Australia's nuclear spin doctors often have differing agendas.

Some are pushing uranium, some pushing reactors, - for overseas.

Some are pushing for stuff here in Australia, e.g uranium enrichment.- and to import the very lucrative toxic wastes. They've all got one thing in common:

Nuclear Spin is the powerful and highly organised propaganda campaign to give the public both lies, and incomplete and distorted information in favour of the uranium/nuclear industry

Delaying action on greenhouse emissions, and pushing for nuclear power - these are "two sides of the same coin" - NUCLEAR SPIN

Nuclear spin reaches us via a chain of command of money, power and influence.

4. Australian journalists connected to the front groups

Soldiers of spin - Just a few of the well funded spinning organisations are shown at left, - and a few of their connected publicists

RECENT NEWS and VIEWS

This news item highlights the importance of WORDS - carefully chosen to allow NUCLEAR SPIN - 2020 success prompts call for regular summits - Stock and Land 21/04/2008 - "The Prime Minister's 2020 Summit concept should become an annual or biennial event according to the Independent Member for New England Tony Windsor.

……………….Whilst Mr Windsor did not agree with all of the final communiqué from his grouping, he was happy that he had the opportunity to raise concerns about climate change, the use of renewable energy and the role that agriculture could play in both……………………………….

'The final communiqué does not mention specifically the word 'renewable' rather it speaks of 'clean' energy which leaves the door open for nuclear power stations and fossil fuels to further impact on other parts of our environment through the waste left behind and its method of extraction on aquifers that sustain other productive activities'.........................................."

ACTU: Greenwashing the mining industry? Green Left Ben Courtice 8 April 08

After decades of "greenies versus jobs" propaganda, it is high time unionists and environmentalists started working together on the looming threat of catastrophic climate change. Sadly, the Australian Council of Trade Unions' (ACTU) policy on global warming released in March barely strays from what is acceptable to the government and big business. ……………

…………The document puts a concise and convincing case against nuclear power - construction is too long and expensive, creates greenhouse gases itself, and creates very expensive electricity, as well as the "unsolved issue of waste". But nowhere is there mention of Australia's expanding uranium mining industry. Perhaps nuclear power is only inappropriate when it's generated in Australia? Not to mention weapons proliferation, which is not mentioned either - surely peaceful Australian uranium wouldn't end up in bombs?

The false nuclear "solution" on climate change is touted by many (including some environmentalists who ought to know better) as a possible way of replacing carbon emissions, but the ACTU document stops far short of really debunking this red herring or identifying Australia's real place in the nuclear cycle.......................".

Hands off coal subsidies, all you renewa-fools Sydney Morning Herald Colin Power April 1, 2008 - "................As the head of the Australian Greenhouse Business Group, I believe we need to bring this debate back into the real world.......

........Maybe it's not our energy that has to change, it's our attitude to climate that has to shift.........For years we've been pitching radioactive uranium as a clean energy source and we've renamed coal to "clean coal". But it's time for our industry to go a step further.

.You see, this isn't so much an environmental issue as it is a branding issue. "Climate Change" sounds uncertain and "Climate Chaos" is scary, but "Climate Surprise" can mean the same thing - without frightening little kids.

To those of us in the "dig and burn" industries, we know there are years worth of rock just resting below our nation's crust ready to be burned and spewed into the air. We need billions of your hard-earned dollars to compete with the renewa-fool publicity machine. With this in mind, we launch our national campaign Save Our Subsidies

Colin Power heads the Australian Greenhouse Business Group, which today launches its Save Our Subsidies campaign to coincide with April Fools' Day. Power's alter ego is Brett Solomon, a fictional character who pretends to be executive director of an online activist group called GetUp!"
.

GAB fest underway in Adelaide, but not about the GAB (that's the Great Arterial Basin) - Paydirt 2008 Uranium Conference - Christina Macpherson 20 March 08 - In 2007 the Howard government gave Premier Rann of South Australia $7.5 million to study the impact that BHPBilliton's mining was having on the Great Arterial Basin.

Well, what happened to that? You can bet that South Australia's precious groundwater was not a major discussion point at this conference., Olympic Dam copper and uranium mine at Roxby Downs takes 33 million litres a day from the Great Artesian Basin, and the expansion will increase this by over 150 million litres a day

Yes, folks, roll up and take in the spin.

