NucNews - November 15, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- australia Nuclear plant in their sights By GEMMA JONES November 15, 2005 Australia Daily Telegraph http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story/0,20281,17244107-5001021,00.html THE Lucas Heights nuclear reactor has emerged as a potential target of Sydney's alleged terror cell, a police dossier reveals. The group was preparing for a holy war which would cause "maximum damage" to Australians, court documents released yesterday reveal. The main allegations against Sydney's eight terror suspects were released for the first time yesterday in a 20-page police dossier tendered to Central Local Court as part of a bail hearing. The youngest of the eight Sydney men accused of conspiring to make explosives for a terrorist act also told his mentor he was prepared to die, it is alleged. The man was one of six of the terror suspects who allegedly attended training camps in the state's west in preparation for jihad, or holy war. The document also contained new allegations of a four-month campaign by the group to stockpile chemicals capable of making explosives such as those used in the London bombings. Details emerged for the first time of three of the alleged eight-strong Sydney terror cell being caught by police near the nuclear reactor facility in Sydney's south almost a year ago. In December, 2004, Abdul Rakib Hasan, 34, Mohamed Elomar, 40, and Mazen Touma, 25, were stopped by police "in the vicinity" of the facility, the court papers allege. "The men had in their possession a trail bike and claimed they were in the area to ride it," the papers allege. But when the three men were interviewed separately by police they gave differing versions of what had been doing. Police then discovered signs of an attempt to penetrate the reactor's perimeter. "Police inquiries revealed the access lock for a gate to a reservoir in the vicinity of the reactor had recently been cut," the court papers allege. Details of repeated contact between the Sydney and Melbourne accused terror cell members also emerged. The prosecution alleged Hasan and another accused, Khaled Sharrouf, 24, met Melbourne extremist Muslim cleric Abdul Nacer Benbrika in Melbourne in February this year. Benbrika allegedly spoke of living in an Islamic state and preparing the mujahideen – holy warriors. During this conversation, Sharrouf allegedly stated: "I want to die." Benbrika then allegedly replied: "If we want to die for jihad, we have to have maximum damage. Damage their buildings, everything. Damage their lives." Police also allege that in March this year, terror suspects Mazen Touma and Omar Baladjam were recorded discussing the need to train, run and get fit as they would need to be healthy to "shoot some motherf. . .ers". They allegedly spoke of how it was "the order from Allah to be like that, it is in preparation for everything". The prosecution alleged six of the eight terror cell members trained in remote bush in the state's west early this year. The group allegedly chose two properties, booking in hunting and camping trips under fake names. On one of the properties, police later found shell casings, a melted battery and spark plugs. "Police allege that these camping and hunting trips are part of the jihad training being undertaken by this group," the court papers state. "These trips are consistent with the usual modus operandi of terrorists prior to attacks." A detailed inventory of items seized in last week's raids was also contained in the document. Weapons including shotguns, ammunition and chemicals used to make a variety of explosives were among the property seized. In the biggest attempted order of chemicals, "two members of the group" allegedly placed an order on September 29 this year for 50 litres of hydrochloric acid, 25kg of citric acid, 20 litres of glycerine and 200 litres of methylated spirits, the court document said. ---- Alleged bomb cells eyed nuclear plant MERAIAH FOLEY IN SYDNEY Tue 15 Nov 2005 The Scotsman http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2243682005 MEMBERS of an alleged Islamic terror cell in Sydney, Australia, were stockpiling bomb-making materials, undertaking training in terror techniques at Outback hunting camps and sizing up the country's only nuclear reactor as a possible target, police alleged yesterday. In a 20-page report giving a glimpse into Australia's biggest ever terror investigation, police said eight suspects arrested last week in Sydney had the know-how and were assembling the ingredients - from chemicals and detonators to digital timers and batteries - to carry out a deadly, major attack. A nuclear reactor used to make radioactive medical supplies on the southern edge of Sydney was listed as a possible target, according to the report, released by Sydney's Central Local Court. Police did not comment on the document yesterday, but the allegations paint a picture of radical Sunni Muslim men led, by an extremist preacher, who were accumulating the potentially lethal cocktail of products that have become the tools of the modern-day terrorist's trade, enabling them to make bombs similar to those used by the 7/7 attackers in London. Police said they found 24 bottles of hydrogen peroxide solution stashed on public land behind the home of one of the suspects, Khaled Sharrouf. Hydrogen peroxide can be used to make explosives when mixed with other chemicals. In October, Sharrouf was arrested for trying to steal six digital timers and approximately 132 batteries from a