NucNews - December 15, 2004



-------- NUCLEAR 

Uranium puts different gloss on WMC valuation

The Sydney Morning Herald.

By Elizabeth Knight

December 15, 2004

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Elizabeth-Knight/Uranium-puts-different-gloss-on-WMC-valuation/2004/12/14/1102787085189.html?oneclick=true

During the 1990s, when nuclear weapons were being decommissioned, the demand for uranium hit a low point and the reserves that had been stockpiled by miners were more than enough to supply the nuclear energy needs around the globe.

But 18 months ago these stockpiles had become seriously depleted and energy users started to look for fresh supplies.

Over this period the price of uranium oxide has leapt to new highs and there appears to be some recognition that supply and demand are now out of balance - and in favour of suppliers.

Some of the traditional exporters, like Russia, are holding on to their reserves and further curtailing supply.

And who is one of the largest producers of uranium in the world? WMC Resources. The same company that seems to have hidden its light under a bushel until a unwelcome bunch of Swiss upstarts, fresh from gorging themselves on MIM, pitched a cheekily timed and opportunistically priced bid for the Melbourne establishment resources group.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

All of a sudden the outlook for the uranium price has been highlighted, having moved from $US12 ($15.80) a pound to $US25/lb and that as a long-term sustainable price too.

WMC has 8 per cent of wordwide production but 38 per cent of known resources. It's also got political stability.

Led by the Chinese, Korean and a herd of US utilities wondering where to source medium-term supplies of uranium, there is plenty of long-term demand, albeit not growing at great speed.

WMC has got some long-term contracts in place at $US11-$US13 which will need to be phased out over the next four years so it won't get a real kick from the upturn in the uranium price until 2008.

If one could factor this in tomorrow a $US1/lb improvement in the uranium price would equate to an additional $32 million in cash flow to WMC. And that's only if the current production rates are assumed.

If they pull more stuff out of the ground and ramp up production - which is the plan - then the cash flow implications are a multiple of this amount.

But even at the current rate of production, an increase of, let's say, $US5/lb would increase the net present value of the uranium reserves by $1.6 billion.

These are big numbers but let's also remember that they are still a long way off.

Long enough for Xstrata to pretty much ignore them for the purposes of its valuations.

Based on all this, plus WMC's announcement last week of a $1 billion capital return (give or take a couple of hundred million previously announced) plus an upgraded production report from Olympic Dam a few weeks ago, why is it that the WMC share price has done nothing?

(Oops, almost forgot the steak knives: a small profit upgrade also announced last week.)

The reason is that, while facing a bid, WMC is not being priced on fundamentals but on the likelihood of rival offer being placed on the table.

To date WMC's board has done everything in its power to ignore or discourage the overtures from Xstrata.

Its strategy is not so much to find an alternative bidder as to get rid of the underpriced offer from Xstrata and be left independent.

WMC chief executive Andrew Michelmore is aware that when his target statement hits the market in early January, it will provide the trigger for others to enter the bidding war.

I maintain the belief that, despite murmurs to the contrary from the likes of Rio and BHP Billiton, one of the other majors will put some money up to buy WMC.

It has a world-quality resource in Olympic Dam and it is easy pickings for the big boys.

But until there is anything new on the takeover front it is unlikely that all this good news out of WMC will do much to stimulate the share price.

But whether it's ultimately Xstrata with a higher bid or some other mining giant, the fact is that this undeveloped upside in WMC will probably end up in the hands of someone else and not the current WMC shareholders.

This company set itself up for a bid a couple of years ago when it undertook the demerger of its aluminium business.

It did so to ward off a different but, what it considered to be, undervalued bid. And it was only ever a matter of time before this exposed WMC Resources to predators.



-------- britain

Britain to bury other countries' nuclear waste: report

LONDON (AFP)

Dec 15, 2004

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041215152441.d29tgt83.html

The British government has decided to bury nuclear waste from Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland in Britain to raise money to pay for its own nuclear waste disposal, a newspaper said Wednesday.

The decision taken by Trade and Industry Secretary Patricia Hewitt overturns a 30-year-old policy that Britain would not become a dumping ground for other countries' nuclear waste, the Guardian daily reported.

The move was announced Monday in a written statement by Hewitt to the House of Commons.

Hewitt was quoted as saying that the extra income of up to 680 million pounds (1.3 billion dollars, 984 million euros) would be used "for nuclear clean-up which will result in savings for the UK taxpayer over the longer term".

Environmental groups, such as Greenpeace, warned that it would leave Britain with thousands of tonnes of waste for which there is currently no form of disposal.

Both Conservative and Labour governments have previously said that waste arising as a result of lucrative nuclear fuel reprocessing contracts at Sellafield in Cumbria should be returned to the country of origin.

The opposition Liberal Democrats criticized the government for a "deeply irresponsible environmental decision".

The party's environment spokesman Norman Baker called it a "terrible attempt to offload some of the 48-billion-pound cost of cleaning up nuclear sites."

He recalled that Britain does not yet have a depository for its own nuclear waste.

"The Energy Act was supposed to help Britain clean up, but in order to pay for it we are becoming a nuclear dumpsite," he said

-----

'Nuclear dumpsite' plan attacked

bbc 15 December, 2004

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4097935.stm

Plans to allow foreign nuclear waste to be permanently stored in the UK have been branded "deeply irresponsible" by the Liberal Democrats.

The government has confirmed intermediate level waste (ILW) that was to have been shipped back to its home countries will now be stored in the UK.

The cash raised will go towards the UK's nuclear clean-up programme.

But Lib Dem Norman Baker accused ministers of turning Britain into a "nuclear dumpsite".

Waste shipments

Under current contracts, British Nuclear Fuels should return all but low level waste, but none has ever been sent back.

In future, only highly-radioactive waste will be sent back to its country of origin, normally Germany or Japan, under armed guard.

Intermediate waste from countries such as Japan, Germany, Spain, Italy, Switzerland and Sweden will be stored permanently in the UK.

At the moment, this waste is stored at Sellafield, in Cumbria, in the form of glass bricks, untreated liquid waste or solid material in drums.

In a statement, the Department of Trade and Industry said the new policy meant there would be a "sixfold reduction in the number of waste shipments to overseas countries".

And it said highly-radioactive waste would be returned to its home country sooner, ensuring there would be no overall increase in radioactivity.

'Environmental millstone'

Trade Secretary Patricia Hewitt said the new arrangements, revealed in a Commons written statement, would raise up to £680m for Britain's nuclear clean-up programme, under the new Nuclear Decommissioning Agency.

But the move has been criticised by environmental groups and the Liberal Democrats.

Mr Baker, the Lib Dem environment spokesman, said: "I have been warning for months that this would happen and raised it with government several times. But now our worst fears have been confirmed.

"Once again Britain's environmental and health needs are being ignored in policies driven by the Treasury and DTI.

"This is a terrible attempt to offload some of the £48bn cost of cleaning up nuclear sites.

"The Energy Act was supposed to help Britain clean up, but in order to pay for it we are becoming a nuclear dumpsite.

"The nuclear industry is an economic, social and environmental millstone that hangs around Britain's neck."  



<a name="du"></a>

-------- depleted uranium

How Good Is Good Enough?
Chapter 5: The best test

BY BOB EVANS
247-4758
HAMPTON ROADS, VA. Daily Press
December 15, 2004

http://www.dailypress.com/news/specials/dp-du5,0,4881579.story?coll=dp-breaking-news

The world's most accurate test for depleted uranium exposure is now available - but only in Britain and Germany. The Pentagon says U.S. vets don't need it.

ABOUT DU

What is it?

It's a byproduct of making "enriched uranium" for nuclear weapons and fuel. "Enriched uranium" is somewhat misleading because processors take uranium with natural levels of radioactive isotopes, primarily Uranium 238 and Uranium 235, and remove as much of the U-235 as possible. Weapons makers and nuclear plant owners want almost-pure, highly radioactive U-235. What's left behind is primarily U-238 (other isotopes remain, in very small quantities). That substance has about 40 percent less radioactivity than natural uranium and is "depleted uranium."

What makes it so important?

It's proven to be the most effective tank-killing weapon ever. A round of depleted uranium no bigger than your little finger can stop a top-of-the line tank without depleted uranium armor. The weapons get sharper as they hit and plow through thick steel. They also create fireballs of thousands of degrees, a potent combination.

What is the controversy?

As they strike, the weapons get sharper by peeling off millions of shards of burning depleted uranium. Those burning pieces become microscopic dust that can be inhaled. Depleted uranium is a mildly radioactive, toxic substance that can cause damage to live tissue and cells once inside the body.

In Great Britain, veterans of the 1991 Gulf War are signing up to take the world's most precise test for determining exposure to depleted uranium.

The U.S. government advertises a test for its veterans of that war too. But the test that it offers can't detect uranium in low amounts, has a high error rate and uses equipment that's less sensitive and accurate than the machines the British are using. U.S. vets and soldiers who've had this test say they've been told they weren't exposed when, in fact, the tests were simply incapable of detecting whether depleted uranium was present.

Members of Congress have asked the Pentagon to look into testing programs in other countries. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff promised to do that in April. But after that promise was made, the officer in charge of U.S. testing said he had no reason to gather such data because his test was good enough.

"Our labs would easily detect depleted uranium levels approaching U.S. peacetime safety standards," says Lt. Col. Mark Melanson, who runs the health physics program at the Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine.

One of those labs handles all depleted uranium testing for the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Randall Parrish, a scientist who played a big role in developing the British test, says he can't understand why the United States is satisfied with an inferior test.

"It is incorrect to assume that a low concentration of uranium in urine means there is no contamination," he says, because there's no good data to support that conclusion.

The U.S. government's refusal to adopt a state-of-the art test also prevents researchers from finding out why tens of thousands of veterans of the Gulf War have debilitating illnesses, says Mohamad B. Abou-Donia, a researcher at Duke University.

Abou-Donia has conducted many significant experiments into the causes of illnesses suffered by Gulf War vets. He also recently published a study that reviewed available scientific work on the health effects of depleted uranium.

Knowing which veterans were definitely exposed to depleted uranium - not just those who might have been exposed to huge doses - would fill a huge gap in the research, he says.

But until a better test is adopted and used on a larger number of vets, that data isn't available, he says.

So there's no certainty about who was exposed and who was not. Until scientists can reliably determine who was exposed and who was not, they can't prove or disprove links between depleted uranium and individual veterans' health problems, Abou-Donia says.

Veterans and scientists have questioned for several years whether the use of depleted uranium weapons in the Gulf War is one of the reasons that so many veterans of that war came home weak and full of pain.

The weapons provided a decisive edge in tank warfare in the 1991 and 2003 battles in the Persian Gulf region. They also left behind millions and millions of pieces of easily inhalable black dust that's toxic and mildly radioactive. The dust is a necessary result of using the weapons to hit and destroy hard targets.

In recent years, researchers have shown that laboratory animals that inhaled depleted uranium dust developed cancerous tumors. They've also found that a single particle of depleted uranium can alter the genetic structure of nearby cells in ways consistent with widely held scientific beliefs about the way cancer starts in the human body. And they've found evidence that once depleted uranium gets in the body, it migrates through the bloodstream to the brain, testicles, lungs, kidneys and bones, where it can reside for years.

But all that research constitutes preliminary steps toward figuring out how big a problem the dust from depleted uranium weapons might be, researchers say. Meanwhile, the military plans to significantly reduce its investigations into possible health effects resulting from depleted uranium, as well as other possible causes of Gulf War-related illnesses.

IN BRITAIN, SAME COMPLAINTS PROMPTED DIFFERENT RESPONSE

The government's attitude toward critics of the weapon isn't much different in Britain. British and U.S. troops are among the few who actually used depleted uranium weapons in battles. A large number of British vets have also been complaining about health problems similar to those experienced by U.S. armed forces from that war.

Parrish says his government paid to develop the more accurate tests for veterans in part because of political pressure and in part because of medical experts' suspicions that existing tests yielded inconclusive and inadequate evidence of exposure.

Those tests were being used to dismiss the veterans' benefits claims. Some British veterans went to independent labs and received results that proved depleted uranium was in their urine. Analysis of 24 hours' worth of urine is the commonly accepted method of determining whether someone has been exposed to uranium of any kind.

The British veterans' pleas for a better depleted uranium test also got support from the British Royal Society, an invitation-only group of prominent scientists. The Royal Society carries clout in Britain: It dates to 1660, and its members are readily acknowledged as among the best scientific minds in the country. Society members decided to tackle the problem of Gulf War illnesses independent of the government, and after several years, they issued a series of findings.

While those findings didn't contradict the government's official viewpoint in many ways, the society did call for a testing program that could more accurately detect whether someone had depleted uranium in their body. That, coupled with activism by veterans groups, left the government little political choice.

It took about two years to develop the highly accurate tests, says Parrish, a professor of isotope geology at the University of Leicester.

In addition to his teaching, he runs a laboratory at the British Geological Survey supported by Britain's Natural Environment Research Council. The council is independent of the government and is similar to the National Science Foundation in the United States, Parrish says.

Parrish and David Coggon, a scientist and chairman of the board that runs the testing program, say there are only four labs (three in England, the other in Germany) that have adopted the more rigorous testing regimen so far.

Part of the difficulty of testing for depleted uranium in someone's body is that you can't cut up a person and look for the uranium like you would if it were in a rock, soil sample or lab rat. That's why scientists look for it in urine. While not a perfect source, it's the best available right now, Parrish and others say. Even the U.S. military agrees.

Finding depleted uranium in the body gets complicated. Natural uranium is in everyone's body because it's in the food and water we ingest. Therefore, there's natural uranium in everyone's urine. It's difficult to accurately identify the depleted uranium as opposed to the natural uranium, in part because the amounts of both are so small.

Once obtained, the uranium in a 24-hour urine sample is typically measured in nanograms. A nanogram is one-billionth of a gram or one billion times lighter than a dollar bill. If a total of 1 nanogram of natural and depleted uranium are involved, the quantities of each are even lower. It takes extremely sophisticated machines to help find and identify the microscopic bits of depleted uranium.

The British and U.S. governments have been giving veterans and soldiers urine tests for depleted uranium for years. But unless the soldiers had relatively large quantities of uranium in their bodies, the tests couldn't detect depleted uranium apart from natural uranium without a high margin of error, Parrish and other scientists say.

LIMITATIONS ON TESTS CREATE QUESTIONABLE RESULTS

U.S. military testing officials say that unless a sample has a relatively high total uranium level, no attempt is made to determine how much uranium is natural and how much is depleted uranium. The level is deemed safe, and there's no need to tell the difference, they say.

As a result, U.S. and British veterans have been told for years that they tested negative for depleted uranium, Parrish and others say. Instead, all that had been demonstrated was that the methods used in testing were incapable of detecting depleted uranium in such small quantities.

Painstakingly careful methods to collect the urine and separate the uranium from the liquid and other chemicals in the sample are important, Parrish says.

Axel Gerdes, a German scientist who worked with Parrish to develop the tests, says a crucial difference involves the methods used to concentrate the uranium in urine before it's analyzed.

He says the labs used by the U.S. Army dilute the urine with water, which makes it easier to examine, and take other shortcuts that reduce the time and manpower to do the tests. That comes at the cost of losing the ability to detect small quantities with accuracy, he says, by a factor of about 1,000.

SUPERIOR SPECTROMETER USED BY BRITISH LABORATORIES

The British testing program also calls for using superior hardware to aid the analysis, Gerdes and Parrish say.

Several machines are employed for that task, they say, including a multicollector ICP mass spectrometer. A mass spectrometer is a machine used to determine the contents of an unknown substance. A multicollector ICP mass spectrometer is an even more sophisticated version that's specially equipped to accurately measure minute quantities of radioactive substances, including the various forms of an element known as isotopes. The way that scientists tell the difference between natural uranium and depleted uranium in a sample is by counting these isotopes, a process that at times involves tiny amounts of an element.

Scientists using the procedures and hardware developed for the British test are now able to reliably identify the difference between depleted uranium and regular uranium in samples with as little as 0.1 nanogram of total uranium per liter of urine, Parrish says. That's 10 billion times lighter than a dollar bill. All this is done with a margin of error of less than 1 percent, making it a very accurate test.

Lt. Col. Melanson, who oversees much of the Pentagon's scientific research into the health hazards of depleted uranium, says the most exacting lab test used on U.S. veterans and active-duty military personnel must have at least 3 nanograms of total uranium to examine per liter of urine. That's 30 times more than the minimum for the new British test.

The most sophisticated U.S. testing labs use a quadruple ICP mass spectrometer, Melanson says. Parrish and other experts in using mass spectrometry to identify materials say that's a much less capable machine than the multicollector type that the British are using, a machine that's been available for about 10 years.

Gerdes now works at a university in Germany and does testing there for privately financed groups. He has an even more sensitive version of the machine than the British labs do. He says it enables his lab to accurately detect even smaller quantities of depleted uranium.

Earlier this year, nine soldiers from a New York-based National Guard unit who had health problems after serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom had their urine tested at Gerdes' lab at the University of Frankfurt.

Gerdes says the nine veterans had anywhere from 1.6 to 5.7 nanograms per liter of uranium in their urine. Of those, five had little or no depleted uranium in their samples, while the others' samples contained 1.2 percent to 8.2 percent depleted uranium.

After publicity about the tests in the New York Daily News, those veterans were tested by the labs used by the U.S. military, says Michael J. Kilpatrick, deputy director for the Pentagon's office of health protection for deployed troops. None had enough total uranium in their urine to be concerned about, Kilpatrick says, and the U.S. labs didn't find any depleted uranium. The cause of the soldiers' illnesses remain undiagnosed.

Gerdes says the use of total uranium as a guide to the level of depleted uranium in someone's body is a mistake because there's often no correlation between how much total uranium is in a sample and what percentage of it was depleted uranium. That's an important point that the U.S. military seems to overlook, he says. The U.S. military says the only difference is that depleted uranium is less radioactive and therefore less harmful.

After initial reports about the results from Gerdes' lab involving the New York veterans, several members of Congress questioned whether the U.S. military should be looking at more rigorous testing. They directed the questions to Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a congressional hearing April 20.

They specifically asked about tests being developed in other countries, in light of the different results involving the New York National Guard unit.

JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN SAID STAFF WOULD LOOK INTO TESTS

Myers told them he didn't know about the other countries' testing but that he would look into the matter.

Coggon, head of the board that oversees the British testing, says he's not aware of any effort from the United States to get information about the processes or procedures developed there. Melanson, the U.S. military official deemed the most knowledgeable about depleted uranium testing, says he's not familiar with the British program and sees no need to inquire.

The tests available in the United States are good enough, he says, and are capable of determining the presence of depleted uranium at levels nearly 1,000 times lower than the health safety standards established in the United States.

When U.S. troops or veterans are tested, they're usually told that their results didn't contain uranium outside the normal background levels of uranium intake and therefore aren't considered a health risk.

That standard is set by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and is based on a representative sample of 1,006 people given urine tests collected and analyzed by another federal agency. But the NRC attaches a warning to those standards, noting it's "unknown" whether the levels of uranium in the survey "represent cause for health concern." It's merely a level of uranium in urine for a cross section of the population 6 years and older and says nothing of how healthy or unhealthy they are or will be, the NRC says.

The NRC further cautions that "more research is needed" to determine what the healthy level is.

In the draft of a 2002 report outlining the issues involved in using urine testing for soldiers' exposure to depleted uranium, Melanson's own staff pointed out those same limitations and warnings.

One thing everyone agrees on is that no one has been able to credibly determine how much depleted uranium is in someone based on the level of depleted uranium in their urine.

Research shows pretty clearly that when any uranium is swallowed, it passes through the intestines and is excreted quickly. Particles created by the use of depleted uranium weapons, when inhaled, stay in the body much longer, Pentagon research shows.

The tiny bits of depleted uranium created when the weapons hit hard targets tend to be what chemists call ceramic, which means they don't easily break down in liquid. Various forms of uranium have a wide range of solubility, Parrish says. The effect of the high heat from the explosions and other factors make this particular kind of uranium a big unknown regarding how much and how fast it breaks down in the body and enters the blood and urine.

DUST IN LUNGS DOESN'T DISSOLVE QUICKLY, STUDY FINDS

The Army's recently completed five-year $6 million Capstone study of those tiny pieces of depleted uranium concluded that there's "a significant source of uncertainty" regarding how fast inhaled particles would dissolve in simulated lung fluid. Still, the study concluded, there was no significant health risk from inhaling particles of depleted uranium that result from use of the weapons in combat.

The Capstone study said the vast majority of the particles created from use of the weapons and small enough to be inhaled took 100 days or more before dissolving halfway in simulated lung fluid. Generalizations were not easy, it said, but the smallest particles tended to be the least soluble. That means that pieces more likely to get more deeply into the lungs last longer.

Anywhere from less than 1 percent to 35 percent of the inhalable-sized pieces tested in Capstone dissolved halfway in 10 days or less, the study found, while 58 percent to 99 percent took more than 100 days to dissolve half their mass. Dissolution of half of the mass of a contaminant is the government's standard measure of how long it might take to clear something from the lungs after occupational exposures.

That data indicates that even the smallest particles could stay in the lungs for several years, Melanson says, though he doubts that they would pose any significant health risk.

So far, the British have tested only about 30 troops as part of making sure that their procedures are accurate. None of those people had depleted uranium in their samples.

Parrish says it's possible that by now, all the inhaled depleted uranium that will ever dissolve in these soldiers' lungs has dissolved and the rest will remain inside without a way to detect it. He also says it's possible that all the uranium is dissolved.

That's one reason why the testing program is so important, he says - to find out, instead of speculating.

U.S. government scientists still find evidence of depleted uranium in the urine of troops with shrapnel wounds. But those larger particles tend to be more soluble than the dust that's inhaled, the Capstone study says.

Some researchers say the relatively lower solubility of depleted uranium dust could spell even more trouble for the veterans than thought. If those little pieces in the lungs and nearby lymph nodes aren't dissolving quickly and getting flushed out of the body through the blood and urinary tract, then they're sitting next to live tissue and blood cells, emitting DNA-altering alpha particles for years.

Under this theory, it would be extremely important to know how much of the uranium in someone's body is natural uranium, as opposed to depleted uranium, even if there are small quantities involved. That's because the level of natural uranium in someone's body is mostly swallowed, and more than 90 percent of it is flushed from the body within a day or two through excretory systems. The swallowed uranium therefore doesn't stay in one place to irradiate tissue or blood for hundreds of days.

Richard J. Albertini, a cancer researcher at the University of Vermont, says those pieces of radioactive dust in the lungs, as opposed to the digestive system, are important for another reason.

LOCATION OF THE METAL MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE

Research indicates that inhaled depleted uranium can cause genetic mutations in blood, he says. Those mutations signal what very well might be the first step toward cancer. Because all of a person's blood passes through the lungs to pick up oxygen to be distributed throughout the body, large quantities of blood are subject to mutations from exposure to depleted uranium. In contrast, he says, veterans with shrapnel in isolated parts of the body aren't irradiating as much of their blood because their wounds are rarely in places where most blood circulates.

Kilpatrick dismisses these arguments, in part because natural uranium is even more radioactive than depleted uranium. He also dismisses a possible link between inhaling depleted uranium and the neurological problems that seem to form the bulk of complaints by Gulf War veterans.

None of the neurological problems associated with those vets has been noted in the 50 years of research involving workers in the uranium industry, he says. So if the quantities of either form of uranium are lower than the Pentagon testing program shows, there shouldn't be a problem, he says.

The British Royal Society's final report on the hazards of depleted uranium basically agreed with the Pentagon's views of the health risks. But it called for better testing to help scientists get a better understanding of the relationship between intake and risks, as well as help figure out what might be ailing individual veterans.

Abou-Donia, the Duke University scientist who recently published a survey of available research on depleted uranium, says data from better tests - such as the ones being done in Britain - could prove very helpful. "Absolutely. Any monitoring of this chemical would be helpful," he says.

Abou-Donia has been conducting experiments and other studies on various possible causes of Gulf War veterans' illnesses for several years. One of the biggest problems that scientists have in that field is a lack of fundamental data, he says.

If thousands of veterans in the United States got the new tests, the lack of data regarding depleted uranium might be eased, he says.

Scientists might be able to tell, for example, whether veterans who definitely have depleted uranium inside them also have a type of brain abnormality thought to be characteristic of the neurological symptoms among Gulf War veterans, he says.

But until now, no one has had a test considered reliable enough to detect small enough quantities to determine who was probably exposed and who wasn't.

Scientists don't know what causes the brain abnormalities in those vets, Abou-Donia says. But unlike other chemicals and causes under suspicion, the depleted uranium in urine is measurable and might still be in the body.

The level of exposure to chemical weapons, bug spray and other suggested causes of the veterans' illnesses isn't detectable at this late date because those toxins are long gone from the body and no one kept accurate records of doses and other information on the 1991 battlefield, Abou-Donia says. Those toxins have done their damage and are gone. That's one reason that finding the cause of the veterans' complaints has been so difficult.

ACTUAL BENEFITS OF NEW TESTS NOT DETERMINED YET

Gerdes, an environmental geochemist, says he questions whether there's a link between depleted uranium exposure and the illnesses suffered by veterans. But doing the science and the testing is an important step toward understanding the problem. "There is simply a need to do further research in this topic," he says.

Parrish says he's not sure what the testing is going to find. He notes that though the British government agreed to finance use of the new tests for veterans of the Persian Gulf War and peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo, veterans of the continuing war in Iraq are tested with the less precise measurement.

A British Ministry of Defense spokesman says the new testing is considered important for veterans of the other wars because of the long period that's elapsed since the exposure and therefore the need to identify what might be smaller quantities.

He says the military is satisfied with the less-exact testing for veterans of the current fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, though some will be given the more sophisticated tests as an expedience.

The new testing program for the British veterans is just starting. Advertisements and notices directed at veterans started in late September, and about 300 people have signed up so far, Coggon says. About 1,500 are expected to sign up, says Charles Williams, a spokesman for the Ministry of Defense.

Williams and Parrish say it will probably take six months to a year before enough tests are concluded to get an accurate picture of how many vets have been exposed and at what level.

Parrish says that as long as Britain and the United States refuse to let outside independent laboratories handle the testing, there will be suspicions that the truth about exposures and possible problems are being concealed.

The two labs in Britain performing the tests are considered independent.