The uranium industry heavies are there in Adelaide, spruiking and spinning at the well-named Paydirt conferenceChristina Macpherson 20 march 08 . From the ABC News Mar 17, 2008 we're told by Professor Ian Plimer from Adelaide University that Energy 'collapse' will force nuclear use. " Professor Plimer has also argued at the conference that humans are not contributing to global warming.

Adelaide University chemistry professor Stephen Lincoln has urged Australians to embrace nuclear power.ABC News Mar 19, 2008

From the Paydirt conference - Uranium lobby getting busy - Christina Macpherson 20 March 2008 We learn that "Australia is in bad need of political leadership on uranium mining, ." - Mr Warwick Grigor (chairman of uranium explorer Monaro Resources NL,)- "......the anti-uranium stance in Western Australia, and the Queensland Government continues with the pathetically parochial and anti-environmental view"

Australian Uranium Association's Executive Director, Mr Michael Angwin said "We have not yet consolidated our political role."....

Dr Douglas Boreham - "Nuclear power plants do not cause any negative health consequences for humans or other organisms," (Of course, Boreham ignores the total uranium/nuclear cycle) During his talk, Dr Boreham quoted the (completely discredited) Patrick Moore as an authority in support of nuclear power.

Ziggy Switkowski and Nuclear Hypocrisy - Christina Macpherson 21 Feb 2008 Will the world tolerate the hypocrisy and greed of Australiia? Do we really think that our corporate greedies can keep on exporting uranium, keeping Australia "clean", while we lumber other countries with dirty radioactive wastes?

Nuclear power off agenda The Courier 20 February 2008 - "ABOUT 20 extra countries are expected to turn to nuclear power by 2020.But Australia will not be one of them, nuclear physicist and advocate Dr Ziggy Switkowski said in Ballarat yesterday.
Dr Switkowski said, since the Howard Government's demise in November, plans to go down a nuclear path had collapsed.........'The Rudd Government is very clear that they do not believe nuclear power is part of the solution for Australia, and so there will be no continuing activity around nuclear energy' he said.

...'But the government is supportive of making Australia's uranium available around the world and that's a positive thing..The more nuclear power that's used everywhere, given that it's clean and near zero emitting in terms of greenhouse gasses, that contributes importantly to reducing emissions right around the world'............................................."

environmental bond that will see the company save funds to cater for any environmental damage the extraction of uranium ore may cause.

The CBOs tore into the EIA report saying it failed to include studies of both sufficient scientific quality and length of environmental monitoring to make a credible case for assessing the extent of the environmental impacts from the uranium project. The CBOs were further incensed that Paladin proposed to leave the tailings above ground instead of depositing them back into a former open cut or even underground mine as is the standard in Australia - the company's headquarters.

According to the Anti-Nuclear Alliance of West Australia, the most serious health hazard associated with uranium mining is lung cancer due to inhaling uranium decay products.

Uranium mill tailings contain radioactive materials, notably radium-226 and heavy metals - manganese and molybdenum - which can leach into groundwater. What happens to tailings after the mining companies have left the site is said to pose major headaches for the future.....".

Tim Flannery - trying hard to please everyone?

Save the world -but you can still have fun - Australia Day Tim BlueThe Australian 25 Jan 2008 - " 'ENJOY the situation and what you're able to achieve.' That's the message outgoing Australian of the Year Tim Flannery has for the next incumbent......

.........he says climate change is 'my area of expertise' He adds: 'What I know about uranium you could write on the back of a postage stamp'
Asked if he has any regrets, Flannery says there were some 'issues around the margins'............."

cat looks at king -

comment on "Nuclear Comeback" - Christina Macpherson 16 Jan 08. SBS Television showed this documentary last night. On the pro-nuclear side there were three "environmental experts".

1. Bruno Comby - nuclear physicist, but more famous for selling his "Comby Stressometer" - a quack device, similar to the Scientologists' "E-meter". and for his campaign for 100% raw food diet as a treatment for various illnesses.

