Archive By Date | Today's Links to Search By
Activists' News | Nuclear | Depleted Uranium | Military | Police
Alternative Energy Etc. | From Subscribers
NUCLEAR
Iran as Bush's nuclear bogeyman
Commission wants PG&E to be accountable for missing nuclear fuel
Nigeria launches first nuclear reactor
China invites bids for nuclear contracts valued at up to nine bln dollars
Daughter of Soldier Contaminated with Depleted Uranium
Foreign Minister Says Iran Is Using Atoms for Peace
S Africa to help Iran resolve N-programme concerns
Russia against SC taking up Iran's N-issue
Saddam, the Bomb and Me
Japan faces calls to review MOX nuclear fuel plan
US reacts calmly over North Korea nuclear claim
Chinese FM calls for patience in ending Korea nuclear turmoil
Defence shield 'a fraud'
Politically-Timed Terror Alerts: The Real Terror Threat
US scorn for international law blasted
H-Bomb Suspected In Radiation Probe
First Los Alamos Nuclear Materials in Nevada
MILITARY
Rebels Report Truce in Nigeria, but Government Has No Comment
IRAN - Firms sanctioned for weapons sales
Israel lobbying for Taiwan submarine buy
Powell, Li confront sensitive issue of US arms sales to Taiwan
China may have 800 missiles targeting Taiwan in 2006, Taipei warns
Pair of Car Bombs in Iraq Kill Dozens, Including Many Children
The torment of being held hostage
A FAILED "TRANSITION": THE MOUNTING COSTS OF THE IRAQ WAR
'Improved security for Israel in 2005'
A Long Deadly Day in Gaza as Israel Fights Way Into Camp
NATO mission in Iraq could involve 3,000 troops: Jones
Russian Government Backs U.N. Accord on Global Warming
Civilian Spacecraft Rolls Into Space in Bid to Win $10 Million
Private Craft Rockets Past Edge of Space
Clark denies deal on release of spies
Top Air Force Lawyer Steps Aside
Bush's Exit Letter To Guard Released
Assembling Full War Records a Challenge
POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
Ashcroft 'to defend' Patriot Act
Key Part of Patriot Act Ruled Unconstitutional
Judge Strikes Down Section of Patriot Act
Judge strikes down part of Patriot Act
Thai PM launches war on drugs
Captive Briton in Iraq Implores Blair to Do More to Free Him
Death Sentences in Attack on Cole
Plan Would Let U.S. Deport Suspects to Nations That Might Torture Them
POLITICS
Lawmaker expresses "dismay" that White House allegedly wrote Allawi speech
Resolution to Fund Government Until Nov. 20 Passes
Stop-Gap Bill on Spending Is Approved
Pentagon Spends Without Bids, a Study Finds
Ex-Lobbyist Is Assailed at Hearing
Senate Opens Hearings on Lobbyists for Tribes
Networks ignore camera regulations
Falwell asks Christians to support president
High Time for Bush to Tell the Truth
War in Iraq Likely to Be Topic One
Leaders Say Senate Can Act on 9/11 Bills Soon
Cheney, Edwards Stress Differences on Security and Iraq
In Debate on Foreign Policy, Wide Gulf or Splitting Hairs?
ENERGY
Kerry yet to take a position on giant wind-power project
OTHER
Global Warming Is Expected to Raise Hurricane Intensity
Russia set to ratify Kyoto
ACTIVISTS
Vatican official blasts war in Iraq
Protesters prepare for chase as plutonium ships near UK
-------- NUCLEAR
Iran as Bush's nuclear bogeyman
September 30, 2004
San Francisco Chronicle
William O. Beeman, Donald A. Weadon
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/09/30/EDGB790KB01.DTL
The Bush administration continues an escalating spiral toward conflict with Iran, using Iran's nuclear policy as its primary focus. At the same time, the administration is reducing restrictions on other emerging nuclear states that pose a far more serious and immediate threat to world peace.
The consequence of this badly inconsistent policy is increased nuclear danger for the entire world. Since the end of the Cold War and collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States has lacked convenient villains to be "against, " and the essential mechanics of American foreign policy seems to lose focus and founder.
Iran has become an on-again, off-again focus of American international discomfiture. It is a purported linchpin in international terrorism, a defiant nation who refuses to submit to years of U.S. economic warfare, a state run by theocratic functionaries, and now a nuclear felon. In short, Iran is a perfect villain, just what America needs, and the nuclear issue is a perfect pretext for this hostile behavior -- one that plays well to a nervous American public.
What the Bush administration is not telling Americans is that while it is directing attacks and calling for sanctions against Iran, it is touting meaningless nuclear containment efforts on the one hand and is consciously ignoring illegal and far more dangerous nuclear weapons development on the other. None of this is being done to guarantee public safety, but rather for partisan political reasons.
The silliest example of "progress" in nuclear containment is that of Libya. On Sept. 20, just after removing them from the list of terrorist nations, President Bush revoked a number of restrictive executive orders against Libya in part for Libya's abandonment of its nuclear ambitions. The Bush administration claims this as a diplomatic success. In fact, the Libyans gave up a fledgling and inconsequential program in exchange for political acceptance by the Western world and decreased trade restrictions.
The U.S. invasion of Iraq also did nothing to contain nuclear weapons development, since Saddam Hussein's progress on this front was negligible. Nevertheless, Iraq's "nuclear threat" was one of the reasons given by President Bush to justify the Iraq invasion. These examples of "noncontainment" containment are the purest political spin. The choice of the United States to ignore real and significant weapons development elsewhere for equally political reasons has far more serious consequences.
The United States also recently removed nuclear restrictions imposed upon India for their thinly disguised nuclear weapons program. Much of the impetus for this reportedly came from the head of the export licensing arm of the Commerce Department, who is lobbying for a job as ambassador to India and who has a very cozy relationship with the Defense Department's neoconservative leadership.
And then there is North Korea. Washington continues to huff and puff at Pyongyang, but mindful of the intelligence community's long-held determination that we have no real strategic options, we continue to appease North Korea's frankly aggressive nuclear weapons ambitions.
The United States imposed no real sanctions upon Pakistan even though their none-too-secret proliferation, "Dr. A.Q. Khan's Road Show," spanned from South Africa to Taiwan and was responsible for a frightening East Asian nuclear race with India. But Pakistani assistance in the war on terrorism has been so essential as a point of political spin for the Bush administration that the Pakistan government has been granted a pass on their nuclear weapons program.
What about Taiwan? Their decades-old nuclear program included not only weapons development at the Chung Shan Institute, but also production of American Society for Mechanical Engineering Code Part III nuclear components - - the international standard -- at Kaioshung for nuclear programs throughout the world. The open-market availability of these parts through Taiwan is a key element of the world proliferation problem. Sanctions? Absolutely not.
Brazil is now defying the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regarding questions over its nuclear program, which is not benign. This would violate the long-standing U.S. determination to keep South America nuclear- free. And the U.S. response? No seismic rumbles of the kind directed toward Iran are apparent here. And forget South Korean enrichment efforts -- clearly they were "just a mistake."
Finally, Israel has a robust nuclear weapons arsenal and is not a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation treaty, with nary a word of disapproval from Washington.
But, oh, those mad mullahs in Iran! From the rhetoric pouring out of the Bush administration, one would think that they constitute the greatest nuclear threat on the planet.
The Iranian program, in comparison to so many others, is less developed and less dangerous. It is ironic that the United States propelled Iran on a nuclear course years ago, urging them to sink billions into a handful of energy-producing reactors which we now demand they dismantle. Iran has specifically renounced the development of nuclear weapons, and is a signatory to the most stringent nuclear nonproliferation agreements. Even if Iran wanted to develop nuclear weaponry, the CIA estimates that it would take years before anything of any significance could be produced.
Yet speculation is widespread that a military strike by the United States or Israel against Iran's reactors is a possibility, despite the fact that such a strike is fraught with great risk. The U.S. intelligence community was reported in the Sept. 27 issue of Newsweek to have concluded, after months of "war-gaming," that no military strategy exists that would keep a strike on Iran from escalating.
The Bush administration has so mishandled matters that it has now touched the most powerful symbolic nerve for Iran -- national "face." The United States has pushed Iran so hard and with such discriminatory prejudice that the leadership of the Islamic Republic has shown itself willing to partially act against their own interests to rescue Iran's national honor. Threats from the United States, or from its surrogate in this struggle, Israel, are met with escalating defiance by Iran. The Reuters disclosure on Sept. 21 that the United States has agreed to send 500 "bunker buster" BLU-109 bombs, presumably to attack Iranian nuclear facilities has only served to further infuriate the Iranians.
Iranian President Khatami said on Sept. 20, "They [the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United States] have to explicitly recognize our natural and legal right [to peaceful nuclear energy] to open the way for greater understanding and cooperation." He added, "We've made our choice. Now it is up to others to make their choice." Iran then resumed its nuclear enrichment program.
The Bush administration's pursuit of Iran on this issue is counter- productive, and may become deadly dangerous. Through its exclusive targeting of Iran, leading perhaps to an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, the Bush administration is not making the world a safer place. They are giving a pass to powers far more dangerous than Iran, and goading Iran to retaliate for any violence directed against it. If Iran chooses to answer these attacks, it is not likely to be in a way that will improve prospects for peace in the Middle East, or in the rest of the world.
William O. Beeman is professor of anthropology and director of Middle East Studies at Brown University. Donald A. Weadon, a former naval officer, is a Washington-based international lawyer specializing in technology, defense, and trade sanctions.
-------- accidents and safety
Commission wants PG&E to be accountable for missing nuclear fuel
By Meghan Vogel,
The Eureka, California, Times-Standard
http://www.times-standard.com/Stories/0,1413,127~2896~2436684,00.html
EUREKA -- It's still a mystery, and the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission wants to know what happened.
At a public meeting on Wednesday night attended by a couple of dozen people, representatives from the commission and Pacific Gas and Electric met to discuss the possible whereabouts of nuclear fuel that remains unaccounted for at the Humboldt Bay Power Plant near King Salmon.
PG&E is in the process of decommissioning the nuclear part of the plant, which was shut down in 1976 after it was discovered the plant was on a fault line. While conducting an inventory of the plant's spent fuel pool as part of the decommissioning process, it was discovered in June that three segments from a spent fuel assembly -- labeled as A-49 -- were missing. The segments contained enriched uranium oxide and weighed about 4 pounds total.
The NRC was notified, and the spent fuel pool was searched to locate the A-49 segments and to collect other fuel fragments. An initial search of the pool was performed by PG&E and took about a month. A second search of hard-to-reach areas of the pool is now under way, along with an extensive search of historical records.
"You have to exhaust all avenues to find it, and we expect you to continue searching for it," Bruce Mallet of the NRC told PG&E representatives.
Gregory Rueger, PG&E's chief nuclear officer at the plant, assured the commission the investigation is in progress.
"We will be thorough in our efforts to restore accountability," he said.
Rueger said there are "gaps in the picture," but more information is being collected daily. PG&E's John Albers said it is possible the missing segments were shipped for off-site analysis. Currently, however, historic documents are conflicting. While one set of records states the segments were shipped, another states the shipment was canceled and the segments were placed back in the pool. Many records are on microfilm, and PG&E employees are pouring through the microfilm searching for any clues on the missing segments.
So far, PG&E has found 40 fuel fragments in the plant's spent fuel pond. The fragments are being analyzed to see if they match the cuts to the A-49 segments.
During the search, PG&E is also categorizing and taking inventory of all the other nuclear material at the plant as part of the decommissioning process. PG&E estimated the inventory will be complete by 2009, a date that didn't sit well with the NRC.
"We need to help you speed up that process," Mallet said.
Both PG&E and the commission assured the public the missing segments pose no threat to the community. Albers said it was highly unlikely the segments could have been extracted from the pool without the plant's alarms sounding and someone dying very quickly from exposure to the nuclear material.
"We are confident that if the segments are not found in the pool, then they were transferred to a facility licensed to accept radioactive material," said Mark Satorius of the NRC.
-------- africa
Nigeria launches first nuclear reactor
KANO, Nigeria (AFP)
Sep 30, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040930164951.wmfvl8pc.html
Nigeria launched its first nuclear reactor for scientific research Thursday in the northern university city of Zaria, the research project director, Ibrahim Umar, said.
The reactor, which is solely for scientific purposes and constructed with technical assistance from the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), was launched in Ahmadu Bello University, the largest university in northern Nigeria, Umar told AFP in a telephone interview.
Umar, director of the university's Centre for Energy Research and Training, which is in charge of the project, said that the reactor was commissioned by Nigeria's science and technology minister in the presence of representatives of IAEA and the Nigeria's Energy Commission.
"The reactor will solely be applied for scientific research which includes soil mapping to quantify different elements in the soil to boost agricultural production and to reduce the use of chemical fertilizer as well as for solid minerals identification in Nigeria", he said.
"It will also be used in petroleum exploration and for identifying elements associated with diseases in the human body and other human-related research purposes", Umar said.
He ruled out the possibility of expanding the project for research in nuclear weapons, saying the project is under the strict supervision of the
"We are not involved in strategic research like nuclear weapon because we are a university-based research centre, located within the university. We have been doing this kind of research using other techniques which are just expanding using nuclear reactor," he said.
According to Umar, the research centre would be liaising with ministries for science and technology, water resources, agriculture and petroleum for its research programmes.
-------- china
China invites bids for nuclear contracts valued at up to nine bln dollars
BEIJING (AFP)
Sep 30, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040930110719.ef4uxncj.html
China has invited bids for contracts to build four nuclear generating units with a combined value of up to nine billion dollars, French company Areva said Thursday.
The tender is for two reactors at Yangjiang in the south of China and two at Sanmen in the east, Rene de Preneuf, the company's chief China representative, told AFP.
The contracts could be hugely attractive to foreign contractors pining for new opportunities in an era with a cooling interest in nuclear power, but they may have to share with local companies.
"There is a significant demand for localization," de Preneuf said.
Paris-based Areva, the world's largest maker of nuclear reactors, has already built a series of nuclear generating units in China.
Its main competitor in China is a consortium headed by US-based Westinghouse which may see the participation of Japanese and South Korean enterprises.
The State Council, the country's cabinet, approved an eight billion dollar nuclear power project in Yangjiang in early September.
The governments plans to construct 32 reactors, each with a capacity of 1,000 megawatts, from now until 2020 in a bid to meet the soaring demand for power from the rapidly expanding economy.
Currently, less than two percent of China's energy needs are met by nuclear power, while coal accounts for more than two thirds.
In related news, China's populous southwestern province of Sichuan is hoping to get approval by early next year to build two nuclear power plants and will seek foreign partners in the construction, the Tianfu Morning Post said.
"We have proposed four sites for the two nuclear power plants, two sites in Nanchong city, one in Luzhou and one in Yibing," Li Jianguo, director of the local branch of the National Development and Reform Commission's (NDRC), was quoted as saying.
"In the first quarter of next year, we will finalize two sites from the four sites after nuclear experts complete feasibility studies."
"The investment for plants has not yet been finally decided, but it will come partly from government investment and partly from bank loans," Li added.
Li did not say when construction is expected to begin, or when the power plants are likely to be put into operation.
China National Nuclear Corporation and China Guangdong Nuclear Power Group will jointly launch public bidding at the end of this year to encourage foreign investors to participate in the construction of the two plants, it said.
Li said he expected the installed capacity of the nuclear plants to reach 2,000 megawatts in 2015, and 4,000 megawatts in 2020.
A relative newcomer in the atomic field, China put its first nuclear power plant into operation in 1991 at Daya Bay near Hong Kong and now operates nine nuclear power plants with a total installed capacity of 7,000 megawatts.
-------- depleted uranium
Daughter of Soldier Contaminated with Depleted Uranium in Iraq Born with Deformities
Thursday, September 30th, 2004
Democracy Now!
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/09/30/1411222
In a major expose in the New York Daily News, Democracy Now! co-host Juan Gonzalez uncovered the story of how a new-born baby may have suffered deformities because her father was exposed to depleted uranium while deployed as a soldier in Iraq. We are joined in our studio by Guardsman Gerard Darren Matthew and Sgt. Ray Ramos, one of the first confirmed cases of inhaled depleted uranium exposure from the current Iraq conflict. [includes rush transcript] Welcome to Democracy Now!, I'm Amy Goodman in Albuquerque, New Mexico with Juan Gonzalez in New York. For the last five months Juan, you have chronicled the plight of soldiers who have returned from Iraq with mysterious illnesses. Your exclusive groundbreaking investigation in April found that depleted uranium contamination was far more widespread in the military than the Pentagon would admit.
Well in a major expose in yesterday's Daily News, Juan you uncovered the story of how a new-born baby may have suffered deformities because her father was exposed to depleted uranium while deployed as a soldier in Iraq.
Army National Guard Specialist Gerard Darren Matthew tested positive for uranium contamination after he returned from Iraq. He suffered constant migraine headaches, blurred vision, blackouts and a burning sensation whenever he urinated. Shortly after he returned home, his wife became pregnant.
When his daughter, Victoria Claudette, was born on June 29 she was missing three fingers and most of her right hand. The family believes the deformities are a result of the depleted uranium contamination. The Daily News headlined the story "The War's Littlest Victim." Today, Gerard Darren Matthew joins us in our studio in New York. Welcome to Democracy Now!
We are also joined by Staff Sgt. Ray Ramos who was deployed in Iraq with the 442nd Military Police. He is among the first confirmed cases of inhaled depleted uranium exposure from the current Iraq conflict.
- Gerard Darren Matthew, Guardsman sent home from Iraq with mysterious illnesses. He tested positive for uranium contamination. Shortly after his return, his wife, Janice, became pregnant. On June 29, she gave birth to a baby girl, Victoria Claudette. The baby was missing three fingers and most of her right hand.
- Ray Ramos, deployed in Iraq with the 442nd Military Police. He is among the first confirmed cases of inhaled depleted uranium exposure from the current Iraq conflict.
- Juan Gonzalez, Democracy Now! co-host and columnist with the New York Daily News. His front-page piece in yesterday's paper is entitled "The war's littlest victim."
RUSH TRANSCRIPT
JUAN GONZALEZ: We're joined today by Gerard Darren Matthew. Welcome to Democracy Now!.
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: Thank you, sir.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Gerard, can you tell me a little bit -- tell us, the listeners and viewers, a little bit about your experiences. When did you get to Iraq, what did do you when you were there, and how did your illnesses develop?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: Well, I was deployed January 15 of 2003, and I moved out, shipped out, from Fort Dix, April 10, arrived in country April 11. Stayed over there, came home on emergency leave in August, and that's when I started receiving the problems. Initially, I was getting swelling and burning sensation, but I thought it was attributed to the heat, being in a high heat environment. As time went on, going back, I started getting worse. I started getting swelling in my face, blurred vision, because I'm a truck driver, and I felt like I saw my face two -- two different faces. If you put a cross section down the middle of my face it's like I'm seeing a right-side facial droop coupled with blurred vision. It was very traumatic because I've never had any problems before. I'm a very healthy person. I'm a runner, and to take this and now have a child with a problem, and getting a result, it's really traumatic.
JUAN GONZALEZ: What did you do? You said you were a truck driver but where do you think the exposures might have come from?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW:Well, in shipment of exploded material, where it be tank parts, Humvee parts, you name it, from Kuwait going north back and forth. That could be attributed to what I have. Plus, I believe it could be from things that happened from the prior war that's been hidden, or mistargeted shrapnel that we inhaled. I mean I really and truly -- I'm still trying to -- I'm mind-boggled by the whole thing.
JUAN GONZALEZ:The military gave you in May a 40% disability pension. What did they diagnose as what your problems were?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: They gave me 30% for the migraines. They call it a -- and they gave me 10% for angioedema, which is the swelling on my face, which occurs off and on, and for the last -- since I've gotten this, I think -- I don't know if it's just my mind playing games, but it seems like every day under my eye it's swollen for some odd reason.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And when did you learn that your baby was going to be born deformed?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: March 12, at Lenox Hill Hospital, a doctor by the name of Michael Divon, is one of the best doctors rated in Newsweek. He found the anomaly and he told me about it, and they gave me options of having an abortion. And I figure with the child now being five months, it's like killing someone. I been over there in Iraq, I didn't kill anybody, and now I'm going to try to do something to my own daughter. Eventually, she conceived the baby, and it's healthy, except for the hand. We don't know if there's going to be any cognitive issues in the long run, but I mean, you could -- you should see the hand. It's just -- it's unbelievable.
JUAN GONZALEZ: We're also joined by Staff Sergeant Ray Ramos, who was part of the group of soldiers that we tested in the Daily News actually earlier this year. Out of nine soldiers who had returned sick from Iraq, and was stationed at Fort Dix and the army couldn't tell him what was wrong with him. Ray was one them actually who was at Walter Reed medical center. Welcome to Democracy Now!.
RAY RAMOS: Thank you, Juan.
JUAN GONZALEZ: You've just recently have gotten out of the army, finally, I think in July.
RAY RAMOS: Yes, July 31.
JUAN GONZALEZ: What did they finally figure out was wrong with you?
RAY RAMOS: They gave me a 30% disability, temporary disability, for my migraine headaches, and they linked it together with post traumatic stress disorder. The other illnesses they ruled out. They said they were medically acceptable, including the depleted uranium exposure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Right, and the army conducted several tests after the Daily News in our testing did find D.U. in your -- the army claims that their testing did not. In fact, I think they finally said that there were 77 soldiers that they tested as a result of the Daily News articles that came out, and requested testing, and they found no one positive, even though we found four out of nine that were positive for D.U.
RAY RAMOS: Yes, they told me my levels were low. They were too low to even test, pick up the uranium.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Now, let me ask you this: What was the reaction when you were still in the army at Walter Reed when they found out you had gone out for independent testing? Can you talk a little bit about that?
RAY RAMOS: Yes. I was actually grilled for about a couple of hours. I was asked by Colonel Hack, Lieutenant Colonel Mercer. I was questioned as to why I felt that I was exposed to depleted uranium. I was asked if I was in any burning vehicles or I was around any vehicles that had been struck by uranium rounds. My response to them was that I was not aware of any exploded ordinance around me, although we had patrols that had gone out and had expressed that, you know, they would see things. It wasn't too receptive when they first started questioning me about it.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And when they found out you'd gone to the Daily News?
RAY RAMOS: Yes. They were very curious. They were like, why did I go seek independent help? And my answer to them was, when I asked to -- about the depleted uranium in Fort Dix, I was told that I didn't have anything to worry about, and that there was no known testing for depleted uranium.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I'd like to ask Gerard also. You went to the army in April, and you did submit a urine sample and asked for it to be tested for D.U. What happened to the army's test?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: It's so-called unfounded. They don't know where the specimen is, and I've been contacted since the article by Walter Reed and they're wanting to have me redo the test. They'll send the bottles at home and for me to send it to West Point, but in lieu of the articles that what has stirred the pot a little bit.
JUAN GONZALEZ: In other words, they lost your sample, or they claim that they don't have a record that you ever gave it back in April?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: Yes, Mr. Gonzalez.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And now that the article came out, now they're calling you and saying they want to test you now.
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: Yeah, and I think it's kind of late. If one thing is already stating that I have it, what is the use of another test? It's still going to state that I have it.
JUAN GONZALEZ: One of the interesting things obviously is that there has been a lot of, in New York, quite a few of the political leaders, Congressman Eliot Engel, Senator Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer have gotten involved and actually Senator Clinton got a new bill passed just this summer requesting systematic testing of all soldiers when they return from Iraq as well as when they leave, and yet we have a situation with you where the army has lost a test that you gave them, a sample that you gave them five months ago. Senator Clinton issued a statement yesterday saying that she's still troubled by the failure of the army to be able to adequately screen troops when they leave, and when they return from Iraq. So, we'll be continuing to cover this issue of depleted uranium. The military continues to insist that no soldiers that they have tested who have returned from Iraq have tested positive, and yet in the Daily News now, we have out of 10 soldiers that we've tested -- and I should add in your test, we actually sent three different samples to a lab in Germany, two of reporters and one of Gerard's and we didn't identify any of the three. The two reporters came back completely negative, only Gerard's came back positive.
AMY GOODMAN: Juan, congratulations on once again stellar work in this investigation. Today -- yesterday in the New York Daily News when you did this, they went through the effects of this report. At the request of the news, nine soldiers from the New York Army National Guard serving in Iraq tested for radiation from depleted uranium shells. Four of the ailing G.I.s tested positive. The day after your story appeared, army officials rushed to test all returning members of the company, the 442nd Military Police based in Rockland County. By week's end, the scandal had reverberated all the way to Albany as Governor Pataki joined the list of politicians calling for the Pentagon to do a better job of testing and treating sick soldiers returning from the war. Your expose sparked a huge demand for testing. By mid-April, 800 G.I.'s had given the army the urine samples and hundreds more were waiting for appointments. Two weeks later, the Pentagon claimed that none of soldiers from the 442nd had tested positive for depleted uranium; but the news experts found significant problems with the testing methods. Finally, I wanted to just ask, Gerard Darren Matthew, what are you demanding now for your daughter?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: Just take care of her.
AMY GOODMAN: We'll go to that af -- Just to take care of her; and what has the army said about that?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: The army is now willing to give her a test and my wife a test, all of a sudden, and my Tricare insurance runs out November 2nd, but they're willing to do whatever it takes in order to help...all of a sudden.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we want to thank you for being there, Gerard Darren Matthew, guardsman sent home from Iraq, suffering from mysterious illness; now his daughter born is missing three fingers, most of her right hand. Ray Ramos, deployed in Iraq with the 442nd military police. Thank you very much for being with us. This is Democracy Now!. We'll be back in a minute. [break]
AMY GOODMAN: I'm Amy Goodman, broadcasting from Alburquerque, New Mexico. Juan Gonzalez is in New York as we talk about his most recent expose: depleted uranium exposure of U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Juan, this is such an important report. Our guest, Gerard Darren Matthews, who returned from Iraq. His wife got pregnant and born was Victoria Claudette, June 28. The baby is missing three fingers, most of her right hand. Ray Ramos with us, deployed with the 442nd military police. What's most stunning about the effect of the expose, Juan, is that in all of these cases, these men and their families have not been dealt with until you pushed. Ray Ramos, Juan was asking you this question before the break, but can you describe the scene when after the expose came out in the New York Daily News, you were brought into this room with -- at Walter Reed where they grilled you. I mean, how many doctors, military people, were in the room, and were they accusing you of going outside the military to do these tests?
RAY RAMOS: Well, I was in a room with about three military personnel and a civilian. Basically, the questioning was to the effect of why I felt I was exposed. I didn't have anything to worry about unless I was in a burning vehicle that had just been hit with a uranium round. Who was I, who did I get the testing from, and how much did it cost me to get the testing done? Things to that effect.
JUAN GONZALEZ: As I recall, there was one doctor in the room, one officer, who you had asked months before for testing and had turned you down, and you reminded them of that, that several months back, that was the very doctor that you had said, "Listen, I'd like to be tested," right?
RAY RAMOS: Yes. At that time I got the same answer, that I didn't have anything to worry about, that unless I was, again, in direct contact with the uranium round, that I wouldn't be exposed.
JUAN GONZALEZ: See, and I think this is important to understand, because the army in the spin that it is giving this story, Amy, continues to say, "Well, these soldiers were not in direct contact. They were national guardsmen who were doing basically support work for the combat troops." But it's precisely the fact that they were not in combat and yet many of them are turning up positive that would suggest that there's a much more widespread problem, especially among the combat troops who were directly involved. Many of these men were sleeping in their -- next to burned-out tanks or, in Darren's case, were transporting these burned-out tanks to bases in Kuwait. What about those soldiers who were even more closely involved in combat? The army's testing, the problem with the testing, according to the experts that I've consulted in nuclear medicine and in radiation, is that the army is continually referring when they do testing of soldiers to the total uranium content that they find in urine, of natural uranium. If that's not a high level, from their perspective, they don't even bother to look for depleted uranium. The experts that I have talked to say that all of us ingest uranium to one level or another in the food that we eat or in the water that we drink, but that uranium gets excreted within 24 hours from the body. However, if you breathe in depleted uranium and it gets into your lungs, it does not get excreted as quickly. It can stay in your lungs for years and emit alpha particles, intense radiation, to a very, very localized spot within the lung. That can lead to problems, as well as the toxic effects. Because depleted uranium has not only radiological effects, it also has toxic effects as a heavy metal to the kidney and other organs. So that the military is using the testing procedure just for natural uranium and is not even using the most sensitive equipment that could detect smaller parts of depleted uranium that might be a reflection of -- that the uranium has settled somewhere else in the body, especially the lungs.