He says he and other lab workers do the testing and analysis, but they don't know whether they're working on "dummy" samples or actual veterans' urine. That's one of the many levels of exactitude they've built into the process to help ensure accuracy. Some dummy samples might be "spiked" with known quantities of uranium and depleted uranium in another lab and sent out with the vets' samples, but others are taken from people known to have no depleted uranium in their urine. That keeps the labs on their toes, Parrish says.

In the United States, the most precise testing that the Pentagon does is handled at a national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention laboratory, Melanson says.

When that federal agency does testing for the military, it won't release any information about the tests conducted there and won't even answer questions about the procedures, error rates or scientific standards for the tests, says Kathy Harben of the disease control agency.

She referred all questions about the agency's testing for the military to the Pentagon.

VETS SAY U.S. DOESN'T WANT TO PAY FOR BETTER TESTING

Steve Robinson, executive director of the Gulf War Resource Center Inc., a veterans rights group, says he suspects there are two reasons that the United States uses the less sophisticated testing method.

First, he says, is the cost.

Pentagon officials say their tests cost $200 to $400 a sample, depending on whether there's enough total uranium in the urine sample for the government to attempt to determine whether it contains depleted uranium.

Melanson initially refused to divulge the cost of this testing, saying it wasn't a factor in his decision-making.

Parrish says his test costs about $1,000 each.

Robinson and other veterans advocates say the second reason that the U.S. government doesn't want to use the more sophisticated tests is they're afraid the tests might help show possible links between the highly valued depleted uranium weapons and veterans' health problems.

"These are very effective weapons, and they want to keep them," says Steve Smithson, assistant director of the American Legion's Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Division.

Kilpatrick says the critics are wrong.

He and Melanson say there's no need to identify the low levels of depleted uranium that the British can find because the tests that the United States uses can detect depleted uranium 1,000 times less than what's dangerous to health.

They cite World Health Organization, or WHO, and U.S. Institute of Medicine reports as authorities, based on 50 years of health research involving uranium miners, millers and processors. The Institute of Medicine is part of the National Science Foundation and is considered the country's best impartial health research organization. Kilpatrick and Melanson also cite the recently completed Capstone study. It involved measurements of inhalable-sized particles of depleted uranium that resulted from test-range firing of the weapons into a real tank, the hulls and turrets of tanks, and other combat vehicles.

Kilpatrick and Melanson say the Capstone research got its title because officials think that it provides the last pieces of data necessary to determine the health effects of depleted uranium.

Scientists who have been working outside the Pentagon to answer that question say there are still some important pieces missing before drawing such final conclusions.

Carolyn Fulco is one of the authors of the Institute of Medicine's reports on Gulf War illnesses. She says it would not be accurate to say her organization was as conclusive as the Pentagon officials when it comes to how much depleted uranium can harm someone.

"There was almost no literature on depleted uranium," she says. Nearly all of it was on uranium before it became depleted and in circumstances very different from the possible exposure resulting from use of the weapons, she says.

As a result, the institute recommended additional study into nearly all the health questions raised by the use of depleted uranium in warfare. The WHO report says the same.

Beate Ritz is an epidemiologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, who specializes in how internal radiation sources cause cancer. She's also the primary author of several of the most recent studies of the health effects of working with uranium.

SCIENTISTS SAY SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE ISN'T REALLY KNOWN

When the Institute of Medicine needed an expert to review the report that Melanson cited to support his view that the U.S. testing program is adequate, it turned to her for approval. That's because she's one of the few people in the world qualified to pass judgments of that type, Fulco says.

Ritz now sits on an advisory panel for the institute's continuing review of possible causes of the illnesses suffered by Gulf War vets.

She says no one knows what the safe level of depleted uranium is inside someone's body when it comes to cancer and risk from radiation.

The field is rife with errors and misclassifications because actual testing to settle the matter with scientific assurance is almost impossible, she says.

"When you're looking at humans, you need large numbers of subjects," to make sure that you have accurate results, she says. "But you can't cage humans and feed them uranium and count the exposure for 20 years."

The next best thing is to pick an animal - and hope that you've picked the right one, she says.

Even then, rats, mice and monkeys often have genetic and other differences that can't tell you whether a human will react the same way, she says.

So to be sure, you have to try things out on humans. Or see what happens to them after exposure.

Lots of them.

Kilpatrick, Melanson and others say 50 years of experience watching the health and health problems of people who have worked as uranium miners, millers and processors during the Nuclear Age give them the number of people and the confidence to say that enough research has been done. They point out that they add in a large margin of error to make sure they're right.

They also dismiss the idea that depleted uranium exposures resulting from combat can be a serious radiation or cancer risk.

Ritz and Alexandra Miller, a researcher at the Armed Forces Radiobiological Research Institute, say that isn't a justified conclusion, as far as science goes.

"I don't see the data that supports that at all," Miller says.

The studies on people who worked in the uranium industry are often flawed and don't involve the same issues and exposures as soldiers on the battlefield, Miller says. The Institute of Medicine's report says the same thing, and so does the Department of Veterans Affairs' educational program for physicians and other health care workers.

Using uranium industry workers' health experiences as a benchmark might not be a good measure either, say critics of the military's dismissal of the health threat from depleted uranium.

Several studies by Congress' Government Accountability Office, or GAO, note that getting an accurate picture of nuclear workers' health is difficult. That's in part because for years, the government encouraged its contractors and managers to refuse to acknowledge work-related diseases and health problems. This helped mask the true death and illness rate to researchers.

As for whether the health standards are adequate, there's also a great deal of debate. The GAO says the government will probably need to spend more than $1 billion this decade to compensate nuclear workers for health problems - a higher cost than estimated because the number of workers with legitimate claims keeps rising.

In addition, the GAO says, there's little or no scientific agreement on what constitutes an acceptable radiation risk, even among U.S. government agencies.

SCIENTIFIC MODELS NEED TESTING TO PROVE ACCURACY

Kilpatrick and Melanson say the Capstone study's data-gathering enabled them to determine how much depleted uranium dust would be inhaled in the worst of battle circumstances. They say the calculations on that volume of dust, using mathematical and other models of human health adopted by government occupational and safety agencies, prove little or no adverse health effect from use of the weapons.

Those calculations create a new standard for discussing the issue, Kilpatrick says.

Ritz and Miller say the Capstone work doesn't change the fact that there has been insufficient experimentation on animals to prove or disprove the assertions of safety.

The calculations and models that the Pentagon points to are nothing more than theory waiting to be tested, they and other scientists say.

"You know the problem with models, don't you?" Ritz asks. "You get out of them what you put in."

The type of models that the Capstone study relies on for its conclusions are frequently shown to be flawed, she says. That's much of what health science is all about - testing the models and showing whether they work.

A recent example of how these models can be flawed occurred with the chemical paraquat, Ritz says.

For decades, the U.S. government had been using it - and giving it to other countries - to eradicate marijuana and other plants used to make drugs. Critics questioned the wisdom of those programs, noting that the possible effects of ingesting the drugs were not known.

Government officials dismissed the caution warnings.

For one thing, they noted that long-established scientific models said paraquat couldn't cause brain damage because its chemical composition kept it from penetrating through a layer of cells that protect the brain from impurities in the blood.

The layer of cells is called the "blood-brain" barrier.

"All that was true," Ritz says. But just a few years ago, one of her colleagues found that paraquat could get into the brain anyway.

Like other parts of the body, the brain needs amino acids to make proteins to keep going.

The brain has special nerves to directly transfer those acids to the brain, bypassing the brain-blood barrier. Paraquat is made of molecules that look like amino acids.

So the brain sucks up the paraquat molecules, thinking that they're amino acids, she says. "And it can cause brain damage when it happens."

That's one of many examples where the models aren't good enough.

And it's why sufficient research involving human cells and animals should be done to test the models thoroughly before declaring something safe, she and Miller say.

Vernon Walker, a cancer biologist at the Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute in New Mexico, conducted a study that found that when rats inhaled depleted uranium, they developed genetic mutations indicative of cancer.

He says the government exposure standards and scientific models used to determine workplace safety - the barometers of safety used in the Capstone study - don't include the potential for developing cancer in the way that his experiments showed is likely.

The military has drugs, developed in the World War II era for troops exposed to radiation, that can reduce those mutations to safer levels, he says.

Experiments are being conducted to see whether they have the same effect on depleted uranium inhaled from the battlefield, as well as from shrapnel.

He says that based on his experiments and what he's seen from other science on the subject, he'd be taking those drugs if he were a soldier in Iraq and was exposed - especially if he were hit by depleted uranium shrapnel.

"I'd be taking the pills for the rest of my life," Walker says.

Miller says her research has found that a single particle of depleted uranium can deform cells and DNA, the basic building block of life, in ways thought to lead to cancer.

Others have shown that uranium in the body and inhaled uranium can make its way to the brain.

Those findings haven't solved the riddle of Gulf War vets' illnesses, but they're far from comforting about how safe the black dust from the explosions must be, Miller says.

Someone practicing good science shouldn't be closing the book on the subject and declaring a particular level of exposure safe under those under-researched circumstances, she says.

TOO FEW PEOPLE HAVE BEEN STUDIED TO KNOW THE TRUTH

Ritz says the same thing about the possibility that cancer risks might increase after inhalation of depleted uranium.

"Our human research, as valuable as it is, has a lot of severe limitations," she says.

At most, she says, it proves that we've been unable to detect anything, not that there's no risk.

There might be 6,000 people involved in the studies that the government is relying on, she says.

Perhaps that's enough to figure out whether something's toxic, she says, but it's far from enough to determine whether it's carcinogenic.

For cancer, if you had a million people and followed them for 50 years, you might be able to determine a safe level of exposure with confidence, she says.

But no study has ever attempted to follow uranium workers on that large a scale, not to mention people exposed to depleted uranium, she says.

After the Pentagon tested the New York reservists and announced that the soldiers tested negative for depleted uranium, a news briefing was called.

William Winkenwerder Jr., a physician who is assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, told reporters that 10 years of health studies found that "low levels of depleted uranium that our troops would be exposed to are neither a radiological or chemical health threat to our service members."

He also said there was no evidence linking depleted uranium to radiation-induced illnesses such as leukemia and cancers.

But Ritz says the failure to find a link to cancer at this point isn't surprising at all.

It will take about 30 more years before soldiers from the Persian Gulf War could reasonably be expected to start showing evidence of most cancers spawned as recently as 1991, she says.

Lung cancer - which many researchers say is the most likely form that might result from inhaling depleted uranium - would take a few years longer to show up, she says.

Some forms of leukemia and lymphomas might have started showing up in the past year or two, she says.

Those forms of cancer have also been identified as possible problems because lymph nodes are vulnerable when particles are inhaled.

Even if an outbreak of leukemia and lymphomas has begun among veterans of the Gulf War, it's unlikely that the data to prove it would have been collected and that anyone would know about it, the GAO says.

No one is comparing a list of cancer deaths in the 50 states with the names or Social Security numbers of veterans from the Gulf War, the GAO says.

And no one is likely to begin doing it anytime soon because the money has not been made available, the agency says.

NO MONEY TO TRACK VETS' CANCER RATE ANYWAY

In the past 13 years, only two studies have been financed to determine cancer incidence among Gulf War veterans, the GAO says, and both of them had limited ability to study the problem.

The studies' access to data is being curtailed as a result of financial and legal issues, the report says. Veterans in only a few states were included.

VA officials say they're studying ways to fill this gap in the data.

In the meantime, Ritz says, the best that we can do is guess what a safe level of exposure to depleted uranium might be.

Depleted uranium isn't alone in this respect.

Of all known carcinogens, "none of those in the carcinogenic fields have accepted a threshold level," where safe and unsafe can be identified with a measurable number, Ritz says.

Threshold levels are set by government agencies, not scientists, Ritz says.

"These are all policy decisions about what is acceptable," not to be confused with scientific proof, she says.

There are many critics of the military's approach to establishing safety levels and standards, but there are also many scientists who agree with how Kilpatrick, Melanson and others have handled the problem that they're faced with.

Terry C. Pellmar - who works at the same lab as Miller - co-authored the first research paper citing that depleted uranium from pellets embedded in the bodies of rats might migrate to their brains.

Still, she says, she doubts that depleted uranium is responsible for the neurological problems suffered by veterans of the Persian Gulf War. And she doubts that the government is making a mistake in the policies it's established regarding the safety of depleted uranium on the battlefield.

"As a scientist, I'm not sure of anything" that could be deemed absolutely safe, she says.

"As an individual, I would have no personal concerns."

Knowing the science as well as she does, she thinks that a soldier can trust the Pentagon's assessment of the risks.

If she were a soldier on a battlefield, she says, she would feel safe, as far as the danger from inhaling depleted uranium dust.

"We all live in a world that's filled with things that increase the chances of getting cancer," Pellmar says.

Even if Miller's research shows that a single particle of inhaled depleted uranium might increase the risk of cancer, that degree of increased risk is accepted by people all the time in everyday life. There's an increased risk of cancer if you spend time in smoky bars, she says. "Yet, we all walk into smoky bars."

Similarly, she says, there's increased risk from living in Colorado, for instance, because there's more uranium in the environment there naturally, compared with most states.

Yet thousands of people have been moving to Colorado for years.

So given the battlefield advantages that depleted uranium gives soldiers, she says, taking that little extra risk might be a good bet.



-------- india / pakistan

Pakistan recognizes China as market economy, nuclear plant deal signed

AFP  Dec 15, 2004
	
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041215/wl_sthasia_afp/chinaeconomypakistan_041215192115

BEIJING (AFP) - Pakistan recognized China as a market economy Wednesday and Beijing promised visiting Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz 150 million dollars in aid to build a nuclear power plant.

The state Xinhua news agency cited diplomatic sources quoting Aziz as saying Pakistan "recognizes China's full market economy status."

Details of the announcement were not given but the move is expected to help China strengthen its defences against anti-dumping charges.

China is actively seeking recognition from its trading partners as an economy that operates on market forces based on supply and demand, rather than on factors determined by the government.

Following a meeting between Aziz and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, officials from the two countries signed several agreements including an agreement to study the establishment of a free trade area (FTA) and one on preferential trade arrangements.

Wen said the two sides should speed up the FTA study and focus on cooperation in the fields of energy, natural resources and agriculture.

They also exchanged letters on the utilisation of 150 million dollars of the "preferential export credit" provided by China for construction of the second unit of a nuclear power plant at Chashma in Pakistan's central Punjab province.

China agreed to build the 700 million dollar, 300 megawatt power plant last year and both sides have insisted it is for civilian use only. The plant is next to an existing nuclear power plant also built with Chinese assistance.

Terrorism and extremism also topped the agenda. Wen said both sides should strengthen cooperation on tackling the two problems, which he said were directly endangering the security of both countries.

While trade and economic ties were booming, Aziz said, there was still "great potential" for growth.

He said he hopes more Chinese capital will flow into Pakistan, noting that Pakistan's economy had undergone profound changes in the past five years and offered huge opportunities for foreign companies including Chinese firms.

Xinhua said China's current contracted investment in Pakistan reached four billion dollars, according to Pakistani statistics.

Pakistan can serve as a base for Chinese companies to increase sales to the Middle East and Africa, Aziz said.

He said Pakistan is fully committed to opening up to the outside and will not create any obstacles for foreign investment, adding that his government is considering establishing duty-free zones nationwide to attract investors.

Aziz is on a three-day official visit to China, his first to the country's traditional ally since assuming office in August. 

-----

Pakistan and India to start nuclear hotline, no deal on missile tests

(AFP) Dec 15, 2004
	
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041215/wl_sthasia_afp/pakistanindianuclear_041215173745

ISLAMABAD (AFP) - Pakistan and India agreed to push forward plans for a nuclear hotline after two days of talks but failed to reach a deal on advance warning of ballistic missile tests, officials said.

The South Asian rivals said they would "operationalize... as soon as possible" the hotline between their foreign secretaries, which had been agreed on in principle at earlier talks in June.

However, the meetings on so-called confidence-building measures did not produce an accord on giving each other prior notification of missile test-fires, officials said.

Both sides insisted they had made progress during the meetings between senior officials in Islamabad, which are the latest stage in a step-by-step peace process begun in January.

"We have agreed to operationalize it as soon as possible," Tariq Osman Hyder, additional secretary at Pakistan's foreign ministry, who led Pakistan's delegation told reporters when asked about the hotline.

The results of the talks would be submitted to the Indian and Pakistani foreign secretaries, who are scheduled to meet on 27-28 December, according to a joint statement issued by the two parties.

When pressed why the talks had failed to produce both agreements as had been predicted by officials earlier, the two sides blamed the "complex" issues involved.

India and Pakistan have a long history of bad blood since their independence from Britain in 1947 and have fought three wars, two of them over the disputed Himalayan state of Kashmir (news - web sites).

"These agreements are extremely complex. They raise many legal issues," said Hyder. "When we want to go forward on them we have to examine them carefully and I think both sides understand the concerns of the other side."

Pakistan and India held back-to-back nuclear detonations in May 1998 and have twice come close to war since then over disputed Kashmir, which is divided between the two and claimed by both in full.

The two countries hold frequent missile tests although they have an informal arrangement to give each other prior notification. They had been expected to formalize the agreement in a sign that the peace process was on track.

However Hyder added: "South Asia is no longer a nuclear flashpoint."

The head of the Indian delegation at the talks, Meera Shankar, said the two sides were trying to resolve the issue in a "mutually acceptable" way and would continue discussions at a later date.

"I would not characterise these as hurdles but agreements of this nature are complex and raise many questions," she told reporters after the talks.

The joint statement said the hotline was intended to "prevent misunderstanding and reduce risks relevant to nuclear issues."

The two sides also agreed to upgrade an existing hotline between India and Pakistan's senior military officers.

Earlier Pakistani and Indian officials held the first talks on conventional weapons under the current peace dialogue.

"The two sides held discussions on conventional arms to understand each others' perspective. It was a get-to-know meeting," foreign ministry spokesman Masood Khan said after the meeting.

India has a clear edge in conventional military strength over Pakistan, and Islamabad wants a balance for regional stability. 



-------- iran

Iran Tells Russia to Expand Nuclear Ties

By Maria Golovnina

Dec 15, 2004 Reuters
	
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20041215/wl_nm/nuclear_russia_iran_dc_1

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Iran told nuclear partner Russia on Wednesday it would have to show "readiness" to expand nuclear ties with Tehran to secure a solid share of Iran's atomic market in face of growing competition from Europe.

Moscow has built a $1 billion nuclear reactor in Iran in defiance of strong criticism from the United States, which believes Tehran can use the facility to make atomic bombs.

But Russia's stance on Iran toughened since President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites)'s re-election in March gave more priority to ties with Washington, with both softening their criticism of each others' military operations in Iraq (news - web sites) and Chechnya (news - web sites).

Gholamreza Shafei, Iran's ambassador to Moscow, said further nuclear cooperation with Russia depended "on how much such ties will correspond with our national interests and also how much there is willingness from Russia to cooperate with ... Iran to broaden ties in peaceful nuclear energy use."

In written answers to Reuters questions, he also said: "Our ties with Russia depend on how much the Russian side is effectively ready to cooperate with us."

Russia has enjoyed a near-monopoly status on Iran's nuclear market since the early 1990s when the two agreed to build a 1,000-megawatt nuclear plant near the port of Bushehr.

Seeking to remove Bushehr as a irritant in relations with the United States, Russia has maintained Iran's nuclear program is peaceful.

But diplomats in Moscow have hinted Iran is unhappy with the way Russia has dragged its feet on Bushehr, delaying construction schedules at times of political sensitivity.

Russia is now worried it might lose a key nuclear market in the Middle East after the European Union (news - web sites)'s "Big Three" offered last month to help Iran with peaceful atomic technology if it abandons its nuclear fuel production capabilities.

Britain, France and Germany are currently in talks with Iran aimed at brokering a long-term agreement on Tehran's nuclear activities. Iran says its nuclear facilities will only be used to generate electricity, and Russia agrees.

ENEMIES BECOME RIVALS

Shafei's remarks only confirmed Russian worries. But he repeated Moscow would still be able to play a big role in Iran.

"Under such circumstances, the previous enemies of nuclear cooperation between Russia and Iran will turn into 'new rivals' and 'Iran's partners'," he said.

"It's true that under such circumstances Russia will face competitors on the Iranian market but at the same time the Iranian market will stop being closed and limited.

"Russia will be able to play an active role at least in half of this big market, and it will be definitely bigger than the previously narrow market," he said.

Russia's foreign ministry was not available for comment.

A high-ranking Russian official familiar with the Iranian situation said Tehran could be simply trying to use the EU offer as a bargaining chip to get the best deal out of Russia.

"We are ready to expand cooperation with Iran, but it's not easy. Iranians could be difficult too. When European nuclear companies enter the Iranian market, we'll deal with it. But it's too early to talk about this yet," the official said.

Western diplomats in Vienna said leading nuclear firms in the EU would be loathe to offer any nuclear technology to Iran for fear of jeopardising lucrative U.S. business. (additional reporting by Louis Charbonneau in Vienna) 

-----

Iran unconcerned about ElBaradei's fate at IAEA

(Reuters) Dec 15, 2004

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7098630
	
TEHRAN  - Iran does not care whether Mohamed ElBaradei remains head of the U.N. atomic watchdog, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator said on Wednesday following reports that Washington was trying to oust him.

The Washington Post reported on Sunday that U.S. officials were sifting through intercepted phone conversations between ElBaradei and Iranian officials looking for evidence that he was helping Tehran rebuff U.S. accusations it is seeking atomic bombs.

ElBaradei has said he plans to stand for re-election next year for a third term as secretary-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is engaged in a probe of Iran's nuclear activities.

Some U.S. and other officials have privately complained that ElBaradei has been too soft on Iran, which denies seeking nuclear arms.

But Iran's Supreme National Security Council secretary Hassan Rohani, asked whether ElBaradei's re-election would affect Iran's nuclear case, said:

"We are not cooperating with the people of the IAEA but rather we are cooperating with an international agency.

"It does not matter to us who the secretary-general is," the ISNA students news agency quoted him as saying.

Rohani added that Tehran was impatient for results from talks with the European Union, which is hoping to persuade Iran to scrap potentially weapons-related nuclear activities in return for economic, technological and security cooperation.

"One of our new red lines is that this round of negotiations should not be long. It will be unacceptable to us if we feel negotiations are a waste of time," he said.

Iran has frozen key nuclear activities such as uranium enrichment while the EU talks continue. But Iran says it will resume atomic work within three to six months.

"We are committed to the agreement and, as long as Europe respects its commitments, carries them out carefully, the negotiations move forward and our goals in these negotiations are achieved, we will remain committed," Rohani said. 



-------- korea

U.S. plays down division with South Korea on North Korea

Wed Dec 15, 2004 06:22 PM ET (Reuters)
By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=ZQVQ5QU3B0BWWCRBAE0CFEY?type=topNews&storyID=7106945

WASHINGTON - Washington on Wednesday played down differences with South Korea over Seoul's more accommodating approach to communist North Korea but said the two allies must avoid sending conflicting signals.

Chris Hill, the U.S. ambassador to South Korea, was responding to concerns of a possibly widening rift with Seoul over how to confront the impoverished but well-armed North Koreans over their nuclear weapons ambitions.

He acknowledged there were differences of approach, but told a program sponsored by the Asia Society and the Woodrow Wilson Center, "Despite what people think ... we are in sync with the Koreans on how we address this (nuclear) issue."

He said the two countries were both committed to six-party talks to defuse the North Korean threat and that critical comments by South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun during recent speeches in Los Angeles and Europe were not worrisome.

Roh appeared to support the long-standing North Korean argument for its arms policy and challenged any country, including the United States, that might consider using force against the North.

Hill played down the significance of the speech, but said: "We have to work with them (South Koreans) and make sure the North Koreans are not getting conflicting signals."

The United States, after decades of sanctions on Pyongyang, is keen to keep the pressure on the government there, and has mounted naval exercises in the area and taken steps to crack down on hard currency flows that underwrite the government.

IN THE FIRING LINE

But South Korea, on the firing line of the North's artillery batteries, fears a possible flood of refugees and has been providing aid to the North, including the first major joint venture since the 1950-53 Korean War.

Touching on the difference of approach, Hill said the United States "often associates instability with opportunity" while the South associates instability with "tragedy" and hence "operates carefully and on that basis."

Despite a diplomatic flurry aimed at scheduling a new round of six-party negotiations, North Korea has hardened its resistance and some analysts say it was encouraged in its tough line by Roh's statements.

The last round of talks -- also including China, Russia and Japan -- took place in June.

Hill acknowledged it was hard for the United States and its partners in the talks to asses the extent of Pyongyang's highly enriched uranium program, which could be used to produce bomb fuel. But all five partners agree the program exists, he said.

Hill said the United States must respect South Koreans' close proximity to North Korea, their "right to look for efforts to engage their northern neighbors" and the fact that they sometimes will take a different approach from Washington.



-------- missile defense

Canada won't fund missile shield: PM
 
Windsor Star December 15, 2004

http://www.canada.com/fortstjohn/story.html?id=f02a4367-b138-4f32-ae17-32da81fb4a02

Prime Minister Paul Martin said Tuesday he does not believe the U.S. ballistic missile shield will succeed in shooting down incoming rockets, as he threw up new roadblocks to counter President George W. Bush's strong appeal for Canada to join his continental defence plan.

Canada will not put any money into building the missile shield and it will not allow Washington to station rockets on Canadian soil as the price of participation in the multibillion-dollar program, Martin told Global National in a year-end interview.

In another issue that could cause friction with Bush, Martin said Canada was prepared to accept U.S. citizens who do not want to serve in the war in Iraq.

"In terms of immigration, we are a country of immigrants and we will take immigrants from around the world. I'm not going to discriminate," said Martin, when reminded that former prime minister Pierre Trudeau opened Canada's doors to draft dodgers and deserters during the Vietnam War.

'AN ILLEGAL WAR'

When asked whether the prime minister was referring to ongoing attempts by Jeremy Hinzman, a 26-year-old U.S. deserter, to gain asylum in Canada after refusing to serve in what he calls "an illegal war," Martin spokesman Scott Reid said the prime minister "was not commenting on any individual case and certainly was not sending a signal to the immigration board."

Canada will not put any money into building the missile shield and it will not allow Washington to station rockets on Canadian soil as the price of participation in the multibillion-dollar program, Martin told Global National in a year-end interview.

