Eugenics

ALLIGATORS ARE FEASTING ON SHARKS IN AMERICA’S RIVERS AND ESTUARIES, SCIENTISTS DISCOVER

There is always a bigger fish, the old adage goes and if there isn’t, at the very least there is a bigger alligator, new research confirms.

Even when it comes to sharks—an infamous predator of the sea—as they risk becoming prey to the American alligator when they venture into freshwater, a study published in Southeastern Naturalist confirms.

The study of the stomach contents of 500 living alligators captured and examined by Kansas State University researcher James Nifong and IMSS wildlife biologist Russell Lowers unveiled four different species of sharks, including nurse sharks and stingrays.

The American alligator, also known as Alligator mississippiensis, and the various types of sharks usually swim in waters that rarely overlap as alligators are freshwater dwellers, while sharks top food chains in salt waters.

On the rare occasion where either species feels some wanderlust for the other’s ecosystem, the alligator is liable to swap its meal of crustaceans, snails, and smaller fish for more vicious prey.

gator-shark-smAmerican alligator preying on a nurse shark.U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE J.N. “DING” DARLING NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.

Sharks have been spotted slipping into freshwater areas on occasion. Equally, while alligators lack salt glands—a requirement if their body is to filter the saltwater they plan on surviving in—the species can suss out whenever saltwater becomes temporarily diluted, after heavy rainfall for example.

“Alligators seek out fresh water in high-salinity environments,” said Nifong in a statement. “When it rains really hard, they can actually sip fresh water off the surface of the saltwater. That can prolong the time they can stay in a saltwater environment.”

Alligators are not inherently the victor in an altercation with any shark, however. In fact, as the relationship between the two species becomes closer, what the dynamic between them looks like is more of mutual hunting or “reciprocal predation.” In other words, it is likely that once hungry and pitted in the same environment, it is a question of size that determines if the alligator eats the shark or vice versa.

“The frequency of one predator eating the other is really about size dynamic,” Nifong said “If a small shark swims by an alligator and the alligator feels like it can take the shark down, it will, but we also reviewed some old stories about larger sharks eating smaller alligators.”

Advertisements

How anti-Zionists fueled a far-right victory

NEW YORK (JTA) — Last month, New York’s Center for Jewish History was the target of a right-wing campaign seeking to oust its new president, David Myers, over his dovish views on Israel. The campaign drew an appropriately outraged response from leading Jewish scholars, who rallied around Myers, a highly regarded historian who has publicly opposed the anti-Israel BDS — Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions — movement.

Now, one of the five independent historical organizations housed at the center, the American Jewish Historical Society, is also coming under attack. This time, however, the most consequential attacks are coming not from the far right but the far left. Anti-Zionist BDS supporters are masquerading as champions of free expression after their hijacking of the august and heretofore largely apolitical AJHS was foiled.

The latest controversy erupted into public view last week when AJHS’s board canceled two events that the society had been scheduled to host: a play by the anti-Zionist playwright Dan Fishback on intrafamilial disagreements about Israel and a discussion on the Balfour Declaration that was co-sponsored with the BDS-backing Jewish Voice for Peace. The cancellation came the same day as an article criticizing AJHS for hosting the events appeared in the far-right FrontPage Magazine.

Fishback and JVP immediately cried foul. Fishback, a JVP and BDS supporter, complained of “silencing and censorship.” JVP’s executive director, Rebecca Vilkomerson, decried what she called AJHS’s “shameful caving to rightwing pressure.” The New York Times picked up on the ensuing “backlash” from various cultural figures angered by what they saw as AJHS embracing censorship.

Critics focused on the cancellation of the play, “Rubble Rubble,” casting Fishback as a superficially sympathetic-seeming party in the drama. But the play’s cancellation cannot be understood in isolation.

For starters: Why was AJHS hosting a discussion with Jewish Voice for Peace on the Balfour Declaration — with a panel consisting of a Palestinian activist in dialogue with a JVP activist, neither of whom is even a historian? Would AJHS also host a panel discussion on the Oslo Accords sponsored by a far-right pro-settler group like Women in Green? I doubt it.