AMY GOODMAN: Darren, have other people in your unit been tested? Has everyone so far been tested?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: I know of only one soldier who has been tested, and to believe me, he was the one that turned in his urine sample just before mine. That's why. And they have the results of him, but they don't have the results of me, which I find very intriguing.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your company was the 719th Transport Company?
GERARD DARREN MATTHEW: Yes, 719 Transport out of Harlem, New York.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we want to thank you again very much for being with us. Gerard Darren Matthews, guardsman returned, his daughter born without most of her right hand. Ray Ramos, back from Iraq from the 442nd Military Police. And Juan, thanks for doing the report.
-------- iran
Foreign Minister Says Iran Is Using Atoms for Peace
September 30, 2004
New York Times
By SUSAN CHIRA
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/international/middleeast/30iran.html?pagewanted=all
ran's foreign minister said yesterday that Iran would never give up its right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful use, though he denied any intent to produce nuclear weapons.
The minister, Kamal Kharrazi, said at a breakfast with American journalists that relations with the United States were at a low point and charged that influential neoconservatives were urging the United States to attack Iran, seeking "regime change.'' The breakfast was at the residence of the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations in New York City.
But he said Iran was ready to negotiate with European countries to find a way to calm fears that it was developing nuclear weapons.
"Nobody has the right to deny Iran its right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes," he said. "We are ready to negotiate with them on any instrument or mechanism that would remove the concern of others."
Previous meetings with European ministers have ended with no resolution; Dr. Kharrazi said no new meetings had been scheduled, and there was no agreement on any such mechanism.
Last week Iran defied the International Atomic Energy Agency by saying it was resuming the enrichment of uranium, but to produce electric power, not bombs as the United States has charged. The United States has been pushing to bring the matter before the United Nations Security Council.
Asked whether Iran had enriched all of the uranium it possessed, Dr. Kharrazi said, "I don't know, but the I.A.E.A. cameras are there."
On Iraq, Dr. Kharrazi said Iran was eager to see it hold elections as scheduled in January, even if not every city could take part - a position also held by Iraq's most influential Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who has longstanding ties to Iran. Dr. Kharrazi said he was confident that the Iraqi elections, as well as elections scheduled for Oct. 9 in Afghanistan, would be good for the entire region.
Nor was he worried that his country's interests would be threatened by elections in the two nations, which border Iran. "Democracy does not necessarily bring pro-U.S. governments," he said.
Some Pentagon officials have charged that Iran is sending money and weapons into Iraq, to prop up Shiite insurgents like Moktada al-Sadr and to increase its influence over Shiite political parties to help sway the election.
"The Pentagon is quite wrong that Iran is doing this, '' Dr. Kharrazi said. Instead of backing Mr. Sadr, he said, Iran had encouraged him to moderate some of his hard-line positions. The United States made a mistake in opposing Mr. Sadr, he said, because it merely swelled his popularity. And he said Iran did not need to send money, since it already wields influence in Iraq.
He predicted that the insurgency against Americans would continue, fed by the resentment of ordinary Iraqis. "Iraqis who have been humiliated somehow by the United States - and their families have been killed or tortured - are very ready to kill Americans," he said. He said the only solution would be a multinational force under the United Nations, an idea the United States has opposed.
He cited recent opinion polls showing that even in nations whose governments had been friendly to the United States, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, a vast majority of the people are hostile to the American government. Such hostility fuels extremism, he said. Only if the United States changes policies that support Israel can it hope to win over ordinary people in the Middle East, he added.
Despite the rising tensions with the United States, Dr. Kharrazi said he believed that the American presidential election could offer an opportunity, no matter who won. "A president in office for a second term becomes more realistic," he said. "But let's wait and see who comes to office first.''
--------
S Africa to help Iran resolve N-programme concerns
The News International
September 30, 2004
http://jang.com.pk/thenews/sep2004-daily/30-09-2004/main/main10.htm
CAPE TOWN: South Africa will help Iran resolve questions over its nuclear programme that have caused concern within the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency, a top official said on Wednesday.
Abdul Minty, head of the South African Council for the Non-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, said the decision resulted from a meeting on Wednesday with both President Thabo Mbeki and Hassan Rouhani, Iran's secretary of national security.
Minty said they discussed a wide range of issues, including Iran's nuclear programme and concerns voiced by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Last week, Iran's vice president, Reza Aghazadeh, said his country had started converting raw uranium into the gas needed for enrichment.
The declaration came in defiance of a resolution passed by the Vienna-based IAEA, demanding Iran freeze all uranium enrichment-including conversion. Iran insists its nuclear energy programme is meant for peaceful purposes.
"South Africa, as a member of the Board of Governors of the IAEA, has been active on this issue and believes that a confrontation should be avoided and a solution should be sought urgently," Minty said in a statement.
South Africa will interact intensively with all parties concerned, and help work toward a satisfactory solution, Minty said. "Such a solution should be possible by finding a balance" between the rights of countries to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and the need to assuage international concerns, he said. South Africa voluntarily dismantled its weapons programme over a decade ago, and has since won praise for its transparency and efforts in lobbying against proliferation.
-----
Russia against SC taking up Iran's N-issue
The News International,
September 30, 2004
http://jang.com.pk/thenews/sep2004-daily/30-09-2004/world/w9.htm
MOSCOW: Russia is against bringing up Iran's nuclear program at the UN Security Council and thinks the issue should be handled by the body's nuclear watchdog, a top official said on Wednesday. "Moving this question to the Security Council, which is a political body, does not correspond to the interests of the issue," Igor Ivanov, chief of Russia's Security Council, told reporters. "This question falls under the mandate of the IAEA (the International Atomic Energy Agency,) and the IAEA is ready to continue this work," he said at a press conference.
The IAEA has called on Tehran to immediately halt all activities related to uranium enrichment, a process that can make the explosive material for nuclear weapons. The United States claims Iran is hiding a covert weapons development program and wants the agency to bring Iran before the UN Security Council in November. Iran denies it is seeking nuclear weapons and insists it has a right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program.
Russia is building the Islamic state's first nuclear power plant at Bushehr, a project that the United States and Israel insist could be used as a cover for Tehran to obtain nuclear weapons. "Iran has shown in a justifiable matter that it must have access, like other countries, to new technologies, including nuclear technology used for peaceful means," Ivanov said.
"This is a viable justification and that is why Russia is cooperating with Iran."
-------- iraq / inspections
Saddam, the Bomb and Me
nytimes
By MAHDI OBEIDI
September 26, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/26/opinion/26obeidi.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5006&en=761eb721b248235f&ex=1096862400&partner=ALTAVISTA1
While the final report from Charles A. Duelfer, the top American inspector of Iraq's covert weapons programs, won't be released for a few weeks, the portions that have already been made public touch on many of the experiences I had while working as the head of Saddam Hussein's nuclear centrifuge program. Now that I am living in the United States, I hope to answer some of the most important questions that remain.
What was really going in Iraq before the American invasion last year? Iraq's nuclear weapons program was on the threshold of success before the 1991 invasion of Kuwait - there is no doubt in my mind that we could have produced dozens of nuclear weapons within a few years - but was stopped in its tracks by United Nations weapons inspectors after the Persian Gulf war and was never restarted. During the 1990's, the inspectors discovered all of the laboratories, machines and materials we had used in the nuclear program, and all were destroyed or otherwise incapacitated.
By 1998, when Saddam Hussein evicted the weapons inspectors from Iraq, all that was left was the dangerous knowledge of hundreds of scientists and the blueprints and prototype parts for the centrifuge, which I had buried under a tree in my garden.
In addition to the inspections, the sanctions that were put in place by the United Nations after the gulf war made reconstituting the program impossible. During the 1980's, we had relied heavily on the international black market for equipment and technology; the sanctions closed that avenue.
Another factor in the mothballing of the program was that Saddam Hussein was profiting handsomely from the United Nations oil-for-food program, building palaces around the country with the money he skimmed. I think he didn't want to risk losing this revenue stream by trying to restart a secret weapons program.
Over the course of the 1990's, most of the scientists from the nuclear program switched to working on civilian projects or in conventional-weapons production, and the idea of building a nuclear bomb became a vague dream from another era.
So, how could the West have made such a mistaken assessment of the nuclear program before the invasion last year? Even to those of us who knew better, it's fairly easy to see how observers got the wrong impression. First, there was Saddam Hussein's history. He had demonstrated his desire for nuclear weapons since the late 1970's, when Iraqi scientists began making progress on a nuclear reactor. He had used chemical weapons against his own people and against Iran during the 1980's. After the 1991 war, he had tried to hide his programs in weapons of mass destruction for as long as possible (he even kept my identity secret from weapons inspectors until 1995). It would have been hard not to suspect him of trying to develop such weapons again.
The Western intelligence services and policy makers, however, overlooked some obvious clues. One was the defection and death of Saddam Hussein's son-in-law, Hussein Kamel, who was in charge of the unconventional weapons programs in the 1980's.
As my boss, Mr. Kamel was a brutal taskmaster who forced us to work under impossible deadlines and was the motivating force for our nuclear effort. The drive for nuclear weapons began in earnest when he rose to a position of power in 1987. He placed a detail of 20 fearsome security men on the premises of our centrifuge lab, and my staff and I worked wonders just to stay out of his dungeons. But after he defected to Jordan in 1995, and then returned months later only to be assassinated by his father-in-law's henchmen, the nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs lost their top promoter.
In addition, the West never understood the delusional nature of Saddam Hussein's mind. By 2002, when the United States and Britain were threatening war, he had lost touch with the reality of his diminished military might. By that time I had been promoted to director of projects for the country's entire military-industrial complex, and I witnessed firsthand the fantasy world in which he was living. He backed mythic but hopeless projects like one for a long-range missile that was completely unrealistic considering the constraints of international sanctions. The director of another struggling missile project, when called upon to give a progress report, recited a poem in the dictator's honor instead. Not only did he not go to prison, Saddam Hussein applauded him.
By 2003, as the American invasion loomed, the tyrant was alternately working on his next trashy novel and giving lunatic orders like burning oil around Baghdad to "hide" the city from bombing attacks. Unbelievably, one of my final assignments was to prepare a 10-year plan for military-industrial works, even as tens of thousands of troops were gathering for invasion.
To the end, Saddam Hussein kept alive the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission, staffed by junior scientists involved in research completely unrelated to nuclear weapons, just so he could maintain the illusion in his mind that he had a nuclear program. Sort of like the emperor with no clothes, he fooled himself into believing he was armed and dangerous. But unlike that fairy-tale ruler, Saddam Hussein fooled the rest of the world as well.
Was Iraq a potential threat to the United States and the world? Threat is always a matter of perception, but our nuclear program could have been reinstituted at the snap of Saddam Hussein's fingers. The sanctions and the lucrative oil-for-food program had served as powerful deterrents, but world events - like Iran's current efforts to step up its nuclear ambitions - might well have changed the situation.
Iraqi scientists had the knowledge and the designs needed to jumpstart the program if necessary. And there is no question that we could have done so very quickly. In the late 1980's, we put together the most efficient covert nuclear program the world has ever seen. In about three years, we gained the ability to enrich uranium and nearly become a nuclear threat; we built an effective centrifuge from scratch, even though we started with no knowledge of centrifuge technology. Had Saddam Hussein ordered it and the world looked the other way, we might have shaved months if not years off our previous efforts.
So what now? The dictator may be gone, but that doesn't mean the nuclear problem is behind us. Even under the watchful eyes of Saddam Hussein's security services, there were worries that our scientists might escape to other countries or sell their knowledge to the highest bidder. This expertise is even more valuable today, with nuclear technology ever more available on the black market and a proliferation of peaceful energy programs around the globe that use equipment easily converted to military use.
Hundreds of my former staff members and fellow scientists possess knowledge that could be useful to a rogue nation eager for a covert nuclear weapons program. The vast majority are technicians who, like the rest of us, care first about their families and their livelihoods. It is vital that the United States ensure they get good and constructive jobs in postwar Iraq. The most accomplished of my former colleagues could be brought, at least temporarily, to the West and placed at universities, research labs and private companies.
The United States invaded Iraq in part to end what it saw as a nuclear danger. It is now vital to reduce the chance of Iraq's dangerous knowledge spilling outside of its borders. The nuclear dangers facing the world are growing, not decreasing. My hope is that the Iraqi example can help people understand how best to deal with this threat.
Mahdi Obeidi is the author of "The Bomb in My Garden: The Secrets of Saddam's Nuclear Mastermind." Kurt Pitzer, who collaborated on the book, assisted with this article.
-------- japan
Japan faces calls to review MOX nuclear fuel plan
(Reuters)
30 Sep 2004
By George Nishiyama
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/T186261.htm
TOKYO, Sept 30 - Japan's nuclear energy programme, plagued by a series of accidents, is facing growing calls for a rethink of a controversial plan to use reprocessed fuel.
In a project first conceived in 1956, Japan aims to complete a "nuclear fuel cycle" in which spent fuel is reprocessed and the plutonium extracted is used again.
Japan, which imports virtually all of its crude oil and coal, relies on nuclear power for more than 30 percent of its electricity generation, and considers the project crucial.
Currently, no commercial reactors in Japan use the so-called mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel, though electric power companies have said they want to have around 18 nuclear plants using the reprocessed fuel by 2010.
But after repeated delays due to mishaps, that goal appears unrealistic and calls are growing to scrap the project.
"We have to stop this right now," Taro Kono, a lawmaker who has taken the unusual step of speaking out against a project his ruling party supports, told Reuters in a recent interview.
A series of fatal accidents and cover-ups of safety blunders have seriously eroded public trust in Japan's nuclear industry and cast a shadow over the MOX project.
Five years ago, three poorly trained workers at a Japanese uranium-processing plant set off an uncontrolled chain reaction, resulting in the death of two from radiation exposure.
Just last month, five workers died after super-hot non-radioactive steam gushed from a broken pipe at a nuclear plant in Japan's deadliest accident at a nuclear facility.
Even some government officials admit the MOX plan is in jeopardy. "It's true that things are looking very difficult," said a science ministry official who declined to be named.
COST COMPARISON
Critics also point out that the plutonium in the MOX fuel could be used to build nuclear weapons.
"What if we let other countries reprocess fuel and let them have plutonium? What happens to the issue of non-proliferation?" Kono said.
Kono and other critics also say reprocessing fuel is too costly and that instead, the spent fuel should be disposed of after "once-through" use, as in the United States.
After an industry body said in November that the MOX project would cost an estimated 19 trillion yen ($171.1 billion), the media began questioning whether it made economic sense.
"If the government stopped giving subsidies to the nuclear reactors and made electric companies responsible on their own, then the nuclear fuel cycle would have to be reconsidered," Hitoshi Yoshioka, a professor at Kyushu University, told a seminar last week.
A 1994 report by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development showed that disposing of used fuel was about 10 percent cheaper than reprocessing.
In response to growing scepticism, a government advisory panel is comparing the costs of reprocessing and once-through use. The panel will draw up a long-term nuclear energy plan after issuing the results of its study next month.
Government and industry officials argue a change of course would be unwise. "We have stuck to this policy for many, many years," said Nobuyori Kodaira, the country's top energy official.
"It's not just about economics," Kodaira, head of the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, told Reuters recently.
Kodaira and other officials also argue that energy resource-poor Japan has no real alternative to nuclear power, despite the emergence of renewable sources such as solar energy.
"We're doing our utmost in studying renewable energy," Kodaira said. "But with today's technology, it's difficult not to rely on nuclear power."
Last week, officials presented to the advisory panel data showing that if the reprocessing plan were abandoned, all of Japan's 52 nuclear reactors would have to be halted by 2016.
Spent fuel is now stored at plant facilities on the premise that it will be shifted to a reprocessing plant in the future.
If the reprocessing project were scrapped, storage facilities would quickly fill up, forcing reactors to shut down.
A reprocessing plant in Aomori, northern Japan, has nearly been completed and is due to begin operations in 2006, but preparations have been delayed by the public debate. ($1=111.02 yen)
-------- korea
US reacts calmly over North Korea nuclear claim
The News International
September 30, 2004
http://jang.com.pk/thenews/sep2004-daily/30-09-2004/world/w4.htm
WASHINGTON: The United States responded calmly on Tuesday to North Korean claims it has turned the plutonium from 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods into nuclear weapons.
Senior administration officials said they were not abandoning the six-nation talks designed to halt North Korea's nuclear weapons programme, even as they acknowledged negotiations will not resume this month despite previous North Korean commitments to do so.
They suggested North Korea might be wooed back to the table later this year after the US presidential election and after the board of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency meets in November and reviews South Korean experiments with enriched uranium and plutonium.
North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Choe Su Hon disclosed on Monday at the United Nations that his country had converted the spent nuclear fuel rods, saying it would serve as a deterrent to increasing US nuclear threats and to prevent a nuclear war in northeast Asia. The danger of war on the Korean peninsula "is snowballing,'' the North Korean diplomat warned. "We take all their claims seriously,'' State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said on Tuesday, but he also suggested a touch of theater in the North Korean diplomat's statement, saying Pyongyang "is bragging about violating its commitments and its promises.''
Boucher said he held out no hope that a fourth round of negotiations could be held by Thursday, the end of September, as promised by North Korea. The six-nation talks also include South Korea, Japan, China and Russia. Meanwhile, Undersecretary of State John R Bolton said the Bush administration remains committed to six-party talks, and that North Korea was using criticism of South Korean tests as a propaganda ploy. Bolton said it was "very hard to know'' how advanced North Korea's nuclear weapons programme was. North Korea's nuclear weapons programme has become part of the presidential election campaign.
Democratic candidate John Kerry prefers one-on-one negotiations with North Korea and has accused the Bush administration of letting a "nuclear nightmare'' develop by refusing to deal with North Korea when President Bush took office in January 2001. "North Korea's nuclear programme is well ahead of what Saddam Hussein was even suspected of doing, yet the president took his eye off the ball, wrongly ignoring this growing danger,'' Kerry said recently.
Some US intelligence analysts are becoming concerned that North Korea may have up to six nuclear weapons instead of the one or two the Central Intelligence Agency estimates. Daryl G Kimball, executive director of the private Arms Control Association, said North Korea has claimed before to be turning plutonium from spent fuel rods into nuclear weapons, but the claim has never been substantiated. Kimball said the administration was engaged in "wishful thinking'' about six-nation talks. "The North Korean situation has devolved under their watch, and the current approach is clearly not working out,'' he said in a telephone interview.
----
Chinese FM calls for patience in ending Korea nuclear turmoil
WASHINGTON (AFP)
Sep 30, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040930195214.e8eb8ohr.html
Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing called Thursday for greater patience and vision in reviving six-party talks aimed at ending the Korean nuclear crisis.
The fourth round of the talks had been scheduled to be held in September but nuclear-armed North Korea refused to participate, blaming both US "hostile" policy and secret nuclear experiments in South Korea.
Some reports said Pyongyang wanted to wait for the outcome of the US elections.
Li told reporters after talks with US Secretary of State Colin Powell at the State Department that China and other parties to the talks -- the two Koreas, the United States, Japan and Russia -- as well as "the entire international community" felt the six-party forum was the "only feasible and correct option" to end the crisis.
He acknowledged that "some new complicating factors and new difficulties" hampered the talks but said "actually, this has required all of us to continue to adopt a more patient and more creative approach in finding a solution."
Li stresed that "nothing is more precious than peace."
Powell said it was premature to discuss the possibility of bringing the nuclear dispute to the UN Security Council if efforts to woo North Korea back to the talks failed.
"I think that the six-party framework is what we should be concentrating on, and not any other means of dealing with this right now," he said.
"And I'm quite confident that the six-party framework is a framework in which this matter will be dealt with for the foreseeable future, because it serves the interests of all parties," Powell said, citing particularly North Korea's neighbors.
"They had as much of an interest and an even greater equity in seeing a denuclearized peninsula than does the United States," he said.
The nuclear stand-off intensified in October 2002 when the United States accused North Korea of operating a nuclear weapons programme based on enriched uranium in violation of a 1994 agreement.
Pyongyang has denied running the uranium-based program but has restarted its plutonium program.
-------- missile defense
Defence shield 'a fraud'
Can be easily defeated, scientist says. Liberal government is reportedly on verge of consenting to multibillion-dollar system
DAVID PUGLIESE
CanWest News Service Ottawa Citizen
Thursday, September 30, 2004
http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/soundoff/story.html?id=e5cdeb c6-c088-4f3e-adcf-8635631b34bd
The U.S. missile defence shield is so technically unsound, it will never be capable of protecting North America from attack, said a top scientist who blew the whistle on the earlier failures of the Patriot missile.
Theodore Postol, a former science adviser to the U.S. chief of naval operations, said the missile defence shield the Martin government is considering joining is totally unproved and faces so many technical hurdles that to claim it can protect the continent from attack is "scientific fraud."
Postol, a professor of science, technology and national security at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said one of the main problems with the shield is it is incapable of distinguishing between a real warhead and the decoys that would be carried by an incoming missile.
"This is one of the biggest engineering jokes in the history of humankind. It's a fake," said Postol, who is in Ottawa today to meet with MPs and will be giving a public lecture on missile defence tomorrow.
During the first Persian Gulf War, he blew the whistle on military claims that the Patriot missile destroyed almost all of the Iraqi Scud rockets fired during the war. The Pentagon launched an investigation into whether the scientist had violated national security, but Postol was later vindicated by several U.S. government studies that noted the Patriot was successful less than 10 per cent of the time.
Postol has conducted a similar analysis on the U.S. missile defence shield, which will use ground-based interceptor rockets to shoot down incoming warheads. U.S. President George W. Bush has made missile defence one of his administration's priorities and he is expected to declare the system ready to go in the coming months.
The Liberal government is reportedly on the verge of signing on to the multibillion-dollar system and Prime Minister Paul Martin and Defence Minister Bill Graham are among the strong supporters in the party of the plan. Other Liberal MPs, however, have voiced concerns the shield will not work and will pave the way for weapons in space.
Postol warns the shield can be easily defeated by standard decoys that would be carried by an incoming missile. In that case, the missile would release dozens of mylar balloons that would confuse the sensors on the shield's interceptor. Any nation capable of building a missile that could hit North America would have the technology to outfit it with decoys, he noted.
Also, the shield's interceptor "kill vehicle" has never been tested with the rockets that are to carry it to its target. The limited number of tests that have been carried out on the shield's interceptors have been scripted to the point where the system has been fed the co-ordinates of the incoming warhead it is expected to hit. Even then, some of those tests have been failures, Postol noted.
Missile defence agency officials in the U.S., however, have expressed confidence the shield will work. The Bush administration has argued even a rudimentary system is better than nothing.
Government officials and Canadian Forces officers have warned Canada cannot afford not to take part in the missile shield. They have voiced concerns the U.S. could retaliate politically or proceed with security matters on their own, cutting Canada out of decisions on continental security.
But Postol said in terms of North American security, the U.S. needs Canada as many of the key air defence radars that protect the continent are located on Canadian territory.
"The United States needs Canada just as much or more than Canada needs the United States in these matters," he said. "The Canadians have a lot of leverage if they choose to use it."
The missile shield is designed to counter a small-scale attack by countries such as North Korea or Iran, as well as accidental missile launches by Russia and China.
But Postol said it is unlikely North Korea can build a nuclear-tipped missile capable of reaching North America. More worrisome is the possibility the North Koreans could place a crude nuclear weapon aboard a ship and sail it into a U.S. port, he noted.
Postol suggested instead of spending billions of dollars on the missile shield, the U.S. should shore up its continental security.
Postol's concerns are echoed by a group of 49 retired American generals and admirals. In March, the officers wrote Bush recommending the billions of dollars to be spent on missile defence should be redirected to combating nuclear terrorism, the most pressing threat facing the U.S. today.
-------- terrorism
Politically-Timed Terror Alerts: The Real Terror Threat
Capitol Hill Blue
By MIKE HARDEN
Sep 30, 2004
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_5361.shtml
Don't be surprised if between now and Election Day the terror-alert colors start dancing around like the jackpot lights on a cheap Las Vegas slot machine hitting triple sevens.
In early August, while presidential nominee John Kerry was riding a pink cloud after the Democratic National Convention, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge ratcheted up the terror-alert status a notch based on "credible intelligence" (now known to be 3 or 4 years old) that key financial institutions in New York and Washington were under close al Qaeda surveillance and might soon become targets.
Five times since Sept. 11, 2001, the administration has placed the nation on "high" alert. And what is it, precisely, that placating an alarmed American public with security money and manpower has achieved?
A detainee in Canada starts singing about terrorists who have slipped into the United States, whipping the Department of Homeland Security into another one of its falling-sky modes. It turns out that the guy fabricated the threat in hopes of getting a better deal on a forgery charge.
In early summer, Ridge and Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that 90 percent of al Qaeda plans were in place for a major terrorist attack in the United States before the November election.
All of this creates an ongoing public perception of vulnerability.
Blackhawk helicopters hover above Times Square on New Year's Eve and, later, above the Rose Bowl. Even when a high alert is not in place, there seems to be no shortage of reminders that we, presumably, are ever under the scrutinizing eye of al Qaeda operatives just waiting to loose a dirty bomb or launch a nerve-gas attack.
Some believe the most potent weapon in the Bush campaign arsenal isn't an advertising nest egg the size of a Third World nation's gross national product, but the fear card. If the race tightens between now and Nov. 2, they say, another "high" alert might be forthcoming.
I can't get down on Ridge and Ashcroft too much, though, for pulling levers and throwing switches from behind the curtain at Oz's Emerald City. I've always loved a good flimflam man and, among the many I've met, Bush's tweedles dum and dee remind me of a flamboyant and particularly inventive evangelist who cultivated his following by healing the faithful of grave afflictions only he could see.
Stepping down from the pulpit and into the clutch of worshippers who had come to the altar to be healed, he would place one hand on the shoulder of a supplicant while palpating the poor soul's abdomen.
"Oh, yes," he would fret. "I can feel a tumor in your stomach just eating away at your life."
Then, to the rapt and listening throng, he might elaborate on size, the tumors he "discovered" rarely being smaller than a tangerine.
Then he would heal the tumor.
"Praise God, it's gone!" he would shout, suggesting that the "healed" could prove the miracle by submitting to a CAT scan, which would most assuredly reveal no tumor present.
And so it goes. Even here in Columbus, Ohio, the populace works itself into a lather after it is revealed that a terrorist has set his sights on blowing up one of the city's malls. Which mall is never clear.
A truck-driving terrorist is arrested in Columbus for his part in a plot to cut through cables on the Brooklyn Bridge. The peril to the bridge is a matter unsettling only to a rube or two who claim to have been sold the span.
Yes, it is true that we live in dangerous times.
But, it is not the threat of nuclear shoe bombs and vaporized malls that keeps me awake at night.
(Mike Harden is a columnist at the Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch. E-mail mharden@dispatch.com.)
-------- treaties
US scorn for international law blasted
The US has ratified less than 30% of its international agreements
Thursday 30 September 2004
AFP
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/1EA2F3BB-7933-40E2-95ED-FE49777EC616.htm
Failing to ratify the majority of international agreements is causing the United States to lose credibility at offering any kind of global leadership, a Washington-based institute says.
The retreat from the UN-sponsored system of international law makes it much harder for the White House to take the moral high ground, says the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy in Washington.
Speaking to journalists on Wednesday, the institute's vice-president Kristin Dawkins said less than 30% of laws already agreed with the UN had become law, despite pledges made by the White House.
"It has set a dangerous precedent that other countries could follow in areas such as arms trade and nuclear weapons," she added.
Poor record
The widely-publicised Bush decisions to withdraw US support from the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, abandon the US-Russian Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and shun the International Criminal Court are just the latest manifestations.
The report details a generally sceptical attitude in Washington towards international law, the report pointed out.
Over the years, the US has ratified only 14 out of 162 "active treaties" put together by the International Labour Organisation and only two of the eight "core" UN conventions protecting the rights of workers, according to the study.
It has approved just three of 11 major environmental treaties, five out of the 12 human rights treaties promoted by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and about half of the 23 treaties regulating intellectual property rights and related technologies.
As for the 10 treaties managed by the Food and Agriculture Organisation, the US senate has ratified only six of them, the report said.
-------- u.s. nuc weapons
H-Bomb Suspected In Radiation Probe
NATION IN BRIEF
Washington Post
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A17
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61021-2004Sep29.html
SAVANNAH, Ga. -- The U.S. government said Wednesday that it is sending a team of 20 scientists to check a report of unusual radiation readings that could be coming from a hydrogen bomb that was lost off the Georgia coast in 1958.
A crippled B-47 bomber dumped the H-bomb into the Atlantic 46 years ago after the plane collided with a fighter jet during a training flight. Navy divers searched the shallow, murky waters near Tybee Island for nearly 10 weeks before declaring the bomb irretrievably lost.