In another issue that could cause friction with Bush, Martin said Canada was prepared to accept U.S. citizens who do not want to serve in the war in Iraq.

"In terms of immigration, we are a country of immigrants and we will take immigrants from around the world. I'm not going to discriminate," said Martin, when reminded that former prime minister Pierre Trudeau opened Canada's doors to draft dodgers and deserters during the Vietnam War.

'AN ILLEGAL WAR'

When asked whether the prime minister was referring to ongoing attempts by Jeremy Hinzman, a 26-year-old U.S. deserter, to gain asylum in Canada after refusing to serve in what he calls "an illegal war," Martin spokesman Scott Reid said the prime minister "was not commenting on any individual case and certainly was not sending a signal to the immigration board."

Martin was emphatic Canada's participation in the missile defence program would depend on a key decision-making role in the U.S. command and control structure that operates the shield.

"The decision as to whether or not we participate in the ballistic missile defence system is going to depend on whether, in fact, Canada can have a voice in the structure," Martin said in the interview, to be broadcast Christmas Day.

"I'm not going to put money into it. I'm going to put money into our priorities ... Having missiles on our territory is not one of those priorities."

The conditions laid out by Martin are the clearest indication to date the Liberal government is increasingly disinterested in the missile defence program despite Bush's public appeal during his visit to Canada on Dec. 1.

Martin has been under heavy pressure from the Liberal caucus and the party's grassroots to reject the defence shield, which he admitted may not even work to knock down incoming missiles from rogue states or global terrorists.

"Do I believe it could work tomorrow? I suspect there are very few people out there who testify that it could. Do I believe eventually technology could bring it to that point, in all likelihood, but I'm not a rocket expert," he said in another TV interview.

Martin said Canada is not even close to negotiating a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. on missile defence, but added any document must include guarantees that it would not lead to the weaponization of space.

Canada would immediately pull out of the defence shield if it were to join and the U.S. subsequently put missile weapon systems in space.

"I don't believe space belongs to any country," Martin said. "We will not engage in the weaponization of space."

Martin acknowledged for the first time that next year's budget will pump money into Canada's hard-pressed military, including funds to allow the Armed Forces to recruit 5,000 more troops over the next five years.

Martin admitted he struggled over his personal belief in the traditional marriage but finally decided same-sex weddings were a right entitled to all citizens regardless of their sexual orientation.

Martin was emphatic Canada's participation in the missile defence program would depend on a key decision-making role in the U.S. command and control structure that operates the shield.

"The decision as to whether or not we participate in the ballistic missile defence system is going to depend on whether, in fact, Canada can have a voice in the structure," Martin said in the interview, to be broadcast Christmas Day.

"I'm not going to put money into it. I'm going to put money into our priorities ... Having missiles on our territory is not one of those priorities."

The conditions laid out by Martin are the clearest indication to date the Liberal government is increasingly disinterested in the missile defence program despite Bush's public appeal during his visit to Canada on Dec. 1.

Martin has been under heavy pressure from the Liberal caucus and the party's grassroots to reject the defence shield, which he admitted may not even work to knock down incoming missiles from rogue states or global terrorists.

"Do I believe it could work tomorrow? I suspect there are very few people out there who testify that it could. Do I believe eventually technology could bring it to that point, in all likelihood, but I'm not a rocket expert," he said in another TV interview.

Martin said Canada is not even close to negotiating a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. on missile defence, but added any document must include guarantees that it would not lead to the weaponization of space.

Canada would immediately pull out of the defence shield if it were to join and the U.S. subsequently put missile weapon systems in space.

"I don't believe space belongs to any country," Martin said. "We will not engage in the weaponization of space."

Martin acknowledged for the first time that next year's budget will pump money into Canada's hard-pressed military, including funds to allow the Armed Forces to recruit 5,000 more troops over the next five years.

Martin admitted he struggled over his personal belief in the traditional marriage but finally decided same-sex weddings were a right entitled to all citizens regardless of their sexual orientation.

--------

Important Test for Missile-Defense System Ends in Failure

By DAVID STOUT
Published: December 15, 2004
NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/15/politics/15cnd-miss.html?ei=5094&en=6fc01398c045bf2b&hp=&ex=1103173200&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1103146232-s73Xstu91Z1uyyVsXkcr7g

WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - An important test of the
United States' emerging missile-defense system
ended in an $85 million failure early today as an
interceptor rocket failed to launch as scheduled
from the Marshall Islands, the Pentagon said.

A target rocket carrying a mock warhead was
successfully launched from Kodiak, Alaska. But the
interceptor, which was to have gone aloft 16
minutes later and picked off the target 100 miles
over the earth, automatically shut down instead
because of "an unknown anomaly," the Defense
Department's Missile Defense Agency said.

Despite the disappointment, today's event was not
a total failure, said Richard A. Lehner, an agency
spokesman. He said "quite a bit" had been learned
from the aborted test, which he called "a very
good training exercise." He noted that the rocket
that failed to rise can be used later. The target
rocket landed in the ocean some 3,000 miles from
Kodiak, he said.

Mr. Lehner said he could not predict when the
cause of the shutdown might be determined. No
future tests have been scheduled.

The missile agency had attempted a test several
times this month, but weather and other factors
caused postponements. Today's test was to have
been the most advanced so far, Mr. Lehner said.
The interceptor was equipped with the same type of
booster rocket that the defense system is to use
when it is fully operational.

The test was also to have been the first for the
multibillion-dollar program since Dec. 12, 2002.
That test was also a failure; the interceptor did
not separate from its booster rocket, missed its
target by hundreds of miles and burned up in the
atmosphere.

Before today's test, the Pentagon agency had
conducted eight tests with interceptor vehicles,
scoring hits in five. Some critics of the Missile
Defense Agency, which has spent more than $80
billion since 1985, say the entire program is
unrealistic, and that the tests have been
scripted.

On the contrary, the agency says. It says the
tests are designed to answer specific questions
and "to build confidence in the system that we are
working to design." Although individual tests are
expensive, Mr. Lehner said fewer are necessary
than with missiles of years past because of
advanced modeling and simulation techniques.

The missile system under development is a
scaled-down version of the "Star Wars" defense
envisioned by President Ronald Reagan two decades
ago against a rain of missiles from the Soviet
Union. But the end of the cold war made President
Reagan's original vision outdated. The system now
contemplated would guard the United States against
attack from smaller "rogue nations."

The administration of President Bill Clinton
explored a much less advanced system. Then George
Bush pledged during the 2000 campaign to push for
a scaled-down version of the Reagan plan.

It was not immediately clear how long today's
failure might delay deployment of the system. In
December 2002, President Bush said he hoped the
system would be operational by the end of 2004.


-------- terrorism

Dirty Bombs Waiting To Happen?

Dec. 15, 2004 CBS 60 Minutes

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/14/60II/printable660982.shtml

One of the dirty little secrets about international terrorism is that it doesn't take much radioactive material to make a dirty bomb.

And there’s plenty of that material in Georgia – the Georgia that used to be part of the Soviet Union.

During a year-long investigation, 60 Minutes Wednesday found that radioactive material just keeps turning up in Georgia – on military bases, in the woods, outside apartment buildings.

It’s not difficult to find, and as Correspondent Dan Rather reports, it's not difficult to transport, either. Georgia, now an independent country, was known for decades as a lawless, corrupt place. And now, terrorism has become a major challenge for Mikhail Saakashvili, the smart, energetic, new president of the country.

"Terrorism is a valid concern from everybody," says Saakashvili, who was educated in the United States.

Is he concerned about the possibility of terrorists getting hold of some of these radioactive materials? "We still have certain signs that we should be concerned," says Saakashvili. "Because terrorists are getting more sophisticated. And sometimes, they could be more sophisticated than the state."

Listen to Tamaz's story, and you'll realize that in Georgia, terrorists don't have to be very sophisticated to find and transport enough radioactive material to make a dirty bomb. Tamaz has been driving his beat-up taxi in the capital of Tblisi for more than 30 years. Last year, he says two customers told him to drive to the train station. Then, they asked him to make a detour and go up a hill.

Tamaz says he wondered where they were taking him. He was asked to stop and load some very heavy boxes into his trunk. On the way back down the hill, the police pulled him over, but only because the cab was so weighted down in the back.

Tamaz said he got out of the car and showed the officer his license. Then he was asked to open the trunk and says he almost fainted when he saw what was inside.

Pictures taken after Tamaz was stopped showed what was in his trunk: heavy boxes lined with lead and stamped with radiation symbols. Inside were two kinds of radioactive material, Cesium 137 and Strontium 90, and some poisonous gas. There are reports the materials were being transported to the Turkish border.

"Concern is that this stuff might end up in the hands of terrorists," says Gela Bezhuashvili, Georgia’s national security adviser. "This is a real threat that they, any terrorist group, can find the stuff, take it and then explode it either in Georgia or anywhere else." Long before Sept. 11, mountainous Georgia was known as a place where terrorists could easily hide. Georgia has a rich, centuries-old culture and heritage, but it’s in a dangerous part of the world. Chechnya is just across the border.

Russia has dumped or left all kinds of dangerous materials in Georgia that are difficult to keep secure. And it's not just radioactive materials. A director of one research facility showed 60 Minutes Wednesday in Tblisi a small room with several refrigerators packed with deadly pathogens and diseases.

One refrigerator has a collection of anthrax; another has plague; another tularemia; and another botulism.

The anthrax, plague and botulism -- and lots of radioactive materials -- were all left behind when the Russians departed in the '90s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Russians abandoned the materials at about 150 military bases without telling or warning anybody. And they didn't leave a clean-up fund.

"We didn’t get much cooperation on those issues from the Russians," says Saakashvili. "Unfortunately, old Russian military bases, they left the country without proper agreement on how those things should have been handled. It was rather chaotic process."

In fact, it was so chaotic that no one had any idea what the Russians had dumped there until 1997. That’s when a dozen Georgian soldiers accidentally picked up capsules of Cesium 137 at a military base. Most of them received severe radioactive burns.

In 1998 and 1999, radioactive Strontium 90, used by the Russians in an airline navigation system, were found in a remote mountain village. With no biohazard suits available, Georgian authorities did their best to remove the material safely. Then, near an apartment building in Tblisi, more Cesium 137 was found just lying on the ground. In the winter of 2002, more Strontium was removed from a village called Lia. Three woodcutters were severely injured.

Georgia has also been a pipeline for the international transport of dangerous materials. In December 2001, an Armenian man was arrested carrying uranium that apparently had come from a nuclear power plant in Armenia. He told a television reporter that "I wanted to sell each container for $7,000."

During 60 Minutes Wednesday's year-long investigation in Tblisi, they were told someone could buy enough Cesium to make a dirty bomb for $10,000.

Georgia’s former environmental minister, Nino Chkhobadze, has also heard reports that Cesium is for sale. She says she’s concerned because it would take only a small amount to make a dirty bomb. She said that most of the radioactive material from Soviet days has been recovered, but she also knows that some is still missing.

"Everything that was recovered can be used to create dirty bombs. Terrorism has no borders and it is practically impossible to fight against it if the country is not organized," says Chkhobadze.

The Georgian government insists it has safely stored all the Cesium it’s found, but 60 Minutes Wednesday learned that security is rather lax. There are 200 canisters stored at one undisclosed facility. The canisters were sealed, but the radiation level was 80 times higher than outside the building.

In front of the building, there was just one guard with an automatic weapon. There were no guards behind the facility; just a wall, a wire fence and no security cameras. Sasha Gurevich, a former Georgian TV journalist, showed 60 Minutes Wednesday that the crumbling wall is not secure enough to keep out intruders.

"I went over the wall, walked up a little hill, looked around. There was no security so I felt safe. Continued going. I saw the facility it is about 150 meters from the wall. I walked right to it," says Gurevich.

"It was about 10 meters away from me. There was no security around. Nobody was walking around. There was only one rusty lock on the gate, and there was a huge sign of radioactivity on the gate turned around came back, crawled through the wall."

"The government tells us that police should be here in case of trespassing within two or three minutes," adds Gurevich. "Nobody is here. I am standing here for the last 10 minutes now. There is no big gate. There is one little gate and one lock on the gate."

Saakashvili said he needs more money to upgrade security at facilities like this one. And the United States is trying to help. American money will pay for a new building to store Russian radioactive material at a military base near Tblisi.

The American military is also trying to help by training the soldiers at an army base near the capital. From what we saw, they need a few more lessons.

U.S. military assistance to Georgia is expected to keep increasing. Georgia, in fact, has been getting so much help from the United States that some hard-line Russians have been calling President Saakashvili an American spy. He says it's nonsense, but when we talked in New York, he did not hide his affection for the United States.

"I sometimes miss the United States. I miss New York. I love New York. And when I come here, it is very, you know, sentimental and nostalgic for me," says Saakashvili, who lived in New York, and graduated from Columbia Law School in 1994. Back then, his plan was to be a big-time lawyer in New York.

How did he get to where he is now? "I had a choice to make, and the choice was to become a lawyer at Manhattan law firm," he says. "But the point was that I came from the country where, at the time, there was still war. It was ravaged by poverty. It was ravaged by despair."

He says corrupt politicians and Mafia-style gangsters ran the country: "They stole Georgia’s natural riches. They stole our taxes. They stole the foreign assistance that came to Georgia."

Saakashvili decided to return to Georgia, start a reform party, and run against the corrupt regime of former President Eduard Shevardnadze. After a contested election, Saakashvili took over and almost immediately began cracking down on corruption. He fired the hated traffic police, who had hassled and shaken down drivers for years, making more in bribes than wages. And he hired a brand new force.

"We basically manage to crack down on corruption and to basically eliminate the issue of corruption," says Saakashvili. "To tackle the issue of corruption in our security service. And this was very important."

But the president knows it’s only a first step.

"I think our security is much more efficient at this point, but of course, there still could be something out there that's not fully under control," says Saakashvili.

"I think we are getting there, but we are not there yet. Because we need to have much more efficient system that nothing like this could happen."



-------- u.s. nuc weapons

NRC tightening security on accessing classified information

Washington (Platts) -- 15 Dec 2004

http://www.platts.com/Nuclear/News/2044732.xml

Access to classified information will be tightened for those involved in
licensing or other regulatory work for high-level waste repository and new
reactor activities. NRC published a notice today in the Federal Register
stating that it expects to issue a direct final rule Jan. 14, unless it
receives significant opposition, to widen the circle of individuals who need
to get security clearance before accessing certain information. As part of the
rulemaking, NRC is broadening the scope of regulations governing access
authorization. The current regulations do not specifically reference
construction licenses and licenses for high-level waste disposal in
repositories, in general, or at the potential facility at Yucca Mountain, Nev.

--------

Pragmatic genius a key figure behind atomic bomb

The Australian

December 15, 2004

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11691617%255E30417,00.html

Robert Bacher
Physicist. Born Loudonville, Ohio, August 31, 1905.
Died Santa Barbara, California, November 18, aged 99.

PHYSICIST Robert Bacher was a key member of the Manhattan Project, the team that developed the atom bomb during World War II. He directed the experimental physics division at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, a division known as the G division (G being for gadgets). When the operation reached the bomb production stage, he became head of the bomb physics division.

After graduating from the University of Michigan in 1926, Bacher moved to the physics department of Cornell University in 1935, where he became professor of physics and director of the laboratory of nuclear studies. When the war started he worked on radar before joining the Manhattan Project in 1943.

He urged Robert Oppenheimer, director of the project, not to place the enterprise under military control in order to increase secrecy and security. At the time, the Los Alamos laboratory was officially classified as a military establishment, but Bacher believed that, to be effective as scientists, the team needed to be able to think independently.

Bacher was a member of the team that assembled the weapon for the first nuclear explosion, on July 15, 1945, in the New Mexico desert. The test was for a weapon of the design that would destroy Nagasaki on August 9 that year.

The bomb dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, used highly enriched uranium instead of plutonium. The uranium design was so straightforward that the scientists were confident that it would work without testing.

The plutonium bomb was much more complex, so a test was scheduled.

By early July 1945, the Manhattan scientists had produced enough plutonium for only two weapons and sufficient highly enriched uranium for one. It was, therefore, possible to test a plutonium weapon and have just enough fissile material left over for the weapons dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

When the extent of the destruction at Hiroshima and Nagasaki became clear, Bacher was concerned about the huge power of such weapons. He believed it would have been better if the threat of nuclear attack could have been used to persuade the Japanese to end the war without the destruction of the two cities.

Bacher was a close friend of Oppenheimer, who had considered resigning from the project when difficulties arose over the production of plutonium. Bacher persuaded him to stay, knowing the project would be seriously delayed if he quit.

Oppenheimer's loyalty was questioned during the anti-communist witch hunts, with a trial beginning in April 1954 in Washington. This episode began in November 1953 when a former director of a congressional committee wrote to J. Edgar Hoover accusing Oppenheimer of being an agent of the Soviet Union. Given Oppenheimer's role as the father of the atomic bomb, it is hardly surprising that the accusation was taken seriously.

Bacher testified in his colleague's defence, saying that, in his opinion, Oppenheimer was not a security risk. This was a brave move during the hysterical days of the McCarthy inquisition. The verdict went against Oppenheimer.

Bacher became one of the first members of the US Atomic Energy Commission. After an investigation at Los Alamos, Bacher was surprised and shocked at how few nuclear weapons were in the arsenal.

In 1945, six weapons were produced and three were used. During 1946, five more were produced. American nuclear weapon production increased soon afterwards as a result of technical improvements in the production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium. At the end of 1950, the arsenal contained more than 360 nuclear weapons.

In 1949, Bacher became professor of physics at California Institute of Technology, a university for research and teaching in science and engineering that has become a world leader in scientific research and education. Bacher considerably expanded teaching and research activities.

Bacher headed Caltech's division of physics, mathematics and astronomy. He rebuilt the physics department, starting with high-energy particle physics, a rapidly expanding field of study. He oversaw the construction and use of a new electron synchrotron that enabled Caltech physicists to produce their own high-energy particles.

His first recruit was theoretical physicist Richard Feynman. He also recruited Murray Gell-Mann, another brilliant physicist who received the Nobel prize in physics in 1969. Caltech operated a large telescope at its observatory on Palomar Mountain, then the world's most powerful optical telescope. Bacher also established radioastronomy.

He retired as professor emeritus in 1976. Bacher was president of the American Physical Society in 1946 and president of the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics from 1969 to 1972.

A son and daughter survive him.


-------- u.s. nuc facilities


-------- connecticut

NRC Denies Appeals Of License Renewals For Millstone

TheDay.com	

By PATRICIA DADDONA

12/15/2004

http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.aspx?re=751CAE22-DD15-47D2-A36B-F09E9C2FC7DF

Waterford — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has denied appeals filed by the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone in its quest for a hearing challenging proposed license renewals at Millstone Power Station.

In January, Millstone owner Dominion Nuclear Connecticut proposed extending licenses for two reactors, Millstone 2 and Millstone 3, by 20 years each, to 2035 and 2045 respectively.

This summer, Nancy Burton, then the attorney for the coalition, petitioned the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a division of the NRC, to grant a hearing on health and safety issues. The petition alleged that there are cancer clusters near the power plants, insufficient protection of the site against would-be terrorists, and other issues.

When the panel denied the petition and Burton's request that they reconsider it, Burton appealed to the NRC each time.

In a sternly worded decision from NRC Secretary Annette L. Vietti-Cook, the commission found that the ASLB acted appropriately and that Burton either failed to link her group's concerns with issues concerning the aging of the plants, as required; or simply failed to support her claims factually. She also failed to show where the panel erred in its denials and raised issues that were beyond the scope of license renewal, Vietti-Cook wrote.

The NRC chastised Burton for her “consistent disregard for our practices and procedures” and informed her the agency would reprimand her if that disregard persisted. The coalition, a grass-roots anti-nuclear group, and any legal counsel remain “welcome” at NRC proceedings as long as they follow the rules, the decision states.

Burton did not return calls seeking comment.

p.daddona@theday.com 


-------- new jersey

NRC, PSEG Nuclear to meet Friday

Wednesday, December 15, 2004 NJ Sunbeam

http://www.nj.com/news/sunbeam/local/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1103102413323540.xml

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with the operators of the Hope Creek nuclear reactor Friday to discuss the condition of a key pump at the power plant in Lower Alloways Creek Township.

The meeting -- the first of two expected before the Hope Creek reactor is restarted -- will be held at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Md. The session begins at 10 a.m. and is expected to conclude by 3 p.m.

NRC Spokesman Neil Sheehan said the main focus will be the condition of one of two large recirculation pumps at the Hope Creek reactor which moves water through the nuclear reactor to keep it cool. The pump in question, recirculation pump B, vibrates when in operation.

The NRC wants to hear how PSEG Nuclear, the plant's operator, will ensure the pump doesn't affect the plant's safe operation.

PSEG announced last month it would not replace the pump during the current refueling outage, but would wait until the next outage -- about 18 months away -- to put in a new pump.

The utility maintains despite the vibrations, the pump is safe to operate.

Nuclear watchdog groups are lobbying for replacement of the pump now.

Sheehan said there will be an exchange of information between the federal
agency and the utility about the pump's safety.

Also Friday, other issues at Hope Creek are expected to be discussed,
specifically the plant's high-pressure coolant injection system.

On Oct. 10 a steam pipe broke in the plant's turbine building. When that occurred, operators manually shut down the reactor, but encountered complications" -- problems with controlling water levels in the reactor.

The meeting will be held in Room T7A1 of the agency's Two White Flint North Building, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Md.

The public is invited to observe the meeting and will have an opportunity to talk with NRC staff after the business portion, but before the meeting is adjourned. Those interest in participating by telephone can call 1-888-455-0045. The pass code for the teleconference is "Hope Creek" and several dozen phone lines have been reserved for the meeting by the NRC.

Another meeting on Hope Creek is to be held before the reactor is restarted. During that session, preliminary results from the NRC's special investigation at the plant after the Oct. 10 shutdown are expected to be reviewed.

A date for that meeting has not yet been scheduled, but it may come before the end of the year.

The meeting will be held closer to this area.



-------- MILITARY 


-------- afghanistan

Chemical 'warfare' angers Afghans

By Sudha Ramachandran,  Dec 15, 2004 Asia Times 

http://atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/FL15Ag02.html

BANGALORE - With poppy cultivation in Afghanistan touching new highs in 2004, eradication measures to stamp out the cultivation of the crop are expected to turn more aggressive in the coming months. However, the deep rage and resentment generated by recent incidents of aerial spraying of chemicals on poppy crops in the eastern provinces of Afghanistan indicates that the Afghan government, and the US and Britain - the two countries that are at the forefront of the international effort to combat the Afghan narcotics trade - might need to move more cautiously.

According to the UN Afghanistan Opium Survey 2004, opium cultivation in Afghanistan this year has shown a 64% increase in comparison with 2003. However, because of bad weather and disease, the 2004 opium yield per hectare had been lowered by almost 30%, resulting in a total output of 4,200 tons. While this is lower than the 1999 output of 4,600 tons, the 2004 output is 17% higher than in 2003. Today Afghanistan accounts for 87% of the world's opium cultivation and this year earned an estimated US$2.8 billion. A tenth of the Afghan population is involved in the production and trade of opium.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai, in perhaps his strongest remarks on the topic, has urged Afghans to wage jihad - or holy war - against drugs, much as they did against the Soviet army in the 1980s. Karzai, Afghanistan's first popularly elected president, called poppy farming a national disgrace.

Drawing attention to the seriousness of the problem, Antonio Maria Costa, director of the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, said, "In Afghanistan, drugs are now a clear and present danger. The fear that Afghanistan might degenerate into a narco-state is becoming a reality," he warned.

The 2004 survey reveals that opium cultivation has spread to all of Afghanistan's 32 provinces, with 56% of total cultivation taking place in only three provinces - Badakhshan, Nangarhar and Helmand.

It was over the poppy fields in Nangarhar province, in villages abutting the Tora Bora mountains, that aerial spraying of chemicals kicked up a controversy recently. According to reports in the media, unidentified aircraft flew back and forth over poppy fields in Nangarhar spraying "a snow-like substance" - chemicals - on the crops. The chemicals have not only destroyed the poppy crop, but also ruined fruit and vegetables that were being cultivated there, besides affecting the health of villagers and their livestock. Hundreds of villagers have reportedly shown up at hospitals with skin ailments and breathing problems.

Not surprisingly, the dusting of the poppy crops with herbicide has triggered off immense anger among the villagers, who see the destruction of the poppy crops - their only source of income - as destruction of their livelihood. The poorer farmers now face economic ruin. Who is behind the chemical spraying of the crops is still unclear. The Karzai government insists that it is opposed to "aerial spraying as an instrument of eradication" of the poppy crop and "has not authorized any foreign entity, any foreign government, any foreign company, or anyone else to carry out aerial spraying".

Most Afghans point an accusing finger at the Americans or the British, but both countries have denied involvement in the spraying. The US Embassy in Kabul insists that the US government has "not conducted any aerial eradication [of the poppy crop], nor has it contracted or subcontracted anyone to do it on its behalf". It also denies knowing who carried out the spraying.

However, few in Afghanistan appear to be convinced by the US denial. After all, as pointed out by Hajji Din Muhammad, the governor of Nangarhar, "The Americans control the airspace of Afghanistan, and not even a bird can fly without them knowing."

Afghan officials have also pointed out that the Americans have been arguing for many months now in favor of chemical eradication of Afghanistan's poppy crops. This is a strategy they have used to tackle coca cultivation in Colombia, despite the anger it has triggered among the coca farmers, and they are keen to adopt that strategy in Afghanistan.

Anti-narcotics officials in Kabul argue that the recent chemical spraying appears to have been carried out not so much with the intention of eradicating the poppy crop - the plants are too young at this juncture for spraying to take real effect, they point out - as it is to stir anger among the farmers. According to these officials, therefore, the chemical spraying was the work of major players in the Afghan drug trade, who are seeking to build up mass opposition to the "real" eradication efforts planned for the next few months.

Whatever the motivation of those behind the chemical spraying, it is clear from the recent episode in Nangarhar province that adopting tactics such as crop-dusting raids as part of a new robust and aggressive policy to fight the Afghan drug trade could prove counter-productive. It could alienate the very people - the Afghan peasants - whose support the US-backed government is trying to win over.