AJHS, consistent with its focus on American Jewish history, does little Israel-related programming. But the planned Balfour Declaration panel was not even the only event in partnership with JVP. Earlier in the year, AJHS partnered with JVP to host an event with an anti-Zionist Ethiopian Israeli activist. AJHS also was publicly offering discounted tickets to JVP members for Fishback’s play about Israel.

These three events, it’s worth noting, seem to be the only Israel-related programs hosted by AJHS in 2017. It’s simply not as if AJHS was hosting tons of Israel programs — or even many plays — and then singling out Fishback’s performance for cancellation because some people complained about his views on Israel.

Here’s the real question: How is it that American Jewry’s leading historical society came to select a fringe anti-Zionist group as its sole interlocutor on Israel-related programming?

AJHS’s director of programming, Shirly Bahar — who publicly supports the boycott of Israeli academic institutions — announced the society’s fall schedule with the declaration that she had worked to foster “critical, edgy, and politically challenging cultural and academic programs where difficult conversations about Mizrahim, Jews of Color, Palestine, cross-cultural solidarity, and anti-racism are highlighted rather than censored.”

The result, at least as far as Israel programming, seems to have been a schedule that reflected only one very particular strand of thinking on Israel — one that is far removed from the views of the overwhelming majority of American Jews.

The AJHS board officers did not seem to be aware of this sudden slant in the society’s programming until quite recently, as a source confirmed to the Forward. Ultimately, members of the AJHS board decided to cancel the events, with AJHS stating that “they do not align with the mission of the AJHS.”

The Jewish community does have genuine problems with campaigns to stigmatize and shut down people based on their views on Israel. Too often those who criticize Israel — liberal Zionists and anti-Zionists alike — are subjected to campaigns of invective and incitement. The right-wing campaign against David Myers is a prime example.

That’s not what happened at AJHS. Rather, an anti-Zionist fringe coopted the programming of a mainstream Jewish institution, then cried “censorship” when the institution’s board realized what was going on and put a stop to it.

Moreover, JVP and Fishback don’t exactly have the strongest standing to complain about shutting down or stigmatizing others. This is the same JVP that tried to shame LGBT supporters of Israel who marched in this past summer’s Celebrate Israel parade in New York by disrupting their contingent. This is the same Fishback who defended pro-Palestinian activists who shut down an event by a pro-Israel LGBT group at a conference hosted by the National LGBTQ Task Force.

Activists like these appear all too happy to see those with whom they disagree shut down or shouted down. And they seem equally happy to aggressively try to coopt the Jewish institutions to which they can gain entry. When they are denied, they kvetch about being silenced.

AJHS was the collateral damage. Now it faces the wrath of those who were wrongly led to believe that AJHS “caved” to right-wing censors. And AJHS has alarmed constituents who wonder why a preeminent communal historical institution would subcontract its Israel programming to a widely loathed anti-Zionist group.

But if AJHS came out as a loser, there were also winners. The incident gave new ammunition to those on the far right who are now trying to smear David Myers and the Center for Jewish History for the programming decisions of AJHS, an independent organization. And JVP gets to resume its favorite posture: righteous “silenced” victim.

GERMAN LEFT PARTY LEADER CALLS MP A ‘SNEAKY JEW’

 

The head of the German Left Party in the city of Saarlouis, situated in the state of Saarland, used an antisemitic phrase on his Facebook page to denigrate an MP in his party, according to a Monday report in the regional paper Saarbrücker Zeitung.

Mekan Kolasinac, the chairman of the Left Party in Saarlouis, called the party’s federal head, Bernd Riexinger, a “sneaky Jew.”

Kolasinac told the paper he wrote the anti-Jewish entry but regrets it. He said it was a mistake and he intended to write “Judas” instead of “Jew.” Kolasinac said he apologized on his Facebook page and apologized to “my Jewish friends.”