Derek Duke, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who has been looking for the 7,600-pound bomb for five years, asserted recently that he had found a football-field-size area off the coast with higher-than-normal radiation levels. He suspects the area holds the lost Mark-15 bomb.
-------- u.s. nuc facilities
-------- nevada
First Los Alamos Nuclear Materials in Nevada
Sep 30, 2004
Associated Press
By LESLIE HOFFMAN
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041001/ap_on_re_us/los_alamos_nuclear_material_1
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - Federal officials said Thursday that the first shipment of weapons-grade nuclear material has been sent out of a steep canyon at Los Alamos National Laboratory that some warned was vulnerable to a terrorist attack.
The Energy Department has been working since December 2002 to move the highly enriched uranium and plutonium from Los Alamos' Technical Area 18 to the Device Assembly Facility, a high-security storehouse in a remote area of the Nevada Test Site, northwest of Las Vegas.
The first transfer was completed Thursday.
TA-18 was built in the 1940s at the bottom of a steep canyon, and critics have raised security concerns about the site. Lab officials have said they are able to protect the material, but add that the cost of maintaining security there is high.
The transfer is aimed at consolidating the National Nuclear Security Administration's nuclear materials in a newer, more secure facility, officials have said. The NNSA is an arm of the Energy Department responsible for overseeing the department's nuclear complex.
Lab watchdogs have pushed for the transfer, arguing it will improve national security and save taxpayers money.
It was temporarily put on hold last summer when cost estimates soared to $310 million - a more than threefold increase from initial estimates.
The NNSA plans to relocate the most sensitive weapons-grade nuclear material by September 2005 and move the remaining material by 2008.
Completion of the first shipment reinforces "NNSA's commitment to relocate TA-18 activities to a newer, more secure location," said Everet Beckner, deputy administrator for defense programs.
NNSA spokesman Bryan Wilkes said only that a "specialized transportation system with very high security" was used to transport the material on unspecified roads. He said the agency, for security reasons, would not disclose the amount of material transferred.
Lab employees at TA-18 study nuclear materials to see how they will react in certain situations, train Nuclear Emergency Search Teams and International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, and support nonproliferation efforts, among other tasks.
On the Net:
National Nuclear Security Administration: http://www.nnsa.doe.gov
Los Alamos National Laboratory: www.lanl.gov
-------- MILITARY
-------- africa
Rebels Report Truce in Nigeria, but Government Has No Comment
REUTERS
September 30, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/international/africa/30nigeria.html?pagewanted=all
ABUJA, Nigeria, Sept. 29 - The Nigerian government and rebel militia fighting in the Niger Delta agreed Wednesday on a truce while talks continue on the rebels' demands for autonomy, Mujahid Dokubo-Asari, a rebel leader, said.
Mr. Asari, speaking during a break in talks here in the capital, repeated his warning to foreign oil workers to leave the region, which pumps almost all of Nigeria's crude oil, 2.3 million barrels a day, until a final agreement is achieved.
"We have finished the first round of talks" with President Olusegun Obasanjo, Mr. Asari said. "There should be a cessation of hostilities on both sides. Apart from that, we have not agreed anything else for the time being."
Nigeria's information minister, Chief Chukwuemeka Chikelu, declined to comment on any cease-fire, the BBC reported, or even to confirm that President Obasanjo was at the talks, saying only that the rebel delegation had met "security officers and other officers of the state."
Mr. Asari's militia, the Niger Delta People's Volunteer Force, had threatened to open an offensive on Friday unless a deal was reached on autonomy and oil revenues for the poor Ijaw people of the delta.
"Foreign nationals are still advised to leave the delta because they are part of the overall situation," Mr. Asari said, adding that an attack was possible if the autonomy talks failed.
The rebels, who have been fighting sporadic battles since last year, issued a communiqué on Monday telling all foreign nationals to leave the delta before what Mr. Asari described as an "all-out war on the Nigerian state." He said oil companies in Nigeria, the world's seventh-largest exporter, should halt production.
Oil prices exceeded a record $50 a barrel on Monday because dealers feared a further tightening of the global oil supply. The prices slipped a bit on Wednesday on word of the cease-fire and after the United States reported an unexpected increase in oil supplies.
Multinationals have largely ignored the warning to their workers, but they have stepped up security in the vast area of mangrove swamps and creeks that produces almost all of Nigeria's oil. The top producer here, the Royal Dutch Shell Group, said it had evacuated more than 200 workers from two oil fields near fighting, but only small amounts of oil output had been affected.
Companies fear a repeat of last year's uprising by the Ijaw, who dominate the delta, which forced them to briefly shut 40 percent of Nigeria's oil production.
Oil executives were divided over how seriously to take the threats by Mr. Asari, whose following has grown rapidly in the delta since he launched an armed uprising against the government last year.
"Frankly, I don't take his threats seriously at all," said a senior executive at a multinational oil company. "If he attempts to harm any expatriate, he will incur the anger of the federal government, and he cannot withstand that."
But a security consultant at another multinational company said that if Mr. Asari galvanized the Ijaws' strong feeling of injustice, he would become a "serious threat to oil operations in the delta."
Many Ijaws see Mr. Asari as a local hero, but the government has described him as a gangster fighting for control of oil smuggling routes. Human rights groups have said that senior government officials may also be behind the trade in stolen oil.
Amnesty International said as many as 500 civilians were killed in fighting around Port Harcourt in the first three weeks of September, but the government said far fewer had died. The deaths have been mostly from gun battles between rebels and troops sent to crack down on them.
-------- arms
IRAN - Firms sanctioned for weapons sales
September 30, 2004,
Washington Times
World Scene
http://www.washtimes.com/world/worldscene.htm
The United States penalized seven Chinese companies for selling unconventional weapons and missile technology to Iran, the State Department said yesterday.
Sanctions also were imposed against two Indian companies and one each in Belarus, North Korea, Russia, Spain and Ukraine, said State Department spokesman Richard Boucher, adding that the penalties apply to the companies, not their countries or governments.
As a result of the penalties, the U.S. government cannot proceed with transactions with these companies or issue any new licenses and must suspend licenses that have been issued for high-technology items controlled by the United States.
----
Israel lobbying for Taiwan submarine buy
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Thursday, September 30, 2004
http://216.26.163.62/2004/ea_israel_09_28.html
Israel has been quietly lobbying for the launch of a U.S. project to provide advanced conventional submarines to Taiwan.
The reason: a Taiwan buy could launch a conventional submarine production line in the United States that would be used by Israel to procure additional subs.
"Israel really wants advanced conventional submarines but can't afford to buy them on the open market," a U.S. official said. "With a production line in the United States, Israel could purchase these vessels with U.S. military aid."
The official said he expected pro-Israel lobbyists in Congress to help Taiwan in efforts to win approval for the U.S. sale of advanced conventional submarines, Middle East Newsline reported. After years of delay, Taiwan has requested eight Type-209 submarines as part of a proposed purchase of $18 billion in U.S. platforms and weaponry. Taiwan's legislature was expected to vote on the procurement project in October.
Sept. 30: Toning down terrorism at the N.Y. Times In 2001, the Bush administration agreed to sell Taiwan eight diesel-electric submarines, 12 P-3C Orion anti-surface-warfare aircraft and four Kidd-class destroyers. But Tapei, amid heavy domestic opposition, failed to negotiate contracts with U.S. defense firms for the air and naval platforms.
In the meantime, Taiwan's request has stirred debate in Washington. The request has been opposed by the State Department, but supported by congressional leaders.
The U.S. Navy has also opposed the sale. Officials said the navy does not want the establishment of a U.S. electric-diesel submarine production line that could harm funding for nuclear submarine production. They said the Taiwanese request would be decided after the U.S. elections in November.
Israel, which has been struggling in efforts to procure additional submarines, has been closely following Taiwan's request. Officials said Washington's approval could lead to the establishment of the first diesel submarine production line in the United States since the 1960s.
In contrast, Germany has been alarmed over the prospect that the United States would launch a diesel submarine line. Germany has been the leading producer of diesel submarines and Israel has been negotiating with Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft, or HDW, for two Dolphin-class submarines. HDW has also begun producing and exporting the more advanced Type-212 submarine.
Over the last year, industry sources said, HDW has reduced its price of the Dolphin for Israel from $610 million to $375 million per submarine. Officials said this has reflected slumping HDW sales as well as a decision to continue production in Germany.
Israel has already examined the prospect of using U.S. Foreign Military Financing for the Dolphin sale, officials said. Under the FMF, Israel could seek an exception of the requirement that about half of the military platform undergo production in the United States. The exception could be applied if such a platform or its components were not available in the United States.
"Congress could promote the exception for Israel if the president decides on it," an official said.
In an effort to overcome U.S. Navy opposition, the administration was examining the option of purchasing Type-209 submarines for Taiwan from Argentina. The South American country has submarine production capability and officials said U.S. defense firms could order the hull in Argentina and later outfit the platform with electronic and combat suites in the United States.
----
Powell, Li confront sensitive issue of US arms sales to Taiwan
WASHINGTON (AFP)
Sep 30, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040930185856.s355t5p6.html
Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing warned the United States Thursday against arms sales to Taiwan but US Secretary of State Colin Powell defended them as obligatory under American law.
Li told reporters after talks with Powell at the State Department that China was "firmly opposed to the sales of weapons by any foreign country to Taiwan, which is a part of China."
Powell, speaking alongside Li, reminded his Chinese counterpart of "our obligations under our domestic law," stressing that US arms sales were solely for Taiwan's self defense.
The United States remains the leading arms supplier to Taiwan even though it moved diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979.
While Washington acknowledges Beijing's position that Taiwan should be considered an integral part of China, it is bound by law to provide weapons to help the island defend itself if its security is threatened.
Li and Powell were forced to address the prickly arms issue at a news conference when Li was asked to comment on a controversial arms sales package offered by US President George W. Bush in April 2002 that could be effected in
The Taiwan cabinet recently approved plans to spend 610 billion Taiwan dollars (18.2 billion US) on the package, which also includes eight US-built submarines and a fleet of submarine-hunting P-3C aircraft, over a 15-year period from 2005.
The deal will go to Taipei's parliament for approval towards the end of the year.
China has constantly threatened to use force to reunify with the island, which it considers part of its territory, should the island seek independence.
-------- china
China may have 800 missiles targeting Taiwan in 2006, Taipei warns
TAIPEI (AFP)
Sep 30, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040930072310.ulx1k6bt.html
China is likely to have 800 ballistic missles targeting Taiwan before the end of 2006, Taipei's defense minister said Thursday as he pressed the case for an 18 billion dollar special defence budget.
Lee Jye told parliament's defense committee that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) now operates some 600 short-range ballistic missiles -- mostly deployed in coastal provinces facing Taiwan.
"The number of Dong Feng-11 and Dong Feng-15 ballistic missiles is expected to rise to 800 before the end of 2006," Lee said.
Should war break out in the Taiwan Strait, the PLA could launch five waves of extensive strikes lasting for 10 hours, he said.
"They may also fire 200-odd cruise missiles from bases 1,000 mileskilometers) away from Taiwan to attack the island's key targets," Lee said.
"Given missile defensive capabilities, we are hardly able to cope with the threat."
Since pro-independence president Chen Shui-bian was re-elected in March, Beijing has stressed its long-standing vow to take Taiwan by force should it declare formal independence.
Lee said Taiwan's other armed forces are also inferior to China's and China's sustained rise in military spending is expected further to tilt the balance towards the mainland in coming years.
The number of China's second-generation military aircraft like the Russian-made Su-27 and Su-30 may increase to 400 in two years from 300 now, he said.
China's military spending, which rose at an average double-digit rate over the past decade, is estimated at 24.5 billion US dollars in 2004.
Taiwan's defense outlays in 2004 were 264.1 Taiwan dollars (7.76 billion after peaking in 1999 at 284.5 billion Taiwan dollars.
Military analysts say the island's military commands, communications, airports and seaports would be vulnerable to surprise missile attacks.
Taiwan has put into service three US-made PAC-2 anti-missile systems to protect the greater Taipei area, and is planning to acquire six more improved PAC-3 systems.
The Patriot weaponry is part of a controversial arms sales package offered by US President George W. Bush in April 2002.
The cabinet has approved plans to spend 610 billion Taiwan dollarsbillion US) on the package, which also includes eight US-built submarines and a fleet of submarine-hunting P-3C aircraft, over a 15-year period from 2005.
The deal will go to parliament for approval towards the end of the year.
Li Weiyi, spokesman for China's Taiwan Affairs Office, Wednesday criticized Taiwan's proposed arms package. He cited a protest rally staged in Taipei over the weekend as proof that it was not supported by the island's people.
"For the Chinese people, there is nothing more important or holy than protecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China," Li said.
Tensions escalated over the weekend when Taiwan Premier Yu Shyi-kun threatened to strike Shanghai with missiles if major cities in Taiwan were attacked.
Media reports have suggested Taiwan is involved in research efforts to improve its missile capability, some of which could eventually hit cities on China's east coast.
The two sides split in 1949 at the end of a civil war on the mainland which was won by the communists.
-------- iraq
Pair of Car Bombs in Iraq Kill Dozens, Including Many Children
September 30, 2004
New York Times
By DEXTER FILKINS
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/international/middleeast/30CND-IRAQ.html?oref=login&pagewanted=all
BAGHDAD, Iraq, Sept. 30 - In one of the most horrific attacks here since the fall of Saddam Hussein, a pair of car bombs tore through a street celebration today at the opening of a new government-built sewer plant, killing 41 Iraqi civilians, at least 34 of them children, and wounding 139 people.
The bombs exploded seconds apart, creating a chaotic scene of dying children and grieving parents, some of them holding up the blood-soaked clothes of their young, and howling in lament. Arms and legs lay amid pools of blood, with some survivors pointing to the walls of the sewer plant, now spattered with flesh.
The attack was one of several on a particularly bloody day in Iraq that took place just hours before President Bush and Senator John Kerry were to debate American foreign policy in Miami in the first of three such face-to-face meetings in advance of the Nov. 2 presidential election.
The bombing also resulted in the largest death toll of children in any insurgent attack since the American invasion in March 2003, and it came on the last day of one of the most violent months of the war thus far. American and Iraqi officials believe the upturn in violence is linked to both the American presidential election and the Iraqi elections scheduled for January.
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld acknowledged in a radio interview today that the violence in Iraq was ``getting worse.''
``We do expect that the incidents of violence in both Afghanistan and Iraq between now and the elections will very likely increase and that these dead-enders will try to see if they can prevent it from happening,'' he said in the interview with WCHS-AM radio in Charleston, W.Va., according to a transcript from his office.
In the attack at the government-sponsored celebration, the bombers drove their cars into a crowd of children that had gathered for the ceremony, meant to mark the completion of a $400,000 project sponsored by the Army's First Cavalry Division. Ordinarily, Iraqi children would be attending school, but the chaos in the capital caused by the ongoing war has delayed the opening this year.
``These people want to kill innocent children,'' said Ahmed Hussein, a 14-year-old wounded by the blasts. The boy spoke from his bed at Yarmouk Hospital, his arms and legs bandaged, while is his mother, seated next to him, shuddered and sobbed. ``Many people were killed and many were injured and they are all here now at the hospital and I am one of them,'' the boy said.
The attack on the sewer plant was indicative of the calculation employed by the insurgents fighting the American-backed enterprise in Iraq. The plant was a symbol of progress, a project designed to serve 20,000 ordinary Iraqis in the neighborhood of El Amel in southern Baghdad. It was one of many public works projects drawn up by the military here: the First Cavalry Division has also built a medical clinic, football fields and other water stations, also opened with fanfare.
``These ceremonies are pretty well attended by people in the neighborhood,'' said Lt. Col. James Hutton, a division spokesman. ``They see it for what it is, as something that is going to help them in their lives.''
And that also makes such projects and ceremonies potential targets of attack.
Ten American soldiers were wounded in the blasts, which failed to damage the newly refurbished sewage plant.
The bombing of the ceremony was the worst of the day's violence in Iraq, but there was plenty elsewhere. Less than a mile away, in the same neighborhood, a car bomb ripped into an Iraqi National Guard post, causing an undetermined number of casualties. Earlier, a car bomb at a military checkpoint killed one American soldier and 2 Iraqi soldiers and wounded 3 Americans and 10 Iraqis.
An American soldier was killed when a rocket landed inside a logistical base in Baghdad, the military said on Wednesday. In the northern city of Tal Afar, the scene of heavy fighting earlier this month, a car bomb killed four Iraqis and wounded 16 others. In Mosul, also in the north, two Iraqi policemen were gunned down in a drive-by shooting.
The recent run of car bombings and other killings is part of a general upsurge in the violence. Last month, attacks against American forces reached their highest level yet, nearly 2,700.
``We are obviously seeing a major onslaught by the terrorists,'' Deputy Prime Minister Barem Salih said. ``It is not possible to accommodate these people.''
Mr. Salih reaffirmed the Iraqi government's intention to hold nationwide elections by the end of January, despite the violence. He pledged that the Iraqi government, with the help of American forces, would reassert control over many of the areas that have slipped into insurgent hands before the elections.
There were also reports of more hostage-taking. The Arab satellite network Al-Jazeera showed footage of what it said were 10 hostages seized by militants in Iraq. Al-Jazeera said the 10 - 6 Iraqis, 2 Lebanese and 2 Indonesians, both women - were taken by the Islamic Army in Iraq. The group took responsibility for seizing two French journalists last month.
The footage showed three of the hostages, who were not identified, and two masked gunmen pointing weapons at them. There was no mention of demands or where the hostages were abducted. Al-Jazeera said the 10 were employees of an electric company.
A Lebanese Foreign Ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity, later told The Associated Press that two Lebanese citizens had been seized in Iraq, but it was not immediately clear if they were the same as those shown by Al Jazeera.
The Frenchmen, Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot, disappeared Aug. 20 during a trip to Najaf, in southern Iraq. The Islamic Army in Iraq demanded that France revoke a new law banning Islamic head scarves from state schools. It did not.
Maria Newman contributed reporting for this article from New York.
----
Kidnap-for-cash is the one growth industry in Iraq's no-go areas
30 September 2004
independent.co.uk
By Patrick Cockburn in Baghdad
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=567208
Iraq is becoming the kidnap capital of the world, though this gets international attention only when foreigners are taken hostage.
It is the one growth industry in the country. Nobody is safe. "We had one case recently where the kidnappers seized a three-year-old," said Sabah Kadhim, a senior official at the interior ministry in Baghdad.
Most kidnap victims are Iraqis and the motive is always money. Many well-off Iraqis have fled to Jordan or Syria. "I just don't make enough money in Iraq to take the risk of being taken hostage," a businessman who had moved to Amman said. Doctors are a frequent target and many of the best-qualified have gone abroad.
Mr Khadim says he is convinced the motive for kidnapping the two Italian women, Simona Pari and Simona Torreta, now freed, was always money.
"The kidnappers are not stupid," he says. "They could see Italy was part of the coalition but the war was very unpopular there. They knew that if they kidnapped women this would generate publicity, and this means more money in ransom."
Only a few kidnappings are political, probably including that of Kenneth Bigley, the British engineer, held by the Tawhid and Jihad group led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
The Jordanian-born militant has discovered that as a way to attract the world's attention, horrific videos of captives being beheaded or pleading for their life are difficult to beat. Unlike commercial kidnappers, few of Zarqawi's victims are known to have survived.
The wave of kidnappings started soon after the fall of Baghdad last year. Criminals, many released by Saddam Hussein just before the invasion, found it was an easy way to make money with almost no fear of punishment. Some gangs have their own dungeons so they can handle several victims at once.
The police admit they do not know how many people are being kidnapped because relatives or friends of victims think it is dangerous to tell them. People also think the police are paid by kidnap gangs.
One man, who turned down an offer of police assistance in getting back his business partner, had a phone call from the kidnappers 30 minutes later complimenting him on his discretion.
The hostage-takers are often cruel. One 22-year-old student called Ali was left in a room by himself for three days without food or water. Later, he met two other victims, both young men, held by the same gang. One day, a man came in and shot one victim in the head. Negotiations with his family had failed.
Months ago, the kidnappers realised they could make even more money seizing foreigners. Word spread that a Kuwaiti company had paid $100,000 each for the return of several employees. Before, the kidnappers had thought taking foreigners could cause them trouble, but as the strength of the US occupation ebbed over the past six months, expatriates became fair game.
It is impossible to draw a line between commercial and political kidnappings. This is because kidnappers whose only aim is to make money often pretend to be fighting the occupation. Iraqi security men, who have not had much success against kidnappers, tracked one gang which had seized a Lebanese man. In their hideout the police found banners with religious and political slogans.
The head of the gang said they were to be used as a backdrop if they made a video of their victim, in the hope that it would be shown on television. "If you can get a kidnap on television, you can make more money," the gang leader said.
Kidnapping foreigners also became easier after the Sunni Muslim uprising in April. Fallujah and most of Anbar province in western Iraq, stayed in rebel hands. Insurgents also control towns south of Baghdad, including Latafiyah, Mahmouiyah and Iskandariyah, a large no-go area for Iraqi government forces where hostages can be concealed.
This was where the two French journalists, Georges Malbrunot and Christian Chesnot, were kidnapped on 20 August.
Commercial and political kidnappings are likely to continue because they are successful. But the pool of available kidnap victims is now small. This puts foreigners in greater danger.
----
The torment of being held hostage
BBC News Online
by Paula Dear
30 September, 2004
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3703486.stm
Gary Teeley The father of five felt guilty about what his family was going through
No one can possibly imagine what thoughts are going through the mind of hostage Ken Bigley, after nearly two weeks in captivity in Iraq.
But one fellow Briton knows more than most about what it is like to face the horror of a hostage situation.
British man Gary Teeley, who was held hostage for six days in Iraq earlier this year, has joined calls for the release of captive Ken Bigley.
Mr Teeley was snatched from a house in the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriya by a large gang of Iraqi militiamen on 5 April this year.
The laundry firm consultant, who lives and works in Qatar, was in Iraq to cover for an American friend and colleague who had asked for time off.
"I was just about to leave the house for work, when through the window I saw these guys running towards it, carrying heavy guns, dressed in black and wearing masks.
"The living room door was put in and the first thing I saw was a guy holding a rocket launcher.
"As soon as one gun was pointed at me I thought I was going to be shot. Then one gun became six guns. Within 30 seconds I was out in the street.
"The shock to the system was incredible."
Mr Teeley was later taken to his first "prison" of the many he would see over the next six days.
"I thought any minute a guy might just walk in here and shoot me."
The following day a firefight between Italian forces and Iraqi militia raged outside for 11 hours.
"It was horrific, I was just waiting the whole time for a bomb to hit the house. Then afterwards I kept thinking, what happened and who won?
"If the militia had been defeated, maybe they would come in and take it out on me, I thought."
Mr Teeley, who has a wife and baby son in Qatar and four children from a previous marriage, asked his captors "30 to 40 times a day" whether they intended to shoot him or release him.
As far as he knows, he had been mistaken for an American or Israeli and no specific demands were being made for his release.
On the morning of his birthday, 8 April, he was moved to a different location.
"I was put in a room. Then the door opened and four guys were stood there. That was the worst time of all.
'Keep your chin up'
"They beat me, then had me on my knees blindfolded. Barrels of guns were pushed to my head, I was just waiting for it.
"I started to think I'd rather be shot that go through this."
For seven hours he was tormented with swords, hand grenades and guns.
"When I was left on my own at night I thought about trying to get out. But I didn't really think I could get away with it. You're thinking, 'stay with it, you're doing well, keep your chin up'.
"But I also got angry with myself for not doing something. I said to myself 'are you a man or not?'"
Things took a dramatic turn when Mr Teeley was driven around 30km outside the city, and taken to a house where he met two new captors he refers to as Mr A and Mr H.
"I got very close to Mr H. He was a big man, well dressed, clean, and spoke English. I made him laugh.
Your imagination can go a little crazy if you're not careful
"I believe if it had not been for them I wouldn't be standing here today."
Over the following days they talked about the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein, 11 September and Osama Bin Laden, and Mr Teeley told jokes about US president George Bush and UK prime minister Tony Blair.
"They told me I was courageous," he says.
Following what he believes was an intervention from his company's chairman he was released.
"Mr H came into the room, holding out his arms, with a big smile on his face and he said 'Mr Gary, now you go see baby'. That was an unbelievable feeling."
Thoughts of his baby son and the rest of his family had only added to the torment while he was being held, says Mr Teeley, which is something Mr Bigley is likely to be going through.
"I'm so close to my mum and I knew she would be beside herself. I felt a lot of guilt, especially if I was going to die.
"I didn't want my children to think I had given up my life for the sake of money."
Ill effects
Ken Bigley's state of mind will depend mostly on what is happening around him, and how much information he has, said Mr Teeley.
"How are they feeding you, do they hand it to you or throw it at you? Do they kick you? Do they hold guns to your head? All these things affect how you cope.
"Does Ken Bigley have access to the outside world? For example if he hears about the damage the US is doing in Fallujah he'll probably worry that his captors will take it out on him.
"And he'll know he had two American colleagues who are not there now. Have they told him what happened to them?
"Your imagination can go a little crazy if you're not careful."
Since hearing of Ken Bigley's plight, Gary Teeley has had some sleepless nights.
"It was the first real ill effects I had felt since my release. Last week I felt like I was a member of Ken Bigley's family.
"When I was captured I didn't really know what my family was going through, but now I feel like I do."
-----
A FAILED "TRANSITION": THE MOUNTING COSTS OF THE IRAQ WAR
A Study by the Institute for Policy Studies and Foreign Policy In Focus September 30, 2004
http://www.ips-dc.org/iraq/failedtransition/index.htm
Full report with citations (.pdf document) http://www.ips-dc.org/iraq/failedtransition/A_Failed_Transition-webver.pdf
"Just the Numbers" factsheet feel free to photocopy and share (.pdf document) http://www.ips-dc.org/iraq/failedtransition/transition.pdf
KEY FINDINGS
A Failed 'Transition' is the most comprehensive accounting of the mounting costs of the Iraq war on the United States, Iraq, and the world. Among its major findings are stark figures about the escalation of costs in these most recent three months of "transition" to Iraqi rule, a period that the Bush administration claimed would be characterized by falling human and economic costs.
1. U.S. Military Casualties Have Been Highest During the "Transition": U.S. military casualties (wounded and killed) stand at a monthly average of 747 since the so-called "transition" to Iraqi rule on June 28, 2004. This contrasts with a monthly average of 482 U.S. military casualties during the invasion (March 20-May 1, 2003) and a monthly average of 415 during the occupation (May 2, 2003-June 28, 2004).
2. Non-Iraqi Contractor Deaths Have Also Been Highest During the "Transition": There has also been a huge increase in the average monthly deaths of U.S. and other non-Iraqi contractors since the "transition." On average, 17.5 contractors have died each month since the June 28 "transition," versus 7.6 contractor deaths per month during the previous 14 months of occupation.
3. Estimated Strength of Iraqi Resistance Skyrockets: Because the U.S. military occupation remains in place, the "transition" has failed to win Iraqi support or diminish Iraqi resistance to the occupation. According to Pentagon estimates, the number of Iraqi resistance fighters has quadrupled between November of 2003 and early September 2004, from 5,000 to 20,000. The Deputy Commander of Coalition forces in Iraq, British Major General Andrew Graham, indicated to Time magazine in early September that he thinks the 20,000 estimate is too low; he estimates Iraqi resistance strength at 40,000-50,000. This rise is even starker when juxtaposed to Brookings Institution estimates that an additional 24,000 Iraqi resistance fighters have been detained or killed between May 2003 and August 2004.
4. U.S.- led Coalition Shrinks Further After "Transition": The number of countries identified as members of the Coalition backing the U.S.-led war started with 30 on March 18, 2003, then grew in the early months of the war. Since then, eight countries have withdrawn their troops and Costa Rica has demanded to be taken off the coalition list. At the war's start, coalition countries represented 19.1 percent of the world's population; today, the remaining countries with foces in Iraq represent only 13.6 percent of the world's population.
Highlights of "A Failed 'Transition'"
I. Costs to the United States
A. HUMAN COSTS TO THE U.S. AND ALLIES
U.S. Military Deaths: Between the start of war on March 19, 2003 and September 22, 2004, 1,175 coalition forces were killed, including 1,040 U.S. military. Of the total, 925 were killed after President Bush declared the end of combat operations on May 1, 2003. Over 7,413 U.S. troops have been wounded since the war began, 6,953 (94 percent) since May 1, 2003.
Contractor Deaths: As of September 22, 2004, there has been an estimated 154 civilian contractors, missionaries, and civilian worker deaths since May 1, 2004. Of these, 52 have been identified as Americans. Journalist Deaths: Forty-four international media workers have been killed in Iraq as of September 22, 2004, including 33 since President Bush declared the end of combat operations. Eight of the dead worked for U.S. companies.