hardware store, police said. Another alleged cell member, Abdul Rakib Hasan, tried to buy laboratory equipment and a 100-litre (26.4-gallon) cooler that detectives said was to be used for storing chemicals. Two other men, whose identities were not released, visited a car parts wholesaler to buy 200 litres (53 gallons) of brake fluid and 300 litres (80 gallons) of sulphuric acid, police say. "They were informed by the manager that the combination of sulphuric acid and brake fluid was a highly volatile mix" and were asked for their business details, according to the statement. The men said they would come back the following day, but never returned. And in the first details to emerge of links between alleged terror cells in Sydney and Melbourne, police said that three Sydney men, including two of those now in custody, visited a radical Muslim leader in the southern Australian city in February. Sharrouf told the firebrand Algerian-born cleric Abdul Nacer Benbrika - known as Abu Bakr - that he wanted to be a martyr for the jihad, or holy war, police said. "If we want to die for jihad, then we have to have maximum damage, maximum damage. Damage their buildings, everything, damage their lives. To show them," Abu Bakr, who police call the two cells' spiritual leader, allegedly replied. Abu Bakr also visited Sydney on 31 July to preach. In his sermon, he said that Muslims should respect their parents and ask permission to become involved in jihad. "If your mother says no jihad, then no jihad," Abu Bakr said, according to quotes transcribed from surveillance tapes. "Two days later, [the suspect Mazen] Touma requested permission from his mother to undertake jihad," the police statement said. A search of Moustafa Cheikho's home when he was arrested uncovered two loaded semi-automatic pistols, two samurai swords and various chemicals, police said, adding that he attended a terror training camp in Pakistan in 2001. Police also recovered videotapes entitled Sheikh Osama's Training Course and Are you ready to die? during the raids, the document said. As plotting for an attack gathered pace, police allege that in March and April this year several members of the group took hunting and camping trips near the Outback town of Bourke, about 650 kilometres (400 miles) north-west of Sydney. "Police allege that these camping and training trips are part of the jihad training being undertaken by this group. The trips are consistent with the usual modus operandi of terrorists prior to attacks," the statement said. Months earlier, police said they stopped and questioned three of the terror suspects near Australia's only nuclear reactor. The police fact-sheet said that Touma, Mohammed Elomar and Abdul Rakib Hasan were stopped in a car by New South Wales state police near the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in December 2004. The men had an off-road motorcycle and told police that they were in the area to ride it, the document said. When interviewed separately, however, all three men gave different versions of the day's events. After investigating the area, police found that the lock to one of the gates surrounding the nuclear complex "had recently been cut", the fact sheet said. The New South Wales state premier, Maurice Iemma, yesterday moved to reassure the public that the reactor was safe. "Lucas Heights is a Commonwealth facility, but we have extensive plans in critical infrastructure protection which form part of our counter-terrorism plans," he said. The reactor is used for making radioactive material for medical uses and does not generate power. During a search of Elomar's home on 27 June, 2005, police said they found a computer memory stick that contained instructions in Arabic for making TATP, or triacetone triperoxide - a highly unstable explosive made from commercially available chemicals such as hydrochloric and sulphuric acids, brake fluid and hydrogen peroxide. The eight Sydney suspects have been charged with conspiring to manufacture explosives in preparation for a terrorist act. Ten members of the alleged Melbourne cell are accused of being members of a terrorist organisation. All 18 suspects face a maximum of life imprisonment if convicted. • Authorities in Brisbane ordered the city's bus and train services to halt for a half hour yesterday following a series of phone threats. The Queensland state premier, Peter Beattie, apologised for the disruption to services, but said the threats had to be taken seriously. ---- Nuclear reactor 'not easy to attack' Jonathan Porter November 15, 2005 The Australian http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17248602%255E31477,00.html THE nation's only nuclear reactor could be vulnerable to a determined terror attack on its cooling towers. Defending the security at the Lucas Heights nuclear facility, Ian Smith, executive director of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, conceded it might be possible to attack the site's cooling towers if terrorists were prepared "to lose a lot of people". But he would expect a warning from ASIO and the Australian Federal Police if such a massive attack - using hundreds of terrorists - were being planned. Adam Cobb, director of Stratwise Strategic Intelligence, who has written a chapter in Counter Terrorism in Australia, said the reactor's cooling towers were vulnerable to a truck bomb, with "dire cascading consequences" inside the reactor core. Three of the men arrested last week in anti-terror raids in Sydney and Melbourne were interviewed by police 500m from the