliance sleep a mere 300 feet beyond the "approximate 50 mile radius" from Davis-Besse routinely observed under legal precedents for standing. Further research by the Intervenors has revealed that Canadians would not necessarily be informed even if a severe accident were to occur.
Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear, a party to the intervention, said "Granting Davis-Besse 20 additional years to operate would be playing radioactive Russian roulette on the Great Lakes shoreline."
Beyond Nuclear has prepared a background summary on Davis-Besse's trouble-plagued history, including some of the closest-calls to major accidents in U.S. history. Among these were a Three Mile Island reactor meltdown precursor accident in 1977, a 1985 loss of cooling to the reactor core, a 1998 tornado strike, and the infamous 2002 hole-in-the-head reactor lid corrosion accident (a 2010 lid leak shows the problem is recurring). Each of these four incidents came unacceptably close to causing a reactor core loss-of-coolant-accident, which could have led to a full nuclear meltdown. The Davis-Besse backgrounder is posted at the Beyond Nuclear website at https://www.beyondnuclear.org/storage/Davis_Besse_Backgrounder.pdf.
The environmental intervenors' expert witness on renewable power sources, such as wind and solar PV readily replacing Davis-Besse, is Alvin D. Compaan, Ph.D., Distinguished University Professor of Physics, Emeritus, at the University of Toledo, and former Chair of UT's Physics and Astronomy Department. UT physics undergraduate student, Kathryn Hoepfl, has also provided intervenors with analysis showing that a combination of wind and solar could readily replace Davis-Besse.
"The good news is that vast renewable energy sources, such as wind power and solar PV, coupled with energy efficiency, are ready and cost-effective today. Efficiency and renewables will benefit everyone's pocket book, health, safety, and environment, and do not risk catastrophic radioactivity releases for the sake of corporate greed," said intervenor Joe DeMare of Rossford, Ohio, a Wood County Green Party member. "Opposition to nuclear power is in keeping with the Greens' Key Principle of Ecological Wisdom," he added.
The intervention filing and its defense extensively documented the vast offshore wind power potential of Lake Erie, as well as vast on-land wind power potential in Ohio, and the ability of a combination of wind power and solar PV to readily displace Davis-Besse. A recent NRC ruling in separate proceeding may provide a significant precedent for the Davis-Besse license extension dispute. On December 28, 2010, the ASLB overseeing the Calvert Cliffs Unit 3 new reactor application in Maryland ruled in favor of environmental intervenors, including Beyond Nuclear, ordering NRC staff and the nuclear utility to more realistically consider the vast potential of offshore wind power, as well as a combination of renewable energy technologies, such as wind and solar, as alternatives to nuclear power. A link to the Calvert Cliffs 3 ASLB ruling has been posted at Beyond Nuclear's website:
https://www.beyondnuclear.org/nuclear-power/2010/12/29/nrc-licensing-boa....
The intervenors' concluding contention holds that FENOC has vastly understated the true costs that would occur in the aftermath of a catastrophic radioactivity release at Davis-Besse.
"Davis-Besse risks a Chernobyl-type nuclear catastrophe in the heart of the Great Lakes," said intervenor Derek Coronado, coordinator of the Citizens Environment Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, based in Windsor. "Its current, ongoing leaks of hazardous tritium into the watershed are bad enough, but a catastrophic radioactivity release at Davis-Besse could instantly ruin the drinking water supply for many millions of people downstream in the U.S., Canada, and numerous Native American and First Nations." Coronado expressed dismay when he learned that Canadians would not necessarily be alerted about a severe accident, saying "No wonder they attempted to exclude our standing by 300 feet, they want to duck the question."
Intervenor Michael Keegan of Don't Waste Michigan in Monroe said "This radioactive rust bucket has got to go before it blows."
The NRC's 1982 report "Calculation of Reactor Accident Consequences," based on 1970 Census data, determined that a major accident at Davis-Besse could cause 10,000 fatal cancers downwind, 1,400 "peak early fatalities," 73,000 "peak early injuries," and $84 billion in property damage in the region. Intervenors have challenged the conclusions on casualties as severe underestimates, based on population growth over the past 40 years. Adjusted for inflation, property damages would now top $184 billion, in Year 2009 Dollars.
Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic.
(301) 270-2209"This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it," warned one Democratic senator.
US President Donald Trump late Tuesday declared a blockade on "all sanctioned oil tankers" approaching and leaving Venezuela, a major escalation in what's widely seen as an accelerating march to war with the South American country.
The "total and complete blockade," Trump wrote on his social media platform, will only be lifted when Venezuela returns to the US "all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us."