Critics of the US-British approach have pointed out that in order to check the supply of narcotics to their countries they are targeting desperately poor farmers, while avoiding the political price that comes with taking stern action to tackle demand for drugs in their countries. Some have suggested action against those higher up in the narcotics trade chain. But this the Americans and the British have failed to do. Those who languish in Afghan jails for narcotics-related offences are the small-time peddlers, not the big players in the business. US forces have also ignored warlords' involvement in the opium trade in exchange for their help in fighting al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Analysts have also argued that Washington has exaggerated the links between al-Qaeda and the drug trade. In an article in Terrorism Monitor, Pierre-Arnaud Chouvy draws attention to "the minimal role this [the drug economy] plays in al-Qaeda's finances". He points out that "a few cases have been highlighted by the media as evidence of al-Qaeda tapping into the opium economy of Afghanistan, even though the claims in themselves do not constitute an argument for the existence of any organized form of 'narco-terrorism'."

He cites the findings of the 9-11 Commission, according to which there is "no substantial evidence that al-Qaeda played a major role in the drug trade or relied on it as an important source of revenue either before or after" September 11, 2001, and that "intelligence collection efforts have failed to corroborate rumors of current narcotic trafficking. In fact, there is compelling evidence the al-Qaeda leadership does not like or trust those who today control the drug trade in Southwest Asia, and has encouraged its members not to get involved."

Chouvy points out, "Recent efforts to link the narcotics economy to terrorism really aim at linking the war on drugs to the war on terrorism, and vice-versa. While drugs and terrorism are not necessarily the two faces of the same coin in Afghanistan, the war on drugs and the war on terrorism may serve the same political agenda. A clear example is the current efforts of the US Southern Command to guarantee the prolongation of its enhanced funding by raising the threat of 'narco-terrorism' in Latin America, where US military aid and training, which previously were focused on counter-narcotics operations, have now been re-tasked as counter-terrorism responsibilities."

That Afghanistan's booming opium trade poses a threat to stability and security within the country and outside cannot be denied. Washington's anxiety to tackle the problem is therefore understandable. The problem lies with its approach to fight the problem. Some in the administration of US President George W Bush have called for direct US military action against traffickers in Afghanistan. But others have argued that battling Afghanistan's drug trade is primarily a law-enforcement problem, not a military one, and must be led by local Afghan forces. Drawing US troops into drug fights, they have cautioned, would alienate Afghan peasants and undermine the core US military mission in Afghanistan of fighting the insurgents.

Alienation of Afghans is just what might happen under the new US plan, which among other things calls for destruction of poppy fields covering an area five to seven times larger than that eradicated this year. The destruction is to be offset by more than $100 million in aid to Afghan farmers to plant substitute crops and for other rural economic development projects.

The anger that was generated by the recent "mysterious" chemical spraying in Nangarhar signals that Washington's war on poppy cultivators in Afghanistan could go very wrong. Washington will have to take on the big players in the opium trade, but that it appears reluctant to do, as some of them are its allies. Besides, it is reluctant to open up new fronts to fight in Afghanistan.

Sudha Ramachandran is an independent journalist/researcher based in Bangalore.



-------- arms 

South Africa set to become first overseas client for Airbus military plane

JOHANNESBURG (AFP) Dec 15, 2004

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041215152409.mey8kho2.html

The South African government committed Wednesday to acquire a number of A400M military transport aircraft developed by Airbus Industrie in a deal worth at least 750 million euros (one billion dollars), Airbus said in a statement.

But a group spokesman was unable to say how many planes might be ordered.

Airbus Military, an Airbus subsidiary, said a "declaration of intent" had been signed earlier in the day in Pretoria, marking the first commitment of interest in the A400M from a government outside the seven countries that launched the project.

The South African Transport Department last Thursday said the government was prepared to sign a multi-million-euro deal to buy between eight to 14 Airbus A400M military transport aircraft in exchange for investment, technological knowledge and jobs.

A South African Defence Ministry spokesman told AFP in Johannesburg on Wednesday that "as things stand currently, we are going to acquire a minimum of eight aircraft and a maximum of 14."

In return for buying the aircraft in a deal valued from 837 million euros (1.1 billion dollars) between 2010 and 2014, South Africa would also participate in the A400M design and manufacturing program, the department said.

"This is not a defence deal, what is involved in being part of this is a whole boost to the industrialisation of the country, particularly the aerospace industry," Vuyo Zambodla told AFP.

Exact details were not yet available, but local Transport Ministry spokesman Ian Phillips said earlier it included "guaranteed work packages to meet global standards that will be in place for the next 17 years."

"Being in at the beginning also gives our industry a strong chance to bid successfully in the maintenance and upgrade work in the future," Phillips added.

The A400M troop and light armoured vehicle carrier is the most ambitious project ever launched by the European military industrial sector, carrying an estimated cost of 20 billion euros.

To date 180 planes have been ordered: 60 from Germany, 50 from France, 27 from Spain, 25 from Britain, 10 from Turkey, seven from Belgium and one from Luxembourg.

Airbus Military hopes to sell at least 200 in the next 15 to 20 years.

The first flight is scheduled for 2006, with initial deliveries planned for

South Africa's existing fleet of a dozen upgraded C130 medium transports and a few smaller Spanish-built CASA 212 light transports would not be able to meet future airlift requirements, including a greater focus on peacekeeping activities on the African continent, officials have said.

----

Poland to sell military hardware to Iraq

WARSAW (AFP)

Dec 15, 2004

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041215162310.2bd79lcd.html

Poland will provide the Iraqi army with weapons and equipment worth 236 million dollars, including helicopters and small arms, and train Iraqis to use them, officials said Wednesday.

Polish Deputy Defence Minister Janusz Zemke said some of the helicopters and other equipment currently in Iraq would be handed over to the Iraqis when the Polish troop contingent in the country is cut by a third in February.

His Iraqi counterpart Ziad Catan said 20 Polish-built Sokol and 24 Soviet-designed Mi-17 transport helicopters would be included in the sale.

Under contracts signed Wednesday Poland's Bumar group would deliver water and fuel cisterns, ambulances, grenades and sub-machine-guns next year, its president Tadeusz Baczynski said.

Zamke said Warsaw had also agreed to train 10 Iraqi helicopter pilots and 20 engineers.

Catan said other deals were still being negotiated, including the modernisation of Iraqi tanks and the sale of communications and radar systems.

The deals were agreed as three Polish soldiers were killed in Iraq Wednesday and four injured when their Sokol helicopter made an emergency landing south of Baghdad.

Catan said after arriving in Poland Monday with Iraqi military chief General Babekr al-Zibari that he hoped Poland would become Iraq's main arms supplier.

Poland has 2,500 troops in Poland as part of a Polish-commanded multinational force of 6,000 fighting alongside US forces against insurgents.



-------- britain

UK to keep foreign nuclear waste

Paul Brown, environment correspondent
Wednesday December 15, 2004
The Guardian

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,9061,1373965,00.html

The government has decided to bury Japanese, German, Italian, Spanish, Swiss and Swedish nuclear waste in Britain as a money-making venture to help pay for the UK's own unresolved nuclear waste problems.

The decision, announced in a written Commons statement, has been taken by the trade secretary Patricia Hewitt despite the fact that Britain as yet has no depository for the waste. It overturns a 30-year-old policy that the UK would not become a dumping ground for other countries' nuclear waste.

Previously both Conservative and Labour governments have said waste arising as a result of lucrative nuclear fuel reprocessing contracts at Sellafield in Cumbria should be returned to the country of origin.

Successive governments had intended to return all highly dangerous waste contaminated with plutonium to its country of origin - a total of 225 nuclear shipments. This week's decision means keeping and disposing of the bulk of that toxic waste in Britain.

Mrs Hewitt said: "The benefits are both environmental and economic."

She said the additional income - up to £680m - would be "used for nuclear clean-up which will result in savings for the UK taxpayer over the longer term".

Environmental groups warn that it will leave Britain with thousands of tonnes of waste for which there is currently no form of disposal.

Jean McSorley, nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace, said: "The government is trying to encourage Japanese utilities, and others, to sign more reprocessing contracts at Sellafield knowing that they will not have to have their nuclear waste returned."

The government has set up a committee to find a way of disposing of high- and intermediate-level nuclear waste safely. It considered 20 options, including burying the waste in the Antarctic and firing it at the sun. No preferred method has been established, but it is likely to be either storage above ground or disposal below ground in deep rock caverns.

British Nuclear Fuels, which currently stores the foreign waste at Sellafield, said it was delighted by the decision. A spokesman said it would mean up to 3,000 cubic metres of radioactive waste would now not need to be shipped back to its place of origin, saving tens of thousands of tonnes of greenhouse gases in ship fuel.

As a result of this week's decision, the foreign waste that will remain in Britain will be exchanged for much smaller quantities of waste of a higher radioactivity produced from British reactors - up to 38 shipments. The government says this trade amounts to an equal quantity of radioactivity.

Critics though raise the prospect of the British waste being hijacked by terrorists. Llew Smith, Labour MP for Blaenau Gwent, last night asked a written question of Ms Hewitt about her assessment of any increased terrorist threat. "Intermediate level waste is bulky and difficult to handle but shipments of high level waste in smaller cannisters might be an attractive terrorist target," he said.

The policy would mean very long-lived, high-activity radioactive waste from Sellafield being shipped to Japan. To European continental customers it will be carried on ferries and trains to Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Sweden and Italy.

The government says using armed police and transports mounted with guns to escort the high level waste minimises the risk.

Currently overseas nuclear waste is stored at Sellafield either in the form of glass blocks, untreated liquid waste, or in drums of solid waste. It is mixed up together with UK waste but British Nuclear Fuels keeps a log of how much radioactivity had been allocated to each country.

Gordon MacKerron, head of the government's committee on radioactive waste management, said: "Of course the volumes of nuclear waste we will have to deal with in Britain will be substantially greater... but overall because of the large existing volume of UK waste it will not make a big difference in percentage terms.

"In practical terms it does not make a lot of difference to our overall nuclear waste problem."



-------- business

U.N. Board Cites U.S. Contractor in Iraq
Pentagon Audits Found Halliburton Subsidiary 'Overstated Costs,' Report Says

By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 15, 2004; Page A27

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A64784-2004Dec14?language=printer

UNITED NATIONS, Dec. 15 -- Pentagon auditors concluded that Kellogg Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton Co., charged "unsupported" and "overstated costs" in more than $800 million in U.S.-administered projects financed by Iraqi oil revenue, according to a report issued Tuesday by a U.N.-appointed financial oversight board.

The chairman of the International Advisory and Monitoring Board (IAMB), Jean-Pierre Halbwachs, said that it was impossible to determine the extent of alleged overcharges because the figures had been redacted from a series of five Pentagon audits presented to the board last month. But he said that he had agreed to a U.S. proposal to appoint an independent auditor to conduct a "special audit" of all contracts awarded to Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) and other companies without competitive bidding.

The international board was created by the U.N. Security Council in May 2003 to monitor the U.S.-led coalition's management of Iraq's oil revenue. It had been pressing the Pentagon for months to release the audits of KBR as part of a broad effort to ensure that Iraq's oil revenue has been properly spent. The U.S. company had been awarded at least $1.4 billion from Iraqi revenue to repair the country's oil facilities and to import fuel for domestic uses, according to Halbwachs.

A Pentagon spokeswoman, Lt. Col. Rose-Ann L. Lynch, declined to release an estimate of the overcharges cited in the audit, calling the information "proprietary in nature." She said that the United States and KBR both approved the redacted versions of the audits presented to the IAMB.

Lynch said that the KBR contracts had been administered by the Army Corps of Engineers and noted that the Government Accountability Office stated in a June report that the Army Corps had "properly awarded" a sole source contract to rebuild Iraq's oil infrastructure. Iraq's oil revenue "will continue to be used in a transparent manner to meet the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people," she said.

Halliburton spokeswoman Wendy Hall declined to discuss the conclusions of the Pentagon audit. But she wrote in an e-mail that the company has addressed the auditors' assertions "directly with the Army, and we will continue to work with our customer to prove that KBR is delivering services at the best value at a time when few other companies could or would."

The U.N. report issued Tuesday comes as the United Nations, which monitored Iraq's oil exports before the U.S.-led invasion, confronts allegations of corruption and mismanagement in that oil-for-food program. Some U.S. lawmakers have called for the resignation of U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan as a result of the allegations, but Bush administration officials have said they do not seek Annan's ouster and are working well with him. Annan plans to meet Thursday in Washington with Secretary of State-designate Condoleezza Rice, officials said.

The IAMB first raised concerns in March that contracts financed by Iraqi revenue had been awarded to KBR without competitive bidding. The Pentagon's initial refusal to release internal audits on the contracts fueled criticism among Democratic lawmakers about the U.S.-led coalition's management of Iraq's oil revenue.

The board, which includes representatives from the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, has sharply criticized the U.S.-led coalition's handling of billions of dollars in Iraqi oil revenue. It has also drawn attention to lax financial controls of Iraqi ministries, citing poor bookkeeping and duplicate payments to government workers.

A series of audits commissioned by the board, covering May 2003 to June 2004, found that the deposits and disbursements of billions of dollars in oil sales were accounted for by the U.S. led-coalition. But the audits, which were carried out by the accounting firm KPMG, have noted that the "financial controls" were insufficient to ensure the money was properly spent.

"There were a number of weaknesses in the overall financial management system that are of concern," the IAMB report stated. "There was an absence of control over oil extraction . . . the execution of the accounting function was often inadequate . . . proper contracting procedures were not always adhered to, in particular the use of single-source contracting."


-------- iraq

Roadside bombs slow US operations in Iraq: general

WASHINGTON (AFP)
Dec 15, 2004

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041215191939.4gntygmr.html

Increasing use of roadside bombs by insurgents has slowed US military operations in Iraq, forcing changes in tactics and a greater reliance on aircraft to move supplies, a senior commander acknowledged Wednesday.

Lieutenant General Lance Smith, deputy commander of the US Central Command, said new technologies have been used with varying success to thwart improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, but there are "no silver bullets."

Senior army officials said they are spending 4.1 billion dollars through 2005 to armor nearly all Humvees and trucks in Iraq -- an issue which has brought public complaints from US troops in recent days.

And the air force chief on Tuesday said commanders are to step up the use of cargo planes to move supplies to ease the pressure on truck convoys.

Asked whether insurgent bombings have slowed military operations in Iraq, Smith said, "They are."

"They cause us to reroute vehicles. They cause us to have to employ tactics. Although the tactics have been generally successful, we have had to introduce speed and maneuverability and protection of vehicles and (it's) caused us to have to convoy," he said.

Insurgents shifted to IEDs in August and September 2003 after recognizing that they were no match for US forces in direct attacks, military officials said.

"So they had a growing understanding that where they can affect us is in the logistics part. and so they have learned, as we have, and they have moved the fight in many cases back to the rear areas," Smith said.

"There are areas where they can do that effectively, and there are areas where we find it difficult to maintain constant (control) -- like cities and the like," he said.

US forces find or neutralize about half the bombs before they go off, driving convoys fast to outrace explosions or using devices to jam remotely controlled bombs, he said.

"And that's been effective. But it's effective for a short time. The enemy is very smart and thinking," he said.

Smith said he was meeting with a joint task force that is trying to provide technological solutions to the problem.

"We've had a number of technologies that we've tried out in the theater, some more successful than others, but no silver bullet," he said. "I don't know that we'll ever find a silver bullet."

He said several hundred truckloads of supplies are being moved by air and planners are rethinking the distribution system closer to their destination, shortening the distances trucks have to travel with supplies.

The IED threat and its impact on the force -- though not new -- has drawn renewed attention since US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was asked by a soldier in Kuwait last week why soldiers were having to dig through landfill for scrap metal to protect their vehicles.

General John Jumper, the air force chief of staff, said Tuesday that 350 trucks worth of cargo a day are now moving by air in Iraq, and the goal is to increase that number to at least 1,500 truckloads a day.

Army officials said Wednesday that they have reached an agreement with Armored Holdings Inc, its exclusive supplier of armored Humvees, to step up production from 450 to 550 vehicles a month by March in order to accelerate deliveries to Iraq.

Brigadier General Jeff Sorenson, and army procurement officer, said the army plans to have nearly all Humvees in Iraq and its heavy truck fleet armored by March. By June, 32,288 Humvees and medium and heavy trucks in Iraq -- almost the entire fleet of vehicles -- are to have some level of armored protection, the officials said.

Still, the need for armor has increased at a faster pace than the army has been able to produce it.

Currently, 80 percent of the Humvees are armored. Smaller percentages of trucks have armor on them now.

Meeting the growing requirement for armored protection "is a very, very expensive proposition," said Major General Stephen Speakes, the army's director of force development.

"As you look at our forecast, both of what we've already spent and what we're immediately forecasting to spend here over the next six or eight months or so, it's several billion dollars, as you can see: 4.1 billion dollars to be specific," he said.

"And so this is an enormously expensive program but, very frankly, the communication from the secretary of defense has been real clear, which when it involves a soldier's life, we're not into the money business," he said.


-------- israel / palestine 

Abbas calls for no arms against Israel

December 15, 2004
By Paul Martin
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041215-120033-4535r.htm

LONDON — Mahmoud Abbas, the prohibitive favorite to succeed Yasser Arafat as president of the Palestinian Authority, called yesterday for an end to the use of deadly weapons against Israel so as to create a suitable climate for negotiations.

    Mr. Abbas had previously said the use of arms against Israelis had hurt Palestinian interests — a remark he repeated yesterday — but had not so explicitly demanded an end to their use.

    It was not immediately clear how the comment in an interview with a London-based Arabic newspaper would affect his campaign for the Palestinians' Jan. 9 presidential election, but it was liable to anger militants.

    In the interview with the newspaper Asharq Al Awsat, Mr. Abbas said the intifada should continue, but that it should return to the use of tactics employed in the first such uprising from 1987 to 1993.

    "The use of live weaponry has harmed the intifada and it should stop," he was quoted as saying.

    "The intifada is our legitimate right of the Palestinian people, and its purpose is to give expression to our opposition to conquest by popular and social means — as happened in the first intifada," Mr. Abbas continued.

    "We, at this stage, are against the militarization of the intifada because we want to negotiate. And because we want to negotiate, the atmosphere should be calm in preparation for political action," he said.

    Mr. Abbas also told the newspaper that Palestinian security services must be rapidly consolidated and reorganized, a demand that previously has been made by Israel and the United States.

    Delays in consolidating 12 often-rival security groups have complicated previous efforts to exercise control over armed militants.

    In the first uprising, which lasted seven years, Israel calculates that 236 of its citizens were killed in shootings, lynchings, knife attacks and stonings. But the Palestinians, whose death toll was far higher, portray it as a David-and-Goliath struggle pitting stone-throwing youths against Israeli tanks and live bullets.

    The interview contrasted with strong praise in the Palestinian Authority's official media for an armed attack on an Israeli border post in the Gaza Strip on Sunday. Five Israeli soldiers were killed by subterranean bombs before Palestinian gunmen raked Israeli rescuers of a trapped soldier.

    The Israeli government has not yet reacted to Mr. Abbas' reported comments. However, a senior Likud party lawmaker expressed doubt in a telephone interview about Mr. Abbas' ability to end armed attacks on Israelis.

    "It's better than saying he supports more armed violence," said Yuval Steinitz, chairman of the Knesset's Security and Foreign Relations Committee. "But he has not shown us any sign that he has the ability or desire to take concrete steps against those wielding the weapons."

    Mr. Abbas has already held talks in Gaza City and Damascus with radical opponents of the Oslo Accords, which established the Palestinian Authority. However, he has declined to say whether he called on these groups to stop all armed activity, let alone to disarm. Israel has demanded both steps as conditions for a resumption of the "road map" peace process.

    Mr. Steinitz acknowledged that Mr. Abbas has in the past opposed armed violence, but maintained that this was because he found it counterproductive, rather than immoral.

    "OK, it's better than encouraging it," he said. "He might try to stop it, but to do so he has to dismantle Hamas and [Islamic] Jihad. Maybe he will try. We don't know what would happen once he meets resistance."

    Mr. Steinitz remained worried by Mr. Abbas' insistence, reflected in numerous public statements, that descendants of Palestinian refugees must be allowed to repopulate Israel.

    "What he is really telling us is that he is not prepared for two states. He wants not a Palestinian state and a Jewish state, but he wants us to give up part of our homeland while they can return to our part. ...

    "He is not ready to recognize that part of this land will be for Jews and not for Palestinians," Mr. Steinitz said.

    Palestinian observers said Mr. Abbas had been carrying out a complex balancing act with considerable aplomb.

    To ensure a smooth election, he has had to dampen violence against Israeli targets from Hamas and other Islamic radicals, as well as from hard-liners within his own Fatah movement. On the other hand, being seen to appease Israeli and American concerns is considered a vote-loser.

    He may have become emboldened, these observers said, by the findings of the last independent Palestinian opinion poll, which showed that popular support for suicide bombings against Israelis had dropped below 50 percent for the first time in several years.

    The withdrawal last weekend of his main rival in the upcoming election, jailed Fatah West Bank leader Marwan Barghouti, may also have made Mr. Abbas feel more comfortable in making the sort of statements needed to move the peace process forward, analysts said. 


-------- nato

Poland vows to back Georgia's EU, NATO aspirations

WARSAW (AFP) Dec 15, 2004

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041215181903.2ifudhb0.html

Poland will support Georgia's aspirations to become a part of NATO and the European Union, Foreign Minister Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz said on Wednesday following talks with his Georgian counterpart.

Warsaw will "not only give political backing to Georgia's aspirations, but will also share Poland's own experiences of integrating the EU," Cimoszewicz was quoted as saying by the PAP news agency.

Georgian Foreign Minister Salome Zurabishvili, in Warsaw for an official visit, said both countries shared a "common objective which is to encourage the spread of democracy in Europe".

Zurabishvili notably referred to the situation in Ukraine, where the Western-leaning opposition has managed to secure a re-run of a fraudulent presidential election following several weeks of mass protests.

The turbulence in Ukraine came exactly one year after Georgia peacefully ousted its communist-era leadership, forcing veteran leader Eduard Shevardnadze to step aside in favor of a Western-educated reformer, Mikhail Saakashvili.

The strategic former Soviet republic in the Caucasus has said it hopes to join the NATO military alliance within four years and eventually also to join the EU.

Zurabishvili and Cimoszewicz on Wednesday signed a cooperation agreement on European and euro-Atlantic integration, as well as an agreement in the field of science and culture.

The Georgian minister, who held talks earlier Wednesday with Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski, was travelling with a 50-strong delegation of business leaders.

Both countries share a communist past but Poland joined the European Union in May and NATO in 1999.

--------

Israeli membership of NATO depends on Mideast peace: British envoy

HERZLIYA, Israel (AFP) Dec 15, 2004

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041215152106.dp1slj5a.html

Israel will not be allowed to join NATO until there is a viable Middle East peace settlement, Britain's envoy to the military alliance said Wednesday.

"I am sure that the issue of membership of NATO for Israel could only come about in the context of a wider settlement of the Israel-Palestine issue," Peter Ricketts, Britain's permanent representative to NATO, told a security conference near Tel Aviv.

Israel has been developing closer relations with NATO in recent years.

It attended talks at the alliance's Brussels headquarters last month, along with representatives from six other Mediterranean-rim countries, as part of efforts to increase cooperation against terrorism.

Oded Eran, Israel's ambassador to the European Union, told the conference that NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer and Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom had held talks on Sunday "about upgrading relations."

"The secretary general will come to Israel in the spring," Eran added.

However Ricketts poured cold water on any suggestion that the closer ties could be a precursor to Israeli membership of NATO.

"I think there's a lot that NATO and Israel could do together in areas like counter-terrorism and in discussing the threats posed from WMD" (weapons of mass destruction), he added.

"I don't think it (membership) is for the immediate future. I don't see how Israel could become a member without the settlement of the Israel-Palestine issue," he said.



-------- spies

Former FBI agent cites penetration of CIA by China

December 15, 2004
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041214-104813-7821r.htm

China's intelligence service spent years training a spy who posed as a Catholic priest in New York and was part of an escape plan for a Chinese agent in the CIA, according to a veteran FBI counterspy.

    Retired Special Agent I.C. Smith said China's use of the masquerading priest was "one of the most fascinating things" about the spy case of Larry Wu-tai Chin, who supplied secrets to China for decades as a CIA translator until his arrest in 1985.

    "The People's Republic of China Ministry of State Security took a married Chinese national from the People's Republic and over several years gave him the background to be a priest," Mr. Smith said in an interview.

    He identified the agent-priest as Mark Cheung, a minister with the Church of the Transfiguration in New York's Chinatown. "He was actually a Ministry of State Security operative," Mr. Smith said of Cheung.

    Cheung was a Chinese "illegal" — a deep-undercover spy dispatched abroad to help in intelligence-gathering operations, he said. Mr. Smith said Cheung "was there to be part of the escape plan for Larry Chin."

    According to Mr. Smith, emergency escape plans called for Chin to meet Cheung in the confessional booth of the downtown New York City church. China's intelligence service "spent years on this guy, bouncing him around in the South Pacific, building up a background to make it appear that he was a legitimate Catholic priest."

    FBI agents later caught up with Cheung in Hong Kong and questioned him about his activities. But he was "uncooperative" and eventually fled to mainland China, where he is believed to be today, Mr. Smith said.

    Mr. Smith, a former FBI special agent in charge in Little Rock, Ark., worked for years in Chinese counterintelligence within the agency. He disclosed new information about China's spy and influence operations in his book, "Inside: A Top G-Man Exposes Spies, Lies and Bureaucratic Bungling Inside the FBI." Mr. Smith spent 1973 to 1998 in the FBI.

    Chin was uncovered in 1983 and arrested in November 1985. In 1986, he killed himself using a plastic bag in an Alexandria jail cell two weeks after he was convicted of spying for China since 1948. He was revealed after an official of the Ministry of State Security began working secretly for the CIA before defecting to the United States.

    The Chinese defector has been identified by U.S. officials as Yu Zhensan, who was code-named "Planesman" by the FBI. He is one of only two major intelligence defections from China. "He was a guy that was being operated in China," Mr. Smith said.

    Chin was caught after the defector provided a "sketchy" clue in the early 1980s that an Asian employee of U.S. intelligence was spying for China and had once been delayed prior to a flight to Hong Kong to meet a control agent.