Birgit Huonker, a spokeswoman for the Left Party in Saarland, said: “Antisemitism in one’s party. Bad.”

The Saarbrücker Zeitung said the background to Kolasinac’s verbal attack on Riexinger is a BILD paper article, in which Riexinger allegedly sought to oust the party’s parliamentary head Sahra Wagenknecht. Riexinger is co-chair of the federal Left Party.

The Left Party has been plagued over the years by allegations of antisemitism and anti-Israel scandals, according to critics.

The Left Party in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia attempted last week to pass a Boycott, Divestment,Sanctions (BDS) motion against Israel.

Wagenknecht refused to participate in the standing ovation for Nobel Peace Prize laureate and former Israeli President Shimon Peres during his 2010 Holocaust remembrance speech in the Bundestag. Her action along with other Left MPs was praised by Germany’s NPD neo-Nazi party.

Wagenknecht defended her party’s lawmakers Inge Höger and Annette Groth who traveled aboard the Mavi Marmara vessel in 2010 in an attempt to break Israel’s blockade of the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. Groth is no longer an member of parliament. Left Party MP Christine Buchhloz supports the “legitimate resistance” of Hamas and Hezbollah. Left Party MPs are also known to have hosted BDS activists in the Bundestag in 2014.

LEBANON GRANTS OIL, GAS EXPLORATION LICENSE FOR WATERS BORDERING ISRAEL

 

The Petroleum Administration in the Lebanese Ministry of Energy and Water has announced that an international consortium won two licenses for exploration for oil and gas, one of which borders on Israel’s exclusive economic zone.

Israel has not yet decided how to respond to this development, against the background of the border dispute between the two countries that has continued since Israel withdrew from its security zone in Lebanon in 2000.

According to the Lebanese Petroleum Administration announcement, two bids were accepted in an auction of oil and gas exploration licenses in Lebanon’s exclusive economic zone. Both bids were submitted by a consortium comprising French company Total S.A, Italian company Eni unit International BV, and JSC Novatek from Russia. The consortium will receive blocks 4 and 9. Ten blocks were offered in the auction, but only the two bids from this consortium were received, which represents partial failure for the Lebanese government.

The southern perimeter of block 9 borders the line separating Israel and Lebanon’s exclusive economic zones. The two countries are in dispute over where precisely the line should be drawn. As a result, a disputed area exists forming a triangle of which the apex is at Rosh Hanikra (on the Israeli side of the Lebanon-Israel border) and of which the base borders the exclusive economic zone of Cyprus. Attempts have been made to mediate between the sides, among other things through a US envoy to the region, but, according to Israel, a compromise proposed four years ago was rejected by Lebanon.

The potential of block 9 is still unclear, as seismic tests and exploratory drillings have not yet been carried out, but preliminary estimates are that there is a geological structure in the block that could hold gas in similar quantities to those in the Tamar reservoir in Israeli waters.

In the past, Israel suspended the Alon D license, which borders block 9 on its northern edge, but two months ago Minister of National Infrastructures, Energy and Water Resources Yuval Steinitz decided to return the license to its original holders, Delek Group Ltd. (TASE: DLEKG) and Noble Energy, for a further 32 months.

Iran general: Trump quiet on military ​threat because he ‘realizes our power’

https://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-general-trump-quiet-on-military-%E2%80%8Bthreat-because-he-realizes-our-power/

 

The deputy head of Iran’s hardline Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) mocked US President Donald Trump Tuesday, saying that his omission of military options in his recent rhetoric threatening to cancel the Iran nuclear deal proves he is scared of engaging the Islamic Republic.

“Unlike the past, the new US president didn’t speak of the military option against Iran because Iran’s power is credible and the enemy has realized and accepted Iran’s power,” said General Hossein Salami, in remarks quoted by Iran’s Fars news agency.