B. SECURITY COSTS
Terrorist Recruitment and Action: According to the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, al Qaeda's membership is now at 18,000, with 1,000 active in Iraq. The State Department's 2003 "Patterns of Global Terrorism," documented 625 deaths and 3,646 injuries due to terrorist attacks in 2003. The report acknowledged that "significant incidents," increased from 60 percent of total attacks in 2002 to 84 percent in 2003.
Low U.S. Credibility: Polls reveal that the war has damaged the U.S. government's standing and credibility in the world. Surveys in eight European and Arab countries demonstrated broad public agreement that the war has hurt, rather than helped, the war on terrorism. At home, 52 percent of Americans polled by the Annenberg Election Survey disapprove of Bush's handling of Iraq.
Military Mistakes: A number of former military officials have criticized the war, including retired Marine General Anthony Zinni, who has charged that by manufacturing a false rationale for war, abandoning traditional allies, propping up and trusting Iraqi exiles, and failing to plan for post-war Iraq, the Bush Administration made the United States less secure.
Low Troop Morale and Lack of Equipment: A March 2004 army survey found 52 percent of soldiers reporting low morale, and three-fourths reporting they were poorly led by their officers. Lack of equipment has been an ongoing problem. The Army did not fully equip soldiers with bullet-proof vests until June 2004, forcing many families to purchase them out of their own pockets.
Loss of First Responders: National Guard troops make up almost one-third of the U.S. Army troops now in Iraq. Their deployment puts a particularly heavy burden on their home communities because many are "first responders," including police, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel. For example, 44 percent of the country's police forces have lost officers to Iraq. In some states, the absence of so many Guard troops has raised concerns about the ability to handle natural disasters.
Use of Private Contractors: An estimated 20,000 private contractors are carrying out work in Iraq traditionally done by the military, despite the fact that they often lack sufficient training and are not accountable to the same guidelines and reviews as military personnel.
C. ECONOMIC COSTS
The Bill So Far: Congress has approved of $151.1 billion for Iraq. Congressional leaders anticipate an additional supplemental appropriation of $60 billion after the election.
Long-term Impact on U.S. Economy: Economist Doug Henwood has estimated that the war bill will add up to an average of at least $3,415 for every U.S. household. Another economist, James Galbraith of the University of Texas, predicts that while war spending may boost the economy initially, over the long term it is likely to bring a decade of economic troubles, including an expanded trade deficit and high inflation.
Oil Prices: U.S. crude oil prices spiked at $48 per barrel on August 19, 2004, the highest level since 1983, a development that most analysts attribute at least in part to the deteriorating situation in Iraq. According to a mid-May CBS survey, 85 percent of Americans said they had been affected measurably by higher gas prices. According to one estimate, if crude oil prices stay around $40 a barrel for a year, U.S. gross domestic product will decline by more than $50 billion.
Economic Impact on Military Families: Since the beginning of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, 364,000 reserve troops and National Guard soldiers have been called for military service, serving tours of duty that often last 20 months. Studies show that between 30 and 40 percent of reservists and National Guard members earn a lower salary when they leave civilian employment for military deployment. Army Emergency Relief has reported that requests from military families for food stamps and subsidized meals increased "several hundred percent" between 2002 and 2003.
D. SOCIAL COSTS
U.S. Budget and Social Programs: The Bush administration's combination of massive spending on the war and tax cuts for the wealthy means less money for social spending. The $151.1 billion expenditure for the war through this year could have paid for: close to 23 million housing vouchers; health care for over 27 million uninsured Americans; salaries for nearly 3 million elementary school teachers; 678,200 new fire engines; over 20 million Head Start slots for children; or health care coverage for 82 million children. A leaked memo from the White House to domestic agencies outlines major cuts following the election, including funding for education, Head Start, home ownership, job training, medical research and homeland security.
Social Costs to the Military: In order to meet troop requirements in Iraq, the Army has extended the tours of duty for soldiers. These extensions have been particularly difficult for reservists, many of whom never expected to face such long separations from their jobs and families. According to military policy, reservists are not supposed to be on assignment for more than 12 months every 5-6 years. To date, the average tour of duty for all soldiers in Iraq has been 320 days. A recent Army survey revealed that more than half of soldiers said they would not re-enlist.
Costs to Veteran Health Care: About 64 percent of the more than 7,000 U.S. soldiers injured in Iraq received wounds that prevented them from returning to duty. One trend has been an increase in amputees, the result of improved body armor that protects vital organs but not extremities. As in previous wars, many soldiers are likely to have received ailments that will not be detected for years to come. The Veterans Administration healthcare system is not prepared for the swelling number of claims. In May, the House of Representatives approved funding for FY 2005 that is $2.6 billion less than needed, according to veterans' groups.
Mental Health Costs: The New England Journal of Medicine reported in July 2004 that 1 in 6 soldiers returning from war in Iraq showed signs of post-traumatic stress disorder, major depression, or severe anxiety. Only 23 to 40 percent of respondents in the study who showed signs of a mental disorder had sought mental health care.
II. Costs to Iraq
A. HUMAN COSTS
Iraqi Deaths and Injuries: As of September 22, 2004, between 12,800 and 14,843 Iraqi civilians have been killed as a result of the U.S. invasion and ensuing occupation, while an estimated 40,000 Iraqis have been injured. During "major combat" operations, between 4,895 and 6,370 Iraqi soldiers and insurgents were killed.
Effects of Depleted Uranium: The health impacts of the use of depleted uranium weaponry in Iraq are yet to be known. The Pentagon estimates that U.S. and British forces used 1,100 to 2,200 tons of weaponry made from the toxic and radioactive metal during the March 2003 bombing campaign. Many scientists blame the far smaller amount of DU weapons used in the Persian Gulf War for illnesses among U.S. soldiers, as well as a sevenfold increase in child birth defects in Basra in southern Iraq.
B. SECURITY COSTS
Rise in Crime: Murder, rape, and kidnapping have skyrocketed since March 2003, forcing Iraqi children to stay home from school and women to stay off the streets at night. Violent deaths rose from an average of 14 per month in 2002 to 357 per month in 2003.
Psychological Impact: Living under occupation without the most basic security has devastated the Iraqi population. A poll conducted by the Iraq Center for Research and Strategic Studies in June 2004 found that 80 percent of Iraqis believe that coalition forces should leave either immediately or directly after the election.
C. ECONOMIC COSTS
Unemployment: Iraqi joblessness doubled from 30 percent before the war to 60 percent in the summer of 2003. While the Bush administration now claims that unemployment has dropped, the U.S. is only employing 120,000 Iraqis, of a workforce of 7 million, in reconstruction projects.
Corporate War Profiteering: Most of Iraq's reconstruction has been contracted out to U.S. companies, rather than experienced Iraqi firms. Top contractor Halliburton is being investigated for charging $160 million for meals that were never served to troops and $61 million in cost overruns on fuel deliveries. Halliburton employees also took $6 million in kickbacks from subcontractors, while other employees have reported extensive waste, including the abandonment of $85,000 trucks because they had flat tires.
Iraq's Oil Economy: Anti-occupation violence has prevented Iraq from capitalizing on its oil assets. There have been an estimated 118 attacks on Iraq's oil infrastructure since June 2003. By September 2004, oil production still had not reached pre-war levels and major attacks caused oil exports to plummet to a ten-month low in August 2004.
D. SOCIAL COSTS
Health Infrastructure: After more than a decade of crippling sanctions, Iraq's health facilities were further damaged during the war and post-invasion looting. Iraq's hospitals continue to suffer from lack of supplies and an overwhelming number of patients.
Education: UNICEF estimates that more than 200 schools were destroyed in the conflict and thousands more were looted in the chaos following the fall of Saddam Hussein. The State Department reported on September 15th that "Significant obstacles remain in maintaining security for civilian/military reconstruction, logistical support and distribution for donations, equipment, textbooks and supplies."
Environment: The U.S-led attack damaged water and sewage systems and the country's fragile desert ecosystem. It also resulted in oil well fires that spewed smoke across the country and left unexploded ordnance that continues to endanger the Iraqi people and environment. Mines and unexploded ordnance cause an estimated 20 casualties per month.
E. HUMAN RIGHTS COSTS
Even with Saddam Hussein overthrown, Iraqis continue to face human rights violations from occupying forces. In addition to the widely publicized humiliation and torture of prisoners, abuse has been widespread throughout the post-9-11 military operations, with over 300 allegations of abuse in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantánamo. As of mid-August 2004, only 155 investigations into the existing 300 allegations had been completed.
F. SOVEREIGNTY COSTS
Despite the proclaimed "transfer of sovereignty" to Iraq, the country continues to be occupied by U.S. and coalition troops and has severely limited political and economic independence. The interim government does not have the authority to reverse the nearly 100 orders by former CPA head Paul Bremer that, among other things, allow for the privatization of Iraq's state-owned enterprises and prohibit preferences for domestic firms in reconstruction.
III. Costs to the World
A. HUMAN COSTS
While Americans make up the vast majority of military and contractor personnel in Iraq, other U.S.-allied "coalition" troops have suffered 135 war casualties in Iraq. In addition, the focus on Iraq has diverted international resources and attention away from humanitarian crises such as in Sudan.
B. DISABLING INTERNATIONAL LAW
The unilateral U.S. decision to go to war in Iraq violated the United Nations Charter, setting a dangerous precedent for other countries to seize any opportunity to respond militarily to claimed threats, whether real or contrived, that must be "pre-empted." The U.S. military has also violated the Geneva Convention, making it more likely that in the future, other nations will ignore these protections in their treatment of civilian populations and detainees.
C. UNDERMINING THE UNITED NATIONS
At every turn, the Bush Administration has attacked the legitimacy and credibility of the UN, undermining the institution's capacity to act in the future as the centerpiece of global disarmament and conflict resolution. The efforts of the Bush administration to gain UN acceptance of an Iraqi government that was not elected but rather installed by occupying forces undermines the entire notion of national sovereignty as the basis for the UN Charter. It was on this basis that Secretary General Annan referred specifically to the vantage point of the UN Charter in his September 2004 finding that the war was illegal.
D. ENFORCING COALITIONS
Faced with opposition in the UN Security Council, the U.S. government attempted to create the illusion of multilateral support for the war by pressuring other governments to join a so-called "Coalition of the Willing." This not only circumvented UN authority, but also undermined democracy in many coalition countries, where public opposition to the war was as high as 90 percent. As of the middle of September, only 29 members of the "Coalition of the Willing" had forces in Iraq, in addition to the United States. These countries, combined with United States, make up less than 14 percent of the world's population.
E. COSTS TO THE GLOBAL ECONOMY
The $151.1 billion spent by the U.S. government on the war could have cut world hunger in half and covered HIV/AIDS medicine, childhood immunization and clean water and sanitation needs of the developing world for more than two years. As a factor in the oil price hike, the war has created concerns of a return to the "stagflation" of the 1970s. Already, the world's major airlines are expecting an increase in costs of $1 billion or more per month.
F. UNDERMINING GLOBAL SECURITY AND DISARMAMENT
The U.S.-led war and occupation have galvanized international terrorist organizations, placing people not only in Iraq but around the world at greater risk of attack. The State Department's annual report on international terrorism reported that in 2003 there was the highest level of terror-related incidents deemed "significant" than at any time since the U.S. began issuing these figures.
G. GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS
U.S.-fired depleted uranium weapons have contributed to pollution of Iraq's land and water, with inevitable spillover effects in other countries. The heavily polluted Tigris River, for example, flows through Iraq, Iran and Kuwait.
H. HUMAN RIGHTS
The Justice Department memo assuring the White House that torture was legal stands in stark violation of the International Convention Against Torture (of which the United States is a signatory). This, combined with the widely publicized mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. military and intelligence officials, gave new license for torture and mistreatment by governments around the world.
Full report with citations (.pdf document) http://www.ips-dc.org/iraq/failedtransition/A_Failed_Transition-webver.pdf
-------- israel / palestine
'Improved security for Israel in 2005'
The News International
September 30, 2004
http://jang.com.pk/thenews/sep2004-daily/30-09-2004/world/w8.htm
JERUSALEM: Israel's military intelligence chief expects regional threats against the Jewish state to weaken in 2005 and the security situation to improve, newspapers reported on Wednesday. General Aharon Zeevi Farkash told a meeting with MPs on Tuesday that Israel's planned evacuation from the Gaza Strip next year was likely to ease friction with the Palestinians, Haaretz said.
After the US presidential polls in November, the United States will step up efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining weapons of mass destruction and pressure Syria to stop harbouring Palestinian "terrorist" groups, he also predicted. Farkash said that intelligence showed neighbouring Jordan and Egypt were cooperating closely in reining in extremists, while the anticipated starting date of EU accession talks for Turkey would also lower tension in the region.
But Israel still faces several major threats, including Iran's alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons and the support provided by the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah to Palestinian armed groups, he said.
Palestinian militants, meanwhile, were seeking to increase the range of makeshift rockets they fire on southern Israel from the Gaza Strip and also trying to acquire 120-mm mortars.
----
A Long Deadly Day in Gaza as Israel Fights Way Into Camp
September 30, 2004
New York Times
By GREG MYRE
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/international/middleeast/30CND-MIDE.html?pagewanted=all
NISANIT, Gaza Strip, Sept. 30 - In the bloodiest day in more than two years, 28 Palestinians and 3 Israelis were killed today as Israeli troops pushed into a densely packed refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip and battled militants darting among the narrow alleys.
The Israelis fired from tanks and armored personnel carriers as they edged into the Jabaliya refugee camp, just north of Gaza City, that is home to more than 100,000 Palestinians. Masked Palestinians fired automatic rifles and antitank missiles, and planted explosives along the narrow, sandy streets.
The Israelis rolled into northern Gaza on Tuesday night following the latest upsurge in Palestinian rocket fire. The heavy fighting today, combined with warnings from Israeli officials, pointed to the possibility of a massive military offensive in Gaza directed at the Palestinian factions responsible for the almost daily attacks.
Throughout four years of fighting, the Israeli military has been reluctant to enter the congested cities and refugee camps in Gaza, where it is difficult for its armored vehicles to operate. Even limited Israeli ground incursions in Gaza have resulted in large numbers of casualties among both Palestinians and Israeli soldiers.
However, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has expressed determination to proceed with his unilateral plan to withdraw Israeli soldiers and settlers from Gaza, and the persistent fighting is complicating his efforts.
Army radio reported that Mr. Sharon had approved a major offensive that would involve re-occupying parts of Northern Gaza.
"This will only make the prime minister more intent to pursue his disengagement plan," Gideon Meir, a senior official in the Foreign Ministry, said of the latest turmoil. "The Palestinians want to convince the world that Israel is withdrawing because of terrorism. We know this is not the truth."
About half of the Palestinian dead were militants, with the other half civilians, according to witnesses and the overburdened staff at Kamal Adwan Hospital, which treated about 100 wounded Palestinians.
In the deadliest single episode, an Israeli tank fired a shell at Palestinian militants who had just hit an armored Israeli vehicle with an antitank missile, wounding three soldiers, the military said. The tank shell killed 7 Palestinians and injured about 20, with civilians accounting for most of the casualties, according to Palestinian witnesses and the hospital.
The Israeli army commander in Gaza, Maj. Gen. Dan Harel, acknowledged the civilian casualties and expressed regret. However, he also accused the militants of using civilians as shields.
The Israelis also bulldozed about 20 homes on a narrow road leading into the camp, apparently to allow better access for armored vehicles, Palestinian residents said.
Muhammad Dahlan, a former security chief in Gaza and still an influential figure, said in a statement that the Israeli operation would "result in a bloodbath on both sides because the Palestinian people cannot remain silent in the face of this aggression."
On the Israeli side, a kindergarten teacher was shot dead while on her regular morning jog along a road linking three Jewish settlements on the northern edge of Gaza, just a couple miles from Jabaliya.
With a heavy nighttime fog providing cover, two Palestinian gunmen apparently breached a fence that screens both sides of the road. The gunmen fatally shot the teacher outside the Nisanit settlement and then gunned down an army paramedic who arrived moments later. Israeli soldiers shot dead both gunmen, officials said.
In a settlement with 300 families, most with small children, virtually everyone knew the slain teacher, Shula Batito, 36, who had run the kindergarten for more than a decade.
"All the kids knew her, all the parents knew her, and everyone loved her," said Helena Edry, Ms. Batito's next-door neighbor.
Tal Barda, 35, a construction worker who has lived in Nisanit for the last 12 years, said: "Every day we hear shooting, and then helicopters and tanks on the move. You can never feel safe."
Near Jabaliya, an Israeli soldier was killed when two Palestinians opened fire with rifles and grenades at the entrance to a military post. The Palestinians were then shot dead, the military said.
Israel has staged repeated incursions into northern Gaza, but at best, the rocket fire has been reduced only temporarily.
Despite the large military presence, Palestinians fired a rocket on Wednesday night that killed two Israeli children, ages 2 and 4, in the town of Sederot, in southern Israel, just outside Gaza's fence.
Israelis were outraged by the deaths, which came just before the holiday of Sukkot, fall's harvest festival. Israeli officials warned that the Israeli operation in Gaza would be intensified, and today's fighting appeared to confirm that.
However, it is not clear whether the Israelis will be able to stop the rocket fire despite their vast military superiority.
Palestinians are able to set up and fire their simple, homemade Qassam rockets, and then flee the area within minutes, making it difficult for the Israeli forces to track them down.
Most of the rockets have been fired by Hamas, which took responsibility for the attack that killed the two children on Wednesday.
"Thank God the holy warriors have designed these rockets. They are shaking the Jewish people," said Motea al-Sharafi, whose brother was killed during clashes on Wednesday. "This is the way we will take revenge."
Over the past few years, the Palestinians often fired from the cover of citrus and olive groves in northeast Gaza. In response, Israeli bulldozers flattened many of the groves, driving the Palestinians deeper inside Gaza.
The rockets carry a small payload and have a maximum range of about five miles, according to the Israeli military. They are extremely inaccurate and rarely cause casualties or damage.
But Wednesday's volley, which landed between two residential buildings, injured a dozen or so Israelis in addition to killing the two children.
The combined Israeli-Palestinian death toll of 31 was the highest single day count since Israel carried out a sweeping incursion of the West Bank in March and April of 2002.
Taghrood El Khodary contributed reporting from Gaza.
-------- nato
NATO mission in Iraq could involve 3,000 troops: Jones
BRUSSELS (AFP)
Sep 30, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040930164844.wu87k12w.html
NATO's top commander in Europe General James Jones said Thursday that up to 3,000 troops could be deployed to train Iraqi security forces, under an Alliance mission given the green light last week.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) agreed to the training mission in principle in June, but has struggled to agree on the details amid resistance notably from France.
Jones, who is NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said: "in the initial paper we sent out we hypothesized that it will be no more than a brigade. that's approximately 3,000."
"It may be less than that but it will not be more than that," he said, adding that it would be made up of some forces that are already in Iraq.
That figure would include the military trainers as well as security personnel, according to Jones.
Up to now, NATO officials have spoken only of a mission of "a few hundred" instructors, probably about 300, who would train army officers at a military academy outside the Iraqi capital Baghdad.
"He's not envisaging it will go beyond 3,000," a military source close to Jones said, adding that the exact size was still to be determined.
Jones has provided the alliance's highest military body with an "operational plan" outlining the framework for the mission, which is due to go before NATO's top ambassadors for approval at their next meeting on October 6.
NATO officials contacted on Thursday refused to confirm the figure of 3,000 troops and stressed that discussions were still at a "preliminary" stage.
"It is too early to prejudge the size of the mission," said one official, who did not wish to be named. He added that the figures quoted were attributed to general Jones only.
Last Wednesday NATO approved the political directives that will make it possible for the training mission to go ahead.
The man expected to command the mission on the ground, US army lieutenant general David Petraeus, is to travel to NATO headquarters on October 8 for talks with NATO leaders, according to the official.
Petraeus is currently head of the training programme run by the US-led coalition in Iraq.
A majority of NATO members are part of the current coalition in Iraq, and are expected to supply troops for the training mission.
NATO leaders agreed at a June summit to launch the mission after overcoming objections from France, which strongly opposed last year's US-led invasion.
But it has taken months to hammer out details of the mission. France, Germany, Belgium and Spain have all said they will not under any circumstances contribute troops to the operation.
The alliance already has about 40 soldiers in Iraq training army officers, but London and Washington argued that it had to be enlarged.
-------- russia / chechnya
Russian Government Backs U.N. Accord on Global Warming
September 30, 2004
New York Times
By SETH MYDANS and ANDREW C. REVKIN
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/international/europe/30CND-RUSS.html?pagewanted=all
MOSCOW, Sept. 30 - After years of unusually public infighting, the Russian cabinet approved the Kyoto Protocol on global warming today and prepared to send it to parliament, where its expected approval would allow the long-delayed climate change treaty to come into force around the world.
Rejection three years ago by the United States of the 1997 United Nations treaty had left the decisive vote to Russia, a major industrial polluter, where opponents have argued that it would harm the nation's economic interests.
The treaty, which orders cuts in emissions of gases linked to global warming, must be ratified by at least 55 countries that accounted for at least 55 percent of global emissions in 1990.
Already 120 nations have ratified the treaty or acceded to it but some large polluters have refused to do so, and Russia's agreement was needed to reach the required proportion of global emissions.
In 1990, the United States accounted for 36.1 percent of emissions, and Russia for 17.4 percent.
The treaty is widely considered a milestone of international environmental diplomacy. It is the first agreement that sets binding restrictions on emissions of heat-trapping gases that, for now, remain an unavoidable result of almost any activity from driving a car to running a power plant. The main source of the dominant gas, carbon dioxide, is burning coal and oil.
But many experts say that, at the same time, the protocol is just the tiniest step toward ultimately limiting the human influence on climate, given that its targets are small and that major polluters, including the United States and China, will not be bound by its terms.
The Russian parliament, or Duma, is dominated by supporters of President Vladimir V. Putin and although Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov predicted a "difficult debate," the president's wishes were expected to be final.
Mr. Putin made no public statement today. His top economic adviser, Andrei Illarionov, a leading opponent, said that the decision had been taken for political reasons and that the task now would be to try to minimize what he called its negative consequences for Russia.
He said compliance would slow Russia's economic growth and make it impossible to meet the president's stated goal of doubling its gross domestic product within a decade.
"It's a political decision, it's a forced decision," he said, according to the Interfax news agency. "It's not a decision we are making with pleasure." He said the treaty was based on false and even deceptive scientific assumptions.
German Gref, the economic development minister, called the treaty "a progressive step" but said, "It will hardly be decisive in radically improving the environmental situation." He added that it was unlikely to undermine Russia's economic growth.
Vladimir Azkharov, director of the Center for Russian Environmental Policy, a local lobbying group, said the treaty "very, very probably" would be approved in parliament, although he said, "there is no guarantee."
President Bush rejected the treaty in 2001, saying it would burden the economy by limiting use of still-abundant fossil fuels and unfairly excluded big developing countries from binding curbs on emissions. The Senate had long ago signaled its opposition, as well.
China and other developing countries, while signing the treaty, only did so because it obligated established industrial powers to act first.
Last December, in what seemed a definitive rejection, Mr. Illarionov said Russia would not sign the treaty. In May, however, Mr. Putin pledged to speed ratification in return for support by the European Union for Russia's bid to join the World Trade Organization.
International environmental groups voiced satisfaction at the news.
"As the Earth is battered by increasing storms, floods and droughts, President Putin has brought us to a pivotal point in human history," said Steve Sawyer, a climate campaigner for Greenpeace International, in a statement.
"We are on the brink of securing the Kyoto Protocol. The Bush Administration is out in the cold and the rest of the world can move forward as one to start tackling climate change, the greatest threat to civilization the world has ever seen."
In a telephone interview from New York, Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense, said, "What is significant is that it will be a market signal heard around the world, a signal that we are moving into a carbon-constrained future."
Monitoring and enforcement mechanisms will be put in place and businesses and developed economies will begin "a hunt for least-cost ways to reduce carbon," he said.
As reported by the Interfax news agency, today's cabinet meeting was contentious.
"The Academy of Science confirms its position that the protocol is not effective and gives us no advantages," the head of the academy's institute on climate change and ecology, Yuri Izrael was reported as saying.
Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov opened the meeting by focusing on Russia's international reputation, saying, "If we had denied ratification we would have been in the wrong. If the blame had been placed on Russia we would have suffered political and economic losses."
Mr. Illarionov presented the world from a different perspective in remarks earlier this week when he said pressure on Moscow to ratify was part of an "undeclared war against Russia" and based on "insolent interference in economic growth and the development of society."
Russia signed the treaty in 1997, as the United States did under President Bill Clinton, and expressed initial support for it.
Last December, in what seemed a definitive rejection, Mr. Illarionov said Russia would not sign the treaty. In May, however, Mr. Putin pledged to speed ratification in return for support by the European Union for Russia's bid to join the World Trade Organization.
The treaty, signed in Kyoto, Japan, set a deadline of 2012 for major industrialized countries, as a group, to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other heat-trapping gases by 5.2 percent from 1990 levels.
Many of the treaty's weaknesses are a function of the time that has elapsed since its targets and basic architecture were hastily negotiated in December 1997.
Since then, economic activity and emissions have threatened to put Europe and Japan, its main proponents, out of compliance.
The treaty provides "flexible mechanisms" for countries to reach their targets without actually reducing their emissions at home. These include emissions trading, in which one country buys the right to emit from another that has already met its targets for reduction and has "spare" emissions reductions.
By declining to sign the treaty, the United States has removed itself as a major potential market for these sales.
In the cabinet meeting, Dr. Izrael of the Academy of Sciences said the sale of emission quotas would bring Russia no more than 400 million euros, or $490 million. "It's big money for me, but a trifle for the state," he said.
Prof. David G. Victor, a political scientist at Stanford and longtime student of the protocol, said that Russia had nothing to lose in moving ahead, given that it surpassed its Kyoto targets even before they were negotiated. After the Russian economy collapsed with the fall of communism, the country's greenhouse-gas emissions plummeted far below 1990 levels, leaving it with a bonanza of tradable credits earned when it surpassed its targets.
Russia's agreement on the treaty's terms in 1997 hinged on its getting what could amount to billions of dollars in revenue from selling such credits to other industrial powers, which could use them as a cheap way of meeting their obligations under the treaty.
For Europe, however, this bundle of credits is a markedly mixed blessing now, Mr. Victor said.
The European Union recently passed legislation creating an internal trading market under the protocol's terms, so that its richer member states, like Britain, could get credit toward targets by investing in emissions-cutting projects in poorer, more polluted, ones, like Spain, where the cuts could come more cheaply.
But under the treaty's terms, Europe, Japan, and other industrialized participating countries can buy credits from Russia as well.
If Russia now starts selling its credits to Europe, there will be little incentive for companies within the European Union to push ahead with emissions-cutting schemes that would be more costly, Mr. Victor said.
That could lead to big fights within Europe, where the Green Party holds significant sway in many parliaments. Greenpeace and other environmental groups have derisively labeled the Russian credits "hot air," because they don't represent fresh reductions in emissions.
Russia's accounting system for its credits also remains murky, Dr. Victor said, meaning "there could be a potentially infinite supply."
-------- space
Civilian Spacecraft Rolls Into Space in Bid to Win $10 Million
Rocket's Ride Has Dramatic Climax
By Guy Gugliotta
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A03
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59435-2004Sep29?language=printer
MOJAVE, Calif., Sept. 29 -- Test pilot Michael Melvill flew a stubby civilian-built rocket plane 337,500 feet into suborbital space Wednesday, overcoming a series of spectacular unplanned rolls in a bid to win the $10 million Ansari X Prize.
A jubilant Melvill glided SpaceShipOne gently to a stop on a remote airstrip in the Mojave Desert, dismissing the journey's dramatic climax as a "a victory roll." Engineers said that the spacecraft has rolled on every flight but that they are investigating the cause.
"You just cannot describe what a feeling this is," Melvill said, standing on the tarmac. "I just loved every second of it. Maybe I'm crazy."
Melvill easily reached the 100-kilometer (328,084 feet) altitude defined as "space" and put SpaceShipOne on track to fly again by Oct. 13 to claim the X Prize. Designer Burt Rutan has suggested the spacecraft may fly as early as Monday but said the team will make a final decision today.
"The ship has no squawks -- there is nothing to fix," Rutan said at a news conference after the flight. "The motor is in beautiful shape, and we are analyzing whether there are any safety issues."
The X Prize competition, which has attracted 26 teams worldwide, requires that the winning craft -- made by a civilian entrepreneur with no government financing -- carry three 198-pound people, or a pilot and equivalent ballast, into suborbital space, then repeat the feat within two weeks.