    "The source basically said [the spy] came to Beijing, but his flight got delayed," Mr. Smith said. "We go back and find a phone call went in to the [Chinese] Embassy, where it basically said, 'Hey, my flight's delayed, what do I do?' That kind of gave it to us. We looked at everybody on the flight. It was just typical grunt, hard investigative work."

    The phone call led the FBI to Chin.

    Prior to the FBI probe, the CIA conducted its own probe, but failed to uncover Chin, a translator who was granted access to classified information in 1970. He caused the deaths of U.S. agents by supplying information to Chinese intelligence during trips to Hong Kong, Mr. Smith said. 



-------- un

Annan to hold talks in D.C.

December 15, 2004
By Betsy Pisik
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041215-120032-8196r.htm

NEW YORK — Embattled U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan will visit Washington tomorrow for discussions that likely will steer clear of a simmering oil-for-food scandal that has prompted congressional calls for his resignation.

    Agenda items for his talks with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice include preparations for elections in Iraq, violence in western Sudan, and peacekeeping in Haiti, according to U.S. and U.N. officials.

    The issue of calls for Mr. Annan's resignation "may just be noted," said a senior official at the State Department, which has defended Mr. Annan, "but we are not going to plot strategy against the U.S. Congress."

    Mr. Annan has not scheduled meetings with any of the 20 members of Congress who last week signed a resolution calling for Mr. Annan to resign and for U.S. payments to the world organization to be reduced if he does not.

    "This is not a PR visit to the Hill," U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said. Asked whether the secretary would discuss the oil-for-food investigation at the State Department, Mr. Eckhard said, "We don't want to; maybe they will want to."

    A spokesman for Sen. Norm Coleman, the Minnesota Republican who is heading the main congressional inquiry into the scandal, said yesterday the senator did not plan to meet with Mr. Annan and had not changed his mind about the secretary-general.

    Mr. Coleman "still feels Mr. Annan should resign from his post as the investigation has widened into probing accusations that a member of his own family took a bribe," the spokesman said.

    Mr. Annan's son Kojo Annan worked as a consultant to the Swiss company Cotecna, which managed the oil-for-food program, and recently acknowledged having received payments from the company for much longer than previously reported.

    But he denied any wrongdoing yesterday in a written statement to CNN, the cable network reported.

    "The whole issue has been a witch hunt from day one as part of a broader Republican political agenda," CNN quoted him saying. "I have never participated directly or indirectly in any business related to the United Nations."

    U.N. officials said they expected Mr. Powell and Miss Rice would be most interested in talking with Mr. Annan about what the world body can do to help make Iraq's Jan. 30 election successful.

    Mr. Annan, for his part, wants to talk about assistance to U.N. activities in Afghanistan, Sudan and Haiti, Mr. Eckhard said.

    Mr. Annan was invited to Washington to discuss U.S.-U.N. relations and possible U.N. reforms in a lunchtime lecture at the Washington branch of the Council on Foreign Relations. He will leave immediately afterward for a European Union summit in Brussels, leaving no time for courtesy calls to Congress.

    Mr. Annan's congressional critics charge that he presided over the United Nations during the biggest scandal in its history, the systematic manipulation of a humanitarian program for Iraq that appears to have lined the pockets of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and senior members of his Ba'ath Party.

    That money is thought to be fueling the Iraqi insurgency that kills an average of two U.S. service members a day and is laying waste to the public infrastructure in the oil-rich nation.

    At least a half-dozen investigations have been opened into the $64 billion oil-for-food program, which distributed food and other goods throughout Iraq from 1996 to 2003. So far, the United Nations is cooperating only with its own inquiry, led by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker.

    Mr. Annan has been defended against the calls for his resignation by the State Department and again on Monday by Rep. Tom Lantos, California Democrat, during a visit to the United Nations.

    "I assured the secretary-general that all of us in Congress who know him continue to have the highest regard not only for his commitment to public service but his integrity and dedication to international peace and the improvement of economic conditions throughout the less-developed world," Mr. Lantos said after meeting with Mr. Annan.

    "Knowing Kofi Annan as well as I do, I know he will be the one leading the cleanup," Mr. Lantos added.

    He acknowledged that Congress is divided on how to view the United Nations.

    An unabashed supporter, Mr. Lantos said Congress is "not interested at all in functioning as a body which excuses mistakes in the U.N. or by the U.N. entities such as the General Assembly."
    
     Brian DeBose contributed to this report in Washington.
     
--------

Blueprint for a Better United Nations

By Nora Boustany

Wednesday, December 15, 2004 Washington Post; Page A30

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A64742-2004Dec14?language=printer

After a series of sometimes acrimonious brainstorming sessions, a United Nations advisory committee has issued recommendations on reforms to make the international organization more effective. At the request of U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, the 16-member committee, known as the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, issued a blueprint of more than 100 pages on Dec. 2.

Annan had asked the panel to address old and new threats to the United Nations, and discover what reforms should take place.

The panel's most significant contribution was reaching a consensus on the definition of terrorism, said one panel member, Enrique Iglesias, president of the Inter-American Development Bank. In an interview Sunday, Iglesias said the discussion of that subject was also "the toughest."

The standards governing the use of force by non-governmental entities have not kept pace with those pertaining to states, the participants agreed, according to Iglesias.

For the first time, the report spelled out that terrorism should be seen as any act of violence against innocent people, even if committed by non-state actors "under occupation," Iglesias said, adding, "America will be very happy."

According to the report, "Achieving a comprehensive convention on terrorism, including a clear definition is a political imperative. . . . The central point is that there is nothing in the fact of occupation that justifies the targeting and killing of civilians."

Annan is scheduled to present the report to the United Nations by March with his revisions. Iglesias said the U.N. Charter could be changed if two-thirds of the General Assembly's 191 members agree, but only if none of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council vetoes the report.

Iglesias said there was agreement among the committee that the Security Council must undergo changes, and that there was a need to "democratize."

On the whole, Iglesias said, the advisory group considered its task in terms of "a positive examination of conscience."

The group "did not look to the past for retribution as much as it did to ways of building the system for the future," Iglesias said, when asked if guidelines were discussed for preventing controversy, such as the one that has developed between the United Nations and the U.S. government over the past few years.

The committee presented two proposals to Annan on changing the Security Council. The first allows for increasing the permanent members from five to 11 but not giving veto power to the six new countries. In that provision, the number of non-permanent, two-year rotating members would be increased from 10 countries to 14.

The second proposal, which encountered serious opposition from four countries -- Brazil, India, Japan and Germany -- calls for maintaining five permanent members but expanding the number of semi-permanent countries, which would be elected for membership every four to five years.

Others on the panel with Iglesias included Brent Scowcroft, former national security adviser; Gareth Evans, a former Australian foreign minister; Amr Moussa, the Arab League secretary general; and Sadaka Ogata, former U.N. high commissioner for refugees. The committee met six times over the past year in Princeton, N.J.; New York; Tarrytown, N.Y.; Geneva, Vienna, and Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Iglesias said the panel had combined principles and political realism in its effort to establish an international pact on peace and security. "Ultimately, it will depend on the capacity of governments to compromise and to respect its commitments," he said. "Under these circumstances, a real modernization of the United Nations is not only desirable but feasible."

Germans Voice Concern

The German ambassador, Wolfgang Ischinger, discussing the U.N. reformers in a separate interview on Tuesday, said the U.N. study required serious follow-up by governments as well as debate and leadership by the United States.

"We hope the United States will be actively involved," he said in a telephone interview. "Security Council reform is long overdue, and though the report offers two options, we are happier with the first, which proposes the creation of permanent members," Ischinger said. "The best way forward would be increasing the number once and for all."

He said Germany was concerned that political considerations would influence Security Council membership if country membership was subject to reelection.

"If you are up for reelection, you will be under the temptation as a new member to campaign and create incentives to make yourself eligible for another rotation," he said. "To make important decisions as a permanent Security Council member, sometimes you have to be unpopular."

He said the German government preferred that new permanent members maintain the same rights and privileges as old ones. "All this is up for discussion, and ours is certainly not a take it or leave it position," the ambassador said.

Ischinger also commented on Iran and its nuclear program. He said negotiations for a long-term agreement on the nuclear controversy began Monday and the talks could take several months.

"What we hope for is for the United States to try to make an active contribution to make these negotiations productive," Ischinger said. "The Europeans are doing this alone. We are looking for more active and substantive U.S. participation." 

 <a name="usmilitary"></a>


-------- us

War funding request may hit $100 billion

By Bryan Bender, Boston Globe Staff  |  December 15, 2004

http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2004/12/15/war_funding_request_may_hit_100_billion?pg=full

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration plans to ask for between $80 billion and $100 billion to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, rather than the $70 billion to $75 billion the White House privately told members of Congress before the election, according to Pentagon and White House officials.

Administration officials said yesterday they have not concluded how much money they will request in a "supplemental" spending package that is scheduled to go to Congress in January.

"There's work going on inside the department to understand what's needed, and there's work going on with the Office of Management and Budget," the Defense Department's chief spokesman, Lawrence Di Rita, told reporters yesterday.

But some analysts and government officials said the request is expected to run as high as $100 billion, bringing the total cost of operations in Iraq alone to well over $200 billion since the March 2003 invasion.

Earlier this fall, members of Congress said the Defense Department told them in private briefings the supplemental package would be between $70 billion and $75 billion. The budget request will be higher, sources said, because of the greater number of soldiers -- temporarily boosted to 150,000 -- needed to provide security around the time of the Jan. 30 Iraqi elections, and the loss of equipment due to the vigorous insurgency there.

In June, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the 2005 supplemental to be submitted this January for Iraq and Afghanistan would be between $55 billion and $60 billion.

The January supplemental will be the third special budget request to cover the military costs of Iraq. The administration asked for $55.8 billion in April 2003 and $71.8 billion in November 2003. In May of this year, Congress added $25 billion in war costs to the fiscal 2005 defense budget. In total, $152.6 billion in military funding for Iraq has been provided through the end of this year.

Those statistics do not include emergency money to support the 20,000 US troops in Afghanistan, which brings the total bill to $162.3 billion.

In addition, the military has been spending more than was approved for 2004, in anticipation of a fresh infusion of funds in early 2005.

"They ran out of the 2004 budget a month early [and] had to borrow [from] 2005," said John Pike, a defense specialist at the military think tank GlobalSecurity.org, a military think tank in Alexandria, Va. "They're already starting to suggest that the 2005 budget is going to be $100 billion for one year alone."

The Iraq operation, he said, has "been running over a billion a week thus far. I think we're probably getting up to $2 billion a week fairly soon."

Few analysts expect the Iraq mission to be wrapped up in a year, and many question why the Bush administration is continuing to budget its war costs through supplementals -- usually reserved for one-time, emergency expenses -- rather than include them in the annual budget request that is sent to Capitol Hill every February.

Democrats and some fiscally conservative Republicans believe the administration is trying to hide the effects of rising war costs on the federal deficit, thereby justifying President Bush's calls for making some tax cuts permanent and spending more on education and other domestic priorities.

Although war costs ultimately get added to the deficit, keeping them off the annual budget creates a false picture of the government's commitments at a time when Congress is making funding decisions, critics said.

Brian Reidl, an economist with the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation, said the Iraq funding should be put in the defense budget, because the Pentagon knows it will need money to pay for the operation. Leaving it out masks the true size of the deficit, he said.

"There's an argument to be made that [early in the year] you don't know what you'll need" for Iraq funding, Reidl said. But "there's no reason why you can't put in a place-holder to at least estimate the cost."

The administration separates the Iraq funding because "it's easier to sell the budget resolution with a smaller deficit and a smaller spending total because Iraq is excluded," Reidl said.

Steve Kosiak, a defense budget specialist at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, added that "the idea is [supplementals] are supposed to be used when there is a surprise. This is no longer a surprise that we are in Iraq."

The actual cost of the military operations in Iraq is higher than any of the supplementals suggest, analysts said, because the wartime wear and tear on people and equipment will require expenditures long after the war ends.

A soon-to-be-completed classified study by the Government Accountability Office requested by Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee concludes that the cost of "resetting" the worn-out armed forces for peacetime will require billions more than the money needed simply to maintain combat operations, according to congressional officials.

"They will need new training and the sense is that the longer this thing goes on the deeper the problems get," said a congressional staff member who has been briefed on the GAO study.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon yesterday alerted more units to be ready for duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Tens of thousands of Army soldiers from Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, New York, and Texas -- including a brigade of the Army's 10th Mountain Division based at Fort Drum in New York -- will prepare to deploy overseas by the middle of 2005. The planned rotations, and others to be announced in the coming weeks, would maintain a force of 138,000 US troops in Iraq well into 2006.

However, Di Rita called the notifications "prudent planning" and cautioned that it does not necessarily mean the United States will need all those forces.

"It would be wrong to say that, as far as the eye can see, this is the number," Di Rita said. "It may very well be less than this. It may be the same amount. It may be more."

Susan Milligan and Kathleen Hennrikus of the Globe staff contributed to his report. Bryan Bender can be reached at bender@globe.com .

--------

Army women and combat

December 15, 2004 Washington Times Editorial

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20041214-090300-2779r.htm

The Army's 3rd Infantry Division is scheduled to head to Iraq next month to bolster security before the Jan. 30 elections. When they leave, they could be the first division that deploys mixed-sex units near all-male combat units. The reorganization is part of Army Chief of Staff Peter Schoomaker's plan to change the basic combat brigade into self-contained "units of action" that train and deploy with their support teams. The mixed-sex units, known as Forward Support Companies, would be on the ground near fighting, but not actively involved in combat.

    As Rowan Scarborough has reported, the redesign has created a stir inside the Pentagon, as well as among civilian defense organizations, as some allege that "collocating" mixed-sex units with combat units violates a ban imposed in 1994. While the Army admits that it has considered altering the ban, it says the current proposal allows forward support units to collocate only with brigade-support battalions, which are not considered combat units. The Army also notes that the roles women would be performing would not be much different than the ones they perform now in other support units. It should be emphasized that this new method would not permit women to take on direct combat duties. What it does do is increase the risk to female soldiers performing their traditional combat support duties.

    Those crying foul see a degree of political correctness sneaking into the one government department that should resist such pressure. While it is true that in the past the armed forces have not been immune to such tinkering, the Army's current reorganization doesn't seem to be one of those cases. In May, an internal Army briefing paper set forth a sober analysis of its current personnel problems: "Army manpower cannot support elimination of female soldiers from all units designated to be units of action elements," the document states. In other words, for the Army to go forward with Gen. Schoomaker's transformation plan, it would not have enough male personnel to fill out the forward support units. The paper further states, all-male FSCs "creates potential long-term challenges to Army; pool of recruits too small to sustain force."

    As Mr. Scarborough has reported, some inside the Pentagon see the proposal as "skirting" the existing 1994 ban, if not violating it. That very well could be the case. Events in Iraq have shown that insurgencies do not operate on a front, thereby removing the safety support brigades enjoy being "behind the line." Placing mixed-sex forward units with support brigades could endanger more female soldiers than would otherwise be the case.

    Even so, it would be far more detrimental to the Army's transformation objectives to deplete other units, possibly combat units, of needed manpower. To secure the highly mobile, self-contained fighting units Gen. Schoomaker envisions, combat units must be in close contact with support brigades. Allowing women to serve in such support units might not be the best alternative, yet until the Army increases its retention and recruitment it seems to be the only available one. 


-------- war crimes

UN court dismisses Belgrade genocide claims against NATO states

THE HAGUE (AFP)

Dec 15, 2004

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041215153409.cpu4ohp1.html

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN's highest legal body, Wednesday dismissed cases filed by Serbia and Montenegro accusing eight NATO members of genocide during the alliance's 1999 bombings of Kosovo.

The court ruled that Belgrade's claims against NATO members Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Britain should be rejected because Serbia and Montenegro was not a member of the United Nations at the time the complaint was filed in April 1999.

"The court concludes that at the time of filing of the application of the present procedings ... Serbia and Montenegro was not a member of the United Nations and was not on that basis a state party to the ICJ," presiding judge Shi Jiuyong said.

The 15-judge panel reached their decision unanimously.

The ICJ can only rule on disputes between UN member states, unless they have signed conventions giving the court jurisdiction or two states agree to let the court consider its dispute or if the UN Security Council refers a case for an advisory opinion.

--------

Justice in Baghdad? A Debate Between Saddam's UK Lawyer and a US Attorney Who Helped Create Legal System in Occupied Iraq

democracynow.org
December 15th, 2004

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/15/1458246

We host a debate between Abdul Haq Al-Ani, a London-based attorney who is one of Saddam Hussein's lawyers and Michael Scharf, one of five international law experts who helped train Iraqi judges after major combat ended in the country. [includes rush transcript] Almost a year to the day after Saddam Hussein's arrest, Iraq's unelected, interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi made a surprise announcement that his government will begin trial proceedings against some of Saddam's top lieutenants. The announcement came during Allawi's address to the interim national assembly on Tuesday.

Allawi said, "I will tell you clearly and specifically that next week, God willing, the trials of the symbols of the former regime will begin."

In his address, Allawi went on to say that the trials had been delayed by what he called preparation difficulties and complex legal procedures. But he said "We have finished the procedures and nominated (judges) and I can say, with certainty that the trials will begin next week and continue."

The announcement reportedly took US officials and even Iraq's Justice Ministry by surprise. Iraqi Justice officials were quoted by news agencies as saying they had heard nothing about any start to the prosecution process next week. A US official also said the news caught him by surprise and another Iraqi official said it was an election stunt by Allawi, who announced his candidacy today in Iraq's planned elections set for January 30.

The former Iraqi officials are set to be tried by a special Iraqi tribunal for cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Some of the men and women who ruled Iraq for decades could face the death penalty if found guilty.

Iraq's Defense Minister announced today that Ali Hassan al-Majid, one of Saddam Hussein's top military figures, will be the first leader of the former regime to be tried for war crimes. Majid is accused of some of the worst crimes committed during Saddam's decades in power, including the gassing of up to 5,000 Kurds in northern Iraq in 1988.

To discuss these trials and the case of Saddam Hussein, we are joined by two people on different sides of this story.

    * Abdul Haq Al-Ani, London-based lawyer. He is one of Saddam Hussein's lawyers and is also one of the lawyers representing former Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz. Last year, he himself was arrested in London on charges he had violated the sanctions on Iraq.
    * Michael Scharf, Director of the Frederick K. Cox International law Center at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio. He worked in the State Department during the administrations of George HW Bush and Bill Clinton. More recently, he was one of five international law experts who helped train Iraqi judges after major combat ended in the country.

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

AMY GOODMAN: To discuss these trials and the case of Saddam Hussein, we're joined by two people -- Michael Scharf is director of the Frederick K. Cox Law Center at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio, and Abdul Haq Al-Ani is a London-based lawyer, one of Saddam Hussein's attorneys. We'll begin with Michael Scharf, will this happen?

MICHAEL SCHARF: Amy, there is no way the trials will begin next week. First of all, the Iraqi Special Tribunal is independent and the prime minister and defense minister cannot control when it begins its trials. Secondly, the rules of procedure and evidence are still being drafted and they can’t begin the trials until after that. Thirdly, there’s always been a consensus that they wouldn’t want to start until the elected government was in place, because they would give the defendants an argument under the Geneva Conventions that this is an illegitimate tribunal. And finally, I have been involved in training the Iraqi judges and we still have several training sessions scheduled for the new year, so I know they're not intending to begin any time soon.

AMY GOODMAN: So, are you calling Iyad Allawi a liar?

MICHAEL SCHARF: What I’m saying... there is one way to interpret what he said consistently with the truth. It is possible they will have arraignments in the next few weeks where they bring these defendants to the court, and they appoint a defense counsel, and they read the charges, and they ask if they plead guilty or innocent. And I suppose in a stretch, you could say that the trial has begun. And that would be perfectly consistent with where things stand, but the actual trials will not begin until mid-time next year.

AMY GOODMAN: Abdul Haq Al-Ani with us, the London-based attorney, one of Saddam Hussein's lawyers also one of the lawyers representing the former Iraqi deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz. Last year, he himself was arrested -- that is our guest, Abdul Haq Al-Ani -- on charges he’d violated the sanctions. Your response to this announcement.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: Salam alaikum. Well I don't know what to take of Iyad Allawi. He has been saying the last few months every now and then that there is going to be a trial, and he is immediately rebuked by the Americans who at the end of the day control the show. I don't know why he keeps talking about, since he has no control. I don't think there's going to be a trial next month or whatever or next two months. It's a political decision, which is going to be decided by the Americans, and Iyad Allawi has got no control. The anomaly of this mess is that the Americans hold the prisoners. Allawi seems to assume legal jurisdiction over them, which he hasn't got, and at the same time claiming there is a legal basis for trying them. I'm very surprised that I’ve just heard your speaker talking about the court. Which court? Under which law is it created. There's no law in Iraq which allows the people to be tried for war crimes. The Iraqi law, which exists under the Hague Regulations does not allow them to be tried, and -- under any other law. If the United Nations wants to create a special tribunal, it should create such, but not a couple of American professors somewhere teaching Iraqi judges to create the kangaroo or camel court -- rather than a kangaroo court -- to try Iraqis under fictitious legal principles. This is a charade that's never been seen internationally, and I don't know how Americans could really stand and argue for it. I honestly do not understand. Under which laws are you people talking about? Which court? Which law made that court? It’s Bremer who created that court. He has no authority to create a court to try people in Iraq. He has no authority to pass any regulation in Iraq. Allawi changed the Iraqi legal system which under the Hague regulations, he has no authority to do so.

AMY GOODMAN: Let's put the question to Michael Scharf, one of the five international law experts who trained Iraqi judges.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Amy, when I first heard about the court, I felt very much like your other guest today. I even wrote an article saying that this court seemed to me to look like an American puppet tribunal, but the more I learned about the court, especially when I got up to London spent a whole week getting to know the judges and learning how this was going to proceed, I learned that they have an awful lot of independence and autonomy and even the Department of Justice office in Baghdad, which is assisting them, has been given instructions from Washington they're on their own. They won't be given guidance or instructions on how to -- the timing of the indictments or who to indict, or how to proceed. Their only instruction is do what you think is right. And so, what I have learned from working with the judges is that this Iraqi special tribunal, which is consistent with international law, provided that the elected government ratifies it, is capable doing a fair and effective trial of Saddam Hussein.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: This is a retrospective activity that does not exist at law. I'm sorry to hear an international lawyer talk about this rubbish, I'm sorry to say that. But what Iraqi government is going to ratify what has happened before it? This court exists now without jurisdiction. It has no authority to act. What do you mean independent judges? An independent judge appointed under the Iraqi constitution has no authority to try Saddam Hussein. He does not have that authority. Everything he is doing now is illegal, and I’m -- I don't know if it gets the -- if they get advice from Washington. Why should Washington decide what happens in Iraq?

MICHAEL SCHARF: You know, I expected this -- I expect the defense counsel to state these arguments, especially in front of the tribunal. In fact defense counsels have argued that the Rwanda tribunal, Yugoslavia tribunal, and the special court for Sierra Leone have been illegal or outside of international law, and when the judges look at those arguments very carefully and look at the precedents, they have always rejected the arguments.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: I'm sorry. All of these tribunals that you are talking about have had a mandate from the Security Council. You go get a Security Council mandate to set up an international court in Iraq, and that will be legal, but don't you just go and pick a third grade judge in Baghdad and tell me he's independent -- appointed by Bremer – and tell me he’s independent. None of the judges sitting on the bench – so-called bench -- has got any experience in law. These are political appointees. If you go get me a tribunal like Milosevic, I accept that, but don't appoint judges who have no authority under Iraqi law to try Iraqi officials and tell me this is legal.

MICHAEL SCHARF: I met the judges. I don't think you know what you are talking about. These judges have quite a bit of experience, but in general --

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: You met them now? You know them now?

MICHAEL SCHARF: Let me just say this. No judge who has --

AMY GOODMAN: One person at a time. Michael Scharf, who are these judges? Let Michael Scharf explain who they are and you can respond...

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: ...We're tired of this.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Can you please let me finish?

AMY GOODMAN: Abdul Haq Al-Ani.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: We don't want you in Iraq. We don't want any meddling. We have enough legal experience. We don't want any American rubbish, any American breach of international law anymore. Thank you very much.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Amy, I think you're seeing what Saddam Hussein --

AMY GOODMAN: Let's let Michael Scharf respond and then, Abdul Haq Al-Ani, you can talk about who these people are. Michael Scharf.

MICHAEL SCHARF: : I think you're seeing from Abdul what the defense of Saddam is likely to look like. Very emotional, not necessarily grounded in law. Excuse me, can I finish, please?

AMY GOODMAN: Yes. Go ahead.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: ..try Saddam under international law...

AMY GOODMAN: Abdul Haq Al-Ani, let Michael Scharf explain who the lawyers are.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: I will arrest you at the London airport.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Ok, so what I was saying...

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: ...arrest you as a criminal because you have breached every single possible and international law. I challenge you to tell me when you have the -- when you arrive in London I’ll have the indictment.

MICHAEL SCHARF: I'm going to let you speak if you let me finish my statement.

AMY GOODMAN: Ok, let -- just let Michael Scharf finish his statement.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: I represent a detainee in Iraq, by what authority are you talking? Who appointed you? You tell me.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Can I speak now?

AMY GOODMAN: Yes. Go ahead, Michael Scharf.

MICHAEL SCHARF: What I was saying even with the international tribunals appointed by the Security Council, none of the judges had experience in war crimes law. There just aren’t that many people in the world that have the experience. Basically, they're the old Nuremburg prosecutors. I have one on our faculty at Case who is 85 years old and has been very helpful to me. But those aren’t the people being selected even for international tribunals. So these judges, you're right, they don't have experience in war crimes trials. And in fact they're not high level judges because those were seen as corrupted under the Saddam Hussein regime and they're not exiled judges because those were seen as having a grudge to bear. These are judges who were vetted carefully to make sure -- They were vetted both by the provisional government with the assistance of the Justice Department.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: ...a bunch of incompetent people appointed by Bremer. You are telling me that I appoint incompetent people and then say they are competent. That’s brilliant. By which law is that functioning?

AMY GOODMAN: We're going to break and then when we come back, --

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: Have to speak to the question by what authority is he functioning? This is fundamental to law. But -- who appointed him to function in this position? I want that answer. He's a lawyer... he should tell me who appointed him to function in his capacity.