reactor's front gate last December, documents released in Sydney's Downing Centre court revealed yesterday. Mazen Touma, Mohammed Elomar and Abdul Rakib Hasan were interviewed after they were stopped near an access road to the reservoir that supplies the reactor with its cooling water. The men were inside the reactor's 1.6km security zone. A padlock on the reservoir's access road was found to be cut, the police statement of facts said. NSW Premier Morris Iemma said authorities had extensive plans in place to protect critical infrastructure, including Lucas Heights. "Lucas Heights is a commonwealth facility but we have extensive plans in critical infrastructure protection which form part of our counter-terrorism plans," he said. Dr Smith said the three men could have been "innocently" riding their trail bikes, adding there was "no evidence" they intended to attack the 45-year-old reactor. "I understand from the AFP the men were interviewed and allowed to go. (The police) didn't see anything suspicious," Dr Smith said. He said it was "very hard to get close enough to do any damage to a nuclear reactor and terrorists have generally attacked soft targets like hotels". "Even in the worst case it is very unlikely there would be any effect felt outside our buffer zone of 1.6km within our site." Dr Smith said it was "unlikely we would be attacked". "The fact that the AFP and ASIO did not raise the alert on site means that they had no credible evidence there was a threat to this site," he said. Dr Smith said if there were a successful attack on the cooling towers "that would cause the emergency shutdown procedure to trip in the reactor". "We would be in a situation where the reactor would no longer be critical and we would using a secondary cooling system," he said. Dr Smith said there was 48 hours of cooling water left in reserve tanks, which could be used to keep the core cool. When that ran out, there was another source of water on hand - the pool used to store spent fuel rods. If there were a radioactive dispersal, "there would be a mess to clean up", he said. Asked if it was possible to breach reactor security with a Baghdad-style attack, with multiple truck bombs and attacks on foot by terrorists armed with automatic weapons, Dr Smith said: "They would have to use a lot of people." "If an attack on that scale were to happen we would expect ASIO and the AFP to give us some warning," he said. The Lucas Heights facility, in southern Sydney, produces medical radioisotopes used to detect cancer and other diseases. It is due to be replaced next year by a $330 million facility called the Open Pool Australian Light-water reactor. ---- Panic the real risk if Lucas Heights bombed By Richard Macey November 15, 2005 The Age http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/panic-the-real-risk-if-lucas-heights-bombed/2005/11/14/1131951100188.html UP TO 13,000 people could require iodine to counter the effects of radiation if terrorists destroyed the core of the nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights. But the NSW Government report that examined responses to any major disaster at the reactor suggested psychological problems triggered by public panic could be the real danger. A police statement of facts tendered to the Central Local Court on Friday, and made public yesterday, revealed that three of the Sydney terrorist suspects, Mazen Touma, Mohammed Elomar and Abdul Rakib Hasan, were stopped by police near the reactor in December 2004. The police allege the men said they were there to ride a trail bike, but when interviewed separately, gave conflicting versions of events. The police statement also says inquiries revealed a lock for a gate to a reservoir of the reactor had recently been cut. It has been claimed that terrorism suspect Willie Brigitte was examining Lucas Heights as a potential terrorism target. The NSW Health Department study found that if the reactor was destroyed and wind blew radioactive fallout into populated areas, up to 13,000 people may be affected "to the extent that an intervention with iodine may be necessary in the unlikely event of prolonged exposure". The risk of a child within three kilometres developing thyroid cancer after a disaster was one in 10,000. But it warned that "perception of risk in the community is significant and mental health and psychological consequences should not be underestimated", with consequences "regarded as high" for some people. One of the most effective responses would be to evacuate all 13,000 people within three kilometres within 12 hours, which would obviate the need for iodine, even in the worst case. Australian National University scientist Ben Selinger agreed yesterday that panic was the biggest risk. He said if terrorists managed to bomb the reactor core, they could disperse uranium and other material. But "you would need an aircraft, and you would have to be very careful to (hit) the core", Professor Selinger said. Even if it was breached, any uranium dust would produce only "local" fallout. "It could be vacuumed up." Professor Selinger said the reactor would be "a good media target" for terrorists wanting maximum publicity. The 1950s reactor operating at Lucas Heights is powered by seven kilograms of uranium, enough "to fill one coffee cup", said Sharon Kelly, a spokeswoman for the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation. A new reactor, now being built, will be powered by 10 kilograms of low enriched uranium. Its core will be at the bottom of a 14-metre deep stainless steel