In a much-anticipated White House speech on Friday, Trump stopped short of withdrawing from the accord, but “decertified” his support for the agreement and left its fate in the hands of Congress.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear control accord reached between Iran and the so-called P5+1 — Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States — was signed in 2015 and saw economic sanctions on Iran lifted in return for limitations place on it nuclear program to prevent it from producing nuclear weapons. Israeli officials, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, opposed the deal, saying it did not go far enough to prevent Iran from going nuclear in the future.

Outlining the results of a review of efforts to counter Tehran’s “aggression” in a series of Middle East conflicts, Trump ordered tougher sanctions on Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps and on its ballistic missile program.

But unlike his predecessor Barack Obama who said during the negotiations for the 2015 agreement that “all options are on the table,” Trump made no threat of using military force against Iran if they fail to comply.

“Trump’s remarks, which seemed threatening on the surface, admitted emergence of an uncontrollable power,” Salami said, addressing a ceremony in Tehran. “It’s clear that he realizes our power.”

Salami said that Trump’s speech was “US defeats, failure and inability,” according to Fars.

Trump, however did announce targeted sanctions on the Revolutionary Guards, a key instrument of Tehran’s military and foreign policy that the president described as “the Iranian Supreme Leader’s corrupt personal terror force and militia.”

He said he is authorizing the US Treasury Department to “further sanction the entire Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps for its support for terrorism and to apply sanctions to its officials, agents, and affiliates.”

But the US leader backed away from designating the Guards Corps as a terror group, a move that would have triggered a slew of sanctions and almost certain Iranian retribution.

Irani Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Sunday that Trump’s speech outlining an aggressive new strategy against Iran violated Tehran’s nuclear agreement with world powers.

The virulent speech contravened three articles of the 2015 deal, Zarif said in televised remarks broadcast late on Saturday.

They include the requirement to implement the accord “in good faith” and for the US to “refrain from re-introducing or re-imposing” sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program.

Iran drops death sentence in Prophet Mohammed insult case

TEHRAN — Iran has dropped a death sentence for a man convicted of insulting the Prophet Muhammad in a series of Facebook posts, prosecutors said Tuesday.

Soheil Arabi was sentenced to hanging in August 2014 after allegedly defaming the prophet and the 12 holy Imams of Shiite Islam in comments on social media.

Tehran prosecutor Jafari Dolatabadi said Arabi, who was also found guilty of “insulting state officials” and “propaganda against the regime,” will now serve an unspecified jail term.

“The initial sentence was execution and its reduction to prison by the Supreme Court shows the independence of the judges,” judiciary-linked Mizan Online quoted Dolatabadi as saying.

The harsh sentence for Arabi, who is in his early 30s, had sparked criticism from rights activists.

Human Rights Watch called on Iran to “vacate the death sentence” for Arabi and has urged authorities to reform the criminal code to improve freedom of speech.

Dolatabadi also said that trade unionist Reza Shahabi Zakari — considered a “prisoner of conscience” by Amnesty International — has been charged with selling “security-related information” to “hostile groups.”

Earlier in the month, labour news agency ILNA quoted Shahabi’s wife, Robabeh Rezayi, as saying her husband had been taken back to prison after being released on medical leave.

Former transport worker Shahabi, who was jailed in 2010 on charges supporters say are political, recently went on a 50-day hunger strike in protest at his detention, ILNA reported.

Iran does not provide official figures on executions, but Amnesty says it was the world’s second-most prolific executioner after China in 2016. Most of its hangings relate to drug trafficking.

More than 4,000 people sign petition against Golders Green Islamic Centre

More than 4,200 people have signed an online petition protesting against plans to turn the Golders Green Hippodrome into a mosque.

The petitioners – who are asked to say whether they either live, work or study in the area but are not asked to provide proof – claim the new Islamic religious centre will cause “disruption,” citing traffic and pollution problems.

The complainants, writing under the banner of ‘Golders Green Together,’ say they wish to “restore the charm, harmony and safety of our family neighbourhood”.

They have called on Barnet Council to “approach the management of the Centre and oblige them to make the necessary arrangements and changes in order to stop the deleterious impact on the lives of the local residents and their visitors”.