X Prize Foundation Executive Director Gregg Maryniak, a competition judge, said Melvill's flight topped out at 337,500 feet, but the figure would not be final until confirmation comes from engineers at Edwards Air Force Base. He predicted the Edwards result would not differ by much.
The competition is patterned after the $25,000 Orteig Prize won by Charles Lindbergh in 1927 for the first nonstop flight from New York to Paris, and is designed to stimulate interest in space tourism. Earlier this week, British entrepreneur Richard Branson's Virgin Group announced that it was licensing the SpaceShipOne technology in hopes of beginning suborbital flights for tourists by 2007.
Virgin is a sponsor of SpaceShipOne's X Prize attempt, and the rocket plane wore the company's "Virgin Galactic" logo on its tail Wednesday, one of myriad endorsements and publicity initiatives that were visible -- or audible on loudspeakers -- at the Mojave Civilian Aerospace Test Center.
The gaggle of high-rolling new sponsors contrasted sharply with SpaceShipOne's premiere space flight on June 21, which was a relatively austere affair despite generous financing by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, who said he has spent more than $20 million on the project. That flight put Melvill -- alone with no ballast -- into suborbital space, making him the first civilian to earn astronaut's wings flying for a civilian company.
Wednesday's flight had endorsements from celebrities, praise from NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe for the Rutan team's "spirit of innovation" and a webcast that began in the chill darkness of the high desert at 6 a.m. Pacific time (9 a.m. Eastern).
By that time, thousands of people had begun to gather in roped-off areas along the tarmac to witness the flight. Food stands sold pizza and drinks, and a souvenir stall offered inflatable SpaceShipOnes for $10 and "silk blend peach piquet shirts" bearing the X Prize logo for $100.
"I think it's fabulous," said Heather Perry, 36, who owns a greeting card business in Torrance, Calif., near Los Angeles, and drove in for the launch with her husband, Heath. "I love all this stuff; I just wish I had the courage to do it. I have a fear of flying."
Melvill, 63, lifted off at 7:11 a.m. Pacific, slung below White Knight, the wispy aircraft that carried him to an altitude 50,000 feet before cutting SpaceShipOne loose. An egg-yolk morning sun bathed the airfield, quieting the wind.
Melvill had aboard several hundred pounds of ballast, mostly mementos and memorabilia, including seedlings from the desert and Terrence, a teddy bear that flew with U2 spy flight pilots.
Rutan sent along his college slide rule and the ashes of his mother, who died in 2000. Employees who worked on the project sent tools and other personal objects, in some cases signing releases promising not to sell the items.
At 8:10 a.m. White Knight released SpaceShipOne. Its rocket boosters ignited a few seconds later, fueled by a combination of nitrous oxide (dentists' laughing gas) and hydroxy-terminated polybutadiene (a clear rubber), to accelerate to a speed of Mach 3.2, or 2,400 mph.
The plane ascended like a shot, spewing a contrail in the clear, blue sky. Fifty seconds into the rocket's burn, however, it started to roll like a gigantic howitzer shell, eventually making more than 20 rotations as Melvill shut the engines down and coasted into space. "This does not appear to be a scripted maneuver," the webcast commentator announced.
But when Melvill landed at 8:34 a.m. he appeared anything but chastened. "The rocket ran like a dream," he yelled to reporters from the tarmac. "Did I plan the roll? I'd like to say I did, but I didn't. Probably I stepped on something too quickly."
Rutan, however, discounted both pilot error and wind shear, blamed for badly joggling SpaceShipOne during the June flight. Instead, he suggested that the plane had an intrinsic problem with "dihedral effect," in which air buffeting the spacecraft at an angle causes it to roll.
This occurs to some degree in all aircraft, but in SpaceShipOne it happened during every flight and "much too much," Rutan said. "We wrestle with it all the time," he added, but it does not appear to harm either the aircraft or the pilot.
"I didn't have any discomfort," said Melvill, adding that he had many hours of practice coping with the roll during flight simulations. "It was kind of cool. It was a spectacular view watching the world go around."
--------
Private Craft Rockets Past Edge of Space
September 30, 2004
New York Times
By JOHN SCHWARTZ
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/science/space/30fly.html?pagewanted=all
MOJAVE, Calif., Sept. 29 - Completing the first leg of a quest for a $10 million prize, a test pilot took a privately financed plane past the cusp of space on Wednesday morning in a flight that had equal measures of white-knuckle moments and triumph.
The rocket ship left the ground at 7:10 a.m. and reached a height unofficially reported at 337,500 feet (63.9 miles), well above its 328,000-foot goal set by the X Prize. That goal altitude, 100 kilometers above the Earth, is an arbitrary but widely accepted definition for the border of space. By 8:34, the squid-shaped craft had glided safely back to the runway.
The plane, called SpaceShipOne, was first lofted to 50,000 feet by a carrier craft called White Knight, which then released it so that it could fire its engine and reach its maximum altitude. Both craft were created by the aircraft designer Burt Rutan and financed by Paul G. Allen, the co-founder of Microsoft.
The pilot, Michael W. Melvill, had already taken SpaceShipOne to 100 kilometers in a test run on June 21. Wednesday's flight was the first of two required within two weeks to win the $10 million Ansari X Prize; the second attempt is tentatively scheduled for Monday. The competition has attracted more than two dozen teams from around the world in hopes of kicking off a private human spaceflight industry.
"The airplane flew like a dream," Mr. Melvill said upon returning to Earth. But at the top of his arc, the tiny ship unexpectedly went into dozens of rapid rolls, initially turning once every two seconds and slowing gradually as he brought it back under control with stabilizing jets. On the ground, spectators watching the craft's corkscrewing vapor trail gasped and held their breath.
Mr. Rutan's team initially called the roll a "flight-control anomaly." Mr. Melvill, 63, suggested that he might have accidentally caused the problem himself. "It's possible I stepped on a rudder when I shouldn't have - when you get older, you do things like that," he said with a smile.
Mr. Melvill joked that it was an unintentional "victory roll," and said that he had been so well conditioned to deal with such problems that he never felt that he was in danger, and did not even feel discomfort. "I thought it was kind of cool," he said.
He had a scare during his previous flight, when the plane veered some 22 miles off course. The Rutan team initially thought that might have been a steering problem, but later determined that it had more to do with Mr. Melvill's overreaction to a roll.
Mr. Rutan said that the craft's tendency to roll had been known for some time, but that it would be difficult to fix such a problem in a vehicle that had already been built. He added that the next version of the spacecraft would eliminate the flaw.
That the roll did not harm the craft and that Mr. Melvill was so readily able to bring the roll under control further proves its spaceworthiness, Mr. Rutan said. If a conventional spacecraft went into a similar roll, he said, "we would be looking for small pieces now." He said he did not know if the unanticipated roll would delay the next flight.
The contest calls for two flights within two weeks with a pilot and two passengers, or the equivalent weight. Instead of passengers, the craft carried items from employees of Mr. Rutan and Mr. Allen. The night before the flight, Mr. Rutan said, he decided to add the ashes of his mother, Irene, who died in 2000. "She flew today," he said, his voice breaking.
Despite some jibes at the NASA bureaucracy from Mr. Rutan and others over the course of the X Prize contest, the space agency's administrator, Sean O'Keefe, attended the event and spoke glowingly of the private-enterprise role in human space flight. "This is history," Mr. O'Keefe said, adding that the X Prize "is another important chapter inspired by the human desire to compete."
The era of private spaceflight may actually have begun with the announcement on Monday that Richard Branson, the founder of Virgin Airlines, would build a new space tourism company based on the technologies developed by Mr. Rutan and Mr. Allen, with flights scheduled to begin in 2007 with an initial price of about $200,000 per ticket.
In a graphic demonstration that the next phase of human spaceflight will be run from the realm of business, SpaceShipOne's stylish exterior, a swirl of windows and stars, was complemented by the logos of the corporations and organizations that sponsored the competition and the flight.
After the June flight, Mr. Melvill said that he would not fly the craft again. He agreed to the Monday flight after the intended pilot became ill. As for the next one, he said, "If no one else wants to fly it, I'd be happy to."
-------- spies
Clark denies deal on release of spies
The Australian
Martin Chulov
September 30, 2004
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,10923921%255E2703,00.html
TWO Israeli spies released from a New Zealand prison are expected back in Tel Aviv today after serving less than half of their six-month sentences for passport fraud.
The men were rushed away from Auckland's Mount Eden prison at 5am yesterday amid denials that a deal had been struck between Israel and New Zealand, countries that have had no formal contact since the jail term was handed down in June.
Before leaving, the two Israelis, Eli Cara and Uriel Kelman, paid $107,000 to the Cerebal Palsy Foundation as penance for their conviction for trying to use the identity of an Auckland-based sufferer of the disease to acquire a false passport.
Their early release had done little by last night to thaw diplomatic relations between Wellington and Jerusalem, which were frozen after the two men were convicted.
New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark has said she is convinced the two Israelis are agents of Israel's foreign spy agency, Mossad.
Israel has refused to acknowledge that either man is a secret agent. Its representatives in Australia and New Zealand were maintaining their silence last night.
As part of the diplomatic freeze, Mrs Clark cancelled a visit by Israeli President Moshe Katsav and toughened visa requirements for Israeli officials.
"At this point there have been no approaches from the Israeli Government with respect to the actions for which the two Israelis were sentenced," she said yesterday.
"The ball is in Israel's court."
Ms Clark said Israel had not made representations to secure the men's early release.
The New Zealand Department of Corrections said the pair had been released early for good behaviour.
It is understood that Kelman and Cara were booked on a Cathay Pacific flight to Hong Kong that departed around midday. They then flew on to Israel with New Zealand police escorts.
Two men accused of being part of the operation to obtain the passport, one a Sydney resident, Zev Barkan, fled New Zealand after their colleagues' arrest and have not been located since.
Mossad agents have previously been caught using Canadian passports to secure entry to Jordan.
-------- us
Top Air Force Lawyer Steps Aside
Investigators Examine Alleged Sexual Conduct With Subordinate
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A02
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60550-2004Sep29.html
The top lawyer in the Air Force has temporarily given up his job after coming under investigation for allegedly having an inappropriate sexual relationship with a female subordinate and perhaps with other women, Pentagon officials said yesterday.
Maj. Gen. Thomas J. Fiscus, the Air Force's judge advocate general, asked last week to be relieved of his duties while the investigation is pending, according to a memorandum sent Monday to all Air Force lawyers.
"I ask each of you to refrain from speculation and to caution others that rumors and conjecture needlessly damage reputations and careers," wrote Maj. Gen. Jack L. Rives, the Air Force's number-two lawyer. Rives said in the memo that he is taking over Fiscus's duties until the inspector general's investigation is completed.
Investigators are examining Fiscus's relationship with a female Air Force lawyer who joined his office earlier this year, said officials familiar with the situation. Investigators are looking especially at e-mail exchanges between the general and the woman, a Pentagon official said. But their inquiry extends beyond that relationship, another official said.
Fiscus did not return calls to his office and his home seeking comment. The female officer who is being investigated also did not return calls.
Col. Jay DeFrank, an Air Force spokesman, said, "The memo pretty much summarizes" the situation. He declined to elaborate.
The investigation of Fiscus, which was first disclosed by Air Force Times, an independent newspaper, is likely to gain unusual attention for three reasons.
In recent years, the Air Force has experienced several major incidents of sexual harassment or abuse, most notably at the Air Force Academy. Also, in 1997, it suffered through one of the highest-profile military trials in the modern era after it charged a female bomber pilot, Lt. Kelly Flinn, with adultery, insubordination and lying. One of the charges against Flinn was that she had a sexual relationship with the spouse of a subordinate. The case ended with her accepting a general discharge rather than being court-martialed.
Since then, said David Sheldon, a defense lawyer specializing in military cases, "The Air Force has taken sexual harassment and fraternization very seriously."
In a 2000 case, a military court ruled that affairs between officers can be illegal even when they are consensual. That matter involved an Air Force squadron commander who was found to have developed an improper relationship with a female intelligence officer.
Now the top lawyer in the Air Force is being investigated along the same lines.
The case is also significant because in the history of the military no judge advocate general, as the top uniformed lawyer in any service is called, has been relieved for unprofessional conduct, a Pentagon official said.
In addition, Air Force lawyers have been among the most vocal over the past two years in challenging the Bush administration's handling of detainee issues.
In December 2002, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld approved the use of harsh interrogation techniques against suspected al Qaeda and Taliban fighters held prisoner at the Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But military interrogators at Guantanamo complained to superior officers that techniques they were asked to use, such as stripping prisoners to humiliate them and using dogs to scare them, were abusive. That provoked an extended Defense Department review, during which military lawyers for each of the services forcefully expressed their concerns, officials said.
After an intense bureaucratic struggle, the lawyers, including Fiscus, persuaded Rumsfeld to rescind his approval of those interrogation procedures.
"The timing of it is certainly suspect, given [Fiscus's] office's opposing OSD [the Office of the Secretary of Defense] on detainee issues," Sheldon said.
Fiscus has been the Air Force's top uniformed lawyer since February 2002. The judge advocate general oversees 1,600 lawyers and 1,600 paralegals and other civilian employees. Fiscus graduated from the Air Force Academy in 1972 and from Ohio State University's law school in 1975. During the 1990s, he held several of the highest-profile legal jobs in the Air Force. In 1995, he was the staff judge advocate for the Air Force unit enforcing the "no-fly" zone over southern Iraq. He later served as the top lawyer for the Air Force in the Pacific and then for the Air Combat Command.
Researcher Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.
--------
Bush's Exit Letter To Guard Released
Reuters
Thursday, September 30, 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61142-2004Sep29.html
MIAMI, Sept. 29 -- President Bush, accused by Democrats of shirking his duty in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War, wrote that he had "inadequate time" to meet future reserve commitments in his November 1974 letter of resignation, which was released Wednesday.
The letter was released by the White House on the eve of the first presidential debate, in Miami on Thursday, between Bush and his Democratic challenger, John F. Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran.
In the one-page "Tender of Resignation," Bush hand-wrote the following reason for resigning: "Inadequate time to fullfill possible future commitments."
The document does not address the controversy over gaps in his service in the Air National Guard in the 1970s.
Democrats have accused Bush of using family connections to get into the Guard while many of his peers were drafted to fight in Vietnam.
The Boston Globe reported this month that he failed to join an Air Force Reserve unit when he moved to Massachusetts from Texas in mid-1973. But the White House said documents show that Bush was assigned to an Obligated Ready Reserve unit in Denver and was not required to report to duty in Massachusetts.
--------
Assembling Full War Records a Challenge
By Michael Dobbs
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60557-2004Sep29?language=printer
Although both President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry have repeatedly said they have made public their complete military service records, neither presidential candidate has yet permitted independent access to original files held in a high-security vault.
The lack of outside verification of the military personnel records of the candidates has made it more difficult for journalists and historians to evaluate their Vietnam War-era service, which has been the subject of lively election-year debate. In Bush's case, Texas Air National Guard officials have also delayed or prevented public access to 30-year-old unit records that could shed light on whether he received favorable treatment from the Guard because of his father's political connections, as his Democratic opponents have alleged.
More than seven months after the White House announced that Bush's records had been "fully released," files continue to trickle out almost weekly from the Pentagon and elsewhere. Some of the newly released records contradict earlier claims by the Bush camp, such as his assertion in a 1999 campaign autobiography that he gave up flying "because the F-102 jet I had trained in was being replaced by a different fighter."
In the past few weeks, both candidates have been forced to deal with questions about what they were doing in the Vietnam War even as they honed their debating points about Iraq and the war on terrorism.
Assembling a full Vietnam War-era record for the two men is complicated by the fact that the files are scattered around more than a dozen repositories. In addition to master personnel files on each candidate, which are at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, researchers have been looking for the records of the units in which they served. Typically, unclassified unit records are available to the public under much less restrictive conditions than individual files.
Both Bush and Kerry have made public hundreds of documents about their military service and posted them on the Internet. At the same time, they have retained control over their personnel records, making it impossible for outsiders to tell whether anything is being held back.
Chad Clanton, a Kerry campaign spokesman, replied to a request for independent verification of Kerry's master personnel file by saying it was unnecessary "since we've already placed John Kerry's entire military file on our Web site." White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said yesterday that the White House was "working with the Defense Department to accommodate [The Washington Post's] request to independently verify the completeness of the president's personnel records."
An analysis of records released by the White House and the Kerry campaign shows internal discrepancies that raise doubts about whether the full files have been released. Bush aides have made public two versions of the president's master personnel file, one in 2000 and one this February. Each version contains at least half a dozen pages missing from the other, suggesting that neither is complete.
In Kerry's case, it is difficult to tell which documents on his Web site come from his master personnel file. At least one document first posted on the Web site in August -- a recommendation for a Bronze Star -- appears to have come from his personnel file, contradicting earlier assertions by his campaign that everything in the file had already been made public.
Although the St. Louis repository is under the control of the National Archives, officials at the Archives say that the records belong to the military unit that generated them. In practice, they can be released to outsiders only with the permission of the veteran concerned. Such access is usually granted through the signing of a release known as Standard Form 180, a step that neither candidate has so far taken.
Scott Levins, assistant director for military records at the St. Louis repository, said the National Archives made copies of the candidates' master personnel files before temporarily releasing the originals to other government agencies for inspection and copying. He said these authenticated copies are now locked in a vault and can be inspected only with the permission of the originating agency.
Questions about Bush's military records have centered on how he gained a coveted pilot's slot in the Texas Air National Guard in 1968 and why he gave up flying in 1972, more than two years before his six-year term ended. Kerry critics, meanwhile, have focused on how he won the three Purple Hearts that permitted him to return home early from Vietnam.
In part because Kerry served with the Navy rather than the National Guard, his unit records are much more accessible than those of Bush. The Navy maintains a historical center at the Washington Navy Yard where researchers can freely inspect the records of Kerry's Swift boat outfit, Coastal Division 11. The records include after-action reports and unit histories, which have made possible a detailed reconstruction of Kerry's day-to-day activities.
By contrast, National Guard officials say their Vietnam War-era records are sparse and poorly maintained. Because Bush's unit, the 147th Fighter Interceptor Group, was not an active-duty unit, record-keeping was even more informal than in Guard units that served in Vietnam. Until recently, "nobody was interested" in its history, said Travis Evans, a Texas National Guard freedom-of-information officer who has been deluged by requests to access Bush records.
Even so, the Bush administration has made it difficult for researchers to gain access to unclassified Guard files. For months, all requests relating to Bush's military service were referred to one public affairs officer at the Pentagon, Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke. The Freedom of Information Act officer assigned to the Bush records case, James Hogan, declines to talk directly to reporters.
This week, in response to complaints about lack of access, the Pentagon permitted a Post reporter to inspect records held by the Air National Guard history office in Crystal City. The Post has so far been unable to gain access to more detailed records preserved by the 147th in Houston or the Texas adjutant general's office, including a collection of "special orders" that could shed light on Bush's Guard service.
Most records at the Air National Guard history office are unclassified unit histories releasable to the public. But the Pentagon failed to release the 147th unit history until Sept. 17, more than six months after the Associated Press filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits for them and five years after reporters first began requesting them.
A Nov. 28, 1999, letter to the National Guard history office from a Texas National Guard historian, Tom Hail, noted that the 147th unit's histories were generating great interest "by the press scouring for dirt on Governor G.W. Bush." He said requests for copies of the documents were being handled through the Freedom of Information Act process. A Guard public relations officer, Col. Tom Schultz, said more research was required to establish what happened to the 1999 requests.
The unit histories undermine the initial contention of the Bush camp that he gave up flying because his services as an F-102 pilot were no longer needed. They show that the F-102 remained the workhorse of the 147th through mid-1972, when Bush moved from Texas to Alabama to take part in a political campaign, even as pilots were being trained on the more sophisticated F-101. Fifteen F-102 planes were in service in the 147th that year, compared with 18 planes in 1968, the year Bush joined the Guard.
The use of F-102s expanded in October 1972, when the group assumed a new "24-hour active alert mission" to safeguard the southern boundary of the United States against "surprise attack," according to the unit history. The new mission required that two F-102 fighter-interceptors be on five-minute alert at all times. The plane was not phased out until September 1974, 2 1/2 years after Bush stopped flying.
The unit histories also cast doubt on a 1999 statement by Bush that there were "five or six flying slots available" in the 147th when he first expressed an interest in applying, in January 1968. At that time, the unit was two pilots short of its assigned strength of 29 pilots. Two pilots were undergoing training to take over the positions, and one pilot was on the transfer list.
Researcher Alice Crites contributed to this report.
-------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
-------- courts / tribunals
Ashcroft 'to defend' Patriot Act
bbc
30 September, 2004
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3703676.stm
US Attorney General John Ashcroft says the Justice Department is likely to appeal against a court ruling attacking the Patriot Act as unconstitutional.
A US district court ruled on Wednesday that surveillance provisions in the act violated individual rights.
Mr Ashcroft said he did not know the specifics of the ruling but was "almost" certain it would be appealed.
The ruling is the second attack by a US court on the Patriot Act, seen as a cornerstone in the "war on terror".
In January, a US federal judge ruled that a section of the Patriot Act that criminalised those who gave "expert advice or assistance" to terrorist groups was too vaguely phrased and violated liberties enshrined in the US constitution.
Personal security
Responding to the latest court ruling against the act, Mr Ashcroft said, "We believe the act to be completely consistent with the US constitution."
New York District Judge Victor Marrero said on Wednesday that the act violated the constitution by allowing federal investigators to gather telephone and internet records from private companies and then prevent those companies from revealing that they disclosed this information about their customers.
He said the act also violates the constitution's Fourth Amendment by preventing any legal challenge to such surveillance.
Judge Marrero acknowledged the government must be empowered to defend national security, but warned that this must not be at the cost of personal security, which is "especially prized in our system of justice".
'Landmark victory'
A footnote to the ruling said courts must apply "particular vigilance to safeguard against excesses committed in the name of expediency".
The American Civil Liberties Union praised the ruling, citing it as a "landmark victory" against "excessive government secrecy and unchecked executive power".
US President George W Bush has argued the case for Congress to renew the Patriot Act before it expires next year.
Introduced in the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, the act grants government agencies extraordinary powers to spy on and prosecute those suspected of terrorism.
----
Key Part of Patriot Act Ruled Unconstitutional
Internet Providers' Data at Issue
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A16
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59626-2004Sep29.html
A federal judge in New York ruled yesterday that a key component of the USA Patriot Act is unconstitutional because it allows the FBI to demand information from Internet service providers without judicial oversight or public review.
The ruling is one of several judicial blows to the Bush administration's anti-terrorism policies in recent months.
In a sharply worded 120-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero found in favor of the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a lawsuit on behalf of an unidentified Internet service provider challenging the FBI's use of a type of administrative subpoena known as a national security letter. Such letters do not require court approval and prohibit targeted companies from revealing that the demands were ever made.
Marrero, whose court is in the Southern District of New York, ruled that the provision in the Patriot Act allowing such letters "effectively bars or substantially deters any judicial challenge" and violates free-speech rights by imposing permanent silence on targeted companies. Writing that "democracy abhors undue secrecy," Marrero ruled that "an unlimited government warrant to conceal . . . has no place in our open society."
"Under the mantle of secrecy, the self-preservation that ordinarily impels our government to censorship and secrecy may potentially be turned on ourselves as a weapon of self-destruction," Marrero wrote. ". . . At that point, secrecy's protective shield may serve not as much to secure a safe country as simply to save face."
The judge ordered the Justice Department to halt the use of the letters but delayed the injunction by 90 days to allow for an appeal. The government is reviewing its options, Justice Department spokesman John Nowacki said.
Marrero's ruling is the latest setback in the courts for the Bush administration's terrorism policies, which civil libertarians and some lawmakers consider overly broad. The Supreme Court ruled in June that detainees held as "enemy combatants" may challenge their confinement through the U.S. courts. Two rulings by federal courts in California have also struck down portions of statutes making it a crime to provide "material support" to terrorists.
The ultimate impact of Marrero's order is unclear. In addition to having time to pursue an appeal, the government will view the ruling as applying only to New York's Southern District in Manhattan, legal experts said. I. Michael Greenberger, a Clinton administration Justice Department official who teaches law at the University of Maryland, said Marrero's order is unlikely to have any effect until an appellate court rules.
But the ACLU argues that Marrero's ruling is a warning to the government about some of its tactics in the war on terrorism.
"This is a wholesale refutation of the administration's use of excessive secrecy and unbridled power under the Patriot Act," said Ann Beeson, an ACLU lawyer. "It's a very major ruling, in our opinion."
The secrecy surrounding the use of national security letters has had an unusual impact on the ACLU's lawsuit, which itself was initially filed in secret to comply with the Patriot Act, the controversial package of anti-terrorism measures approved by Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Documents in the case also revealed that the government had censored more than a dozen seemingly innocuous passages from court filings, including a direct quote from a 1972 Supreme Court ruling warning that government has a tendency to abuse its powers in the name of "domestic security."
Even now, the plaintiffs are barred from revealing which company filed the lawsuit. Marrero disclosed in his ruling that the FBI has issued hundreds of national security letters before and since the lawsuit was filed in April, but no precise figures have been released.
Beeson said Marrero's ruling applies only to national security letters related to Internet and e-mail service providers. Separate provisions of the Patriot Act also enhanced the government's ability to use such letters against financial and credit institutions.
--------
Judge Strikes Down Section of Patriot Act
September 30, 2004
By JULIA PRESTON
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/national/30patriot.html?oref=login
A federal judge struck down an important surveillance provision of the antiterrorism legislation known as the USA Patriot Act yesterday, ruling that it broadly violated the Constitution by giving the federal authorities unchecked powers to obtain private information.
The ruling, by Judge Victor Marrero of Federal District Court in Manhattan, was the first to uphold a challenge to the surveillance sections of the act, which was adopted in October 2001 to expand the powers of the federal government in national security investigations.
The ruling invalidated one piece of the law, finding that it violated both free speech guarantees and protection against unreasonable searches. It is thought likely to provide fuel for other court challenges.
The ruling came in a case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union against a kind of subpoena created under the act, known as a national security letter. Such letters could be used in terrorism investigations to require Internet service companies to provide personal information about subscribers and would bar them from disclosing to anyone that they had received a subpoena.
Such a subpoena could be issued without court review, under provisions that seemed to bar the recipient from discussing it with a lawyer.
Judge Marrero vehemently rejected that provision, saying that it was unique in American law in its "all-inclusive sweep" and had "no place in our open society."
He ordered that his ruling would not take effect for 90 days, to give the Bush administration time to appeal.
Anthony Romero, executive director of the A.C.L.U., called the ruling a "stunning victory against John Ashcroft's Justice Department." He said it would reinforce arguments the group had made in a separate challenge in Michigan to another surveillance section of the act.
The ruling does not affect many sections of the act, which is more than 350 pages long, that give the government enhanced powers to control immigration, conduct searches and investigate financial support for terrorism. It comes as Congress is debating additions to the Patriot Act.
Bush administration officials have said the Patriot Act is a foundation of their efforts to prevent terrorist attacks against Americans.
The civil liberties group's suit was brought on behalf of John Doe, an Internet provider company that received a national security letter from the F.B.I., but was barred under its terms from revealing its name. Until the judge revealed the facts of the case in his ruling, the civil liberties group had been reluctant to state publicly that it was representing a company that had received a national security letter.
Such subpoenas would prevent Internet companies from telling customers that the F.B.I. had collected their information.
The companies were required to provide customers' names, addresses, credit card data and details of their Internet use. It is not clear how many of the subpoenas have been issued in the last three years. But a list obtained by the A.C.L.U. covering the 14 months after the act was passed was six pages long, although the companies' names were blacked out.
Judge Marrero said he hoped to strike "the most sensitive judicial balance" between national security and basic freedoms. He was aware, he wrote, that the Sept. 11 attacks had created "an atmospheric pressure, a heavy weight that, foglike, has loomed densely" over the case.
He said the subpoena violated the Fourth Amendment because it did not allow for review by a court. He called it "an ominous writ" that the F.B.I. issued "in tones sounding virtually as a biblical commandment." He said he worried that anyone who received a national security letter, except "the most mettlesome and undaunted" targets, would feel barred from consulting a lawyer.
In January, Judge Audrey B. Collins of Federal District Court in Los Angeles struck down a clause of the act that barred providing material support for terrorist groups, saying it was too vague and broad.
In its case in Michigan, the A.C.L.U. is challenging a section of the act that allows the F.B.I. to obtain a court order to force any organization to turn over tangible evidence. Before the act, investigators seeking to obtain concrete evidence had to convince the court that the organizations or people were spies or terrorists for a foreign government.