water tank surrounded by a two-metre thick concrete shield. Steel mesh designed to absorb the impact of an aircraft will protect the whole reactor building. NSW Premier Morris Iemma rejected suggestions that the reactor should be moved. "We have extensive plans in critical infrastructure protection which is part of our counter terrorism plans." With ANDREW CLENNELL -------- iran Peaceful use of nuclear energy, Iran's inalienable right Tehran, IRNA Nov 15, 2005 Iran-Venezuelan Envoy-IRNA Chief http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-234/0511159337195809.htm Venezuelan Ambassador to Tehran Arthura Anibal Galeh Gouss Ramirez in a meeting with the Head of Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) Ahmad Khademolmelleh on Tuesday underlined that Iran is entitled to peaceful use of nuclear technology. He added that Venezuela's support for Iran in the recent IAEA Board of Governors meeting was based on the country's Bolivarian Revolution, which underpins the independence of world countries. Ramirez expressed the firm belief of Venezuelans that every country has the right for access to nuclear technology for peaceful application. He urged that atomic resources should not be merely available to a number of specific countries. For his part, IRNA chief said that every country is entitled to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. He said that propagandist hue and cry over Iran's nuclear program is part of the media campaign launched by the administration of the US President George W. Bush against Iran. Turning to the media and news campaign currently underway by the US administration against Iran and Venezuela, Khademolmelleh called for general media cooperation, in particular between the news agencies of the two countries, to counter such ploys. "The US media, in an attempt to hinder the dissemination of the truth about both countries overseas, distort relevant news," he added. Stressing that the actual developments in the two countries are subject to embargo in the American media, he underlined that the media and news agencies of Iran and Venezuela should overcome such embargoes through close cooperation. Khademolmelleh pointed to the media attack on the presidents of both states and reiterated the need for aborting such propaganda. "Given my experience with the media in New York and news coverage about Venezuela, I am able to distinguish the discriminatory US policies against both countries and understand the problems facing Venezuela." He said that Venezuela is currently is a forerunner in the campaign against the US and noted, "IRNA is determined to draw world attention to the truth about Venezuela away from the hue and cry raised by the US mass media." The Venezuelan diplomat welcomed the proposal of IRNA chief for broader news exchange between the two countries and said that this could facilitate reflection of truth about developments in both countries. "Such cooperation would also make further coverage of news related to South American and Asian states easier." He referred to such news exchange as the best way to obstruct unilateral trend in news dissemination on the international scene. At the meeting, the two sides decided to create grounds for more extensive collaboration between the media and news agencies of Iran and Venezuela. -------- russia Russia, U.S. to discuss submarine disposal in Severodvinsk 15/ 11/ 2005 (RIA Novosti - Northwest, Olga Vtorova) http://en.rian.ru/russia/20051115/42095300.html ST. PETERSBURG, November 15 - Russian shipyard Sevmash and a U.S. task force will discuss the disposal of nuclear submarines in the Russian arctic city of Severodvinsk under the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program (CTR), Sevmash said Tuesday. The parties will discuss the disposal of two Project 941 Akula (Typhoon) attack nuclear submarines and the production of transportation package containers for spent nuclear fuel, Sevmash said. Sevmash has recently completed the disposal of the first Akula submarine, the world's largest nuclear powered naval vessel, under the CTR program. There is an agreement with the U.S. on the disposal of another Akula submarine, which is already in the dockyard of Sevmash, the company said. The parties are also expected to discuss the disposal of yet another submarine in the Russian Northern Fleet. The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program stipulates assistance to former Soviet republics to eliminate weapons of mass destruction under the START-I strategic arms reduction treaty. ---- Former Putin Envoy Appointed Head of Russian Nuclear Agency 15.11.2005 MosNews http://www.mosnews.com/money/2005/11/15/kirienkorosatom.shtml Former presidential plenipotentiary to the Volga Federal District Sergei Kirienko has been appointed the head of the Russian Nuclear Agency (RosAtom), the head of government staff, Sergei Naryshkin, said on Tuesday, Nov. 15. Naryshkin said that the relevant order was signed by Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov. As MosNews reported on Monday, Nov. 14, President Putin dismissed Kiriyenko from his position of presidential envoy “in connection with transferring to another job”. RosAtom is a federal agency which carries out the state policy functions in the sphere of nuclear energy. It provides state services and manages state property in this sphere. RosAtom occupies itself with issues of using nuclear energy, development and the safe functioning of nuclear energy objects. It also manages the nuclear arms complex, nuclear