The Grade ll-listed building on North End Road was bought earlier this year for more than £5 million by the Centre for Islamic Enlightening. It will house the Hussainiyat Al-Rasool Al-Adham Mosque and Islamic Centre, and serve the Shia community.

However the petitioners say the extra traffic would make it an “utterly unbearable” situation leading to an “increased risk to the lives and health of local residents”.

On Wednesday, the Board of Deputies’ chief executive Gillian Merron wrote to the petition’s organisers about the use of the name ‘Golders Green Together.’

She said: “As you may or may not be aware, ‘Golders Green Together’ already exists – it was formed by the Board of Deputies of British Jews and others in 2015 to campaign against a neo-Nazi demonstration in Golders Green.

“It is associated with this successful anti-racist campaign and we are not willing to allow it to be used by others without permission. Please cease to use the name with immediate effect.”

Jewish News readers have previously expressed disquiet about the idea of a Shia religious centre in an area with a large Jewish population, with one Golders Green resident, who preferred to remain anonymous, saying: “We residents object as we want a cultural centre for all, not just them.”

However spokesman Ahmed Al-Kazemi extended a hand of friendship after the sale of the former concert venue, saying: “We are very pleased and excited to be in Golders Green in such a diverse area. We can’t wait to get to know our neighbours and plan to welcome them at an open day sometime in December.”

Raqqa, ISIS ‘Capital,’ Is Captured, U.S.-Backed Forces Say

BEIRUT, Lebanon — American-backed forces said on Tuesday that they had seized the northern Syrian city of Raqqa from the Islamic State, a major blow to the militant group, which had long used the city as the de facto capital of its self-declared caliphate.

Celebrations erupted in Raqqa, where residents had lived under the repressive rule of militants who beheaded people for offenses as minor as smoking. Fighters could be seen cheering and firing celebratory gunfire in the streets, according to residents reached by phone and text message.

The United States Central Command stopped short of declaring victory, saying that “more than 90 percent of Raqqa is in S.D.F. control,” a reference to the Syrian Democratic Forces, an American-backed militia group made up of Syrian Kurds and Arabs.

Col. Ryan S. Dillon, a spokesman for the United States military in Baghdad, said Tuesday that Raqqa was on the verge of being liberated, but that there were still pockets of the city controlled by the Islamic State. Syrian Democratic Forces officers, however, were emphatic in phone interviews and public statements that they had finally wrested control of the city from the militants after a monthslong campaign.

“The military operation is over,” said Talal Salo, a commander reached by phone at the group’s headquarters in Hasaka.

Still, a spokesman for the Syrian Democratic Forces, Moustapha Bali, said suicide bombers might still be hiding in the city. In a video teleconference with Pentagon reporters, Colonel Dillon also said that Islamic State fighters had booby-trapped the city with improvised explosive devices and unexploded ordnance that officials say could take years to remove.

Whether final or not, the seemingly inevitable defeat in Raqqa of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, carries heavy symbolic weight. At its height in 2014, the group controlled Iraq’s second-largest city, Mosul, as well as Raqqa and large stretches of land on both sides of the border. And it had grand aspirations to increase its territory and cement its rule.

The Islamic State leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who once spent time in a prison run by occupying American troops in Iraq, claimed to be the successor to the caliphs, the Islamic emperors who shaped the region in past centuries. He persuaded tens of thousands of Muslims from around the world, some new to the faith or poorly versed in it, to travel to the region to fight. The group seized the ancient ruins of Palmyra in Syria and those of Hatra in Iraq, destroying important historical monuments in the name of its interpretation of Islam.

With the fall of Raqqa, the Islamic State has lost the two most important cities of its self-declared caliphate in three months. It was pushed out of Mosul in July, and now holds only a fraction of the territory it once controlled.

Analysts say the group is already preparing for a new phase, morphing back into the kind of underground insurgency it started as, when it took root among disaffected Sunni populations that were willing to tolerate, if not wholeheartedly embrace, its ultraconservative brand of Islam. And while many Arabs quickly soured on the group because of its brutal crackdowns and unfulfilled promises, their underlying political disaffection has not been addressed.