--------
Judge strikes down part of Patriot Act
September 30, 2004
By Guy Taylor
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040929-111541-6912r.htm
A federal judge yesterday declared unconstitutional a portion of the USA Patriot Act that allows the FBI to demand a company's confidential records without court approval.
U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero sided with an American Civil Liberties Union challenge by ruling Section 505 of the Patriot Act a violation of free-speech rights and unreasonable search-and-seizure protections.
The section made it legal for the FBI to obtain customer records from communication firms, specifically Internet service providers or telephone companies, by issuing a National Security Letter (NSL) to a given firm. That firm was then barred from ever disclosing it had received such a letter.
In a 122-page ruling, Judge Marrero, of the Southern District of New York, said the FBI's use of NSLs without judicial review "violates the Fourth Amendment," and that the "nondisclosure provision" of the law "violates the First Amendment."
The judge ordered the government to stop issuing NSLs or applying the nondisclosure provision, but delayed enforcing the order pending appeal by the government in the next 90 days.
It was not clear yesterday the extent to which federal law enforcement authorities had been using NSLs in the war on terror. The ACLU, meanwhile, said it expects to win should the government appeal.
The Justice Department did not immediately comment on the ruling by Judge Marrero, an appointee of President Clinton. "We are reviewing the decision," said spokesman Mark Corallo.
The FBI had power to issue NSLs prior to the Patriot Act's passage in the wake of September 11. But they were limited to investigations of suspected terrorists or foreign spies, according to the ACLU, which argued the investigations had been expanded beyond the limits of constitutionality.
The ACLU and the New York Civil Liberties Union yesterday hailed the decision as a blow to Bush administration attempts to grow government surveillance powers in violation of the Constitution. "Today's ruling is a wholesale refutation of excessive government secrecy and unchecked executive power," said ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer.
ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero said the ruling was "especially important" in light of efforts in Congress to further increase law enforcement powers by passing Patriot Act II.
"This decision should put a halt to those efforts," he said.
In a statement, the ACLU also charged that House Republican leaders have included "several Patriot Act-like powers" in the intelligence-reform bill introduced last week, and that "in the Senate, many expect law enforcement amendments to be offered to its pending bipartisan intelligence bill."
Yesterday's ruling was the latest in a string of civil liberties victories over the administration's tactics for fighting the war on terror. A Supreme Court ruling in June broadened legal rights of terror suspects held at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The high court also granted access to U.S. courts to Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen captured in Afghanistan. Mr. Hamdi was ordered last week to be released, after being detained nearly three years without charges.
On Monday, a Boston federal judge ordered the Justice Department to release a secret document it used to develop a new policy giving local police authority to check the immigration status of anyone suspected of lacking documents.
-------- drug war
Thai PM launches war on drugs
Monday 04 October 2004,
Agencies
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9B52DD38-1C1C-4B2A-B315-77148090DA14.htm
Thailand's Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has launched his country's latest war on drugs.
Undaunted by criticism after more than 2500 people were killed in his last attempt, the PM vowed to plow on in his efforts to destroy drug bosses.
"We have to take serious actions against them because these wicked diseases never die," Thaksin said on Monday.
"We will continue our drastic actions against those I see as destroyers of everything from the future of our nation, our economy and our society. Many families have fallen apart because of them," he told hundreds of law enforcers and volunteers.
Thaksin ordered school principals to keep a close eye on their students, and village chiefs to monitor unemployed or uneducated youths, the main targets of drug dealers.
"When we've found out these people have become drug addicts, they need to be treated right away otherwise they would become peddlers, using the money they make to fund their drugs," he said.
Killings
Thai and foreign rights groups accuse Thai police of killing drug suspects during a 10-month war on drugs last year. The government says most of those killed were victims of warfare between drug gangs or killed in self-defence.
The government's own Human Rights Commission said in its annual report in August the anti-drugs war had "destroyed the rights to live of more than 2500 people without fair trials under the principles of democracy and rule of law".
Krisana Polanan, head of the Narcotics Control Board, implied on Monday that some of that was true.
He was asked by journalists if there would be extra-judicial killings this time.
"It depends on the circumstances," he replied. "There won't be many this time because we have done that in the first war and we don't think there will be many left."
The main "weapons" in the current drive would be to employ legal processes, including anti-money laundering and tax evasion laws, Krisana said.
The targets were to destroy the networks and seize the assets of 1100 large drug dealers and 28,000 peddlers.
He said the war on drugs was the most popular of his campaigns because people feared drug abuse could hit their families at any time.
-------- prisons / prisoners
Captive Briton in Iraq Implores Blair to Do More to Free Him
September 30, 2004
By DEXTER FILKINS
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/international/middleeast/30iraq.html?pagewanted=all
BAGHDAD, Iraq, Sept. 29 - Caged and shackled, a British engineer kidnapped here two weeks ago appeared Wednesday in a video and beseeched his government to work harder for his release.
The video, shown Wednesday evening on Al Jazeera, the Arab television news channel, showed Kenneth Bigley seated in a tiny cage, peering out through chicken wire. He wore an orange jumpsuit, and his hands were cuffed and bound to his feet. An empty water bottle sat on the floor next to him.
Mr. Bigley, who was kidnapped with two Americans on Sept. 16, accused Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain of lying about the ordeal and putting his life at risk. He begged Mr. Blair to release the Iraqi women held in American prisons here, the condition his captors had set for his freedom. "Tony Blair is lying,'' Mr. Bigley said, under evident duress. "He is lying when he says he's negotiated. He has not negotiated. My life is cheap. He doesn't care about me."
"Tony Blair, I am begging you for my life,'' he continued, his voice cracking. "I am begging you for my life. Have some compassion, please."
As Mr. Bigley, 62, completed his plea, the camera angle widened to reveal the black and gold flag of the militant group One God and Jihad hanging above his cage. The group is led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian believed responsible for a number of deadly suicide bombings, and the kidnappings and beheadings of at least three Americans.
[United States forces on Thursday attacked a house in Falluja that was suspected of being used by followers of Mr. Zarqawi, The Associated Press reported. Hospital officials said at least four Iraqis were killed in the attack. Intelligence reports indicated that the house was being used to plan attacks against American-led forces and Iraqi citizens, the military said in a statement.]
The group has demanded the release of all Iraqi women held in American military prisons here. The Americans and Iraqi officials say only two women are in custody, both of them officials of Saddam Hussein's government. The Americans have ruled out releasing them soon.
The two Americans kidnapped with Mr. Bigley, Eugene Armstrong and Jack Hensley, were beheaded. At least one other American, Nicholas Berg, was also kidnapped and beheaded by men acting under the name of One God and Jihad.
In an interview on Wednesday, Mr. Blair said that his government was trying to contact the kidnappers. "The difficulty is that we are trying to make contact with this particular group, because these are outside people, they are not Iraqis,'' Mr. Blair told Britain's ITV Network. The announcer on Al Jazeera gave no details on how the video had been obtained.
The latest video showing Mr. Bigley was broadcast a day after the release of two Italian aid workers, Simona Pari and Simona Torretta, who were kidnapped at gunpoint from their office in Baghdad on Sept. 7. The two Italians, like Mr. Bigley and the Americans, are among the dozens of people kidnapped by criminals and militants here in recent weeks.
Accounts conflicted Wednesday of whether the Italian government had paid ransom to secure the release of Ms. Pari and Ms. Torretta, both 29. Speaking on Italian state radio, Italy's foreign minister, Franco Frattini, said that their release had been secured by diplomacy, not by money.
But a prominent member of a government party, Gustavo Selva, told Italian radio that he believed that a ransom of about $1 million had been paid. Asked about the government's denials, Mr. Selva said, "The government has denied it, but that's an official denial that comes in the context of the obligations of a government in order not to give the impression that it gave in to the ransom."
Freed Egyptians Return Home
CAIRO, Sept. 29 (Agence France-Presse) - At Cairo's airport, four Egyptians freed by their Iraqi captors were cheered Wednesday evening as they left the terminal after arriving from Iraq. The cellphone company that employs them, Orascom Telecom, said four out of the six Egyptian technicians abducted in Iraq had been released Monday and Tuesday. It identified them as Tareq Abdul Latif, Medhat Rizq, Amir Dawd Issa and Alaa Maqqar.
-------- terrorism
Death Sentences in Attack on Cole
September 30, 2004
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR and DAVID JOHNSTON
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/international/middleeast/30cole.html?pagewanted=all
CAIRO, Sept. 29 - A judge in Yemen sentenced two men to death and four others to prison terms of up to 10 years on Wednesday for the deadly attack in 2000 against the American destroyer Cole. The convictions were the first ones stemming from the maritime suicide bombing, which provided an early glimpse of the brazen nature of Osama bin Laden's global terror network.
Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Saudi-born bin Laden associate, and Jamal al-Badawi, a 35-year-old Yemeni, were sentenced to death for their roles in the deaths of 17 United States sailors on board the destroyer, for planning the attack and for organizing an armed gang to carry it out.
Mr. Nashiri, in custody at an undisclosed location outside the United States, was tried in absentia.
Law enforcement officials have suggested that Mr. Nashiri, who was arrested in the United Arab Emirates and transferred into American hands in 2002, was the mastermind behind the Cole bombing on Oct. 12, 2000, and also played a key role in the United States Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.
In the Cole attack, two men in a small dinghy laden with explosives bashed into the side of the destroyer as it was refueling in the southern Yemeni port of Aden, killing the sailors and opening a gaping tear in its hull.
Cries of "God is Great!'' erupted from the defendants when Judge Najib al-Qaderi read out the sentences, and relatives in the packed courtroom shouted that the sentences were unjust.
"These are American sentences!'' yelled Mr. Badawi, bearded and wearing a long white robe, after he heard his death sentence. "The judge and the entire Yemeni government are tools in the hands of the Americans!''
In the United States, government officials expressed satisfaction with the outcome of a case in which investigators from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service worked closely for nearly four years with the Yemeni authorities.
The verdicts represented a milestone for overseas investigative efforts and appeared to signal that Yemen had adopted a tougher stance toward terrorism, American counterterrorism officials said. But the verdicts came after a sometimes strained investigative effort.
Senior American officials - like the F.B.I. director, Robert S. Mueller III, and his predecessor, Louis J. Freeh - traveled to Yemen several times to urge greater cooperation when the Yemeni authorities balked at providing investigators with access to witnesses and evidence. Several times, American investigators were ordered out of Yemen by their agencies because of security risks.
The issuance of two death sentences did not appear to stir concern among American officials. But the sentencing of Mr. Nashiri raised a potential issue for the United States. He is the one of the six defendants being held outside Yemen and is one of about a dozen high-value Qaeda suspects being held by the Central Intelligence Agency at undisclosed locations outside the United States.
He has been regarded as a senior Qaeda operative in the Persian Gulf region whose capture in November 2002 was hailed by the American authorities as a potential intelligence coup because of his wide ranging knowledge of Al Qaeda's operations and plans. It is unclear how much information he has provided since his apprehension.
Unlike lower-level Qaeda detainees held in places like Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, prisoners like Mr. Nashiri have not been granted access to lawyers or visits by human rights groups. It remains unclear whether the government is willing to transfer Mr. Nashiri to Yemen to face the death sentence or whether the American authorities would resist such a move on legal grounds or because of his intelligence value.
Two of the men sentenced Wednesday, Mr. Badawi and Fahd al-Qusaa, were charged in May 2003 in a 50-count indictment returned in New York for their role in the Cole attack. The indictment was brought after both escaped from a Yemeni jail and was intended in part to allow Interpol to issue a "red notice'' authorizing their detention. Both men were recaptured, and it is unclear whether federal prosecutors will now seek to try either of them in the United States on the indictment's charges.
That indictment said Mr. Badawi had procured safe houses for the attackers, obtained the boat used in the attack along with the truck and trailer used to tow the craft to the harbor in Aden. It said Mr. Qusaa had prepared to film the attack from an apartment overlooking the harbor. Mr. Qusaa, who received a 10-year sentence, was supposed to film the bombing but overslept and missed the attack, the judge said. He underwent training in Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, and a video camera was discovered in the apartment he fled after the bombing.
Lawyers who helped defend the men in Yemen objected to the entire proceedings, noting that the suspects were judged by an exceptional court set up for the very purpose of trying terror suspects and therefore outside the country's Constitution.
"The procedures that took place completely breached the right to a fair defense,'' said Mohammed Naji Allaw, a defense lawyer who had previously withdrawn from the case to protest the proceedings. In a telephone interview, he also said that the men had been tortured to extract confessions during their four years of imprisonment.
All six defendants were found guilty of belonging to Al Qaeda. Maamoun Msouh was sentenced to eight years for helping Mr. Badawi by handling funds and forging identity papers, the latter crime also garnering five-year sentences for two former Interior Ministry employees, Ali Muhammad Saleh and Murad al-Sirouri.
Mr. Badawi said he would appeal his death sentence, and the five other defendants are also likely to seek to have the sentences overturned. They can take their cases to the Court of Appeals and eventually the Supreme Court. In addition, all death sentences, which are carried out by firing squad, need confirmation by President Ali Abdullah Saleh.
In previous political cases, the president has either annulled or reduced sentences and even pardoned some individuals, Mr. Allaw said, but he added that the president's ability to dismiss judges prevented them from making independent decisions.
The death sentences on Wednesday, although among the first for violence linked to Al Qaeda, are not rare in Yemen. Last month, the same special court gave 15 defendants sentences ranging from three years to death for various terror plots and attacks. Those imprisoned for 10 years included five Qaeda supporters for the 2002 bombing of the French supertanker Limburg in an attack similar to that on the Cole. The militant sentenced to death was convicted of shooting dead a police officer at a checkpoint.
Yemen is Mr. bin Laden's ancestral homeland and was considered a safe haven by members of Al Qaeda fleeing American-led forces in Afghanistan after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
But Yemen has been trying to distance itself from a reputation for harboring terrorists. It has arrested hundreds of suspects and taken steps like allowing the United States to use a missile to assassinate an important Qaeda operative in 2002.
Neil MacFarquhar reported from Cairo for this article, and David Johnston from Washington.
-------- torture
Plan Would Let U.S. Deport Suspects to Nations That Might Torture Them
By Dana Priest and Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60779-2004Sep29?language=printer
The Bush administration is supporting a provision in the House leadership's intelligence reform bill that would allow U.S. authorities to deport certain foreigners to countries where they are likely to be tortured or abused, an action prohibited by the international laws against torture the United States signed 20 years ago.
The provision, part of the massive bill introduced Friday by House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), would apply to non-U.S. citizens who are suspected of having links to terrorist organizations but have not been tried on or convicted of any charges. Democrats tried to strike the provision in a daylong House Judiciary Committee meeting, but it survived on a party-line vote.
The provision, human rights advocates said, contradicts pledges President Bush made after the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal erupted this spring that the United States would stand behind the U.N. Convention Against Torture. Hastert spokesman John Feehery said the Justice Department "really wants and supports" the provision.
Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo said, "We can't comment on any specific provision, but we support those provisions that will better secure our borders and protect the American people from terrorists."
The provision is one of several items in the bill that Democrats say are unrelated to intelligence reform but Republicans say are important tools for fighting terrorists. The Senate is debating its own intelligence reform bill that does not include the provision, and the House bill is being marked up in several committees.
Human rights groups and members of Congress opposed to the provision say it could result in the torture of hundreds of people now held in the United States who could be sent to such countries as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan and Pakistan, all of which have dubious human rights records.
Supporters say the measure would provide a much-needed change to U.S. laws.
"Our laws are not up to date with the war we're fighting," Feehery said. In many cases, he said, the Justice Department "can't keep [terror suspects] in detention, they can't convict them, they don't want to try them. . . . If you can't detain them indefinitely, you sure don't want them in America."
The international anti-torture law prohibited the deportation of individuals to countries where there is a reasonable expectation that they will be tortured, abused or persecuted. U.S. immigration law permits non-U.S. citizens to seek political asylum to avoid such persecution and prohibits deportation or removal to countries likely to commit torture or abuse unless the government seeks assurance the country will not do so.
In 2002, the Justice Department, in a case that has earned international condemnation, approved the expedited removal of a Syrian-born Canadian citizen, Maher Arar, to Syria, a country whose long record of torture has been criticized publicly by Bush.
Arar, who U.S. authorities have said they suspect of links to a terrorist group, alleges that his Syrian captors tortured him during his 375 days in prison. He disputes U.S. claims. Freed last year by Syria, he lives in Canada with his family and has never been arrested or charged with a crime by Canada or the United States.
"Is it an inconvenience if we can't send people back to torturers? Sure," said Tom Malinowski of Human Rights Watch. "But since Abu Ghraib, everyone from the president to the Defense Department to Congress has said the United States does not have a policy of torture. If this passes, we will have a policy of tolerating torture."
Under the Hastert bill, U.S. authorities could send an immigrant to any country, regardless of the likelihood of torture or abuse. The measure would shift to the deportee the burden of proving "by clear and convincing evidence that he or she would be tortured" -- a burden that human rights activists say is impossible to satisfy. It would bar a U.S. court from reviewing the regulations, which would fall under the secretary of homeland security.
The provision would apply retroactively, to people now in detention and those who may have already been secretly deported under classified procedures to countries with well-documented histories of torture and human rights violations.
It also would allow U.S. authorities to deport foreigners convicted of any felony or suspected of having links to terrorist groups to any country -- even somewhere that is not a person's home country or place of birth, contrary to current practice. The CIA already has such authority, under a secret presidential finding first signed by President Bill Clinton and expanded by Bush after Sept. 11, 2001. The CIA has taken an unknown number of suspected terrorists apprehended abroad to third countries for interrogation.
Also in the Judiciary Committee meeting, GOP members defeated other Democratic-sponsored attempts to strike provisions that would make it easier to deport or track terrorist suspects.
GOP leaders scrambled to appease disgruntled Republicans who said the chamber was moving too quickly -- and ignoring rank-and-file members -- in pushing the 335-page bill.
As several House committees addressed various portions of the bill, Republicans generally defeated Democratic efforts to sidetrack it. But in some cases, GOP members were the sharpest critics.
In the intelligence committee, three senior Republicans opened a daylong markup by attacking the bill. "It is a cobbled-together bill," said Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.). "It is a rush to judgment."
Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.) said, "We're fools to rush forward and pass something that has been worked on for only so short a time." Rep. Jim Gibbons (R-Nev.) said, "This Congress appears to be rushing to implement reform on an election-year timetable."
With House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) taking the unusual step of temporarily filling a committee vacancy for the day, members soothed tempers, in part by accepting a handful of amendments. One, offered by Gibbons and backed by the panel's Democrats, would authorize a newly appointed national intelligence director to shift unlimited amounts of money from one purpose to another within agencies under the director's purview. Hours later, Gibbons voted to send the amended bill to the House floor. Cunningham did, too, saying he had learned that the House Appropriations Committee was content with the bill's spending provisions. Most Democrats also endorsed the bill. Only two members of the intelligence committee -- LaHood and Rep. Rush D. Holt (D-N.J.) -- voted against the measure.
-------- POLITICS
Lawmaker expresses "dismay" that White House allegedly wrote Allawi speech
AFP
Sep 30, 2004
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040930/pl_afp/us_iraq_allawi_letter&cid=1521&ncid=1480
WASHINGTON (AFP) - In a letter to the White House, a leading US Senate Democrat expressed "profound dismay" that the White House allegedly wrote a large portion of Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's speech to Congress last week.
"I want to express my profound dismay about reports that officials from your administration and your reelection campaign were 'heavily involved' in writing parts of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's speech," California Senator Dianne Feinstein wrote in a letter to President George W. Bush (news - web sites).
"You may be surprised by this, Mr. President, but I viewed Prime Minister Allawis speech as an independent view on conditions in Iraq (news - web sites)," she wrote.
"His speech gave me hope that reconstruction efforts were proceeding in most of the country and that elections could be held on schedule."
"To learn that this was not an independent view, but one that was massaged by your campaign operatives, jaundices the speech and reduces the credibility of his remarks," Feinstein wrote.
Her letter was a response to an article appearing in Thursday's Washington Post, which also alleged that Allawi was coached by US officials -- including Dan Senor, former spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq-- in perfecting his delivery of the speech delivered before a joint session of Congress one week ago.
-------- budget
Resolution to Fund Government Until Nov. 20 Passes
By Dan Morgan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A04
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60552-2004Sep29.html
Congress, officially acknowledging that it will have to return to Washington for a post-election session, yesterday approved legislation enabling federal departments and agencies to keep functioning through Nov. 20 while Congress keeps working on a series of bills to fund the government in fiscal 2005.
With spending authority for all departments other than the Pentagon expiring at midnight tonight, Republican leaders officially recognized what has long been apparent: Procedural problems and policy deadlocks will make it impossible for Congress to finish most spending bills before its planned Oct. 8 adjournment. GOP leaders said they tentatively plan to bring Congress back on Nov. 15.
"We will be back Nov. 15, and we will hopefully complete the balance of the appropriations bills," said Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. But Democrats charged that the delay signifies GOP mismanagement. "It was a confession of failure," Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said.
Of the 13 annual spending bills, only the one funding the Defense Department has been signed into law. GOP leaders still hope to finish five more bills -- those budgeting money for Congress, foreign aid, military construction, and the departments of Interior and Homeland Security -- by the end of next week.
But that still leaves numerous departments and agencies -- including NASA, the State Department, the FBI and the Department of Veterans Affairs -- without a final budget for 2005. The temporary measure passed yesterday allows more than $2 billion once earmarked for Iraq reconstruction to be reallocated to security, law enforcement and public safety in that country, as requested by the administration. It also approves the use of $360 million from the reconstruction fund for restructuring Iraq's debt.
House and Senate Republican leaders have been unable to reach agreement on a new six-year measure authorizing nearly $300 billion worth of highway and transit programs. The current authorizing legislation will expire tonight. GOP officials tried yesterday to work out a deal to extend the authority temporarily. But with differences remaining between the two chambers, Republican leaders appeared to have all but abandoned hopes of completing the six-year bill this year.
Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), who chairs the transportation panel of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, supports a six-month extension. Yesterday, Rep. James L. Oberstar (Minn.), the ranking Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said he, too, favors extending the program until around Memorial Day. "Let's come back next year and do good policy," he said.
--------
Stop-Gap Bill on Spending Is Approved
September 30, 2004
By CARL HULSE
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/politics/30cong.html
WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 - Acknowledging that Congress will not finish almost all of its required spending bills on time, the House and Senate adopted a stopgap measure on Wednesday to keep federal agencies running through Nov. 20.
The legislation, known as a continuing resolution, would maintain current spending levels for all agencies except the Department of Defense and sets the stage for a post-election lame-duck session of Congress to complete the appropriations measures and other unfinished bills.
The Pentagon appropriations bill is the only one of the 13 annual spending measures to have been enacted into law before the start of the new fiscal year, which is Friday. The interim spending measure was adopted on a 389-to-32 vote in the House and on a voice vote in the Senate.
With the Republican leadership trying to break by Oct. 8, lawmakers also began to prepare for the likelihood that other significant legislation was not going to clear the House and Senate before then, including a popular measure that would provide billions of dollars for highway and mass transit projects.
The problems for the spending bills began earlier this year when Congress failed to pass a budget because of infighting over whether to offset the cost of extending some tax cuts by reducing spending. Then, the bills ran into other snags, as well as a focus on intelligence legislation and a six-week summer recess for the national political conventions.
The spending measures are filled with politically sensitive issues and provisions that have attracted threats of a presidential veto. Among the thorny topics that may be sidestepped until after Election Day are new rules on overtime pay, travel to Cuba, importation of cheaper prescription drugs and an increase in the debt limit to allow for more government borrowing.
Republican aides said that the goal would be to have staff members assemble a measure merging most of the spending bills for lawmakers to approve in mid-November. In addition, they said, the House and Senate will continue to work on a handful of spending bills for the Department of Homeland Security, the District of Columbia and foreign aid, as well as others, in hopes of passing those proposals before the end of next week.
Democrats said the inability of the Republican-led Congress to enact the appropriations bills meant that billions of dollars in increased spending for the affected agencies would not be available for months.
"The Republican failure to pass appropriations bills on time has real-world consequences to real people, to states, local municipalities and every individual," said Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 Democrat in the House. Representative David R. Obey of Wisconsin, the Appropriations Committee's senior Democrat, called the stopgap bill a "monument to institutional failure."
The bill clears the way for the Bush administration to shift more than $3 billion in reconstruction money for Iraq to cover increased security costs there.
Lawmakers appeared ready to end their efforts to pass a transportation bill before the election, with aides drafting an eight-month extension of the current program.
The highway bill, a priority of many lawmakers who like to deliver home-state projects before the election, is caught in a dispute between Congress and President Bush over the level of spending. After Mr. Bush drew a line at $256 billion over six years - far below what many lawmakers argued was necessary - the bill lost momentum when House Republican leaders decided they did not want to engage in a veto fight with the president before the election.
--------
Pentagon Spends Without Bids, a Study Finds
September 30, 2004
By LESLIE WAYNE
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/business/30contracts.html
WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 - More than 40 percent of Pentagon business, a total of $362 billion, has been awarded on a no-bid basis over the last six years, according to a report issued Wednesday that showed that the biggest companies won the bulk of their contracts without going through a competitive process.
The nation's largest military contractor, the Lockheed Martin Corporation, received the most Pentagon business on a noncompetitive basis. Seventy-four percent of Lockheed's $94 billion in Pentagon contracts received since fiscal 1998 was awarded without competition, according to the report, which was written by the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington nonprofit group that studied 2.2 million Pentagon contracts worth a collective $900 billion.
"Competitive bidding at the Pentagon happens less often than we think, and the no-bid controversy surrounding Halliburton in Iraq actually is, unfortunately, not an aberration," said Charles Lewis, the center's executive director. Mr. Lewis's organization was one of the first to study contracts won by Halliburton and other companies in Iraq and Afghanistan, and today's report grew out of that earlier work.
At Boeing, the nation's second-largest contractor, 60 percent of the $81 billion in Pentagon contracts since 1998 was awarded without competition, as was 67 percent at the No. 3 contractor, the Raytheon Company, which received $40 billion in contracts over the same period. Of the nation's top 10 military contractors, 9 won more than half of their Pentagon contract dollars through noncompetitive awards.
Thomas C. Greer, a Lockheed spokesman, said that because of "the substantial investment and lengthy development cycles, followed by limited annual production quantities," competitive bidding for Pentagon contracts is often not cost effective. Nevertheless, "It is important to note that sole-source awards still mandate contractor performance," Mr. Greer said.
In addition, the report said that because of military industry consolidation, 80 percent of all Pentagon contracting dollars were won by the top 1 percent of all contractors over the six-year period, which ran from Oct. 1, 1997, to Sept. 30, 2003. The report found that the Pentagon has become increasingly dependent on military contractors for work that had been done by soldiers and Pentagon civilian employees.
Currently, for instance, half of the military budget is outsourced to contractors, while oversight of these contracts has declined, the report said. The Pentagon has reduced the number of government officials who supervise contractors, instead hiring contractors to oversee and manage others, according to the report. The Pentagon hired a contractor to determine how many contractors it had employed, the report said.
"There is an even more fundamental problem underscoring our entire investigation: the stunning lack of accountability," said Mr. Lewis. "This is a Keystone Kop situation where no one is monitoring the monitors. This is a very serious situation, and the Pentagon is treating it like a hair in the soup."
Glenn Flood, a Pentagon spokesman, said that the center's "accusations have been made before." Mr. Flood said that much of the Pentagon's business is so specialized that it is impossible to find more than one supplier. Industry consolidation has also accelerated the noncompetitive trend, he said.
"Where do you go if you want or need a sub or a joint-strike fighter?" said Mr. Flood. "The mergers of the 1980's have taken their toll. You have only five or six major contractors. Where do you go?"
But the center's report said that the great growth in outsourcing is taking place in providing services, not in the production of weapon systems. This includes items like the interrogations at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, helping to write the Bush administration's military budget and devising strategic plans. At the same time, military contractors have become skilled at Washington politics and in providing jobs for Pentagon officials after they leave the government.
The leading recipient of campaign donations from military contractors has been President Bush, with $5.4 million from the industry since 1998. Military contractors, however, began stepping up contributions to Senator John Kerry after he won the Iowa caucuses, the report said. Before the caucuses, Senator Kerry had received $332,000 from the industry. He has received just under $2 million since then. The Republican Party has received $62 million from the industry since 1998, compared to $24 million for the Democratic Party, according to the report.
Richard L. Aboulafia, a military industry analyst at the Teal Group, a consulting firm in Fairfax, Va., said that Pentagon outsourcing is often neither the cheapest nor the most efficient approach.
"I think it is a time for a comprehensive rethink of this trend," Mr. Aboulafia said. "A lot of it is done to produce short-term numbers that reduce the size of government, and that always is pleasing to voters. But I'm not sure it's the best strategic decision. There's a terrific emphasis on cutting the numbers, and to do that, you need outsourcing to make the numbers look good. But how much of that is just window dressing?"