AMY GOODMAN: Okay, Michael Scharf, your response.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Under the provisional law of Iraq -- he's not letting me respond. Ok, under the provisional law of Iraq, they have established the Iraqi special tribunal with a statute --

AMY GOODMAN: Okay are going to go to a break and then we’re going to come back. Michael Scharf at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio is one of five international law experts who helped train Iraqi judges. Abdul Haq Al-Ani is a London-based lawyer hired by Saddam Hussein's Jordanian lawyers to represent Saddam Hussein in London, also represents among others, the former Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: We're continuing with our discussion about law in Iraq, and who is actually in charge, who has authority. The issue of Iyad Allawi, the unelected Iraqi Prime Minister, announcing by surprise yesterday that trials will begin next week for Saddam Hussein's aides in Iraq. Our guests are Michael Scharf, who is the director of the Frederick Cox International Law Center at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio. He worked in the State Department during the administrations of both George H.W. Bush, as well as Bill Clinton. More recently, trained Iraqi judges after major combat ended in Iraq. Abdul Haq Al-Ani is also with us, one of Saddam Hussein's attorneys as well as one of the lawyers representing the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz. I wanted to ask Abdul Haq Al-Ani, where are these people right now? For example, Tariq Aziz, Saddam Hussein?

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: Who knows? Well, the Americans. Nobody -- you see, under international law whether they are civilian detainees or prisoners of war, there are regulations. You civilized people in the West since the second World War devised the so-called Geneva Conventions which were meant to protect people at a time of war. Now, when Iraq was occupied, every single principle under the Geneva Convention has been breached. We are not told where these people are being held. They have not been allowed to receive legal advice. They have not been able to be seen by their families. They have been denied their basic rights for the last 18 months. You ask me, you ask the Americans, you ask your legal advisers in Washington to tell them what has happened to the Geneva Convention, which protected these people? We don't know. Not a single lawyer has been able to see any of these detainees. We don't even know under which law they have been held, at what treatment they have received, even the international Red Cross has breached the Geneva Convention by entering into a secret agreement with the Americans not to discuss the affairs of the detainees with their families, which is fundamental breach of their basic human rights. We don't know. Nobody knows except those who are holding them.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Michael Scharf, what about this? In fact, Abdul Haq Al-Ani went to try to see Tariq Aziz, the Deputy Prime Minister, at the airport where he believed he was being held, and he wasn't allowed to. What about the fact that none of these men have been able to see their attorneys?

MICHAEL SCHARF: Well, here's the interesting thing about that. The Iraqi special tribunal and the Department of Justice Baghdad office have created a process for Iraqi lawyers to register to represent any of the defendants that are being held in custody. And as soon as they register and they are the lawyer on record, of course they’re allowed under international law to see their clients. And what’s most surprising is that Abdul and his colleagues have refused to do this, and I think it’s because they want to manufacture an illegitimate argument to attack the process, an argument that’s not really true, because all they have to do if they want to see their clients is register. There are 50,000 or so Iraqi trained lawyers that are registered to practice in Iraq. The only requirement is that the lead counsel who registers has to be somebody who is a registered lawyer in Iraq. So, there's plenty of people who could be doing this, and none have stepped forward yet.

AMY GOODMAN: Abdul Haq Al-Ani, your response?

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: That's a lie. That is a lie. That is a blatant lie, because when I went to Iraq, there was not even a tribunal set up, I met the colonel of the presidential palace who claimed to be the adviser to the American C.P.A.

MICHAEL SCHARF: When was this?

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: I forgot his name.

MICHAEL SCHARF: When were you there? Tell me when you were there?

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: Can I speak, please

MICHAEL SCHARF: When was that, though? Can you clarify that?

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: In July, 2003.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Okay. But we're talking now about --

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: Forget about --

MICHAEL SCHARF: September, 2004, and I'm not lying. I'm telling you how things are now.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: Let me finish, let me finish, please. I let you finish. I didn't interrupt you.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Okay, go ahead.

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: I met the colonel. I asked him under which law you are holding Tariq Aziz. Is it international law? He said no. Is it American you law? He said no. Is it Iraqi law? He said no. I said under which law? He said, we decide when he is entitled to get legal aid. That's about the most blatant breach of law I have ever heard. Don't tell me I don't give a damn about who the judges are in Baghdad and the process of -- I recognize -- I have no problem, I can apply tomorrow to go see Tariq Aziz, but I can assure you, I want to see Saddam Hussein next week. If you are really competent, arrange it for me, I will go to Baghdad and see him tomorrow. That's all, all fictitious, because you know the fundamental principle, these people have been denied their basic human rights. You know it and the longer you deny it, the more the cruelest, unprincipled, unlawful principle you are upholding, which is at the heart of the American invasion, which is at the heart of the decadence of American society, which elected a man like George Bush who doesn't even know where Geneva is let alone he knows what the Geneva Conventions are. This is where the problem is.

AMY GOODMAN: Abdul Haq Al-Ani, what about --

ABDUL HAQ AL-ANI: …in the world came to invade the most civilized people. We gave you light. We gave you alphabet. We gave you – all you’ve got is a grudge against our civilization. You’re bankrupt culturally, morally, legally. You have got the phantoms, the F-16s, the F-18s, the tanks. You can do that. But culturally, legally, morally, you are completely bankrupt. Thank you very much. I don't have any more time to talk to any trash of a lawyer in America. Good day to you.

AMY GOODMAN: Abdul Haq Al-Ani, a question, though. Why have you not just registered now? Is it that you are not recognizing the authority, are you saying it's an illegitimate authority in Iraq? Why not register now as Saddam Hussein's lawyer in Iraq?

MICHAEL SCHARF: I think he signed off, Amy. But I think the answer is a little bit clear by his behavior. He was talking about the situation during the war a year-and-a-half ago. I'm talking about the situation as it exists today. The lawyers, including Abdul, are still claiming that they cannot see their clients, but there is a process in place, and if they register, they will be allowed to see their clients, and the Justice Department and the Iraqi special tribunal judges are very anxious to have these defendants be represented by lawyers, and they want that to happen as soon as possible.

AMY GOODMAN: What's the difference between July 2003, when Abdul Haq Al-Ani went to Iraq? He is an Iraqi attorney, went to the Baghdad airport and was not allowed see his client. What's the difference?

MICHAEL SCHARF: Since then, sovereignty has passed to Iraq. At the time he was there, it was before the United Nations Security Council resolution was adopted. Bremer was still running the country as an occupied country. He was trying to deal with occupied military forces. Now, sovereignty has switched over, including judicial sovereignty, and there is a judicial process in place to make sure that the Iraqi special tribunal is a legitimate court that follows the human rights that are required under international law.

AMY GOODMAN: But as you're saying right now that there is no legitimate way to proceed with any trials next week.

MICHAEL SCHARF: Well, I would say that they should wait until the elections, and have the elected government approve the Iraqi special tribunal to erase any argument that the provisional government was not authorized to create the tribunal. It's clear under international law, that an occupying government cannot create a special tribunal. It's unprecedented and unclear what a provisional government can do, and so, the thought was always let's wait for the elected government to approve this process, and once, then, they can begin the trials.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you for being with us, Michael Scharf of Case Western Reserve University in Ohio, one of the five international legal experts who has been training Iraqi judges. One last question, Michael Scharf. There was a meeting in October in secret in London that you were a part of. What was that meeting?

MICHAEL SCHARF: It wasn't a secret meeting. It was the first of several training sessions. It was a week long. They brought five experts in. We went through the crimes that are a part of the Iraqi special tribunal's statute and talked about the definitions and contours of those crimes and the kinds of defenses that could be raised. We talked about procedural issues like plea bargaining and the right of self-representation and the human rights that defendants are going to have to be given. We started a process of bringing these judges up to speed so that when the trials begin, they will have quite a bit of expertise in this very unique area of the law.

AMY GOODMAN: Michael Scharf, thanks for being with us. Also, Abdul Haq Al-Ani was with us, London-based attorney, one of Saddam Hussein’s attorneys, as well as Tariq Aziz, the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister. He says he still does not know where his clients are.

To purchase an audio or video copy of this entire program, click here for our new online ordering or call 1 (800) 881-2359.



-------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE


-------- death penalty

Less Support for Death Sentence Cited for Decline in Executions

By Charles Lane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 15, 2004; Page A08

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A64604-2004Dec14?language=printer

Convicted murderers are being sentenced to death half as often as they were five years ago, and the population of death row is declining as a result, an anti-capital punishment information organization reported yesterday. The Death Penalty Information Center said U.S. courts are on track to deliver 130 death sentences in 2004, a 54 percent decline from the 1999 total of 282, while the number of people on death row shrank from 3,504 in 2003 to 3,471 in 2004.

Fifty-nine people were executed in 2004, down from 98 in 1999.

The organization said the sharp decline in death sentences reflects an erosion in public support for capital punishment because of recent exonerations of death-row inmates by DNA evidence. "Because of so many failures, the death penalty is rightly on the defensive," Richard Dieter, executive director of the center, said in a statement.

But Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a Sacramento-based nonprofit that supports prosecutors in constitutional law cases, said death sentences are on the decline mostly because murder is on the decline.

The number of murders and non-negligent homicides fell from 24,526 in 1993 to 16,037 in 2002, according to the FBI. If nothing else but the murder rate had changed, Scheidegger said, the number of death sentences still would have dropped by a third, from 327 in 1994 to 216 in 2003. 



-------- homeland security / national intelligence

Newark Airport Screeners Lose Fake Bomb

December 15, 2004 3:46 PM EST Associated Press

http://enews.earthlink.net/article/gen?guid=20041215/41bfc4d0_3ca6_1552620041215610462379

NEWARK, N.J. - Baggage screeners at Newark Liberty International Airport spotted - and then lost - a fake bomb planted in luggage by a supervisor during a training exercise.

Despite an hours-long search Tuesday night, the bag, containing a fake bomb complete with wires, a detonator and a clock, made it onto an Amsterdam-bound flight. It was recovered by airport security officials in Amsterdam when the flight landed several hours later.

"This really underscores the importance of the TSA's ongoing training exercises," said Ann Davis, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration, the agency responsible for screening passengers and baggage for weapons and explosives. "At no time did the bag pose a threat and at no time was anyone in danger."

Earlier this month, French authorities lost a bag containing real explosives that were being used to train bomb-sniffing dogs. That led French authorities to prohibit using live explosives in future tests.

The incident at Newark Liberty International was only the latest embarrassment for screeners at one of the airports from which some of the Sept. 11, 2001 hijackers took off.

In October, The Star-Ledger of Newark reported that screeners missed one in four fake explosives and weapons in secret weekly tests conducted throughout the summer by TSA agents.

In Tuesday night's test, a TSA supervisor secretly placed the bomb, which was designed to resemble the plastic explosive Semtex, inside a bag that was put through screening machines, Davis said.

A baggage screening machine sounded an alarm, but workers somehow lost track of the bag, which was then loaded onto a Continental Airlines flight.

Despite the incident, no flights were delayed and the terminal remained open.

Davis said the TSA is still investigating how screeners lost track of the bag.

"It was an error that the bag was not intercepted before it was loaded," she said, adding it was too soon to say if anyone would be disciplined for the failure.



-------- terrorism

Terrorism: No Name Death From the Sky

bellaciao.org

Jack Dalton

15th December 2004

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4785

That the United States is a militarized imperial empire is beyond question at this point in time. The level of nationalism, xenophobia, and mindless hatred has divided this nation even worse, in some ways, than what I remember taking place during the civil rights and anti-war movements during the 1960’s. The “my country right or wrong” and “love it or leave it” hysteria today makes the past pale in comparison in many, many ways.

If ever a nation exemplified a “crisis in democracy” it is the United States under George W. Bush and the Bush Brigade, and it’s legions of cheerleaders throughout the nation. Everything has been turned upside down. Up is down; in is out; wrong is right; war is peace; occupation is liberation; fact is fiction; and now, freedom is the freedom to agree and do what you are told.

This nation under the Bush cabal has launched a brutal, senseless and bloody war. Not against a state, but against a tactic-terrorism. The result has been a self-fulfilling prophecy. Iraq is now what it never was, ground zero for fools and fanatics-ours as well as “theirs” whoever they may be.

Iraq had no suicide bombers until after this country invaded, occupied and then proceeded to sell off all of Iraq’s infrastructure, assets and resources to U.S. multinational corporations. It would appear that the people running this absurd and perverted “Twilight Zone” episode (Bush’s “war on terrorism”) have given no thought to “cause and effect” or “for every action there is an opposite reaction.”

Every warning given to BushCo that invading Iraq would result in urban, guerilla war, exactly what is being faced in Iraq now, were ignored and discounted by them. The cost of this has been paid by the over 100,000 Iraqi’s that have been killed and by the over 1200 U.S. personnel killed-and there is no end in sight for the death and destruction. The dynamic duo of Bush-Cheney, has done what Osama bin Ladin needed and that is to provide a recruiting tool for insurgents thru the radicalization of so many in the Muslim world. In that context, Bush has become a “uniter.”

This BushCo war of choice has convinced me that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of that pack of ideologues could care less about how many die or are maimed. Thousands have had their bodies torn apart; head and faces; legs missing; arms missing; burns that maim and cripple from the use of napalm bombs. What do we hear from the Bush camp? “We will win no matter what the cost.” What the final tally of dead and wounded will be is anyone’s guess considering all that have been contaminated by depleted uranium and the slow destruction it will cause in those exposed.

Then there are the wounds that no one sees; the wounds that haunt the mind day and night, the pain of which leads one to question if you still have a soul. These are the wounds that seem never to heal-wounds of the soul, the mind, the emotions-that stay ever present to varying degrees as you attempt to make sense of a world that, to you, no longer makes any sense.

These are the wounds that are born out of fear, guilt, and terror. No name death falling from the sky-that is terrorism--bombs, rockets, and mortars that fall unannounced, at any time, in any place that are capricious, indiscriminate and arbitrary when they kill and maim. I’ve seen men that have gone thru literal hand to hand combat that turned into shaking piles of sobbing flesh during sustained mortar attacks-abject helplessness.

Since this BushCo war of choice was launched there have been close to 30,000 of this nation’s people in uniform that have been medically evacuated from Iraq. Approximately 7,000 of them due to “psychological” reasons-try PTSD. It’s estimated by the Pentagon that one in six are showing significant PTSD problems. That’s what war does, that is the cost of war and the brutality that is war. Those of us that have seen the face of war know and understand this-you lose a part of your humanity, your “soul” when we participate in mass murder of our fellow human beings no matter what the reason.

I wonder what the toll on Iraqi’s will be in terms of PTSD as a result of all the bombs, rockets, mortars and artillery shells the U.S. has dropped and fired on every city and town in Iraq? Iraq is a nation (or was) of 26 million people with over 50% of them under the age of 18. Half of Iraq is children. We know the effects of PTSD on adults, we’ve seen it with those of our people in uniform that are still affected from the Vietnam war; If adults are affected that severely, what about Iraq’s children?

We’re talking about 12-13 million children that have been subjected to almost daily bombings for over ten years and are currently being bombed by an occupying Army. What will be the result of all this on them? I can only imagine, but I do know from my own experiences that it will not be anything nice. In all probabilities, the next generation of insurgents, freedom fighters, and radicalized fundamentalists are being born out of the madness that has become Iraq.

“We’re the good guys. We are Americans. We are fighting a gentleman’s war here -- because we don’t behead people, we don’t come down to the same level of the people we’re combating;” so said a LT Col in charge of some of the Marines that recently attacked Fallujah. How absurd! There is no such thing as a “gentleman’s war” not by any stretch of the imagination. Where is the so-called “moral High-ground” when you drop a bomb on a house and blow up children. Where is the moral high-ground when a sniper puts a bullet in the head of a 6 year old? Where is the moral high-ground when a hospital is used as a base of combat operations while people, children bleed to death from their wounds because they can’t get medical treatment?

“Smart” bombs that keep going to the wrong address and this country pontificates about having the moral high-ground. That would be a joke if not so pathetic and heartbreaking.

Bush & Co. say that “they” through all of this killing in Iraq, are making us safer and promoting “freedom and democracy” in Iraq. At the rate people are being killed in Iraq, the only thing that nation will be free of is human life--with the kids of that country that are left alive having learned that “life is death, and death is life.” So much for the “moral high-ground,” and a “gentleman’s war” as articulated by this nation’s alleged leaders.

As for those wearing this nation’s uniform coming back from Iraq multi-symptomatic PTSD because of what they have seen and done in Iraq, they also will suffer as even now they are being written off as “anxiety disorder” not exacerbated by war. This government did the very same thing to those of us that fought in Vietnam-why are the people in this country allowing this to once again happen. Like I said, so much for the “moral” high-ground.

Jack Dalton is a disabled Vietnam veteran and independent writer that lives in Portland, Oregon. He welcomes all comments, good, bad and everything in-between. While not all can be answered all are read. His email address is jack_dalton@ommp.org His articles have been published by The Project for the Old American Century, Axis of Logic, Uncommon Thought Journal, Crisis Papers, On Line Journal, the Smirking Chimp, Op/Ed News, Democratic Underground, Information Clearing House, Double Standards as well as multiple print newspapers.



-------- POLITICS

Who poisoned Viktor Yushchenko?

Australian Broadcasting Corporation

David Sells

15/12/2004

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/s1265269.htm

MAXINE McKEW: First up tonight, the biggest mystery in world politics - who's responsible for poisoning Ukraine's charismatic opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko?

His ravaged face has overshadowed campaigning in the former Soviet Republic's presidential election re-run later this month.

Ukraine's Supreme Court overturned the result of last month's election because of vote rigging.

But confirmation at the weekend that Viktor Yushchenko's facial disfigurement was caused by near-lethal amounts of dioxin now has Ukrainian prosecutors asking the key question - who stood to gain?

This report from David Sells of the BBC 'Newsnight' program.

DAVID SELLS: In the Ukraine, as in other Slav lands, they pride themselves on their hospitality.

So, three months ago, Viktor Yushchenko, the Opposition leader and challenger for power, happily went for dinner at the summer house of the deputy chief's SBU, the country's intelligence service, and successor to the old KGB, to discuss the coming presidential election.

Ukraine's chief spook, Igor Smeshko, was also a guest.

Yushchenko ate and drank freely.

The following day he fell mysteriously ill with crippling abdominal pains, and as weeks went by with election campaigning beginning in earnest, the smooth-faced Adonis turned into a pockmarked bulldog, his face a ruin.

PROFESSOR JOHN HENRY, CLINICAL TOXICOLOGIST: It's over his face.

It's pitted and has got little cysts and it really looks awful.

It's not getting any better.

As I see it, it's getting worse.

It's probably going to get a bit worse before it begins to get better.

Once the levels in the body go down, that rash will slowly improve, but it will take at least a couple of years before he gets reasonably good-looking again and he will still remain scarred for life.

DAVID SELLS: Was it the food or something in the food?

This weekend the specialist clinic in Austria which treated Yushchenko identified dioxin as the cause.

A common enough industrial pollutant at low levels but rarely, if ever, known to be concentrated as a poison.

It had either been eaten or drunk.

Yushchenko blamed the government for his poisoning.

The government flatly denied.

But has re-opened its investigation into the affair.

So was this after all an attempted assassination of the government's opponent?

NIGEL WEST, INTELLIGENCE HISTORIAN: Demonstrably, it was an inefficient assassination attempt.

Dioxin is a slightly unusual weapon of choice, too, because as a toxin it is accumulative and there are plenty of side effects as indeed he noticed and saw and sought medical attention straightaway.

So not very effective and not really the kind of operation that would be state-sponsored, judging by past experience, although in the Eastern Bloc these days almost anything is possible.

But yet as in those old Cold War days, the poisoned finger today is pointing at either Ukraine's or Russia's intelligence services.

A Moscow academic put it this way, "This practice," he said, "was routine for the KGB in Soviet times and I don't think their successors have higher moral standards.

One target in Soviet days had indeed been Radio Free Europe the American-funded broadcaster to east European satellites."

NIGEL WEST: Several people who had died at Radio Free Europe who had long believed to have died of just a very virulent cancer turns out to have ingested plutonium in a dust form that had been put into their office desks, so when they pulled out their drawer in the morning to start work, they would inhale plutonium dust, they developed virulent forms of cancers and died and that was not detected until years afterwards DAVID SELLS: A notorious case in this country was the killing in 1978 of Georgi Markov, a defector from communist Bulgaria working for the BBC.

A Bulgarian agent used the spring-loaded umbrella to stab the poison ricin into his thigh.

So, alas, dioxin to Yushchenko at dinner does have its precedence.

PROFESSOR JOHN HENRY: It has been suggested that this poison was put in a plate of soup.

It's fat soluble.

We don't exactly know the dose, but it would be perhaps a gram or two or three that would have to be dissolved in fat in either some sort of buttery, fatty meal or a rich soup and together with a lot of alcohol, one might not notice what was going on.

His wife that very evening said that he tasted and smelt of chemical and then he developed symptoms the next day.

DAVID SELLS: It all sounds distinctly sinister.

The Austrian toxicologists say that such a dioxin poisoning has not come to light and testing for it has only recently become possible, one reason why perhaps the perpetrators tried it out on Yushchenko.

PROFESSOR JOHN HENRY: This man developed a very severe illness.

He was quite close to death.

It is most likely that the intention was to kill him.

It's quite possible that he didn't eat all that was there, but he perhaps didn't like the taste of it or whatever.

I think if he had eaten all the dose that was served to him, he might well have died.

NIGEL WEST: To abuse the hospitality of the chief of the service when he is giving hospitality to a guest, I mean, that runs contrary to every kind of ethic of decency, and it seems just slightly improbable, and one would be inclined to discount that under normal circumstances, but there again, there are other people who say when you sup with the devil, I think you use rather a long spoon.

DAVID SELLS: Clearly the current Ukrainian regime, or elements within it, do have a motive to eliminate their political enemy.

But the man didn't die.

And was the intention anyway to kill or simply disable?

Either way, the dioxin diagnosis and Yushchenko's ravaged face will do him no harm in the presidential election re-run later this month.

-----

The Yushchenko 'Poison Plot' Fraud
He's poisoning Ukrainian politics with lies

by Justin Raimondo
December 15, 2004

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=4164

The headlines blared: "Doctors Confirm Yushchenko Poison Claim" – and, yes, even I believed it. But, you know what? It's a lie. And now the truth is coming out….

I knew there was something fishy about the whole "Yushchenko-was-poisoned-by-the-bad-guys" narrative, even as I blindly accepted the pronouncement of Dr. Michael Zimpfer, of the Rudolfinerhaus clinic in Vienna, that tests had "proved" the poisoning hypothesis, and he now considers the "case closed." To begin with, dioxin as a tool of would-be assassins just doesn't make a whole lot of sense: the victim would take far too long to die, and, besides that, not a single case of death-by-dioxin poisoning has ever been recorded. Another suspicious adjunct to this story: Yushchenko declared that he wants to delay the investigation into who poisoned him until after the December 26 election. The ostensible reason for this is Yushchenko's high-mindedness, expressed with the requisite statesman-like gravitas:

"I don't want this factor to influence the election in some way – either as a plus or a minus. This question will require a great deal of time and serious investigation. Let us do it after the election – today is not the moment."

How noble! And, as it turns out, how utterly phony….

Surely, one might assume, a man with a "Dr." in front of his name is a sacred oracle, from whom only truth can spring: and, in any case, Zimpfer was the doctor in charge of the case – right?

Wrong. In news accounts of the Yushchenko "poisoning" mystery, Zimpfer is variously described as the "president" or the "head" of the Rudolfinerhaus clinic, but a better description of his position is "administrative chief." His official title is President of the clinic's Board of Supervisors. The chief medical doctor at the clinic, who supervised and had first-hand knowledge of Yushchenko's case, was Dr. Lothar Wicke. I put that in the past tense because, on December 9, Dr. Wicke resigned. It seems that his skeptical remarks concerning the unproven status of the "poisoning" accusations had proved injurious to his health. At a news conference held just after Yushchenko's first visit to Rudolfinerhaus, Dr. Wicke had accused unnamed individuals not on the medical staff of spreading "medically falsified diagnoses concerning the condition of Mr. Yushchenko." He also pointed to the complete lack of any evidence that the candidate had been poisoned, either deliberately or otherwise. This did not endear him to the Yushchenko crowd.

According to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), a leading German newspaper, and reporter Emil Bobi, of the Austrian magazine Profil, Dr. Wicke received numerous death threats and explicit warnings from the Yushchenko clan. As the FAZ reports [Warning: if you're going to click this link, you'd better be able to read German, and be prepared to pay]:

"Thereafter Yushchenko's people made clear to Wicke that he should not say anything more concerning the affair, since otherwise [as Wicke puts it] 'one would resort to other means against me and the hospital.' Dr. Wicke is also supposed to have received death threats at the time."

The December 10 issue of Le Figaro, a leading French daily, reveals the atmosphere of thuggishness prevailing during Yushchenko's sojourns to Rudolfinerhaus, describing the outbreak of violent scuffles at one October news conference involving "a strange security force with Slavic accents." Yielding to the demand of the Ukrainian parliament, Austrian cops were sent to Rudolfinerhaus to secure Yushchenko's medical files. Profil reports they "practically came to blows with Yushchenko's entourage."

According to Le Figaro, Wicke says Yushchenko angrily berated him for "perhaps having made [Yushchenko] lose the presidential elections." The heat was on, and Dr. Wicke apparently began to wilt: after all, he explained to Le Figaro, "I have a child, you understand." An armed guard was assigned to protect Dr. Wicke by order of the Viennese authorities.

But in the end, Wicke didn't wilt: he refused to give in to demands that he retract his statements. Dr. Zimpfer's response: "Dr. Yushchenko's people will not be happy and will take other measures." Dr. Wicke, rather than face those "other measures," simply resigned. One can hardly blame him.

As a testament to the foresight with which George Orwell wrote about the instant "rewriting" of history, our own unofficial Ministry of Truth has dropped Dr. Wicke down the Memory Hole – the last mention of him in the "mainstream" media that I can find is in a dispatch from the Associated Press that reports the "anonymous" threats against him, and also notes a story in The Times of London citing Dr. Nikolai Korpan, the original source of the poisoning scenario:

"The London newspaper The Times on Wednesday quoted Dr. Nikolai Korpan, the Rudolfinerhaus physician who oversaw Yushchenko's treatment, as saying that Yushchenko had been poisoned and the intention was to kill the candidate. Korpan, appearing at the news conference Wednesday with Zimpfer, said doctors were working on three different poisoning theories, including one involving dioxin.