Another major concern, now that Islamic State-held territory is reduced, is how countries in Europe, in the Middle East and around the world will handle the foreigners who joined the group in places like Syria and might return home and plan attacks there.

A victory in Raqqa has come at a heavy cost. Much of the city has been devastated by American-led airstrikes that killed more than 1,000 civilians, according to tallies by local activists and international monitors. In earlier years, many were killed by Russian and Syrian government strikes. About 270,000 residents have been displaced by the fighting, and thousands of homes have been destroyed.

Hassan Mohammad Ali, a member of a civilian council backed by the United States and the Syrian Democratic Forces that is supposed to be responsible for rebuilding the city, said last week that reconstruction would be a challenge.

“The city is in ruins; it needs time,” he said. “And it needs prospects that are beyond ours, our energy.” Just providing bread to areas retaken from the Islamic State was stretching the council’s capacity, he said.

Dr. Mohammad Ahmed Saleh, a resident of the city who now works in a hospital in Tal al-Abyad, said he was eager to return home but was bracing for the worst.

“I’m expecting to see a new Hiroshima,” he said by telephone, taking a break from treating a newly arrived contingent of 19 wounded people from Raqqa, a mix of civilians and fighters for the Islamic State. “I’m trying to be mentally prepared when I go. I’ll be lucky if I see one of my house’s walls still standing.”

Many former residents said they had no plans to go back.

“Today, I decided to start a new life,” said Wadha Huwaidi, who fled Raqqa a few months ago. “I’m sad, of course, but I had nothing left there. My house was destroyed, my children, my husband all collapsed. There’s nothing left that makes me feel I want to go back.”

For months, Islamic State commanders and fighters have been withdrawing from Raqqa and moving southeast into the neighboring province of Deir al-Zour. They have clustered in neighborhoods in the provincial capital, which is also called Deir al-Zour, as well as in the town of Mayadeen and in a town on the border with Iraq called al-Bukamal. Hundreds of Islamic State fighters had decamped from Raqqa to Mayadeen in recent months, taking heavy equipment with them.

But over the weekend, Syrian government forces, backed by their Russian and Iranian allies, took Mayadeen and continued their advance into the provincial capital, leaving the Islamic State with the border town as the only urban area entirely under its control in Syria. Beyond that, Islamic State fighters are scattered in a large area of the Syrian desert, outside population centers.

It is unclear what happened to the last several hundred Islamic State fighters holed up in Raqqa. There were conflicting reports about whether foreign fighters among them would be allowed to evacuate on buses in a surrender deal.

Last week, the United States-led coalition said there would be no negotiated withdrawal of Islamic State fighters, just the evacuation of civilians, if necessary, to keep them out of the crossfire. But in previous battles, in Hawija and Tal Afar, surrendering fighters were allowed to board buses to Islamic State-held territory. Witnesses in Raqqa said that several busloads of Islamic State fighters, both Syrians and foreigners, had been allowed to board buses to Deir al-Zour.

The fall of Raqqa threatens to inflame relations between Kurds and Arabs, who have been fighting the Islamic State in an uneasy alliance with the United States-led coalition — but against an enemy that is rapidly melting away. Most immediately, they may be at odds over the future governing of Raqqa.

Similar tensions were on display in Kirkuk, Iraq, on Monday after Iraqi government forces drove out Kurdish forces to the cheers of Turkmens and Arabs in the ethnically mixed city.

The battle against the Islamic State has also led to touchy de facto partnerships internationally, with the United States, Russia and Iran all fighting the group in sometimes competing efforts, vying for influence.

Deir al-Zour, home to most of Syria’s modest oil reserves, continues to be a flash point for possible tensions between the two rival coalitions fighting the Islamic State: Russia, Iran and the Syrian government on one side, and the United States and the Syrian Democratic Forces on the other.