-------- corruption
Ex-Lobbyist Is Assailed at Hearing
Senators Say Pair Influenced Indian Tribes to Bilk Them
By Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A04
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60780-2004Sep29?language=printer
Former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and public relations executive Michael Scanlon formed a secret partnership that corruptly influenced Indian tribal elections in order to bilk tribes that operate gambling casinos out of more than $66 million in fees, lawmakers charged yesterday during an unusual Senate committee hearing.
Abramoff, appearing under subpoena before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, endured blistering attacks from senator after senator, turning aside all questions by invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Scanlon dodged U.S. marshals who attempted to serve him with a subpoena compelling him to appear, according to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who with the panel's chairman, Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-Colo.), has been leading the seven-month investigation into Abramoff's and Scanlon's activities.
Nighthorse Campbell said the documentary trail developed by the committee, including the e-mails released yesterday, tell a story of unbounded greed. He said he believes Abramoff privately showed bigotry and contempt for tribal officials who were awarding him and Scanlon multimillion-dollar contracts, referring to them as "idiots" and "troglodytes."
"Do you refer to all your clients as 'morons'?" he demanded of Abramoff. The witness, flanked by lawyer Abbe D. Lowell, looked abashed but did not answer, citing his right against self-incrimination.
Two tribal leaders, one from the Agua Caliente tribe in Palm Springs, Calif., the other from the Saginaw Chippewa tribe in Michigan, testified about their futile efforts to block their tribes from spending millions of dollars to hire Abramoff and Scanlon. Agua Caliente Chairman Richard Milanovich said he has since learned that Abramoff and Scanlon entered into "a secret cabal with certain tribal members" to whom they provided "assistance" that is still being investigated.
Bernie Sprague, sub-chief of the Saginaw Chippewas, said that, in the fall of 2001, Abramoff and Scanlon "smeared the reputations of other candidates running for Tribal Council" and got their hand-picked slate elected.
The Senate committee has assembled hundreds of thousands of pages of documents about Abramoff and Scanlon's work with six tribes in various parts of the country. Records show that Scanlon and Abramoff each collected $21 million of the $66 million in fees paid to Scanlon's companies. On top of that, the tribes paid $16 million in lobbying fees to Greenberg Traurig, Abramoff's former lobbying firm, which typically charged them $150,000 to $175,000 a month.
"The documents show that Jack Abramoff systematically sought out impressionable tribal leaders and representatives, seduced them with promises of power and prestige, and helped them attain positions of power within their tribes," McCain said. "Once in power, their allies on the tribal council steered multimillion-dollar contracts to Mr. Abramoff's lobbying firm and Mr. Scanlon's PR company."
While "every kind of charlatan and every type of crook" has exploited American Indians since the sale of Manhattan island, McCain said, "what sets this tale apart, what makes it truly extraordinary, is the extent and degree of the apparent exploitation and deceit."
The activities of Abramoff, once a powerful lobbyist with extensive ties to Republican leaders, and Scanlon, a former spokesman for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), are also being investigated by a federal grand jury in Washington.
In a telephone interview last night, Scanlon said he did not appear before the committee because his attorneys and committee lawyers had not worked out the terms of the subpoena for his testimony. He said the claims about his manipulation of tribal elections were overblown. "What was alleged is that tribal elections were rigged. What the committee produced were talking points [for tribal candidates]," he said.
Lawmakers yesterday cited the pair's e-mail traffic, which the panel subpoenaed from Greenberg Traurig, where Abramoff was head of government relations until March, when he quit under pressure.
When Scanlon complained on March 5, 2003, about an Agua Caliente tribal member, Abramoff counseled: "I think the key thing to remember with all these clients is that they are annoying, but that the annoying losers are the only ones which have this kind of money and part with it so quickly."
Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.) strained to find words to describe the e-mails and other evidence, calling the two men's activities "a cesspool of greed, a disgusting pattern, certainly, of moral corruption, possibly of criminal corruption. . . . a pathetic, disgusting example of greed run amok."
"I think all of us know this is the most extraordinary pattern of abuse to come before this committee in the 18 years I've served here," said Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who described the pair's conduct as "scuzzy" and "outrageous."
Lawmakers said the e-mails and other documents show that the two men spent tens of thousands of dollars on mailings and other materials for candidates in tribal elections. Individual tribes make their own rules governing outside influence on tribal elections. The National Indian Gaming Act bars the use of tribal funds to benefit individual candidates.
The e-mails show that just before the 2002 Agua Caliente tribal elections, Scanlon asked Abramoff: "How much do you want me to spend on the AC race -- I gotta get a team out there ASAP -- Then rotate a new team in after that -- So travel is gonna run about 20K and materials like 5-10K. Should we go for it?"
Abramoff replied: "Yes, go for it big time."
The panel subpoenaed Chris Petras, former legislative director of the Saginaw Chippewas, who was a liaison to Abramoff and Scanlon. Petras said that he could not recall any discussions about the pair becoming involved in tribal elections and that he was not convinced they had done anything wrong.
An e-mail from Abramoff to Scanlon in the fall of 2001 suggested otherwise. "I had dinner tonight with Chris Petras of Sag Chip. He was salivating at the $4-5 million program I described to him . . . He is going to come in after the primary with the guy who will be chief if they win (a big fan of ours already) and we are going to help him win. If he wins, they take over in January, and we have millions."
After the Saginaw Chippewa election, Scanlon congratulated his staff and Abramoff for the victory of seven of eight candidates running as "The Slate of Eight." "We had less than three weeks to take 8 guys who never met before and get them elected. It was a great plan, and great execution by a great team. . . . We now control 9 out of the 12 seats on the council . . . hopefully we will be doing some more work for the tribe in the near future."
E-mails in the winter of 2002 appear to show Abramoff attempting to drum up more business for Scanlon by stoking unwarranted fears about "racinos" legislation that could revive competition from the horse racing industry.
On Oct. 10, 2002, Scanlon sent Abramoff a news clipping about horse racing bills in the Michigan legislature, with the message: "Here we go! This could kill Saginaw!"
Abramoff responded: "Chris thinks this is not going anywhere. Can you call him and scare him?"
On Dec. 10, 2002, Abramoff appeared to do just that in an e-mail to Petras. "Chris, I am getting worried about this. Last night we opened Stacks [a Pennsylvania Avenue restaurant owned by Abramoff] and there were some WH guys there. . . . They told me that there is a hearing coming up on this immediately, and they have heard that this is going to happen!!! . . . where is Scanlon on this? . . . We need to get him firing missiles. How do we move it faster? Please get the council focused on this as soon as you can."
Abramoff sent a copy to Scanlon, who messaged back: "I love you."
-------- investigations
Senate Opens Hearings on Lobbyists for Tribes
September 30, 2004
By MICHAEL JANOFSKY
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/politics/30indian.html
WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 - A Senate committee on Wednesday began untangling the financial relationship between six Indian tribes and two Washington insiders who Congressional investigators say charged the tribes more than $66 million in less than four years for minimal work.
The two - Jack Abramoff, a Republican lobbyist, and Michael S. Scanlon, a public relations specialist and former aide to Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, the House majority leader - sold themselves to the tribes as influential Washington operatives whose experience and relationships would reap great rewards for Native Americans.
But as details of their work became public through reports in The Washington Post and other newspapers, the government began asking questions. Now, the men are under investigation by the Justice Department, other federal agencies and Congress, all examining the possibility of criminal violations.
In addition, Mr. Abramoff is being investigated by his former law firm, Greenberg Traurig, for possible billing improprieties. He was forced to resign from the firm six months ago as a result of his work with the tribes.
The hearing on Wednesday before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee provided the first public discussion of Mr. Abramoff's and Mr. Scanlon's activities, drawing on a long trail of subpoenaed documents that suggest the two manipulated the tribes, even their elections, to win contracts worth tens of millions of dollars.
Documents cited also showed that the men dropped the names of high-powered Congressional leaders like Mr. DeLay to help persuade the tribes to contribute large sums to Republican organizations like Americans for Tax Reform, as well as to obscure groups like the Capital Athletic Foundation, a Washington group that Mr. Abramoff controlled.
"The accounts in the newspapers were not accurate," Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, Republican of Colorado, the committee chairman and the Senate's only Native American, said. "The truth is, it's much worse than that."
Mr. Scanlon and Mr. Abramoff were the first scheduled witnesses, but only Mr. Abramoff appeared. He pledged to tell the truth, then declined to read an opening statement, as witnesses normally do, or answer questions, citing his Constitutional right against self-incrimination. He left through a back door after the final questioner, Senator Kent Conrad, Democrat of North Dakota, shot him a steely glare and said: "Shame on you. Shame on you."
Stephen L. Braga, a lawyer for Mr. Scanlon, told the committee by letter last week that his client would not appear until the Justice Department concluded its investigation. He also said the subpoena to require Mr. Scanlon's testimony had not been properly served.
Mr. Abramoff's silence did not protect him from a cascade of criticism from committee members of both parties. One by one, they expressed shock and dismay at the idea that he and Mr. Scanlon may have preyed upon tribes with housing and education problems by promising to fix problems and exert influence, charging as much as $180,000 a month.
Mr. Campbell said the six tribes - the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw, the Saginaw Chippewa of Michigan, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians of California, the Tigua Indians of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo of El Paso and the Pueblo Sandia Tribe of New Mexico, all of which operate or want to operate casinos - paid Mr. Scanlon more than $66 million, with more than $21 million of it going to Mr. Abramoff.
Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, who is expected to continue hearings when he replaces Mr. Campbell as chairman next year, compared the actions of Mr. Abramoff and Mr. Scanlon to those of others who have taken advantage of Indians over generations and said, "What sets this tale apart, what makes it truly extraordinary, is the extent and degree of the apparent exploitation and deceit."
Mr. McCain referred to e-mail messages between the men that he said reflected manipulation of the tribes, including one effort that led to a contribution of $25,000 to a research group controlled by Mr. Scanlon. Mr. McCain said the group was headed by "two of Mr. Scanlon's beach buddies, one a yoga instructor, the other a lifeguard."
He cited other e-mail messages between the men that showed how they regarded their partnership. In one, Mr. Abramoff replied to Mr. Scanlon, saying: "You are a great partner. What I love about our partnership is that, when one of us is down, the other is there. We're gonna make $ for years together."
Mr. Scanlon responded: "Amen! You got it boss - we have many years ahead."
Some messages referred to tribal leaders as "morons," "idiots," "troglodytes," "monkeys" and other derogatory names, Mr. Campbell said.
In his first question to Mr. Abramoff, Mr. Campbell asked, "Why would you want to work for people you have that much contempt for?"
Two tribal leaders followed Mr. Abramoff to the witness table. Richard M. Milanovich, chairman of the Agua Caliente band, and Bernie Sprague, subchief of the Saginaw Chippewa, told the panel that Mr. Abramoff and Mr. Scanlon had inserted themselves in tribal elections by currying favor with candidates who later voted to award them contracts. The leaders said they had been powerless to oppose the contracts because the two had secured support from a majority of leaders.
"There is not a word in my language that is strong enough to describe what these people have done to my tribe," Mr. Sprague told the panel.
Kristen Lee contributed reporting for this article.
-------- propaganda wars
Networks ignore camera regulations
September 30, 2004
By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040929-111541-4130r.htm
Broadcasters and political planners turned tonight's presidential debate into a debate of their own this week. In the name of journalistic freedom, the networks simply ignored rules outlined by the Commission on Presidential Debates that curtailed camera shots and other images.
"They set forth 32 pages of restrictions - an attempt to stage the debate as they would stage a political convention," said Princell Hair, CNN's vice president for news. "We intend to cover this debate as we have covered debates in the past - with every single camera angle we have access to."
Specifically, the commission had called a halt to the provocative split screen, typically featuring the eye-rolling reaction of one candidate to the other in mid-argument.
Those were fighting words, though.
Fox News, NBC and MSNBC, CBS News and ABC News agreed: The commission could not dictate how each network would use the video feed from the first of three debates between President Bush and Sen. John Kerry, which begins at 9 p.m.
The nonpartisan commission itself - founded in 1987 to produce and sponsor presidential and vice-presidential debates - remained philosophical about the renegade networks yesterday.
"There are certain things we can't control. And we have no control over how the networks use their cutaway shots," said the group's co-chairman, Frank Fahrenkopf.
The dust-up won't get in the way, according to some.
"A real debate is still going to take place here. I have faith that the actual event itself will outweigh the restrictions and the discussion. It's too important to the country, and the candidates know it. Therefore, they'll get their messages out there," Mr. Hair said.
The news channels plan an average six hours of prime-time debate coverage; among them, Fox News leads in ratings, with an average nightly audience of 1.8 million, compared with 882,000 viewers at CNN and 421,000 at MSNBC, according to Nielsen numbers released Tuesday.
Broadcast networks will air the debates in full, leading up to local newscasts. NBC News has dominated evening prime time this week, with 9.4 million viewers each night, compared with 8.1 million for ABC News and 6.8 million for CBS News.
C-SPAN, meanwhile, will offer commentary-free debate coverage, complete with an hour devoted to the "media spin room" - staged broadcast appearances by political operatives after the debate.
"We're the media covering the media," noted C-SPAN spokeswoman Robin Scullin yesterday.
Meanwhile, the debate commission had other critics.
In fact, an activist organization of law professors and other academics who oppose "dangerous corporate actions" opposes the debate's official sponsors, which include American Airlines, Anheuser-Busch, the Howard G. Buffett Foundation and the Discovery Channel.
"The purpose of presidential debates is voter education, not to promote corporations' political agendas or products, or to boost their sagging public-relations images," the group said yesterday.
"The American public deserves debates that are not for sale to corporations with legislative agendas pending before Congress and the White House," stated the group, adding that corporate banners have been visible on camera in past debates.
• Contact Jennifer Harper at jharper@washingtontimes.com or 202/636-3085.
----
Falwell asks Christians to support president
September 30, 2004
By Jon Ward
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20040929-100500-8817r.htm
LYNCHBURG, Va. - The 4 million evangelical Christians who did not vote in 2000 will unite behind President Bush in November, the Rev. Jerry Falwell said yesterday.
With five weeks until the presidential election, Mr. Falwell said he is trying to muster conservative evangelical ministers to support the Republican ticket. He continued to mobilize the nation's evangelical base at Liberty University here earlier this week, by holding a seminar on preaching about conservative politics from the pulpit without forfeiting tax-exempt status.
Mr. Falwell said yesterday that he plans to hold at least 40 similar talks in several battleground states in the next month. He promised "a landslide" victory for Mr. Bush on Election Day.
"I think the evangelicals are going to play a major part in that," said Mr. Falwell, who founded Liberty University in 1971 and was one of the co-founders of the Moral Majority religious conservative movement in the 1980s.
The seminar, "Politics and Pulpit," drew about 500 church leaders, despite opposition from the Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. It was one of several workshops held during a three-day "Super Conference" that Mr. Falwell holds each year for Christian ministers. More than 3,000 Christian leaders from across the country attended the conference.
Americans United Executive Director Barry W. Lynn has said Mr. Falwell's advice encourages churches to violate or risk violating IRS tax codes for tax-exempt organizations. He sent a letter to Southern Baptist leaders, including Mr. Falwell, urging them not to attend the seminar.
Mr. Falwell called Mr. Lynn's claims "intimidation tactics."
Karl Rove, an adviser to the Bush administration, has said 4 million of the country's 80 million evangelical Christians did not vote in the 2000 election.
Mr. Falwell said that was because they were not sure if Mr. Bush was conservative enough.
"Now they know him," Mr. Falwell said. "It's the highest energy level we've had since 1984. The turnout will be incredible."
However, Mr. Lynn has accused Mr. Falwell of violating tax codes by sending to other religious leaders an e-mail in which he endorsed Mr. Bush.
Churches are allowed to take positions on issues and legislation, as long as it does not surpass 5 percent to 20 percent of their total activity. They are not allowed to endorse any political candidate, give money to a candidate or political action group, or engage in partisan political activity, said Mathew D. Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel, an Orlando, Fla.-based nonprofit group.
Mr. Staver said Mr. Falwell's e-mail did not mention his church or Liberty University, and that church leaders can engage in partisan politics if it is on an individual basis separate of their church. "The church had nothing to do with that," Mr. Staver said.
In 1993, one of Mr. Falwell's religious groups called the Old Time Gospel Hour retroactively lost its tax-exempt status from 1986 to 1987 because, Mr. Lynn said, the group used ministry resources to support congressional candidates.
Mr. Falwell claimed the tax-status decertification was simply part of a settlement to get the IRS out of his hair after a four-year investigation in the wake of the PTL Network scandal involving televangelists Jim Bakker and his then-wife, Tammy Faye Bakker, in the 1980s.
Mr. Falwell said the only violation the IRS found was that he sold Bibles to a political action group at a discount price.
At the conference this week, pastors said they now feel more confident about speaking to their congregations about politics and encouraging their parishioners to vote.
The Rev. John J. Hamric, who heads the 250-member Fishersville Baptist Church in Fishersville, Va., said he expected to hand out voter-registration information at his church this Sunday as a result of the "Politics and Pulpit" seminar.
He said he recently received an e-mail threatening to "sue you for all your worth," if he tried to register church members to vote. Mr. Hamric said he did not remember which group had sent him the e-mail because he immediately deleted it.
"I don't care about a lawsuit, because I'm not violating the Constitution," Mr. Hamric said. He said he does not encourage church members to vote for one party or candidate. ... "I do encourage people to vote pro-life and pro-family, because that comes from Scripture."
The Rev. Al Peverall, who heads the 900-member Jackson Memorial Baptist Church in Chesapeake, Va., said he also does not endorse political parties or candidates from the pulpit. But he said the seminar "affirmed some of what I know, but gave me a greater sense of confidence."
"Christianity is not a political entity, but on the other hand, Christians should not be afraid to engage in the culture or politics," he said. "I can't say 'vote Democrat' or 'Republican.' I can say to them, 'Vote Christian,' which is a vote on the basis of moral and spiritual values."
-------- us politics
High Time for Bush to Tell the Truth
antiwar.com
by Ray McGovern
September 30, 2004
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/mcgovern.php?articleid=3673
It's not an "if." It's a "when." Pentagon officials have indicated that they plan to send as many as 15,000 additional troops during the first four months of 2005, and the President George W. Bush continues to insist "we will stay the course" until Iraq is stabilized. (I do wish his advisers would provide a different vocabulary so that those of us steeped in the mistakes regarding Vietnam could be spared painful flashbacks.)
Where will the additional troops come from? The Bush administration insists there will be no draft, but its credibility has been badly tarnished. The "backdoor draft" that has kept so many from the Reserve and National Guard on active duty has backfired, as quotas for new enlistments have not been met. So plans are already advanced for fully mobilizing the Reserve and National Guard.
Senator John Kerry states the obvious in calling such steps "temporary measures" that have increased the burden on our troops and their families without addressing the basic reality that the active-duty Army is too small. He proposes adding 40,000 troops to the Army and offsetting the cost by reducing expenditures on highly expensive projects like national missile defense (NMD). (Kerry might have added that the NMD boondoggle, for which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and defense contractors have pushed so hard and so long, is now actually being deployed without having been adequately tested - not to mention its dubious utility in the priority struggle against terrorism.)
Let's Be Honest, Finally
But how many troops would be needed to stabilize Iraq? The well respected International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, before which the president spoke last November, says 500,000. Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki told Congress publicly before the war that "several hundred thousand" troops would be needed. It turns out he was asking for 400,000, fully aware that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was planning to attack and occupy Iraq with just a fraction of that. Rumsfeld gave him the back of his hand.
At this point, to be unaware of the requirement for additional troops while watching the burgeoning chaos in Iraq requires a Ph.D. in denial and a childlike, faith-based trust in the administration's PR rhetoric. Indeed, cracks can be seen within the president's own camp regarding what is happening in Iraq and what to do about it. And some truth is now peeking through those cracks.
While the president promotes the bromide of "months of steady progress" in Iraq, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R, Neb.) calls this a "grand illusion." And on Sunday, Secretary of State Colin Powell gave tacit, but unambiguous, support to the gloomy conclusions reached in the recent National Intelligence Estimate.
President Bush says he will provide more troops if commanders ask for them. But it would mean early retirement for any general making such a request before the election. And, sadly, as was the case in Vietnam, the top military brass appear to be giving priority to their careers over their duty to support and protect the troops they send into battle.
Who's the Enemy?
We also need honesty about whom we're fighting in Iraq. Disingenuousness persists about the resistance to U.S. occupation. The president assured us last week that there are only "a handful of people who are willing to kill" in order to thwart U.S. aims. And those interested in learning more about these people are malnourished by "intelligence." Instead, they are forced to resort to Iraqi newspaper listings of the various groups who have claimed credit for hitting the invader.
The reality in Iraq was far better captured by retired Army Special Forces Col. W. Patrick Lang, former Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East and a member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. In an informal e-mail, Col. Lang wrote:
"The sad thing is that US combat intelligence in Iraq does not seem to know who the insurgents are, where they are, how many they are, or what they plan to do. This in spite of all the happy campaign talk about how well things are going."
Another retired Army colonel, a well respected military strategist and educator, Sam Gardiner, writing recently for Salon.com, reacted bitterly to reports - now confirmed by Secretary Powell - that military operations into the "no-go" areas in Iraq have been postponed until after the election.
"There is certainly no commander in the field saying, 'Let's give the bad guys another 60 days to operate freely inside their sanctuaries before we attack.' Such a decision would be particularly bizarre when attacks against coalition forces are more frequent than ever, attacks on oil pipelines are on the rise, and the U.S. is suffering increased casualties."
Needed: Patriotic Leaks
Daniel Ellsberg makes a poignant appeal to conscience in an op-ed in Tuesday's New York Times, noting with great regret that he wished he had made unauthorized disclosures 40 years ago as he worked on plans to expand the war in Vietnam even as President Lyndon Johnson campaigned for president on a platform of "no wider war."
Ellsberg neglects to mention a key juncture four years later when he, with the help of another patriotic leaker, was able to prevent a disastrous widening of the war that threatened to bring in China as an active combatant.
In the election year of 1968, Gen. William Westmoreland, commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam, was proving a master at playing the political game. He put an artificial limit on the count of armed Vietnamese Communists. As a result, U.S. Army Intelligence carried on its books less than half the actual number of 500,000. The countrywide Tet offensive in early 1968 gave the lie to Westmoreland's fictitious figures - at great cost to our troops.
Still, Westmoreland and President Lyndon Johnson dissembled, as the general secretly asked for 206,000 more troops to widen the war into Cambodia, Laos, and up to the Chinese border - perhaps even beyond. They then ran into the troubled conscience of Ellsberg, who leaked the 500,000 figure to the New York Times after another patriot had leaked the 206,000 request.
On March 25, 1968, Johnson complained to a small gathering:
"The leaks to the New York Times hurt us. . . . We have no support for the war . . . I would have given Westy the 206,000 men."
The moral of the story? Leaking can be patriotic; can prevent a wider, longer war.
The Next Four Years
Some say that perhaps the administration's plan, if it gets four more years, is to "clean out" Fallujah and other resistance strongholds, despite the heavy casualties that would result, and then turn the fight over to Iraqi forces and withdraw.
Not a chance. If, as I believe to be the case, the actual objectives of the war on Iraq have mostly to do with achieving military dominance over that oil-rich region and eliminating any conceivable threat to the security of Israel, four more years will mean a still larger U.S. military force there for the duration. Among other things, to leave sooner would leave Israel less safe than it was before the war, something the president's advisers are very loath to do.
President Bush insists, "You can understand how hard it is, and still believe we'll succeed." No you can't - not if you really understand how hard it is and are honest about what would be required.
No matter how much the president may try to disparage as "just guessing" the more accurate intelligence estimates he is now getting, this time the experts have got it right. Even Colin Powell acknowledged on Sunday "we have seen an increase in anti-Americanism in the Muslim world" since the war began, and the insurgency in Iraq is "getting worse."
It is high time the administration explained how it is going to "win" this war with a troop force widely recognized as inadequate to the task.
-----
War in Iraq Likely to Be Topic One
Poll Numbers Put Pressure on Kerry
Washington Post
September 30, 2004
By Dan Balz and Jim VandeHei
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60721-2004Sep29?language=printer
CORAL GABLES, Fla., Sept. 29 -- President Bush and Democratic challenger John F. Kerry will meet here Thursday night for a high-stakes debate that will produce their first direct confrontation over the war in Iraq and that strategists say will be Kerry's best opportunity to shake up a contest that is tilting in Bush's direction.
The two candidates have sparred heatedly over Iraq for months, with Bush accusing Kerry of shifting his positions on whether the war was right or wrong and with the Massachusetts senator newly on the offensive, charging that the president has made a series of decisions that have produced a quagmire in Iraq and left the United States more vulnerable to terrorist attacks.
Kerry comes to the first of three presidential debates under pressure to rise to the moment. Over the past week, nearly a dozen national polls have been released. When taken together, they suggest that Bush is leading by five to six percentage points. Beyond that, the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll and other surveys show that on the major issues in the campaign and on a series of personal and presidential attributes, voters view Bush more favorably than Kerry.
Both sides know that debates can change the dynamic of a campaign, but a senior Kerry adviser, who declined to be identified so he could speak freely, said his candidate must use Thursday's debate to erode Bush's advantage on the Iraq war and terrorism or face a daunting challenge in the final four weeks of the campaign.
After wrapping up debate preparations, Bush and Kerry arrived Wednesday in Florida, where memories remain strong of the bitter 36-day recount battle in 2000 that with the help of the Supreme Court decided the outcome of that election.
"I am looking forward to tomorrow night for an opportunity to be able to share with Americans the truth, not sound bites, not the advertisements, but the truth," Kerry told a small crowd upon his arrival from Wisconsin, where he spent the past three days preparing for the debate.
Bush, who did his preparation at his Texas ranch, toured a farm in central Florida damaged by three of the four hurricanes that have hit this state in the past six weeks. He then flew to Miami. It was his fifth storm-related trip to the state, and he again promised to press Congress for money to help with the cleanup.
Many Floridians have put presidential politics on hold as they try to recover from billions of dollars in damage and try to repair homes and businesses and disrupted lives. Both sides say that they believe the race in Florida remains extremely close and that its 27 electoral votes once again could play a crucial role in determining the election's outcome.
Thursday's debate, sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, will run for 90 minutes and be carried on major broadcast and cable television networks, beginning at 9 p.m. Eastern time. The two men will stand at lecterns for the event, which will be moderated by PBS's Jim Lehrer.
The Bush and Kerry campaigns negotiated extraordinarily tight terms of engagement for the debates that, among other things, rule out direct questioning by the candidates of each other. Still, both sides expect a lively encounter.
The debates will continue on Tuesday, when Vice President Cheney and Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards will face off at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. On Oct. 8, Bush and Kerry will meet at Washington University in St. Louis for a town-hall-meeting-style debate, and they will conclude the series on Oct. 13 at Arizona State University in Tempe.
Debates can change the direction of presidential races. In 1980, for example, Ronald Reagan used his only debate with President Jimmy Carter to overcome questions about his capacity to be president and turned a close race into an electoral landslide.
Bush advisers said the president will try to project resolve and optimism about the war in Iraq while challenging Kerry as indecisive and pessimistic. "John Kerry's task is heavy," said Matthew Dowd, senior strategist for the Bush campaign. "He has to do in 90 minutes what he hasn't been able to do in two years, which is give credibility to what he says."
Kerry advisers said he will aggressively challenge Bush over Iraq by pressing the president to explain why he went to war, why the aftermath is so bloody and chaotic and why he has not laid out a clear plan for stabilizing the country and bringing U.S. troops home. "He's going to have an appointment with his record, which he has avoided nicely," said Joel Johnson, a senior Kerry strategist.
Edwards, in a conversation with radio host Don Imus, said Bush would be under pressure to acknowledge the current difficulties in Iraq. "It will be interesting to see whether he keeps trying to say everything is going well, because everyone knows that's not true."
Bush intends to pin down Kerry on whether voters can trust what he says, and the senator stumbled into another flap on that front when he tried to explain why he had said last spring he had voted for an $87 billion appropriation for Iraq and Afghanistan before he had voted against it.
In an interview with ABC's Diane Sawyer on "Good Morning America," Kerry said he made an "inarticulate" comment late at night after a long day of campaigning that had left him tired. In fact, he uttered those words at a midday event.
Meanwhile, U.S. officials said the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI had recently sent a bulletin to local law enforcement officials warning that terrorists might attempt an attack in the Miami area. A spokesman said there is no specific information about a plot and said the warning was similar to others sent out before high-profile events.