science and technology, and nuclear and radiation safety. RosAtom oversees non-proliferation of nuclear materials and technology and international cooperation in this sphere. Its operating utility is Rosenergoatom, which is responsible for deliveries of nuclear energy and is not controlled by Russia’s power grid monopoly Unified Energy System. Kiriyenko has previously served as Russia’s prime minister under President Boris Yeltsin. Kirienko was appointed to the post in the summer of 1998 on the eve of the infamous financial crisis which hit Russia on Aug. 17, 1998. The whole cabinet was dismissed on Aug. 23, 1998, following the crisis in which Russia’s domestic currency, the ruble, fell almost five-fold against the U.S. dollar and the government defaulted on its financial obligations both to foreign and domestic investors. ---- New director appointed for Russian atomic energy agency MOSCOW (AFP) Nov 15, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051115135622.czgg91hc.html Former Russian prime minister Sergei Kiriyenko was appointed Tuesday to head Russia's atomic energy agency, a post that will include handling nuclear cooperation with Iran, news agencies said. "The prime minister signed the decision on the nomination of Sergei Kiriyenko" to head the agency, Rosatom, the Interfax news agency quoted government spokesman Sergei Naryshkin as saying. The appointment is part of a reshuffle of senior posts in the Russian government that saw the promotion of two key allies of President Vladimir Putin on Monday. Kiriyenko's duties as head of Rosatom, which controls Russia's civilian and military nuclear industry, will include overseeing the ongoing construction of Iran's first nuclear reactor at Bushehr. Previously Putin's special envoy to the Volga region, Kiriyenko replaces Alexander Rumyantsev, who headed Rosatom from 2001. A well-known liberal politician with a reputation as an efficient manager, Kiriyenko was dismissed from the prime minister's post after only a few months' tenure in the wake of Russia's 1998 financial crisis. He later helped found the opposition Union of Rightist Forces party in 2001, along with other reformists who served under former president Boris Yeltsin. Reaction to the appointment was mixed. "Kiriyenko is a good administrator, pro-Western," said Alexander Pikayev, an analyst from the Moscow-based Institute of World Economy and International Relations. Pavel Felgenhauer, an independent analyst, said the appointment of an official with no background in the nuclear industry could cause difficulties. "This is the first time the head of Rosatom has not come from the ranks of nuclear specialists. He risks having difficulties managing the agency," Felgenhauer said. -------- security Congressional Approval of Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Denounced WASHINGTON, DC, November 15, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/nov2005/2005-11-15-09.asp#anchor2 Conservation and scientific groups Monday condemned provisions of the FY 06 Energy and Water Appropriations bill that set aside $130 million for nuclear fuel reprocessing projects, saying the projects increase the risk that terrorists could acquire plutonium and use it to make a nuclear bomb. The Senate passed the bill's conference report on Monday, adding its approval to that of the House and sending the bill to President George W. Bush for his signature. The nuclear fuel reprocessing "will compromise efforts to keep dangerous nuclear technology out of unsafe hands, and substantially increase the flow of nuclear waste for which there is no established means of disposal," warned the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The measure provides $50 million for a pilot program of advanced plutonium separation technology, and $80 million to continue spent fuel reprocessing research under the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative. “Congress is taking a giant step backward by advancing spent nuclear fuel reprocessing programs. This is just a bad idea for a whole list of reasons,” said Dr. Thomas Cochran, Director of NRDC’s Nuclear Program. “These projects threaten our national security, our public health and our safety. And they are wildly expensive. This funding would be better spent finding safer sites for deep geologic disposal with strict, protective public health standards.” The Bush administration had approved deep geologic storage of spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, but the repository has been plagued by a series of setbacks, most recently a complete design retooling, as well as an investigation into the falsification of scientific data by government scientists working on the project. The Union of Concerned Scientists also is critical of the planned reprocessing. "Reprocessing separates plutonium in spent fuel from the remaining radioactive waste. Because separated plutonium can be used in nuclear weapons and is highly vulnerable to theft, this plan will greatly increase the risk that terrorists or hostile states will acquire nuclear weapon materials," the Union of Concerned Scientists said. "The United States needs to take a giant step back from this brink," said Dr. Lisbeth Gronlund, co-director and senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists' Global Security Program. "Separating plutonium from spent fuel is not a solution to the nuclear waste problem and would increase the risk that terrorists could acquire plutonium and use it to make a nuclear weapon." Congressional appropriators claim that