"All theories being pursued involved poison, he said, adding, however, that 'we don't have any evidence of what caused the illness.'"

The Ukrainian-born Dr. Korpan is not a member of the Rudolfinerhaus staff: according to the FAZ, he was the intended target of Dr. Wicke's charge that someone was "spreading falsified diagnoses." Dr. Korpan, whose statements to The Times were denied by Dr. Zimpfer, is a surgeon, not a specialist, brought in by Yushchenko on the occasion of his first visit to Vienna. In true Orwellian fashion, however, Dr. Wicke has been disappeared, as far as our media is concerned, and Dr. Korpan is now universally referred to as "the physician treating Yushchenko."

So, what ails Viktor Yushchenko? Beneath the cloud of murk hanging over this case, there is doubtless the truth waiting to be found. But given the heavy-handed atmosphere of intimidation and political grandstanding in which the poisoning plot has been "confirmed," what Yushchenko and his Western supporters are telling us is almost certainly not the truth. I am not a doctor, but it seems to me as if the blogger at CodeBlueBlog makes a very good case – here and here – that other factors, including lifestyle issues, may account for the dramatic deterioration of Yushchenko's once handsome face.

In any case, what is clear at this point is that Yushchenko and his supporters are the ones doing the poisoning – by spreading their lies far and wide, and then calling for a delay in the investigation. If Yushchenko wins, you can bet the truth will never come out in a court of law – although some news outlets, albeit not the English-speaking media, are exposing him for the fraud that he is.

I have to add that the real story of how and why this tall tale has been transmuted into truth remains to be told. However, the main movers behind this enormous propaganda campaign are not the usual suspects. Jonathan Steele and Ian Traynor at the Guardian have pointed to the role played by the National Endowment for Democracy, as has U.S. Congressman Ron Paul, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. The British writer John Laughland has underscored the key role of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), as well as the double standards employed by "objective" election observers, but the full extent of the Europeans' involvement – especially the Germans – has so far gone undetected, or at least unremarked on, except by John Rosenthal on his excellent blog, Transatlantic Intelligencer. (Also here, and here.) This makes a lot of sense, especially since the EU is now making such a big stink about the perpetrators of the "crime" being "brought to justice." The Ukrainian political crisis is an excellent opportunity for the Euro-crats to extend their frontiers eastward, and they are taking full advantage of it – a form of imperialism that both Kerry-style "progressives" in the U.S. and neoconservatives can join hands in supporting.

I am also indebted to John Rosenthal for his excellent account of the Yushchenko "poisoning" fraud in this detailed post. His politics are apparently quite different from mine, but facts, as Ronald Reagan – and John Adams – used to remind us, are stubborn things, and they trump ideology – at least in my book – every time.

If only that were universally true, but, unfortunately, it isn't. We will no doubt be subjected to another few weeks of mindless MSM propaganda, in which the "official" story will be relentlessly repeated – for the benefit of an international audience as well as Ukrainian voters – until, like Saddam Hussein's fabled nukes and his nonexistent connection to the 9/11 attacks, it will pass into history as a universally accepted urban legend. Yes, facts are stubborn things – but urban myths certainly have their uses.


-------- voting

Proof of Ohio Election Fraud Exposed

By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Report
Wednesday 15 December 2004

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/printer_121604Z.shtml

    Among activists and investigators looking into allegations of vote fraud in the 2004 Presidential election, the company always mentioned was Diebold and its suspicious electronic touch-screen voting machines. It is Diebold that has multiple avowed Republicans on its Board of Directors. It was Diebold that gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bush’s election campaign. It was Diebold CEO Walden O’Dell who vowed to deliver Ohio’s electoral votes to Bush.

    As it turns out, everyone was looking the wrong way. The company that requires immediate and penetrating scrutiny is Triad Systems.

    Triad is owned by a man named Tod Rapp, who has also donated money to both the Republican Party and the election campaign of George W. Bush. Triad manufactures punch-card voting systems, and also wrote the computer program that tallied the punch-card votes cast in 41 Ohio counties last November. This Triad company graphic displays the counties where their machines are used:

    Given the ubiquity of the Triad voting systems in Ohio, the allegations that have been leveled against this company strike to the heart of the assumed result of the 2004 election.

    Earlier this week, the allegations against triad were first raised by Green Party candidate David Cobb, who testified at a hearing held in Columbus, Ohio by Rep. John Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee. In his testimony, Cobb stated:

    Mr. Chairman, though our time is limited, I must bring to the committee's attention the most recent and perhaps most troubling incident that was related to my campaign on Sunday, December 12, about a shocking event that occurred last Friday, December 10.

    A representative from Triad Systems came into a county board of elections office un-announced. He said he was just stopping by to see if they had any questions about the up-coming recount. He then headed into the back room where the Triad supplied Tabulator (a card reader and older PC with custom software) is kept. He told them there was a problem and the system had a bad battery and had "lost all of its data". He then took the computer apart and started swapping parts in and out of it and another "spare" tower type PC also in the room. He may have had spare parts in his coat as one of the BOE people moved it and remarked as to how very heavy it was. He finally re-assembled everything and said it was working but to not turn it off.

    He then asked which precinct would be counted for the 3% recount test, and the one which had been selected as it had the right number of votes, was relayed to him. He then went back and did something else to the tabulator computer.

    The Triad Systems representative suggested that since the hand count had to match the machine count exactly, and since it would be hard to memorize the several numbers which would be needed to get the count to come out exactly right, that they should post this series of numbers on the wall where they would not be noticed by observers. He suggested making them look like employee information or something similar. The people doing the hand count could then just report these numbers no matter what the actual count of the ballots revealed. This would then "match" the tabulator report for this precinct exactly. The numbers were apparently the final certified counts for the selected precinct.

    Triad is contracted to do much of the elections work in this county and elsewhere in Ohio. This included programming the candidates into the tabulator, and coming up with the rotation of candidates in the various precincts (that is, the order of which candidate is first changes between precincts). They also have a technician in the office on election night to actually run the tabulator itself.

    Triad also supplies the network computers on which all of the voter registration information and processing is kept for the county.

    It was unusual for the computers to be taken apart. At least one member of the Board of Elections was told the tabulator was in pieces when he called to check on the office.

    The source of this report believes that the Triad representative was "making the rounds" of visiting other counties also before the recount. This person also stated they would not pass on the suggestion of the "posted" hidden totals, and would refuse to go along with it if it were suggested by the others in the office at the time.

    The source of this information believes they could lose their job if they come forward.

    The source of this information is named Sherole Eaton, Hocking County deputy director of elections. She has since written and signed an affidavit describing her experience with the Triad representative, the text of which is here:

    On Friday, December 10 2004, Michael from TriAd called in the AM to inform us that he would be in our office in the PM on the same day. I asked him why he was visiting us. He said, "to check out your tabulator, computer, and that the attorneys will be asking some tricky questions and he wanted to go over some of the questions they maybe ask." He also added that there would be no charge for this service.

    He arrived at about 12:30PM. I hung his coat up and it was very heavy. I made a comment about it being so heavy. He, Lisa Schwartze and I chatted for a few minutes. He proceeded to go to the room where our computer and tabulation machine is kept. I followed him into the room. I had my back to him when he turned the computer on. He stated that the computer was not coming up. I did see some commands at the lower left hand of the screen but no menu. He said that the battery in the computer was dead and that the stored information was gone. He said that he could put a patch on it and fix it. My main concern was - what if this happened when we were ready to do the recount. He proceeded to take the computer apart and call his offices to get information to input into our computer. Our computer is fourteen years old and as far as I know had always worked in the past. I asked him if the older computer, that is in the same room. could be used for the recount. I don't remember exactly what he said but I did relay to him that the computer was old and a spare. At some point he asked if he could take the spare computer apart and I said "yes". He took both computers apart. I don't remember seeing any tools and he asked Sue Wallace, Clerk, for a screwdriver. She got it for him. At this point I was frustrated about the computer not performing and feared that it wouldn't work for the recount. I called Gerald Robinette, board chairman, to inform him regarding the computer problem and asked him if we could have Tri Ad come to our offices to run the program and tabulator for the recount. Gerald talked on the phone with Michael and Michael assured Gerald that he could fix our computer. He worked on the computer until about 3:00 PM and then asked me which precinct and the number of the precinct we were going to count. I told him, Good Hope 1 # 17. He went back into the tabulation room. Shortly after that he (illegible) stated that the computer was ready for the recount and told us not to turn the computer off so it would charge up.
    Before Lisa ran the tests, Michael said to turn the computer off. Lisa said, " I thought you said we weren't supposed to turn it off." He said turn it off and right back on and it should come up. It did come up and Lisa ran the tests. Michael gave us instructions on how to explain the rotarien, what the tests mean, etc. No advice on how to handle the attorneys but to have our Prosecuting Attorney at the recount to answer any of their legal questions. He said not to turn the computer off until after the recount.

    He advised Lisa and I on how to post a "cheat sheet" on the wall so that only the board members and staff would know about it and and what the codes meant so the count would come out perfect and we wouldn't have to do a full hand recount of the county. He left about 5:00 PM.

    My faith in Tri Ad and the Xenia staff has been nothing but good. The realization that this company and staff would do anything to dishonor or disrupt the voting process is distressing to me and hard to believe. I'm being completely objective about the above statements and the reason I'm bringing this forward is to, hopefully, rule out any wrongdoing.

    Further buttressing Eaton’s claim is an addendum to a previous affidavit filed by Evelyn Roberson who, you may recall, was involved in the Greene County recount action that was summarily shut down by Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell. Her addendum reads as follows:

    Addendum to Declaration of Evelyn Roberson dated December 12, 2004

    Re: Incidents of December 10, 2004

    This is to add to the approximately 1 :15 p.m. portion of the visit with the Deputy Director of Elections Lyn McCoy with respect to the following comment:

    "She said they would have their computer technician check over their computers on Monday in case they has been tampered with."

    the addition is that Lyn McCoy also mentioned to me at the same time that her computer technician was with Triad.

    I declare under penalty of perjury the forgoing is true and correct.

    Dated: December 14, 2004

    Evelyn Roberson

    Original versions of these documents should be available later on Wednesday on the website of Rep. Conyers.

    Conyers, upon hearing these allegations, sent a letter to both the FBI Special Agent in Charge in Ohio and the Hocking County Prosecutor. The text of that letter is as follows:

    December 15, 2004

    As part of the Democratic staff's investigation into irregularities in the 2004 election and following up on a lead provided to me by Green Party Presidential Candidate, David Cobb, I have learned that Sherole Eaton, a Deputy Director of Board of Elections in Hocking County, Ohio, has first hand knowledge of inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering in the Ohio presidential election in violation of federal and state law.

    I have information that similar actions of this nature may be occurring in other counties in Ohio. I am therefore asking that you immediately investigate this alleged misconduct and that, among other things, you consider the immediate impoundment of election machinery to prevent any further tampering.

    On December 13, my staff met with Ms. Eaton who explained to them that last Friday, December 10, Michael Barbian, Jr., a representative of Triad GSI unilaterally sought and obtained access to the voting machinery and records in Hocking County, Ohio, modified the computer tabulator, learned which precinct was planned to be the subject of the initial test recount and made further alterations based on that information, and advised the election officials how to manipulate the machinery so that the preliminary hand recount matched the machine count. Ms. Eaton first relayed this information to Green Party representatives, and then completed, signed and notarized an affidavit describing this course of events, a copy of which is attached.

    The Triad official sought access to the voting machinery based on the apparent pretext that he wanted to review some "legal questions" the officials might receive as part of the recount process. At several times during this visit, Mr. Barbian telephoned into Triad's offices to obtain programming information relating to the machinery and the precinct in question. I have subsequently learned that Triad officials have been, or are in the process of intervening in several other counties in Ohio - Greene and Monroe, and perhaps others (see attached).

    There are several important considerations you should be aware of with respect to this matter. First, this course of conduct would appear to violate several provisions of federal law, in addition to the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. 42 U.S.C. §1973 provides for criminal penalties against any person who, in any election for federal office, "knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by . . . the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held." 42 U.S.C. § 1974 also requires the retention and preservation, for a period of twenty-two months from the date of a federal election, of all voting records and papers and makes it a felony for any person to "willfully steal, destroy, conceal, mutilate, or alter" any such record. Further, any tampering with ballots and/or election machinery would violate the constitutional rights of all citizens to vote and have their votes properly counted, as guaranteed by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

    Second, the course of conduct would also appear to violate several provisions of Ohio law. No less than 4 provisions of the Ohio Revised Code make it a felony to tamper with or destroy election records or machines.1 Clearly, modifying election equipment in order to make sure that the hand count matches the machine count would appear to fall within these proscriptions.

    Moreover, bringing in Triad officials into other Ohio Counties would also appear to violate Ohio Revised Code § 3505.32 which provides that during a period of official canvassing, all interaction with ballots must be "in the presence of all of the members of the board and any other persons who are entitled to witness the official canvass," given that last Friday, the Ohio Secretary of State has issued orders to the effect that election officials are to treat all election materials as if they were in a period of canvassing,2 and that "Teams of one Democrat and one Republican must be present with ballots at all times of processing."

    Third, it is important to recognize that the companies implicated in the wrongdoing, Triad and its affiliates, are the leading suppliers of voting machines involving the counting of paper ballots and punch cards in the critical states of Ohio and Florida. Triad is controlled by the Rapp family, and its founder Tod A. Rapp has been a consistent contributor to Republican causes.4 A Triad affiliate, Psephos corporation, supplied the notorious butterfly ballot used in Palm Beach County, Florida, in the 2000 presidential election.

    Sincerely,

    John Conyers, Jr.

    Enclosures

    cc: The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.

--

    The New York Times published a report on the matter late Tuesday night:

    Lawmaker Seeks Inquiry into Ohio Vote
    By Tom Zeller Jr.
    The New York Times

    Wednesday 15 December 2004

    The ranking Democratic member of the House Judiciary Committee, Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, plans to ask the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a county prosecutor in Ohio today to explore "inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering" in at least one and perhaps several Ohio counties.

    The request for an investigation, made in a letter that was also provided to The New York Times, includes accounts from at least two county employees, but is based largely on a sworn affidavit provided by the Hocking County deputy director of elections, Sherole Eaton.

    Among other things, Ms. Eaton says in her affidavit that a representative of Triad Governmental Systems, the Ohio firm that created and maintains the vote-counting software in dozens of Ohio counties, made several adjustments to the Hocking County tabulator last Friday, in advance of the state's recount, which is taking place this week.

    Ohio recount rules require that only 3 percent of a county's votes be tallied by hand, and typically one or more whole precincts are selected and combined to get the 3 percent sample. After the hand count, the sample is fed into the tabulator. If there is no discrepancy, the remaining ballots can be counted by the machine. Otherwise, a hand recount must be done for the whole county.

    Ms. Eaton contends that the Triad employee asked which precinct Hocking County planned to count as its representative 3 percent, and, upon being told, made further adjustments to the machine.

    County officials decided to use a different precinct when the recount was done yesterday. No discrepancies were found.

    "This is pretty outrageous," Mr. Conyers said. "We want to pursue it as vigorously as we can."

    But Brett Rapp, the president of Triad, said that although it would be unusual for an employee to ask about a specific precinct, preparing the machines for a recount was standard procedure and was done in all 41 counties where Triad handles vote counts. He added that he welcomed any investigation.

    "I've been doing this since 1985, and in all my experience this is the first time that we have had any complaints whatsoever," Mr. Rapp said.

    William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and international bestseller of two books - 'War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You To Know' and 'The Greatest Sedition is Silence.'

--------

Rep. John Conyers Seeks Inquiry Into Ohio Vote

democracynow.org

December 15th, 2004

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/15/1458253

We speak with Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), who is leading the charge to review voting irregularities in Ohio. Conyers is now planning to ask the FBI and an Ohio county prosecutor to explore election tampering in at least one and possibly several Ohio counties. [includes rush transcript] Just two days after the Ohio delegation to the Electoral College cast its votes for President Bush, Michigan Congressmember John Conyers is planning to ask the FBI and an Ohio county prosecutor to explore election tampering in at least one and possibly several Ohio counties. This according to the New York Times.

The request for an investigation is based largely on a sworn affidavit provided by deputy director of elections in Hocking County, Sherole Eaton.

Eaton claims that a representative of Triad Governmental Systems, the firm that created and maintains the vote-counting software in dozens of Ohio counties, made several adjustments to the Hocking County tabulator last Friday, in advance of the state's recount.

Third party candidates, David Cobb of the Green Party and Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party successfully sought recounts in each of Ohio's 88 counties that will begin this week.

    * Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), held a hearing in Washington last week looking into voting irregularities in Ohio.

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

This transcript is available free of charge, however donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, more...

AMY GOODMAN: Congress Member John Conyers is on the line with us right now. He held a hearing in Washington last week, looking into voting irregularities in Ohio. Welcome to Democracy Now!, Congress Member.

JOHN CONYERS: Always good to be here, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: Good to have you. Can you explain what is happening now in Ohio, and what you are calling for?

JOHN CONYERS: Well, we have received, of course, thousands of complaints of irregularities, failure of process, suppression of voting rights, and so we have come now -- have came up in the hearings we went to Columbus on Monday, and to really be there and to attempt to have the electoral disposition of the presidential vote in Ohio delayed until we have investigated some of these complaints. Sure enough, we had staff interview a person who was supposed to have had direct evidence about misconduct, and we have a sworn affidavit, a courageous person. We're hoping that others will come forward, and we are asking that the Ohio F.B.I. and the county prosecutor all get into this case, and if necessary, we may be required to go back in ourselves.

AMY GOODMAN: Realistically, what do you think will happen now?

JOHN CONYERS: Well, realistically, we'd like the right thing to happen. Namely, that we get enough support in and out of the state to persuade those running the electoral college to realize that holding this up until we get some of these questions resolved would strengthen the confidence in the electoral process in Ohio where there have been more complaints than from anywhere else, even including Florida, which had the second highest number of complaints. So this is not an anti-Bush operation or sour grapes. All we want to do is to have this kick in and the Secretary of State there has been amazing in holding back cooperation of being political at the same time that he conducts the presidential -- supervises the presidential election in Ohio. So, realistically, we want people to realize that there are some serious problems, and --

AMY GOODMAN: Now, that's legal, right? That's legal, Ken Blackwell, the Ohio --

JOHN CONYERS: The deputy director was pretty stunning.

AMY GOODMAN: Just let me ask one thing. That is legal, the Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, also heading up the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign, he can be in charge of the recount and he is pushing for Bush to be president?

JOHN CONYERS: Right. He's -- and also administers the November -- administered the November 2 election, too. We think that is something that should not ever happen again from any of the secretaries.

AMY GOODMAN: Who makes that law? Is it a federal law -- it's federal law that Secretaries of State like Katherine Harris in Florida, Ken Blackwell in Ohio, can engage in political activity, can head the re-election campaign for the president and also preside over the election.

JOHN CONYERS: I think it's more that the federal laws allow the states to set up their own system.

AMY GOODMAN: So, let's go back to this issue of this sworn affidavit. Again, if you can explain the significance of it. Sherole Eaton, the Deputy Director of Elections in Hocking County, Ohio, saying that a representative of Triad Governmental Systems, the firm that created and maintains the vote counting software in dozens of Ohio counties, made several adjustments to the Hocking County tabulator last Friday in advance of Ohio’s recount. What exactly does that mean?

JOHN CONYERS: What that is interpreted to mean is that if the Triad people can come in and adjust the machines before the recount and the re-examination of the election vote itself, then there's no way anyone's ever going to find out what really happened. So, it suggests very strongly that that was a very improper act on their part, and the question, of course, is raised, are other Triad computer experts doing the same thing?

AMY GOODMAN: Now, The New York Times quoted Brett Rapp, the president of Triad, saying that although it would be unusual for an employee to ask about a specific precinct, preparing the machines for a recount is standard procedure and was done in all 41 counties where Triad handles vote counts. He said he welcomes an investigation.

JOHN CONYERS: Well, I'm glad that we can enjoy his cooperation. But it still raises not only to those of us that have examined this, but to the Deputy Director of Elections in the county of Ohio that was talking person to person to the Triad expert. So this is what we want to resolve. You know, I'm not trying to pretend that this ends the matter, or that it's -- what we want is an examination, if it can be explained, fine. But it sure didn't sound like it to Sherole Eaton at the time that she was talking to the computer expert that he wasn't doing anything that wasn't improper.

AMY GOODMAN: Congress Member Conyers, final question, and that is: How much is John Kerry helping here? There's been the call for the recount by the parties that can least afford to support this recount, though they have scrounged up the money, the Green and Libertarian Parties, but John Kerry has $51 million left in his war chest, more money than any presidential candidate in history. I think it's something like twice what Bush ended up with. Is he helping in any way?

JOHN CONYERS: Well, he has done the following things as a result of discussions with Reverend Jackson. I missed him when he was in the air in a flight, but he did send one of his lawyers were present in the hearings on Monday in Columbus, and he has now called for a complete recount in one of the contested counties, Delaware County, and so there seems to be in light of the action of the members of Congress and others, that he's moving in the right direction.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you believe John Kerry might have won Ohio?

JOHN CONYERS: Well, I can't tell you that. There are enough discrepancies, if they all played out in favor of the challenger, there is that possibility.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to thank you very much for being with us, Congress Member John Conyers.

JOHN CONYERS: Pleasure as always.




-------- ENERGY 


-------- alternative energy

California Seeks to Create More Solar Homes

December 15, 2004 — By Don Thompson, Associated Press

http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=607

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California could have 1 million buildings producing solar energy by 2018, with half of all new homes powered by the sun, administration officials said as they outlined ways to meet one of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's more ambitious campaign promises.

The goal is to create a self-sustaining solar industry in 10 years, making the zero-pollution power source so commonplace and cheap that costly incentives are no longer necessary, Joe Desmond, Schwarzenegger's deputy secretary for energy, said Monday.

Until then, environmental officials are considering funding methods that could include a charge on electricity bills to pay the estimated $700 million to $1 billion cost. That would return a projected $3 billion to $5 billion, Desmond said in an interview.

The goal is to generate 3,000 megawatts of power from the sun within 13 years, the equivalent of a dozen medium-sized power plants. One megawatt is enough to power about 750 homes.

To get there, solar manufacturers who move to California might be offered an investment credit, while homeowners' income and property tax credits, set to expire in 2006, might be extended, Desmond said.

The administration officials propose to require builders to offer solar power as an option in subdivisions of 50 homes or more by 2010. And they want the California Energy Commission to consider requiring solar energy in the same way the commission has in the past mandated low-flush toilets, insulation standards, energy efficient appliances or low-energy lighting fixtures in bathrooms.

They also want to let owners of solar-powered buildings sell more of their electricity back to power utilities.

The proposals all come in the wake of the blackouts and spiraling power costs that plagued the state in 2000 and 2001 and reverberate today.

California already is the world's third-largest market for solar technology, but advocates say such a statewide incentive plan would put the state on a par with leaders like Japan and Germany.

Schwarzenegger backed a solar homes proposal that failed in the Legislature four months ago. Resource and Environmental Protection agency officials on Monday outlined their goals and solicited suggestions on how to meet his campaign promise, though Schwarzenegger has yet to endorse a new attempt at legislation.

Unlike the previous version, the latest variation would include commercial as well as residential buildings, which may make it easier and cheaper to reach Schwarzenegger's million-roof goal, Desmond said. That's also a goal of state Sen. John Campbell, R-Irvine, who is carrying a preliminary version of the bill with last year's legislative sponsor, Sen. Kevin Murray, D-Culver City.

"The devil will be in the details," said Bernadette Del Chiaro of the Environment California Research and Policy Center.

Her organization estimated that the state needs to pay homeowners at least $2,800 for each kilowatt of solar power generation they install to make the investment worthwhile.

The California Building Industry Association has been generally supportive, but opposes mandates that would cost its members and wants to begin with a smaller program. Utilities and unions in August supported a less ambitious competing bill that Schwarzenegger aides said would have been unworkable.

Source: Associated Press 



-------- OTHER

Privatizing Social Security: A Debate on Bush's Social Security Plan

democracynow.org
December 15th, 2004

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/15/1459201

A two-day conference on the economy hosted by President Bush opens today in Washington, and Social Security is at the top of the agenda. We host a debate on Bush's plan to privatize part of Social Security with independent journalist Eric Laursen and Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute. [includes rush transcript] A two-day conference on the economy hosted by President Bush opens today in Washington, and Social Security is at the top of the agenda.

The White House has repeatedly said that Social Security is facing a financial crisis to the tune of 10 trillion dollars. Bush says he wants to shore up these finances by allowing workers to shift some of their Social Security payroll taxes into private accounts that could be invested in stocks or bonds.

Critics are already voicing their opposition to Bush's plans. Today we host a debate on Social Security.

    * Eric Laursen, independent journalist who has covered Social Security for many years and is writing a book titled "People's Pension: The Politics of Social Security Policymaking Since 1980."
    * Michael Tanner, director of the Project on Social Security Choice at the Cato Institute. He authored a study titled "The 6.2 Percent Solution: A Plan for Reforming Social Security."

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

AMY GOODMAN: We're joined by Eric Laursen, independent journalist who has covered Social Security for many years, is writing a new book, it’s called, People's Pension: The Politics of Social Security Policymaking Since 1980. Michael Tanner joins us on the line, he’s head of the project on Social Security choice at the Cato Institute, authored a study entitled, "The 6.2% Solution, a Plan for Reforming Social Security." Michael Tanner, what's the problem?

MICHAEL TANNER: Well, there are several problems with Social Security. The one that we talk about most, of course, is its financial problem. The fact is that Social Security will begin to run a deficit within 15 years, spending more money on benefits than it takes in through taxes. At that point, of course, it will have to draw on the so-called Social Security trust fund in order to continue to pay benefits until about 2042, but of course, the trust fund actually has no assets in it. It is simply a claim against future tax revenues. So the government will actually begin having to find additional money, will begin running a cash shortfall in less than 15 years. Overall, Social Security is facing some 12 trillion dollars in unfunded Social Security liabilities. But beyond that, we also have the problem that Social Security as a system is providing poor returns to younger workers is discriminating against working women, low income individuals and minorities, and does not give workers any ownership, control, or legal right to benefits.