2. Patrick Moore was quoted as a "founder of Greenpeace". He was not a founder, but did join Greenpeace in 1971 - left it in 1984, and from then on worked on anti-environmental issues, particularly regarding the marine environment.. From 1991, Moore has been a paid spokesman for logging industres (he got the job because of his "Greenpeace credibility"}. . More recently, he also spruiks for nuclear.

3. Ian Hore-Lacy - his job is to promote the World Nuclear Association and the uranium industry. Formerly a PR man for CRA, he promotes nuclear power with a truly religious zeal.

The nuclear spinners are going to have to find some more credible speakers!

Ziggy Spinowski - Australia's top nuke spruiker

Indonesia pushing for nuclear power, despite safety concerns ABC News 10 Jan 08 By Jakarta correspondent Geoff Thompson - "....................It is not yet clear whether Indonesia can expect the same enthusiastic assistance from the Rudd Government, which is less keen about nuclear energy options.........

...............Dr Ziggy Switkowski, who headed the Howard government's nuclear energy task force, says ........'In our region you've got countries such as Japan and South Korea and China and India committing to building more and more reactors into the future,'

.....................Last year there was an explosion at a chemical lab within the grounds of Indonesia's only nuclear testing facility near Jakarta..............................

The proposed site of Java's first proper nuclear power plants is under the shadow of the dormant volcano, Mount Muria, land which has two active geological faults running beneath it.

Yayuk Nur Hidayati is the nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace Indonesia.
'The geographical and geological condition in Java is very unstable. A lot of earthquakes and a lot of faults are found all over Java, not to mention the volcano that is still active in Java,' she said................................

One thing is certain according to the studies which have been done - a nuclear problem for Indonesia could also be a nuclear problem for Australia. ..........".

Re-birth of the nuclear industry? - a phantom pregnancy! - Christina Macpherson. 19/6/07

It's interesting that Ziggy Switkowski, (the Howard government's nuclear mouthpiece), has recently been reported as saying that he was "confident community support would start to emerge once a reactor was built.". In other words, a nuclear plant would have to be imposed on the people against their will, first?

The Howard government and their corporate backers are trying to put it over us on this so-called "nuclear renaissance". In fact, nearly all of the world's nuclear reactors are old and needing to be shut down. The U.S.A has no way of getting rid of their waste stockpile, and U.S. states are suing the Bush government about this. In the UK, the government has just lost a court case about nuclear power, and is forced to listen to public opinion against it.

In Australia, where we clearly don't need nuclear power, there is a great push to sell uranium - FAST, before the uranium speculative stock-market bubble bursts. Then there's the prospect of inviting back overseas nuclear wastes - to the great relief of overseas countries, and the great enrichment of a few peoiple like Hugh Morgan, John White and Ron Walker.

As to nuclear power plants - well, I guess that the uranium deals work better if Australa just says it will have nuclear power?

Who are the nuclear spinners? There are many U.S and UK "think tanks", so-called "environment groups" well paid "experts", especially including "pro-nuclear environmentalists" Just to look at one Australian spinner - Institute of Public Affairs. it promotes Australian Environment Foundation - which campaigns for weaker environmental laws. Its top staffers have backgrounds in uranium mining and conservative politics.

Institute of Public Affairs spokesmen have repeatedly promoted nuclear power, and downgraded renewables. - ""Australia should offer to dispose of the wastes generated from the uranium supplied from our own mines............The disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste in Australia is a major opportunity. It would not only be a significant business opportunity, but also a major enabling step for the use of nuclear power, an important contribution to nuclear safety, and a major contribution to our region." - IPA Board member (and former Deputy Chairman of Energy firm Vencorp) Tom Quirk .

Let the spin begin!"Call it a repository ... not a dump," says Hugh Morgan Call for SA nuclear dump - Adelaide Now 5/4/07 "FORMER mining executive Hugh Morgan says an internationally-owned and run nuclear waste facility should be set up in land across the South Australian and West Australian border..................He said there were three preferable sites for a nuclear waste dump, the best one being in the Australian outback. .......'I would say South Australia/Western Australia, that's where the geological sequence lies,'he said. ............

..........Mr Morgan said fears about nuclear waste disposal were ill-founded. ......................Mr Morgan also wanted the public to stop calling facilities for nuclear waste dumps. 'Call it a repository ... not a dump,' he said. "