reprocessing is needed because of "uncertainties" in the Yucca Mountain plan. But the critics argue that separating plutonium will not avoid the need for geologic repositories to store the remaining radioactive wastes that result from reprocessing spent fuel. "Reprocessing only amplifies the safety, security, economic and proliferation risks of nuclear waste disposal," said Dr. Edwin Lyman, senior staff scientist at UCS. "A much better approach is to continue to store spent fuel on site in hardened casks with improved security against terrorist attack. This would give the United States plenty of time to seek a truly workable and safe solution to its nuclear waste problems." If the U.S. were to reprocess the roughly 50,000 metric tons of spent fuel that it has generated to date, it would produce about 500 metric tons of separated plutonium, enough for tens of thousands of nuclear weapons and an attractive target for terrorists. Although reprocessing supporters claim that the U.S. would be able to promptly use all the separated plutonium in new reactor fuel, this is not supported by the experience of other countries that have reprocessed spent fuel, where well over 200 metric tons of separated plutonium have accumulated. The Energy Department estimated in 1999 that it would cost taxpayers $280 billion to reprocess all U.S. spent fuel and reuse the plutonium in fresh fuel called mixed oxide (MOX) because it mixes the oxides of uranium and plutonium. The same appropriations bill earmarked funds for the start up of the first MOX fuel fabrication facility in the United States to be built at the federal government's Savannah River Site by a private consortium that includes Duke Energy and the French state-owned nuclear services firm Cogema. -------- terrorism US 'failing to stem terror risk' Tuesday, 15 November 2005 BBC News http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4438238.stm The US government is not doing enough to thwart attempts by terrorists to acquire nuclear weapons, members of the former 11 September inquiry have said. The US must also improve its image abroad, damaged by reports of abuse of terror suspects, the group said. It was reporting on the government's progress in meeting key recommendations made by the 9/11 commission last year on how to prevent new terror attacks. The pressure group was formed after the 9/11 commission was disbanded. Called the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, the bipartisan body consists of the same commissioners that investigated the 11 September attacks. Nuclear security In their report they said "minimal" or "insufficient" progress had been made on many of the 9/11 commission's key recommendations. Some praise was given for US efforts to crack down on global terror financing. The group also said "good progress" had been made in encouraging Muslim nations to integrate into global trade. It called on President George Bush to make thwarting arms proliferation "his top national security priority". "Preventing terrorists from gaining access to weapons of national security must be elevated above all other problems of national security," the group said. There were particular concerns about the security of nuclear materials in Russia, said the group's chairman Thomas Kean - who also headed the 9/11 inquiry. An agreement between the US and Russia in February which gave US weapons inspectors greater access to Russian nuclear sites was a step forward, he said, but not enough to contain the risk of material going astray. "The most striking thing to us is that the size of the problem still totally dwarfs the policy response," said Mr Kean. "We have no greater fear than a terrorist who is inside the US with a nuclear weapon." He added that al-Qaeda had sought weapons of mass destruction for years, and had said it was willing to use them. Torture denied The group also criticised the Bush administration's efforts to improve its global image, tarnished by reports of the mistreatment of terror suspects. The government "should work with its allies to develop mutually acceptable standards for terrorist detention", it said. Lee Hamilton - who was co-chairman of the disbanded commission - added that "detainee abuse in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and elsewhere undermines America's reputation as a moral leader". Mr Bush has previously defended his government's treatment of detainees, denying claims of torture and insisting "any activity we conduct is within the law". The 9/11 commission's report in July 2004 urged sweeping changes to how the intelligence services operated, after finding the government had "failed to protect American people" from the 11 September 2001 attacks. -------- u.s. nuc facilities Energy spending bill approved by Senate Nuclear waste burial funds slashed, fuel reprocessing OK'd By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU Nov. 15, 2005 Las Vegas Review-Journal http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Nov-15-Tue-2005/news/4311236.html WASHINGTON -- A bill that slices President Bush's budget request for Nevada nuclear waste burial while directing more federal spending into nuclear fuel reprocessing was passed by the Senate on Monday. Senators approved the $30.5 billion energy spending bill by a vote of 84-4, sending it to the White House for Bush's signature. The House passed the bill last week. The measure for the 2006 fiscal year directs spending for programs within the Department of Energy, the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and