"Venezuela is completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America," Trump wrote, referring to the massive US military buildup in the Caribbean. "It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before."
The government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, which has mobilized its military in response to the US president's warmongering, denounced Trump's comments as a "grotesque threat" aimed at "stealing the riches that belong to our homeland."
The US-based anti-war group CodePink said in a statement that "Trump’s assertion that Venezuela must 'return' oil, land, and other assets to the United States exposes the true objective" of his military campaign.
"Venezuela did not steal anything from the United States. What Trump describes as 'theft' is Venezuela’s lawful assertion of sovereignty over its own natural resources and its refusal to allow US corporations to control its economy," said CodePink. "A blockade, a terrorist designation, and a military buildup are steps toward war. Congress must act immediately to stop this escalation, and the international community must reject this lawless threat."
The announced naval blockade—an act of aggression under international law—came a week after the Trump administration seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela and made clear that it intends to intercept more.
US Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), one of the leaders of a war powers resolution aimed at preventing the Trump administration from launching a war on Venezuela without congressional approval, said Tuesday that "a naval blockade is unquestionably an act of war."
"A war that the Congress never authorized and the American people do not want," Castro added, noting that a vote on his resolution is set for Thursday. "Every member of the House of Representatives will have the opportunity to decide if they support sending Americans into yet another regime change war."
"This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela."
Human rights organizations have accused the Republican-controlled Congress of abdicating its responsibilities as the Trump administration takes belligerent and illegal actions in international waters and against Venezuela directly, claiming without evidence to be combating drug trafficking.
Last month, Senate Republicans—some of whom are publicly clamoring for the US military to overthrow Maduro's government—voted down a Venezuela war powers resolution. Two GOP senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, joined Democrats in supporting the resolution.
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, wrote Tuesday that "the White House minimized Republican 'yes' votes by promising that Trump would seek Congress’ authorization before initiating hostilities against Venezuela itself."
"Trump today broke that promise to his own party’s lawmakers by ordering a partial blockade on Venezuelan ships," wrote Williams. "A blockade, including a partial one, definitively constitutes an act of war. Trump is starting a war against Venezuela without congressional authorization."
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) warned in a television appearance late Monday that members of the Trump administration are "going to do everything they can to get us into this war."
"This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it," he added. "This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela."
"Obviously, they have issues with what is in that video, and that’s why they don’t want everybody to see it," Sen. Mark Kelly said of administration officials after the meeting.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Tuesday that the Pentagon will not release unedited video footage of a September airstrike that killed two men who survived an initial strike on a boat allegedly carrying drugs in the Caribbean Sea, a move that followed a briefing with congressional lawmakers described by one Democrat as an "exercise in futility" and by another as "a joke."
Hegseth said that members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees would be given a chance to view video of the September 2 "double-tap" strike, which experts said was illegal like all the other boat bombings. The secretary did not say whether all congressional lawmakers would be provided access to the footage.
“Of course we’re not going to release a top secret, full, unedited video of that to the general public,” Hegseth told reporters following a closed-door briefing during which he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio fielded questions from lawmakers.
As with a similar briefing earlier this month, Tuesday's meeting left some Democrat attendees with more questions than answers.
“The administration came to this briefing empty-handed,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) told reporters. “If they can’t be transparent on this, how can you trust their transparency on all the other issues swirling about in the Caribbean?”
That includes preparations for a possible attack on oil-rich Venezuela, which include the deployment of US warships and thousands of troops to the region and the authorization of covert action aimed at toppling the government of longtime Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Tuesday's briefing came as House lawmakers prepare to vote this week on a pair of war powers resolutions aimed at preventing President Donald Trump from waging war on Venezuela. A similar bipartisan resolution recently failed in the Senate.
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and co-author of one of the new war powers resolution, said in a statement: “Today’s briefing from Secretaries Rubio and Hegseth was an exercise in futility. It did nothing to address the serious legal, strategic, and moral concerns surrounding the administration’s unprecedented use of US military force in the Caribbean and Pacific."
"As of today, the administration has already carried out 25 such strikes over three months, extrajudicially killing 95 people," Meeks noted. "That this briefing to members of Congress only occurred more than three months since the strikes began—despite numerous requests for classified and public briefings—further proves these operations are unable to withstand scrutiny and lack a defensible legal rationale."
Briefing attendee Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)—who is in the administration's crosshairs for reminding US troops that military rules and international law require them to disobey illegal orders—said of Trump officials, "Obviously, they have issues with what is in that video, and that’s why they don’t want everybody to see it."