Both sides want to increase their influence over the region as their proxies race one another to take Islamic State areas straddling Syria and Iraq. The Syrian government and its allies, Iran and Russia, are steadily driving the Islamic State from Deir al-Zour, and a crucial question is whether the government will ultimately seek to retake full control of Raqqa as well.

Hitler’s Scientists May Have Tested the First Atomic Weapon

Most people are familiar with the famous mushroom-shaped cloud picture which shows the famous atomic bomb dropping on Nagasaki, Japan on August 9, 1945. But what if Germany also had produced its own smaller-scale mushroom cloud a year earlier in the fall of 1944?

The Germans may have lost the neck-and-neck race to build a successful nuclear bomb during WWII, but it’s clear that they were able to test a pretty impressive warhead in 1944.

“A cloud shaped like a mushroom with turbulent, billowing sections (at about 7000 meters) stood, without any seeming connections over the spot where the explosion took place. Strong electrical disturbances and the impossibility to continue radio communication as by lightning turned up.”

This was a statement made by German test pilot Hans Zinsser, in Allan Hall’s DailyMail.com article, who was doing test flights over Ludwigslust at the time. He was not the only witness to the spectacular sight that day.

The Dawn of Nuclear Weapons

In December 1938, German chemist Otto Hahn discovered nuclear fission, the building block of nuclear chain reactions and disastrously dangerous atomic weapons. Shortly after this discovery, Germany’s nuclear weapons project was born.

For over four years, groups of German scientists explored the possibilities of nuclear weapons production under Adolf Hitler’s watchful eye. The Third Reich achieved success in building “uranium machines” otherwise known as nuclear reactors. However, after repeated alterations to the design, they lacked enough of a heavily-ionized water source known as “heavy water.”

Once their supply of heavy water from Norway was cut off, Hitler’s team only had enough resources for a few more large-scale experiments. This resulted in the sensational production of the first nuclear warhead testing cloud ever seen.

The First Ever Nuclear Test

Mark Walker’s article “Nazis and the Bomb,” published by PBS’s Nova states: “During the last months of the war, a small group of scientists working in secret under Diebner and with the strong support of the physicist Walther Gerlach, who was by that time head of the uranium project, built and tested a nuclear device.”

The multi-colored cloud that was several miles wide was definitely not the imagination of those few eyewitnesses who came forward to describe it. Two German pilots, as well as an Italian observer sent by famed dictator Benito Mussolini, described the sight in similar detail to each other.

Germany was not able to produce the atomic weapons it had hoped for in order to gain the upper hand in WWII. In 1942, Hitler ordered the Reich Research Council to be reorganized as a separate division from the military. With Reich Minister for Armament and Ammunition, Albert Speer, heading the council, the project morphed into a study for alternative energy production, Mail Online reported.

This change did not prevent the germans from being able to demonstrate at least one impressive large-scale test of nuclear power. No one can be sure of the exact nature of the warhead that Germany tested, but what remains undisputed is that it was accomplished and reported by several different sources.

Ethnic Dutch a minority in big cities, so how do they integrate?

Instead of being in the majority in large Dutch cities, the native Dutch have become a minority, according to Maurice Crul of Amsterdam’s VU university.

(Dutsch News)

Crul has been investigating migration and integration for 25 years and has just begun a major new study this year, not of migrant groups but of the ‘white ethnic Dutch’ ‘It’s already happening in Amsterdam.

Only one in three youngsters under the age of 15 is of Dutch parentage,’ Crul told Trouw. With a team of eight researchers, Crul is starting a unique €2.5m 5-year study of six large European cities, including Amsterdam and Rotterdam. Frankfurt, Antwerp, Malmö and Vienna will also come under the spotlight.

If you want to look at integration, you need to look at the ethnic white Dutch, he said. ‘Who adapts to who if there is no majority?,’ he said. ‘The ethnic Dutch are the most unstable factor in Amsterdam. They move in while they are at university, and then leave or move with their young families to the suburbs. Migrant groups sometimes live in the same spot for generations,’ he said.