several smaller agencies. The bill contains more than $285 million in earmarked spending inserted by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. The money is directed to research at Nevada universities, for flood control and water conservation programs in the state, and for operations at federal facilities including the Nevada Test Site. Among major items in the bill, Congress reduced the Bush administration's budget request to develop nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. The stalled project was allocated $450 million, a 31 percent decrease from what Bush requested. Lawmakers said persistent delays in the Yucca project mean the department does not need the entire $651 million that it requested earlier this year. At the same time, lawmakers approved $80 million to continue research into advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing technologies, and an additional $50 million for an initiative to identify one or more of them that might be brought online in the next decade. Scientists have touted reprocessing as holding the potential to exact more use out of spent fuel while reducing the leftover waste in volume and toxicity. Experts differ however as to how long it might take to make the technology economical while some others have raised environmental concerns. "Congress is taking a giant step backward by advancing spent nuclear fuel reprocessing programs," said Thomas Cochran, director of nuclear programs for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "These projects threaten our national security, our public health, and our safety. And they are wildly expensive." A repository still would be required for the waste products, experts and lawmakers have said. The measure directs the Department of Energy to open a competition for communities interested in hosting a waste reprocessing complex, offering $5 million apiece to develop site plans at four locations. The department was told to submit a detailed program to Congress by next March 31, and to open the site competition by the end of next June. The target for site selection would be in late 2006 or 2007 with a construction goal of 2010, lawmakers said in the bill. -------- new jersey University receives grant for panel on nukes Kate Carroll Princetonian Contributor Tuesday, November 15, 2005 http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2005/11/15/news/13797.shtml The MacArthur Foundation awarded a grant of $2.2 million to the Wilson School's Program on Science and Global Security (S&GS) for the creation of the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM). The grant, approved by the foundation on Sept. 22, will be administered by the Wilson School to fund research and international conferences on reducing and securing fissile materials, the main ingredient in nuclear weapons. The panel — to be formally instituted in January — will be co-chaired by Wilson School professor Frank von Hippel, co-director of S&GS, and José Goldemberg, a professor at the University of São Paolo, Brazil, and will consist of a diverse group of nuclear experts from countries with and without fissile material stockpiles. Fissile materials, which can undergo an explosive fission chain reaction, include highly-enriched uranium and plutonium. "Today, there is enough plutonium and highly-enriched uranium outside of nuclear weapons to make perhaps 50,000 nuclear weapons," von Hippel said in an email, noting that there are already between 20,000 and 30,000 extant nuclear weapons. In response to this situation, the panel's main objective is "to strengthen the analytical basis for policies that reduce global stockpiles of fissile materials and the number of locations where such materials can be found," von Hippel said. Plans for IPFM have been in motion for "about a year," said Wilson School professor Harold Feiveson, co-director of S&GS. "The idea ... was hatched even earlier, but it's been more ... focused for the past year." "[The goal] is certainly to make more vivid to policymakers the issues they should be thinking about in controlling, securing and getting rid of weapons of fissile materials in various countries," Feiveson added. Members of the panel will meet twice a year for five years in different capitals. The panel will conduct analyses to educate policymakers and the public on a range of issues regarding the regulation of fissile materials, including a cutoff of fissile material production for weapons by nuclear-weapon states, and the monitoring of programs to strengthen the security of nuclear facilities. The panel's work will also seek to support the next Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference, which will be held in 2010. NPT was created in 1970 by the United Nations and has 187 signatories, five of which are nuclear-weapons states. The treaty is reviewed every five years. "The [review conference] this year went badly in a lot of ways and if the next one goes badly I think it could really put in jeopardy the Nonproliferation Treaty, which would be a tragedy," Feiveson said. "One thing we want to do [to help support the NPT] is to look at undertakings that would involve commitments and actions by the nuclear-weapon states to reduce their arsenals and their stocks of fissile materials or to not produce any more fissile materials," Feiveson added. Though IPFM has yet to discuss how to reduce tension between states with and without nuclear weapons, Feiveson said one possible approach would be to institute international regulations about fissile