Defending Hegseth's decision to not make the boat strike video public, Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) argued that “there’s a lot of members that’s gonna walk out there and that’s gonna leak classified information and there’s gonna be certain ones that you hold accountable."
Mullin singled out Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who, along with the Somalian American community at large, has been the target of mounting Islamophobic and racist abuse by Trump and his supporters.
“Not everybody can go through the same background checks that need to be cleared on this,” he said. “Do you think Omar needs all this information? I will say no.”
Rejecting GOP arguments against releasing the video, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said after attending Tuesday's briefing: “I found the legal explanations and the strategic explanations incoherent, but I think the American people should see this video. And all members of Congress should have that opportunity. I certainly want it for myself.”
"This administration's racist cruelty knows no limits, expanding their travel ban to include even more African and Muslim-majority countries, even Palestinians fleeing a genocide," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
President Donald Trump faced sharp criticism on Tuesday after further expanding his travel ban—an effort the US leader launched during his first term, reinstated upon returning to office in January, and previously ramped up in June.
The Republican's new proclamation maintains full restrictions for people from Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen, and introduces them for travelers from Laos and Sierra Leone, who previously faced partial limitations.
Trump also added Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, South Sudan, and Syria to that list, just days after he vowed to "retaliate" for an Islamic State gunman killing three Americans, including two service members, and wounding three others in Syria. Journalist James Stout warned that "expanding the travel ban to Syria leaves few options for the people who fought and defeated the Islamic State and are being increasingly threatened by the Syrian state."
While the US government does not recognize Palestine as a state—and has backed Israel's genocidal assault on the Gaza Strip—the president also imposed full restrictions on individuals holding travel documents issued by the Palestinian Authority.
"The harm isn't theoretical," stressed Etan Nechin, a New York-based reporter for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. Pointing to Palestinian peace activist Awdah Hathaleen, who earlier this year was denied entry at San Francisco International Airport, deported, and then murdered by an Israeli settler in the West Bank, the journalist suggested that Trump and his allies know the consequences of the travel ban, and "they don't care."
As Common Dreams reported earlier Tuesday, Sudan, Palestine, and South Sudan topped the International Rescue Committee's annual humanitarian crisis forecast.
Trump's latest proclamation continues partial restrictions for Burundi, Cuba, Togo, and Venezuela, and adds such limitations for Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Cote d'Ivoire, Dominica, Gabon, Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Tonga, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
It also lifts a ban on nonimmigrant visas for people from Turkmenistan but maintains the suspension of entry for them as immigrants, with a White House fact sheet stating the country "has engaged productively with the United States and demonstrated significant progress."
Writer Mark Chadbourn said, "It's a white nationalist list—mainly Africa, some Middle East, plus Haiti and Cuba."
Here is a map of the affected countries (excluding Tonga), to give you a sense of how much this new ban restricts immigration from Africa in particular.Of the newly-added country, Nigeria faces the largest impact, with tens of thousands of visas issued every year to Nigerians.
[image or embed]
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social) December 16, 2025 at 3:58 PM
US Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian American in Congress, said that "this administration's racist cruelty knows no limits, expanding their travel ban to include even more African and Muslim-majority countries, even Palestinians fleeing a genocide."
Tlaib also accused the president, along with his deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser, of wanting the United States to resemble a Ku Klux Klan event, declaring that "Trump and Stephen Miller won't be satisfied until our country has the demographics of a klan rally."
As the Associated Press noted:
The administration suggested it would expand the restrictions after the arrest of an Afghan national suspect in the shooting of two National Guard troops over Thanksgiving weekend...
The Afghan man accused of shooting the two National Guard troops near the White House has pleaded not guilty to murder and assault charges. In the aftermath of that incident, the administration announced a flurry of immigration restrictions, including further restrictions on people from those initial 19 countries who were already in the US.
Laurie Ball Cooper, vice president of US Legal Programs at the International Refugee Assistance Project, said in a statement that "IRAP condemns the Trump administration's escalating crackdown on immigrants from Muslim-majority and nonwhite countries. This expanded ban is not about national security but instead is another shameful attempt to demonize people simply for where they are from."
"Subjecting more people to this policy is especially harmful given the administration's recent invocation of the travel ban to prevent immigrants already living in the United States from accessing basic immigration benefits, including pulling them out of line at citizenship ceremonies," she continued.
"The expanded proclamation notably includes Palestinians and eliminates some exceptions to the original ban," she added. "This racist and xenophobic ban will keep families apart, but we are prepared to defend our clients, their communities, and the American values of welcome, justice, and dignity for all."