AMY GOODMAN: We are also joined in our studio by Eric Laursen, independent journalist, who has written a book -- writing a book on Social Security. Well, is Social Security in danger?

ERIC LAURSEN: The short answer is that we don't know. The protections that we get from the Social Security trustees that they put out every year deal with 75-year periods. They also have projections on when the system is going to start to pay out more money than it takes in. But really, these are very speculative numbers. They have to do with birth rates. They have to do with immigration rates. We don't know. They're projections they're not meant to be used as hard and fast rules, here is how you change the system. Social Security is -- it's a social compact. It's not really a -- an investment account. To treat it that way is really the wrong way to address the problem. What's disturbing about the privatization proposals that are coming up is that they treat it as something akin to a savings account or an investment account rather than as a social compact. The numbers that Michael cites are ones that actuaries come up with, but they don't really have much to do with the guts of the system, which is a modest benefit for people who are retired, disabled or the children of deceased workers. What we need to concentrate on is the social promise that's being made there and how we as a society want to fulfill it.

AMY GOODMAN: What's wrong with partially privatizing Social Security? Can't you trust workers to invest?

ERIC LAURSEN: Well, to put that in perspective a little bit, there are portfolio managers on Wall Street today with degrees in higher math who lose millions of dollars every day on huge investment accounts. For them it's all right because theoretically, these investment portfolios they manage go on forever. For workers to have to operate into the same system is a very different story. You have to learn how to ratchet down the level of risk in a portfolio, as you approach retirement or as you approach your death. And that's a very difficult thing to do. It's not patronizing at all to say that this is not a job that should be given to each and every worker in the country. Because it's a formidable task. And to impose a system like that that's highly risky on workers who deserve to have a secure retirement is not fair.

AMY GOODMAN: Michael Tanner?

MICHAEL TANNER: Well, no one is suggesting that workers are going to have to sit down at night with the Wall Street Journal and try to pick between General Electric and General Motors. All the plans being currently discussed would actually have workers invest in a very small number of broadly diversified index-style funds, very similar in fact to the federal thrift savings program that every federal worker is invested in, every mailman and GS2 secretary is participating in the private investments for the thrift savings program. We are suggesting that the average American worker should be able to invest the same way. That would give many workers who are now cut out of the opportunity to build real inheritable wealth a chance to get in on investment and wealth creation the same way that wealthier people can do. We can make every waitress and every lathe operator on the factory floor a participant in capitalism, a participant in ownership of the American economy. We can democratize with a small d, the ownership of capital in the country and that will have a profound effect on the future of American labor.

AMY GOODMAN: Eric Laursen.

ERIC LAURSEN: There's something a little bit disingenuous in what Michael is saying, I think. Democratize, yes, for people who have accounts or high wage earners who would have accounts that are large enough to be viable. Most workers, who work at demanding or even debilitating jobs do not make the kind of money that would allow them to accumulate a large enough account to make it viable. This is not a formula for democratizing investment. This is a formula for augmenting the ability of people who already have the resources to increase them. It's going to help to create a more bifurcated, a more wage split society than we already have.

AMY GOODMAN: Michael Tanner, what about someone who’s investment gets wiped out?

MICHAEL TANNER: Well, first of all, I just respond to that by saying that's an argument for creating larger individual accounts and not stopping with 2% of payroll. Let's let the low wage workers invest their half of the Social Security payroll tax so that they can accumulate substantial amounts of wealth. As for people whose investments don't do as well as others. First of all, I would say, that given a large enough time horizon, whether we are talking about people investing for 30, 40, 50 years, investment is remarkably safe. There's never been a 20 year period in which you would have lost money in the markets, but if you did, every major proposal on Capitol Hill includes some level of safety net or minimum benefit. In fact, many of the proposals actually increase the current benefit up to 100% or 120% of the poverty level.

ERIC LAURSEN: There's a saying in the social welfare profession in the country that programs for the poor tend to be poor programs. You can have a minimum benefit, you can have a sort of a welfare net for people whose savings accounts in Social Security don't work out. But the fact of the matter is, we know what happens to welfare systems in this country. We know what happened to Aid to Families with Dependent Children. They get whittled down. The people who receive them are demonized as welfare queens or whatever. Ultimately, those benefits get cut because they don't have a constituency for them. There's all sorts of goodwill behind some of the proposals that are -- that have gone forward on Social Security, but ultimately, we're talking about a guaranteed benefit that is being turned into an at-risk account.

MICHAEL TANNER: But just imagine the undermining of support for the social welfare aspects of the Social Security system if we have to raise taxes -- payroll taxes by as much as 50%, which is what could happen in order to preserve the current system. If we have to raise taxes on middle income people in order to continue to provide the current level of Social Security benefits, that is going to undermine the long term social compact here. Much better that we give all Americans a chance to build and create real wealth, and then those few Americans who have a problem, let's step in and make the welfare aspects of Social Security explicit and take care of them.

ERIC LAURSEN: Again, making the welfare aspects explicit is an invitation to cut them. I think also, you have to keep in mind here that this is not a free lunch. As it's being portrayed by members of the Bush administration, and I think also by think tanks like Cato in a lot of cases. Private accounts would come at the cost of a cut in benefits. One of president Bush's plans that was outlined in his 2001 Social Security Commission that has been scored by the Congressional Budget Office that worker who was born in this decade would take a 40% cut in benefits. And this is in a system that only makes up on average maybe 30% of a person's working income on average. That's a substantial cut in the kind of -- in the only part of the system that's guaranteed, and what you get in return is a private account that is very much at risk. Michael points out no 20-year period of the market has lost money. Over a 16-year period from 1966 to 1982, if you invested $100 in the market, you would have made nothing until 1982. It depends very much on your timing -- when you participate in the market. That's not something that workers who are in low wage jobs can afford.

AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Eric Laursen, writing a book on Social Security in our studio, Michael Tanner on the line with us from the Cato Institute. New York Times had a news analysis piece yesterday by Edmund Andrews that says while Bush is focusing almost all his rhetorical energy on the need to let people divert some of their taxes to private retirement accounts, nearly every leading Republican proposal on Capitol Hill acknowledges that private accounts by themselves do little to solve the system's projected shortfall of at least $3.5 trillion. Instead, these proposals rely on deep cuts in benefits to future retirees. He says, the uncomfortable political truth was driven home Monday by the head of the investigative arm of Congress, named David Walker, the controller general of the government accountability office. He said that the creation of private accounts for Social Security will not deal with the solvency and sustainability of the Social Security fund. Your response to that, Michael Tanner?

MICHAEL TANNER: Individual accounts and private investment will not get us all the way out of the hole. The unfunded liabilities of Social Security are so huge that even the powers of private investment cannot get us all the way out of there. What they're doing is simply acknowledging that fact. But those -- that hole exists whether or not you create individual accounts. The benefit cuts they are talking about would occur now, by law, that when Social Security has no longer enough revenue coming in to pay the benefits they are promised, it must by law cut those benefits by at least 23%. The benefit cuts are coming if we don't make any reforms at all. What individual accounts do is offset some of the cuts that would otherwise be coming, and raise people's benefits above the level of what Social Security can actually pay. Making any comparison at all to the promised level of Social Security benefits is meaningless. Because those promised benefits are simply a fantasy. They cannot be paid.

AMY GOODMAN: We only have 10 seconds, but Eric Laursen, why is Social Security so important?

ERIC LAURSEN: Social Security is the primary income support for over 50% of the elderly in this country. And to reduce it to dollars and cents and not address the fact that it's a social promise that we make that's vital is a very skewed and frankly kind of creepy way to look at the system it's not about numbers. It's about what we are willing to, as a society, provide for the elderly, who have worked all their lives.

AMY GOODMAN: On that note, I want to thank you both very much for being with us. Eric Laursen, independent journalist, writing a book on Social Security. Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute.

To purchase an audio or video copy of this entire program, click here for our new online ordering or call 1 (800) 881-2359.



-------- environment

Pentagon Restructures Environmental Strategy

WASHINGTON, DC, December 15, 2004 (ENS)

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/dec2004/2004-12-15-02.asp

Without public debate or Congressional review, the Pentagon is moving reduce its environmental duties, according to a draft directive that cancels a 1996 Clinton-era policy ensuring that environmental factors are integrated into Defense Department decisionmaking processes that may impact the environment. But at the same time, the Pentagon has a new procurement policy, and is urging employees and military to "buy green."

The draft Department of Defense (DoD) directive, issued October 18, removes the requirement to prevent pollution and minimize adverse environmental impacts, or do anything that does not directly “sustain the national defense mission.”

By its terms, this directive covers all “DoD operations, activities, and installations worldwide, including Government-owned/contractor-operated facilities.”

The new directive would eliminate provisions that now exist such as,“Reducing risk to human health and the environment by identifying, evaluating, and where necessary, remediating contamination resulting from past DoD activities.”

No longer would the Armed Forces be engaged in "Protecting, preserving, and, when required, restoring, and enhancing the quality of the environment,” as the 1996 directive mandates.

“The Pentagon is transforming itself into an entity concerned only about its own logistics and facility management – and the public be damned,” said attorney Jeff Ruch of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), a national alliance of federal, state and local resources personnel which released the draft directive Tuesday. “Under this new policy, who will protect America’s waters, air and soil from the Pentagon?"

The Department of Defense manages 30 million acres of land, making it the third largest land management agency in the United States. In addition, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers manages 11 million acres of water and related lands at over 500 water resources projects across the nation.

The new directive would drop requirements that the Defense Department obey “regulations, Executive orders, binding international agreements” and other federal “environmental, safety, occupational health, explosives safety, fire and emergency services, and pest management policies.”

Instead, the Pentagon would pledge only to abide by “applicable law and DoD policy.”

The new directive says that the Pentagon “will evaluate all activities…and make prudent investments in initiatives that support mission accomplishment, enhance readiness, reduce future funding needs, prevent pollution, ensure cost effective compliance, and maximize the existing resource capability.”

The day after the Pentagon issued its draft directive, the U.S. Army announced a new environmental strategy. None of the other armed forces has issued a separate environmental strategy document.

Entitled “The Army Strategy for the Environment: Sustain the Mission, Secure the Future,” the document "transitions the Army’s compliance-based environmental program to a mission-oriented approach based on the principles of sustainability," the Army said in a statement.

“We have learned over the past decades that simply complying with environmental regulations will not ensure that we will be able to sustain our mission,” said Acting Secretary of the Army Les Brownlee and Army Chief of Staff General Peter Schoomaker in a joint letter released with the strategy.

Six goals are outlined in the Army's strategy:

    * Foster an ethic within the Army that takes us beyond environmental compliance to sustainability.

    * Strengthen Army operational capability by reducing our environmental footprint through more sustainable practices.

    * Meet current and future training and testing and other mission requirements by sustaining land, air, and water resources.

    * Minimize impacts and total ownership costs of Army systems, materiel, facilities, and operations by integrating the principles and practices of sustainability.

    * Enhance the well-being of our soldiers, civilians, families, neighbors, and communities through leadership in sustainability.

    * Use innovative technology and the principles of sustainability to meet user needs and anticipate future Army challenges.

“This is a long-term commitment to radically change the way we design, build, buy, transport, and otherwise perform our mission, as we transform our weapons systems, tactics, and installations over the coming decades,” said Ray Fatz, deputy assistant secretary of the Army for environment, safety and occupational health.

The new strategy, "requires radical changes in almost all of the core business processes the Army performs today," Fatz said.

During the same week, the Defense Department announced a new environmentally related procurement policy for all branches of the armed forces.

The new "green procurement" policy requires the department's civilian and military personnel to purchase products and services that benefit the environment, said Alex Beehler, the DoD's chief of environmental safety and occupational health, in an October 21 interview with the Pentagon Channel and American Forces Press Service.

He said that recycled office supplies and lubricants and biomass produced energy are among the types of purchases the policy requires.

Beehler said the green procurement policy is the latest endeavor by the Pentagon "to forge its reputation as being a good environmental steward." That reputation, he said, stretches back some 30 years and includes myriad DoD recycling programs.

Recycling cabinet at the Pentagon (Photo courtesy DoD)
The first recycling policy developed by DoD was under Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's first term in 1976. Like that policy then, Beehler said, this new policy is "intrinsically the right thing to do."

"It's the right thing to do toward our environment, toward the mission, toward making the lives of our civilian and military employees and families much better by having a safer, better Earth."

Beehler said there is no requirement under the policy to purchase green products that "cost more, are scarce, or have other limitations." Consideration should be given to those items that over the long term would produce more cost savings or improved efficiency, he said.

The Pentagon will provide training to help those directly involved in the purchasing process identify green procurement items.

The training also will help raise the awareness of procurers to buy green, he added, "so that it becomes incorporated into their daily operations to look at pursuing green procurement opportunities wherever they realistically exist."

The department plans to develop a catalog that will show DoD procurement officers and employees where they can find and purchase green products, he said.

Beehler said for now, the DoD is focusing on implementing the new policy, not enforcing it. But in the future the Pentagon plans an environmental management system that will monitor compliance through "environmental audits and environmental contracting to make sure that the policy is successfully implemented," he added.

Beehler said the time has come "to go beyond environmental compliance," and that the focus now should be on "improving the environment rather than just protecting it."

The new policy, he said, "will empower each individual to have a vital stake in improving the environment."

----

Rich Need To Do More on Environment - World Bank

REUTERS USA: December 15, 2004

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/28577/newsDate/15-Dec-2004/story.htm

WASHINGTON - The World Bank on Tuesday chastised rich countries for not giving enough to fund global environmental protection and warned that overall progress in meeting global environmental targets was "alarmingly slow."

In an annual report entitled "Environment Matters," the World Bank said aid for the environment averaged about $2 billion a year over the past decade, far less than well-off societies agreed during a major environment summit in Brazil in 1992.

The report estimated that protecting the environment in developing countries amounted to about $2.50 per person a year in rich countries, less than the current price for a gallon of gasoline in most industrialized nations.

"If the war on environmental degradation is to be won, we need a major turnaround," James Wolfensohn, president of the World Bank urged in the report.

He said rich countries should set an example by adopting environmentally friendly production and consumption practices.

"Rich countries' larger contribution to environmental damage means they must shoulder greater responsibility for fixing the problem," he said.

And in poorer countries, governments should improve policies on water, energy, transport and trade to help reduce consumption of scarce natural resources, Wolfensohn added.

"Beyond this, environmental concerns must be integrated more fully into development policymaking," he said.

World Bank's top environment official, Ian Johnson, said in the report that it was vital that global efforts on the environment be targeted and coordinated to enhance growth and reduce poverty.

"Clearly the prudent way forward must be based on promoting a development path that integrates economic growth with environmental responsibility and social equity," said Johnson, vice president of the environmental and social sustainable development division at the bank.

The report urged governments to overcome significant political, governance and institutional constraints to reverse harmful environmental trends.

--------

One in Four Bird Species Could Disappear by Century's End

By J.R. Pegg

WASHINGTON, DC, December 15, 2004 (ENS)

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/dec2004/2004-12-15-10.asp

A quarter of the world's bird species will likely be extinct or critically endangered by the end of the century, according to a new study by U.S. researchers.

This projected extinction wave has implications beyond the fate of individual bird species, the researchers said, as the loss of birds will have negative impacts on the environment and may encourage the spread of human disease.

The findings add to growing concern about the planet's biodiversity and echo several other recent studies that indicate conservation efforts are failing.

The most recent Red List of Threatened Species, released late last month by IUCN-The World Conservation Union indicates that 12 percent of all bird species, 23 percent of all mammal species, one-third of all amphibian species and 42 percent of all turtles and tortoises are already threatened with extinction.

This latest study, considered one of the largest ever of avian biodiversity, centers on analysis of conservation, distribution, ecological function and life history data for all 9,789 living and 129 extinct bird species.

"The result is one of the most comprehensive databases of a class of organisms ever compiled," said lead author Cagan Sekercioglu, a researcher at the Stanford Center for Conservation Biology (CCB).

Some 1.3 percent of bird species have gone extinct since 1500, Sekercioglu and colleagues report, but the global number of individual birds is estimated to fallen by 20 to 25 percent during the same period.

"Given the momentum of climate change, widespread habitat loss and increasing numbers of invasive species, avian declines and extinctions are predicted to continue unabated in the near future," the authors said.

Published online Monday in the "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences," the study used computer modeling to simulate best case, intermediate case and worst case scenarios for the future of bird species.

The forecast is a worrying one for birds even under the best case scenario, which was based on improved conservation methods. It predicted six percent of all bird species would be extinct by 2100 and another eight percent on the brink.

For the intermediate case scenario, the scientists assumed present trends would continue - that scenario projected one in 10 species will disappear by 2100, with 15 percent critically endangered.

Of even graver concern to conservationists is the projection made under the worst case scenario, which assumed the number of threatened species would increase by about one percent per decade.

"These assumptions are conservative, since it is estimated that, every year, natural habitats and dependent vertebrate populations decrease by an average of 1.1 percent," the authors wrote.

The worst case prediction found 14 percent of all bird species extinct and another 25 percent critically endangered or extinct in the wild.

The impacts from the predicted loss of bird species will ripple across ecosystems, the authors said.

Birds are intimately entwined with the health of other species and perform a number of vital roles in ecosystems throughout the world, including insect control, pollination, seed dispersal and disposal of dead animal carcasses.

More insect eating bird species are prone to extinction than any other group, the authors said, and it unlikely that other organisms will be able to take up their role in controlling pests.

Island birds and birds with highly specialized diets are also predicted to experience more extinctions than average, according to the report, which notes their loss could doom some plants that depend on individual species for pollination and seed dispersal.

The researchers found more than a third of all scavengers and fish eaters are prone to extinction.

The disappearance of scavengers is of particular concern and could have a serious impact on both the environment and human health.

"These birds are important in the recycling of nutrients, leading other scavengers to dead animals and limiting the spread of diseases to human communities as a result of slowly decomposing carcasses," the authors said.

The researchers cited the ramifications from the collapse of the vulture population in India over the last decade.

In a decline linked to widespread veterinary use of a pharmaceutical called diclofenac, vulture populations in India and other areas of South Asia plummeted by some 95 percent in the 1990s.

This decline was followed by an explosion of rabid feral dogs and rats, which put humans at risk. In 1997 alone, more than 30,000 people died of rabies in India, more than half of the world's total rabies deaths that year.

History offers another lesson in the impact of bird extinction on human health, said coauthor Gretchen Daily, an associate professor in Stanford's Department of Biological Sciences and director of the CCB Tropical Research Program.

Daily pointed to the example of the passenger pigeon - a North American bird wiped out early in the 20th century by hunting and habitat loss.

"Its loss is thought to have made Lyme disease the huge problem it is today," Daily explained. "When passenger pigeons were abundant - and they used to occur in unimaginably large flocks of hundreds of millions of birds - the acorns on which they specialized would have been too scarce to support large populations of deer mice, the main reservoir of Lyme disease, that thrive on them today."



-------- health

Vitamin E in Nuts, Seeds Blocks Cancer Cell Growth

WEST LAFAYETTE, Indiana, December 15, 2004 (ENS)

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/dec2004/2004-12-15-09.asp#anchor7

The form of vitamin E found in sesame seeds, walnuts and pecans - but not in most manufactured nutritional supplements - might halt the growth of prostate and lung cancer cells, researchers at Purdue University have found.

A team led by Qing Jiang has found that gamma-tocopherol, which occurs naturally in walnuts, pecans, sesame seeds, and in corn and sesame oils, inhibits the proliferation of human prostate and lung cancer cells cultured in a lab.

The vitamin's presence interrupts the synthesis of fatty molecules called sphingolipids, which are components of cell membranes. Healthy human prostate cells are unaffected.

"This is the first time gamma-tocopherol has been shown to induce death in lab-grown human cancer cells while leaving healthy cells alone," said Jiang, who is an assistant professor of foods and nutrition in the College of Consumer and Family Sciences.

"This could be wonderful news for cancer patients if the effect can be reproduced in animal models. But because most nutritional supplements contain only alpha-tocopherol, a different form of vitamin E that alone does not have these anticancer properties, it may be better to supplement the diet with mixed forms of vitamin E. The study shows that the anticancer effect is enhanced when mixed forms are used."

Jiang's research appears in the current online edition of the scientific journal "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences." It was funded in part by the National Institutes of Health.

Jiang said the next step for her research team will be testing the effect of gamma-tocopherol and mixed forms of vitamin E on animal cancers.

"Although this discovery is promising, we do not yet know whether gamma-tocopherol has any effect on cancer in living creatures," she said. "We hope that future research not only will clarify whether gamma-tocopherol could have applications in human cancer treatment, but also will show how we might supplement the body with the vitamin to prevent cancer from developing in the first place." 



-------- ACTIVISTS

MORDECHAI VANUNU, 
ISRAELI NUCLEAR WHISTLEBLOWER -
RELEASED FROM PRISON, BUT NOT YET FREE

by Felice Cohen-Joppa

"My message today to all the world is `Open Dimona reactor
for  inspection'.... I will continue to speak against all kinds of
nuclear  weapons."
Mordechai Vanunu speaking to the press immediately after his 
release from prison on April 21, 2004

	On April 21, 2004, Mordechai Vanunu was released from 
Israel's Ashkelon Prison.  In spite of the fact that he served his
entire  18 year sentence (more than 11 1/2 years spent in solitary 
confinement), Israel has imposed severe restrictions that 
unjustly limit his speech and movement - including forbidding 
his contact with foreigners, controlling his movements inside 
Israel, and forbidding him to leave Israel.  With these restrictions, 
Israel has created a special prison just for Mordechai Vanunu.

	At the height of the Cold War and a global nuclear disarmament 
movement, Mordechai Vanunu was a lab technician at the 
Dimona nuclear facility in the Negev Desert.  He later, in 1986, 
told his story and gave photos he had taken inside the factory to 
the London Sunday Times, in an act of conscience.  He believed 
the world had the right to know about Israel's undisclosed 
nuclear weapons program.  Days before his story and photos 
were published, Israeli agents lured Vanunu from London, 
kidnapped him in Rome, and smuggled him back to Israel for a 
secret trial where he was convicted of espionage and treason.

	His revelations gave the world its first solid evidence of
Israel's secret and sizable nuclear arsenal.  Israel insists 
Vanunu still has more secrets he intends to reveal, and is 
therefore a danger to state security.  But Vanunu told everything 
he knew to the Sunday Times over 18 years ago.

	In July 2004, the Israeli Supreme Court rejected an appeal of
the restrictions, and at a six-month review in October, the restrictions 
were renewed.  The next review will occur on the first anniversary 
of his release from prison.  On November 11, thirty armed police 
stormed St. George's Anglican Cathedral in East Jerusalem 
and rearrested Vanunu (he was given sanctuary at the Cathedral 
after his release and has been living there since).  They seized 
his laptop computers and cell phone, and questioned him about 
interviews he'd given to foreign press, before releasing him
that evening to seven days of house arrest.

	When Vanunu was released from custody, he told the press, 
"They cannot punish me for the same crime, twice, three times.  
How many times [do] they want to punish me??"

	Mordechai Vanunu wants to leave Israel and rebuild his life.  
The U.S. Campaign is working with the international campaigns 
and Mordechai's supporters in other countries, and with 
anti-nuclear and human rights groups worldwide for an 
immediate lifting of the restrictions and Vanunu's full freedom.
 

HOW YOU CAN HELP
Make sure Israel knows that the whole world is watching.

? Write to these officials, urging them to lift Vanunu 's
restrictions and let him leave Israel immediately.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
3 Kaplan St.
Hakirya, Jerusalem 91007 ISRAEL
Fax: +972 2 566 4838
Email: rohm@pmo.gov.il

Tommy Lapid
Minister of Justice
29 Salah al-Din St.
Jerusalem 91010 ISRAEL
Fax: +972 2 628 5438
Email: sar@justice.gov.il

Tzahi Hanegbi
Minister of Internal Security
P.O. Box 18182
Jerusalem 91181 ISRAEL
Fax: +972 2 581 1832
Email: sar@mops.gov.il

Ambassador of Israel
3514 International Drive NW
Washington, DC 20008 US
Fax: 202-364-5607
Email: ambassador_sec@israelemb.org

? Write a note of support to Mordechai Vanunu, c/o Cathedral 
Church of St. George, 20 Nablus Road, PO Box 19122, 
Jerusalem 91191, Israel, or email vanunumvjc@hotmail.com

? Nominate Vanunu for honors, awards and honorary 
doctorates.  He 's been repeatedly nominated for the Nobel 
Peace Prize, received the Lennon-Ono Peace Grant in October, 
and while imprisoned was honored with the Right Livelihood 
Award, Nuclear Free Future Award, and received an honorary 
doctorate from Tromso University in Norway, among many other 
honors.

? Visit the campaign website at www.vanunu.com, sign the 
online petition, and encourage others to do so.  You can also 
receive email updates and alerts by sending a blank email to 
free_vanunu-subscribe@yahoogroups.com and following the 
confirmation instructions that will be emailed back to you.

? Make a donation to the campaign.  We need to continue our 
efforts until Mordechai Vanunu is truly free, and financial support 
is crucial.  After he is allowed to leave Israel, the remainder of 
campaign funds will be given to him to help him rebuild his life.  
So please give as generously as you can!

? Make a donation now to help Vanunu rebuild his life.  He was 
locked away from the world for almost 18 years - a very large 
price to pay for his courageous act of whistleblowing.  There is 
much that Vanunu needs as he readjusts to life outside of 
prison, and he will be very grateful for our support.s

	Checks and money orders made payable to the U.S. Campaign 
to Free Mordechai Vanunu should be mailed to the address 
below.  Please indicate on the check's memo line if this 
donation is meant for campaign expenses ("for campaign ") or 
the Mordechai Vanunu post-release account ("for Mordechai").  
You can also donate by credit card or direct withdrawal online via 
Pay-pal 's secure service at our website.

	For more information, contact The U.S. Campaign to Free 
Mordechai Vanunu, P.O. Box 43384, Tucson, AZ 85733 U.S., 
phone/fax (520)323-8697,  email - 
freevanunu@mindspring.com, website address: 
http://www.vanunu.com