Kerry and the Democratic National Committee continued their pre-debate advertising barrage Wednesday. One new spot asks: "Why did George Bush go to war in Iraq? First it was weapons of mass destruction. Later, Iraq's links to al Qaeda. One reason after another -- a new one offered every time the facts crumble." A second Kerry ad pitches an energy independence plan as an alternative to relying on the "Saudi royal family."
A DNC spot quotes three Republicans -- Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Richard G. Lugar (Ind.) -- as offering downbeat assessments of the war. "This week it will come down to one question," the narrator says. "Will Americans finally hear the real truth about Iraq?"
Staff writers Howard Kurtz and John Mintz in Washington contributed to this report.
--------
Leaders Say Senate Can Act on 9/11 Bills Soon
September 30, 2004
By PHILIP SHENON and CARL HULSE
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/politics/30panel.html
WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 - Senate leaders promised Wednesday that they would act within days to reorganize the way the Senate provides oversight on intelligence and domestic security, a response to criticism by the Sept. 11 commission that Congressional oversight was dysfunctional.
The majority leader, Senator Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee, said the Senate would agree on "reform" of intelligence oversight before lawmakers left for a recess scheduled to begin Oct. 8.
Dr. Frist promised that the Senate would meet the same deadline to pass a sweeping bill to enact other recommendations of the commission, including establishing the post of national intelligence director.
The minority leader, Senator Tom Daschle, Democrat of South Dakota, immediately voiced support for Dr. Frist's timetable and the institutional overhaul.
"Both of these matters have to be addressed," Mr. Daschle said.
The moves in the Senate are likely to increase pressure on House Republican leaders, who have been notably cooler to many of the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, to consider similar changes in the House.
Although some lawmakers said they did not expect the Senate to agree on the broad overhaul recommended by the independent panel, they have said they expect the Senate, probably through revising its rules, and not through legislation, to expand the powers of committees responsible for intelligence oversight.
Senate officials said the Senate would also most likely consider creating an appropriations subcommittee for intelligence, to consolidate authority held by several subcommittees, and putting oversight of domestic security under a single committee, probably Governmental Affairs.
Intelligence and domestic security agencies have long complained that they answer to too many committees and subcommittees of Congress.
The oversight problems have been under review by a bipartisan group led by Senators Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, and Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada.
Despite Dr. Frist's promise to act next week, any change is likely to be opposed by lawmakers who cede authority if they are enacted.
In its final report, the Sept. 11 commission said Congressional committees on intelligence "lack the power, influence and sustained capacity" to meet their responsibilities.
"So long as oversight is governed by current Congressional rules and resolutions, we believe the American people will not get the security they want and need," the panel said.
It called for Congress to consider a joint House-Senate intelligence committee or, alternatively, for a single committee in each house that would have the authority to appropriate money to intelligence agencies, a power now reserved to the House and Senate appropriations committees.
A member of the Sept. 11 panel, Timothy J. Roemer, a former Democratic House member from Indiana who has been on Capitol Hill to encourage enactment of the findings, said he understood that although the Senate's institutional changes would fall short of the recommendations, "they appear to be helpful reforms."
Debate continued Wednesday in the Senate and the House on bills to respond to the commission by reorganizing the executive branch and creating the post of national intelligence director.
The sponsors of the bipartisan Senate bill, which is being debated on the floor this week, easily beat back an amendment to give the intelligence director direct control over military intelligence agencies, an idea that the Pentagon and its Congressional backers have staunchly resisted.
The House began debate in earnest on a bill that would grant less authority to a national intelligence director than in the Senate counterpart.
The House Intelligence Committee voted, 17 to 2, to approve sections of the bill on a national intelligence director. Democrats who voted for the provisions suggested that they intended to revise them later to strengthen the director's powers and to make the overall bill conform to the companion Senate bill.
"Moving the process forward on a bipartisan basis is what's critical," said Representative Jane Harman of California, the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee who voted for the provisions, though she called the overall bill "fatally flawed."
--------
Cheney, Edwards Stress Differences on Security and Iraq
By Matthew Mosk and Ovetta Wiggins
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, September 30, 2004; Page A09
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60558-2004Sep29.html
WEIRTON, W.Va., Sept. 29 -- Vice President Cheney and his counterpart on the Democratic ticket, Sen. John Edwards, continued to trade sharp words on security and Iraq on Wednesday as they charged through the nation's hotly contested battleground states.
Speaking to retirees at a social hall in this depressed steel town, Edwards zeroed in on comments Cheney made more than a decade ago when explaining the quick pullout from Iraq during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. A transcript of Cheney's remarks, published Wednesday by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, quotes the then-secretary of defense as saying, "We were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."
"Twelve years ago, Dick Cheney was saying there was a great danger, a great risk of getting bogged down there," Edwards said. Parroting the GOP attacks on presidential candidate John F. Kerry, Edwards said: "He was against getting bogged down in Iraq before he was for it."
But a Cheney spokeswoman said there was a reason he changed his mind: Sept. 11, 2001. "Senator Edwards is acting as if September 11th never happened," Anne Womack said. "In the years between then and now, Saddam Hussein . . . continued to grow as a gathering danger to the United States and President Bush decided to address those gathering threats and protect the American people."
While Edwards was taking shots, Cheney took his case to rural Minnesota. He warned that Kerry's inconsistencies should make voters nervous about relying on him to make crucial choices about the nation's security. "What I see is a man who has changed his position repeatedly. He's taken so many positions that there isn't anything he could say today that doesn't contradict something he's already said," Cheney said.
Wednesday's terse exchanges offered a snapshot of the strategy that appears to be driving both vice presidential campaigns. With five weeks left to the election, Cheney and Edwards are hard on the attack on issues of security and Iraq.
Edwards still flashes his toothy smile, but the upbeat message has been supplanted with a speech largely monopolized by the war. He shares most of his thoughts on the campaign's other priorities -- jobs and health care -- only during question-and-answer sessions.
In the West Virginia social hall, the senator from North Carolina used bleak public assessments by some Republicans to bolster his claim that "Iraq is a mess." How can the president maintain Iraq is a success, Edwards asked, while Americans are being kidnapped and beheaded, parts of the country remain under the control of insurgents, terrorists "are flowing into the country from all over the world" and more than 1,000 U.S. troops have died?
Cheney said those who criticize the administration's actions since Sept. 11 do not understand the threat facing the United States and the world. "The idea that somehow we could pull back and simply sit behind our oceans and not aggressively be going after the terrorists and those who sponsor terrorists, I think misreads the situation completely," he said.
Wiggins is traveling with Cheney.
--------
POLITICAL MEMO
In Debate on Foreign Policy, Wide Gulf or Splitting Hairs?
September 30, 2004
By JAMES BENNET
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/politics/campaign/30debate.html?pagewanted=all&position=
WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 - It is an axiom of the two presidential campaigns that their candidates offer a stark choice about America's role in the world.
On Thursday night, voters will have their best chance yet to judge that choice when President Bush and Senator John Kerry meet in their first debate, on foreign policy.
"I don't think we've had as clear-cut a difference between two presidential candidates on international issues since 1980," said Richard C. Holbrooke, a former United Nations ambassador and now a top adviser to Mr. Kerry.
There are "clear differences on the biggest priorities facing the American people, first and foremost on the war on terrorism," Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said on Wednesday.
Yet, in the view of some politicians and policy analysts, this race has done little so far to clarify the major issues of foreign policy. "I was a little more hopeful this year that we'd get a robust debate on these issues," said Lee H. Hamilton, the former Democratic representative from Indiana who served as the vice chairman of the Sept. 11 commission. "It's just appalling, if you look at what is not being addressed. You confront not just terrorism in the world, but you confront turmoil, chaos."
One reason the candidates have not discussed a wide range of issues is that - for all the talk about stark differences - on many foreign policy subjects, from relations with China to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, the two differ only slightly, if at all.
Even on Iraq, the candidates' sharpest stated differences are retrospective, rather than prospective. Mr. Bush defends the war as central to the struggle against terrorism; Mr. Kerry criticizes it as a diversion. As they look ahead, though, neither man is calling for the immediate departure of American troops; both advocate accelerating the training of Iraqi forces.
Both want to create similar conditions for an American withdrawal; Mr. Kerry argues he will find a way to do that more quickly.
Concerning China, both candidates speak of building a cooperative relationship while promoting internal reform. Susan Rice, another Kerry national security adviser, argued that the candidates had "fundamental differences" on foreign policy, but said that on the specific question of China, "the differences are more of nuance than fundamentals."
On Israel and the Palestinians, both candidates support Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister, in building a barrier against West Bank Palestinians and planning to evacuate settlers from the Gaza Strip without a peace agreement.
Sam Nunn, the former Democratic senator from Georgia who is co-chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, which focuses on threats from unconventional weapons, noted that both candidates had called controlling such weapons the No. 1 foreign policy challenge. "But I don't think there's enough discussion," he said.
For example, Mr. Nunn asked, could the United States simultaneously build a strong relationship with Russia to control such weapons and press the Russians to move ahead with internal democratic reform? "If there's a conflict between those two goals," he asked, "which is more important, and how do you deal with it?"
Both men have proposed plans to restrict more countries from producing potential fuel for nuclear weapons. Mr. Kerry has said he would sharply step up a program, which he argues Mr. Bush has underfinanced, to secure nuclear stockpiles in Russia.
Senator Chuck Hagel, the Nebraska Republican, said, "I think both these campaigns have let down this country." He said that the most important issue to address was how "to put back together America's standing in the world."
In modern presidential campaigns, candidates tend to pick foreign policy issues at least as much for what those issues say about them as for what they might have to say about the issues. They marshal policy differences as symbols, as markers of values, judgment or style.
When they debate Iraq, the candidates are clashing over matters of real moment - over whether, for example, the insurgency is growing stronger - but also trying to cement specific images. Call it character versus competence: Mr. Bush wants to present himself as a leader with the courage to go it alone, facing a rival who wavers; Mr. Kerry wants to present himself as wise and prudent, better able to judge threats and enlist allies against them.
In discussing what he described as major differences between the two candidates, Mr. Holbrooke argued that "the core issue is that John Kerry is a real internationalist." He added that from Mr. Bush's speeches, "you could put him right up there with Woodrow Wilson," but that there is no "connection between his speeches and his performance."
White House officials continued to cast the foreign policy debate primarily as a way for Mr. Bush to make his case that Mr. Kerry is not a suitable commander in chief.
"We are a nation that is still at war, and it's important that the president speak with clarity and show resolve,'' Mr. McClellan said. "And that's what this president has done.
"He will talk about his optimistic vision and his resolve and his clear strategy for success. And that stands in stark contrast to Senator Kerry, who has offered pessimism and uncertainty and defeatism during a time of war."
There are substantive reasons for the candidates to emphasize their styles in foreign policy, for it is no easy matter to anticipate what crises will astonish the next administration. Four years ago, during the three debates between Vice President Al Gore and Governor Bush, "terrorism" was mentioned only once - by Mr. Gore.
And even when it comes to approaches, presidents have often found themselves prompted by circumstances to modify or reverse a stance they promoted as candidates. "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building," Mr. Bush declared in 2000.
James B. Steinberg, the director of foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution, argued that the questions of character and policy were entwined this year to a degree they had not been since 1972, during the Vietnam War. "There is a big character issue being debated here," he said. "But people are also really lining up around two very different world views, and two very different responses to 9/11." Those two worldviews are easily caricatured, with Mr. Bush mocked by Democrats as a trigger-happy loner and Mr. Kerry lampooned by Republicans as wanting permission from the United Nations to protect the United States. Yet behind the cartoons are unmistakable philosophical differences, with application across the range of foreign policy. Mr. Bush has a record of breaking with allies to act in what he perceives as vital American interest; Mr. Kerry is more comfortable operating with consensus.
The debate on Thursday is likely to focus on Iraq. Mr. Bush's advisers have identified what they think is a major vulnerability in Mr. Kerry's arguments: The Democrat, they say, is far more interested in talking about plans to withdraw American troops than in describing how he would stabilize Iraq and bring democracy to the region. They have hinted that Mr. Bush will make that a key point. One senior Bush official called Mr. Kerry's arguments "a slow version of cut and run."
Mr. Kerry has seized on Mr. Bush's admission of a single "miscalculation'' in the post-invasion phase in Iraq, and regularly ticks off other miscalculations that he argues have cost lives and money. His advisers have discussed how long a list Mr. Kerry should present in the debate.
Iraq is also likely to serve as a gateway to other issues. Already Mr. Kerry's claim that Iraq is a diversion has led him to accuse Mr. Bush of neglecting other matters. Speaking at Temple University on Friday, he cited independence from Middle East oil and relations with the Muslim world among those areas of neglect, and he called for debt reduction to support social progress in "the most vulnerable nations."
Mr. Kerry also argued that the Bush administration had failed to address "the nuclear danger" posed by the advancing nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea.
Some foreign policy analysts argue that Iran has been an accidental beneficiary of the two American-led wars of the last four years, which removed hostile governments in neighboring Afghanistan and Iraq. The 160,000 American troops in those two nations are preoccupied, at least for the moment. Oil prices are at record levels, a boon to Iran, and Iran's fundamentalist religious leaders have tightened their hold on power.
"I don't care who wins the election - Bush or Kerry - Iran will come right to the top of the agenda, right under Iraq," said Geoffrey Kemp, director of regional strategic programs at the Nixon Center.
Both Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry call Iran's nuclear program unacceptable, and both speak of pursuing diplomacy to choke it off. Mr. Kerry says he would also pursue sanctions, though there is little sign that European nations would join that course.
North Korea's nuclear program is more advanced than Iran's; the C.I.A. has warned that North Korea may conduct its first nuclear test before the election. Again, both candidates call for diplomacy. But while Mr. Bush wants to continue the "six nation" talks toward North Korea's disarmament, Mr. Kerry says he would also pursue direct talks with Pyongyang.
Neither man has said what he would do if diplomacy failed.
-------- ENERGY
-------- alternative energy
Kerry yet to take a position on giant wind-power project
By Hal Bernton
Seattle Times staff reporter,
Thursday, September 30, 2004
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002049881_kerrywind30m.html
NANTUCKET, Mass. - From his family's island vacation home here that fronts the sea, John Kerry relishes the chance to hook into his windsurfing gear and sail as far as 35 miles across Nantucket Sound to Cape Cod.
On the campaign trail, when Kerry talks about U.S. energy independence, he cites the wind as part of a massive, new effort to develop U.S. renewable-energy sources.
"I believe we can - and should - produce 20 percent of our electricity from renewable sources by 2020," Kerry said in a June 2003 speech on energy delivered in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. "Twenty by 2020 - now that's a clear vision for America."
But Kerry's vision is not yet clear on whether he supports the largest wind-power project ever proposed in the United States. The project would erect 130 turbine-topped towers in the middle of blustery Nantucket Sound, a site touted by the developer as the best wind-power site in New England.
So far, Kerry has balked at endorsing the project, saying he is waiting to review an Army Corps of Engineers draft report expected to be released later this fall.
"I believe that wind energy can, and should play an important role in supplying a portion of our future energy needs," Kerry said in a written response to The Seattle Times. "The Cape Wind project is the first of its kind in the nation. And like ... major environmental groups, I will wait until the Environmental Impact Study is complete before making a final decision on the project." Republicans have taken note of Kerry's noncommittal stance on the project in his home state even as he preaches the virtues of alternative energy in campaign stops around the nation. And the Republican National Committee Web site portrays that as another example of what it says are Kerry's contradictory policy stances.
Kerry's cautious approach to the Nantucket project reflects the intense controversy the project has generated since first disclosed in 2001.
Spun by offshore breezes, the project's wind turbines - on an average day - could supply about 75 percent of the power demand of the Cape Cod area, including Nantucket Island, power that might otherwise be supplied by an oil-fired or coal-fired power plant that emits carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and other pollutants.
Some renewable-energy advocates, including Greenpeace, have embraced the project as an important step in easing the nation's reliance on foreign oil and combating global warming.
Craigville Beach's waterfront homes look out across Nantucket Sound where Cape Wind wants to build a wind-power park. Opponents say it would despoil the area. "This is what leadership is all about," said Kert Davies, research director for Greenpeace USA. "He [Kerry] can tell the story about why we need this."
But critics - and there are plenty to be found on Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket - raise concerns about the effects on birds, fish, whales and navigation. And, they say that their beloved Sound - a place cherished by whale watchers, boaters, fishermen and millions of other New Englanders - is the wrong place for an industrial-scale wind-power project.
"As noble as is the concept of clean energy, I dare to argue that it's different here," wrote Brian Tarcy a Falmouth, Mass., resident in an opinion piece published in the Cape Cod Times on April 23. "Is this so hard to figure out? This is our Yosemite, our Grand Canyon. That's the argument, period."
For Kerry, the debate also is complicated by the vehement opposition of a close political ally, Sen. Ted Kennedy, whose Hyannis Port compound on Cape Cod would be among the closest shore points to the project. Kennedy's front lawn would be just six miles from the nearest turbines, which would be clearly visible on sunny days.
But Kerry also has political allies who are backing the $750 million project, including Jim Gordon, president of Cape Wind Associates, the Nantucket project developer. Gordon is a Boston neighbor to Kerry and has raised funds for his campaign. And he hasn't been shy about pressing the merits of the project to Kerry.
"I have been to his office a couple of times to talk about the project," Gordon said. "He [Kerry] wants to see the [Corps of Engineers] environmental-impact statement, and that is certainly a reasonable position. We are convinced that when it is complete, that it will show a compelling public-interest benefit."
The project would have a significant footprint.
The towers would rise about 250 feet above the ocean and would support gargantuan turbine blades that, when extended in a vertical position, would rise another 170 feet or so, creating a total height roughly two-thirds that of Seattle's Space Needle.
These turbine-topped towers would be spaced in a grid pattern over 24 square miles of Nantucket Sound in a shallow-water area known as Horseshoe Shoal that lies between Cape Cod and Nantucket Island.
The Cape Wind proposal is part of a broader wave of wind-energy projects taking hold around the nation. Washington - with vast windy expanses east of the Cascades - is at the forefront with 254 megawatts of power installed last year, the sixth-highest capacity in the nation, according to the American Wind Energy Association.
Many of these projects have been spurred by a federal tax credit that Congress has yet to renew.
The Cape Wind project would be the first U.S. project to be located offshore. It follows the development pattern of offshore projects in Europe and a proposal to build a 700-megawatt wind plant off Prince Rupert, B.C.
But the United States does not have a comprehensive plan to regulate offshore wind power, or even to collect royalties or lease fees from those developers who erect towers in federal waters. Such regulatory gaps prompted the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, in a major review that Kerry helped to launch, to conclude that the current permitting process for offshore wind power is inadequate.
Still, proponents say that such shortcomings are no reason to delay the project, with construction scheduled to begin as soon as next year.
In the meantime, everyone is waiting to see if the plan passes muster with the Army Corps of Engineers, and the junior Democratic senator from Massachusetts.
Hal Bernton: 206-464-2581 or hbernton@seattletimes.com
-------- OTHER
-------- environment
Global Warming Is Expected to Raise Hurricane Intensity
September 30, 2004
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/science/30hurricane.html?pagewanted=all
Global warming is likely to produce a significant increase in the intensity and rainfall of hurricanes in coming decades, according to the most comprehensive computer analysis done so far.
By the 2080's, seas warmed by rising atmospheric concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases could cause a typical hurricane to intensify about an extra half step on the five-step scale of destructive power, says the study, done on supercomputers at the Commerce Department's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, N.J. And rainfall up to 60 miles from the core would be nearly 20 percent more intense.
Other computer modeling efforts have also predicted that hurricanes will grow stronger and wetter as a result of global warming. But this study is particularly significant, independent experts said, because it used half a dozen computer simulations of global climate, devised by separate groups at institutions around the world. The long-term trends it identifies are independent of the normal lulls and surges in hurricane activity that have been on display in recent decades.
The study was published online on Tuesday by The Journal of Climate and can be found at www.gfdl.noaa.gov/reference/bibliography/2004/tk0401.pdf.
The new study of hurricanes and warming "is by far and away the most comprehensive effort" to assess the question using powerful computer simulations, said Dr. Kerry A. Emanuel, a hurricane expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has seen the paper but did not work on it. About the link between the warming of tropical oceans and storm intensity, he said, "This clinches the issue."
Dr. Emanuel and the study's authors cautioned that it was too soon to know whether hurricanes would form more or less frequently in a warmer world. Even as seas warm, for example, accelerating high-level winds can shred the towering cloud formations of a tropical storm.
But the authors said that even if the number of storms simply stayed the same, the increased intensity would substantially increase their potential for destruction.
Experts also said that rising sea levels caused by global warming would lead to more flooding from hurricanes - a point underlined at the United Nations this week by leaders of several small island nations, who pleaded for more attention to the potential for devastation from tidal surges.
The new study used four climate centers' mathematical approximations of the physics by which ocean heat fuels tropical storms.
With almost every combination of greenhouse-warmed oceans and atmosphere and formulas for storm dynamics, the results were the same: more powerful storms and more rainfall, said Robert Tuleya, one of the paper's two authors. He is a hurricane expert who recently retired after 31 years at the fluid dynamics laboratory and teaches at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Va. The other author was Dr. Thomas R. Knutson of the Princeton laboratory.
Altogether, the researchers spawned around 1,300 virtual hurricanes using a more powerful version of the same supercomputer simulations that generates Commerce Department forecasts of the tracks and behavior of real hurricanes.
Dr. James B. Elsner, a hurricane expert at Florida State University who was among the first to predict the recent surge in Atlantic storm activity, said the new study was a significant step in examining the impacts of a warmer future.
But like Dr. Emanuel, he also emphasized that the extraordinary complexity of the oceans and atmosphere made any scientific progress "baby steps toward a final answer."
--------
Russia set to ratify Kyoto
Putin has backed Kyoto to get EU support for Russia joining WTO
Thursday 30 September 2004,
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0F18E5D1-D030-4530-80E7-8A0AECB5B8C7.htm
The Russian cabinet has approved the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol on combating global warming.
Thursday's move cleared the way for parliament to vote on the international pact, which needs to be ratified by Moscow to take effect.
The cabinet has to submit a draft bill on ratification of the protocol to the state Duma, the lower parliament, which approves nearly all bills backed by President Vladimir Putin.
A government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the ratification bill would be submitted to parliament shortly so that the Duma could ratify it before the end of the year.
Putin pledged in May to speed up approval of the protocol in return for European Union support of Russia's bid to join the World Trade Organisation (WTO).
"It's a political decision, it's a forced decision" to ratify Kyoto, Putin's economic adviser Andrei Illarionov, who led Russian opponents of Kyoto, told the cabinet, Interfax news agency reported.
Global warming
"It's not a decision we are making with pleasure."
"It's a political decision, it's a forced decision [to ratify Kyoto]. It's not a decision we are making with pleasure"
Andrei Illarionov, Putin's economic adviser
The 1997 Kyoto Protocol seeks to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which are widely seen as a key factor behind global warming.
The EU has long urged Russia to ratify the pact, which must be joined by no fewer than 55 countries that accounted for at least 55% of global emissions in 1990.
That minimum now can be reached only with Russia because the US, China and some other big industrial nations have rejected the treaty.
Illarionov and other Russian foes of the Kyoto protocol have argued that joining the pact would stymie Russia's economic growth and make Putin's goal of doubling gross domestic product in a decade unattainable.
The protocol calls for countries to bring their emissions down to 1990 levels by 2012.
Industrial production
If a country exceeds the emissions level, it could be forced to cut back industrial production.
Russia's emissions have fallen by 32% since 1990 largely due to the post-Soviet industrial meltdown, but they have started to rise again amid the economic revival of the past few years.
Greenhouse gas emissions in Russia have begun to rise again Illarionov continued his scathing attack on the pact on Thursday even though he acknowledged that Russia needed to ratify it for political reasons.
"We mustn't cherish illusions about positive or neutral consequences" of the pact, he told the cabinet, according to Interfax. "This will concern each of our citizens."
Some observers have speculated that Russia has wavered on the Kyoto ratification because it was jockeying for more favourable terms when rules are worked out.
They say Russia wants a mechanism under which countries that come in with emission levels below the targets can sell credits to nations that still need to reduce emissions. Agencies
-------- ACTIVISTS
Vatican official blasts war in Iraq
Vatican has reiterated the Holy See's position on the invasion
Thursday 30 September 2004
AFP
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/BFDF967B-70D5-4412-9019-E8CF022B2A8E.htm
The Vatican has blasted the US-led war in Iraq in the first speech by an official of the Holy See at the United Nations general assembly in New York.
"The position of the Holy See concerning the military action of 2002-2003 is well known. Everyone can see that it did not lead to a safer world either inside or outside Iraq," the Vatican's foreign minister, Monsignor Giovanni Lajolo, said in his address.
It was the first speech to the assembly by a representative of the Holy See, which holds observer status at the UN. The Vatican was only given the right to speak at the annual assembly in July.
According to a text of the speech made public by the Vatican on Thursday, Lajolo condemned terrorism as "an aberrant phenomenon, utterly unworthy of man".
"It seems obvious that terrorism can only be effectively challenged through a concerted multinational approach ... and not through the politics of unilateralism," said Lajola.
Global dimensions The official, appointed the Vatican's top foreign official by Pope John Paul II last year, said that while the fight against terrorism meant "neutralising its active breeding grounds", more important was "long-term action, directed with foresight and patience, at its roots".
"It seems obvious that terrorism can only be effectively challenged through a concerted multinational approach ... and not through the politics of unilateralism"
Monsignor Giovanni Lajolo, Vatican's Foreign Minister He said terrorism had already assumed global dimensions, "today no state can presume to be safe from it".
Turning to the Middle East, he said Israeli and Palestinian leaders "have the grave duty to demonstrate their desire for peace" and urged them to follow the road map for peace "with determination and courage".
He reminded delegates that there could be no justice in the Middle East without mutual forgiveness. "This clearly requires greater moral courage than the use of arms."
As for the future of the body, which failed to prevent the US and Britain from going to war in Iraq, Lajola said the UN should be given "special prerogatives to facilitate action to prevent conflicts at times of international crisis".
--------
Protesters prepare for chase as plutonium ships near UK
By John Lichfield in Paris
30 September 2004
UK Independent
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/story.jsp?story=567215
Anti-nuclear protesters are preparing for a game of cat and mouse with French and British authorities as two ships loaded with weapons-grade plutonium approach the Channel in the next few days.
The two British ships, with an escort of Royal Marine commandos, are transporting 140kg of military-surplus plutonium - enough to make 30 nuclear warheads - for experimental conversion to nuclear fuel in the south of France.
The ships, which left Charleston, south Carolina, on 20 September, are designed to carry radioactive materials. Their progress across the Atlantic is being monitored by satellite and aircraft.
A Greenpeace ship, L'Esperanza, and a flotilla of yachts, hope to impede the plutonium shipment before it reaches Cherbourg for a 600-mile road journey to a nuclear processing plant in the Rhône estuary.
The precise whereabouts and movements of the British-flagged, nuclear transports - the Pacific Teal and the Pacific Pintail - are being kept secret to prevent protesters from intercepting them at sea. Greenpeace officials expect the ships to dock in Cherbourg this weekend, probably at night.
"The US and France are unnecessarily threatening international security and the environment. There is no conceivable justification for this transport," said Shaun Burnie of Greenpeace International.
The US will have no capacity to convert military plutonium into nuclear power station fuel - a process never attempted before - until next year. Washington has awarded a €243m (£167m) experimental contract to convert the plutonium into fuel for nuclear reactors - mixed oxide fuel or Mox - to the French company, Areva. Once converted, the fuel will be shipped back to the US early next year.
The contract for transporting the material has been awarded to a British company, whose ships are - exceptionally - being guarded by a unit of Royal Marine commandos.
Greenpeace and other anti-nuclear campaigners say that the movement of weapons-grade plutonium half the way around the world in this way is an invitation to catastrophe: either a radioactive leak or an attempt by a terrorist group to seize the shipment to make a nuclear bomb of its own.
Protests are planned all along the route from Normandy to the Rhône estuary but the plutonium is expected to travel at night along a secret route.
The consignment represents a tiny portion of the 34 tons of excess weapons grade plutonium which the US must dispose of as part of a disarmament agreement with Russia.
Jacques-Emmanuel Saulnier, a spokesman for Areva, accused Greenpeace and other "militant ecologists" of hypocrisy. He added: "They fought for years for the elimination of military-grade plutonium and now they are protesting against a process which is part of that elimination".
Greenpeace says that military-grade plutonium should not be recycled for peaceful purposes but mixed with radioactive waste, solidified or vitrified, and stored.
-------
------- OneList (submissions from subscribers)
------- Depleted Uranium Keeps On Killing!
-----------
Posted
without profit or payment for research and educational
purposes only,
in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.