material reductions and the construction of nuclear facilities that all nations must obey. A website for IPFM will also provide information about fissile materials to update and educate the public about the panel's efforts, another important aspect of IPFM, Feiveson said. Students at the University may also have the opportunity to participate, with plans underway for an annual Wilson School graduate student policy workshop on a problem of interest to the panel, said von Hippel, who is co-leading a seminar on the spread of national nuclear fuel-cycle facilities this semester. Feiveson also said that there might be related undergraduate policy task forces at the Wilson School, but details have not yet been finalized. -------- pennsylvania Landfill drops plans to take radioactive ash By Sam Kusic TRIBUNE-REVIEW Tuesday, November 15, 2005 http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/s_394599.html An East Huntingdon Township landfill has dropped its plans to bury tons of radioactive ash. The Greenridge Reclamation landfill had won a contract to dispose of the uranium-contaminated ash, but now has rescinded its bid after the public, township supervisors and the Southmoreland School District promised to fight the plan. The Kiski Valley Water Pollution Control Authority is responsible for cleaning up the ash. Authority manager Robert Kossak said the authority was notified of the landfill's decision on Monday. Dave Smith, the landfill's general manager, did not return phone calls seeking comment. The authority is under a state Department of Environmental Protection order to dispose of 12,000 cubic meters of ash, which is sitting in a wastewater treatment lagoon in Allegheny Township. The ash is the leftover of incinerated sewage sludge generated by the former Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corp. and its successor companies, Atlantic-Richfield Co. and Babcock & Wilcox. Three DEP-qualified landfills put in bids to accept the ash. Waste Management Inc. facilities in Penn Township and Monroeville, along with Greenridge, submitted bids. Greenridge won out, but residents and school district officials were troubled that radioactive material would be trucked into the community, especially to a place near three of the district's school buildings. At a meeting last week, the school board asked the landfill to reconsider and said it would join the township to pursue legal action if the bid wasn't withdrawn. "I'm very pleased that they rescinded the bid," said Superintendent John Halfhill. "They used good judgment in not allowing it to come into this landfill." DEP officials have insisted the ash poses no threat to the public. They said the landfills had to show that once the ash was buried, it wouldn't emit more than 1 millirem of radiation per year. A person's average exposure to radiation in the United States is about 360 millirems per year, according to the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Web site. Some, however, are still skeptical not only of the DEP's claims, but of the landfill's decision to withdraw its bid. "I want to see this in ink," said Julie Martinosky, who lives close to the landfill and is a member of a citizens group that has formed because of the issue. "Just because they pulled the bid doesn't mean that it's over," she said, asking what is to prevent the landfill from accepting a similar waste material in the future. And though the ash apparently won't be deposited in the township, no other community should have to live with it, either, she said. It wasn't clear yesterday whether the two remaining bidders are still interested in taking the ash. Managers at those landfills couldn't be reached for comment. Patty Ameno, an environmental activist from Leechburg who has been fighting the authority over the ash, said it doesn't belong in area landfills. Rather, she said the authority should pack the ash in sealed, above-ground storage containers and ship it to a nearby nuclear waste dump in Parks Township, where it would be temporarily stored for later transportation to a nuclear waste repository. "I don't want that damnation shared with any community," she said. The ash issue is to be discussed at a school board meeting and a township supervisors' meeting, both scheduled for Thursday. Sam Kusic can be reached at skusic@tribweb.com or 724.463.8742. -------- south carolina Barnwell County nuclear dump keeps permit (Charleston-AP) November 15, 2005 http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=4119994 A judge says Chem-Nuclear Systems can keep its permit to run a low-level radioactive waste dump in Barnwell County. Administrative Law Judge John D. Geathers says the company must study ways to improve its disposal practices after an environmental group raised serious concerns, but that admonition was not enough for the Sierra Club. The environmental group brought the case and says it plans to appeal Gathers' ruling. Sierra Club attorney Jimmy Chandler says the judge's rule provides no punishment if Chem-Nuclear fails to address environmental concerns. -------- vermont NRC extends time for testimony at hearing By Brattleboro Reformer Staff Tuesday, November 15, 2005 http://www.reformer.com/Stories/0,1413,102~8862~3130560,00.html BRATTLEBORO -- Today and Wednesday, area residents will get some of their final opportunities to speak out before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission decides if Vermont Yankee can complete a proposed power boost. There has been very high demand for opportunities to speak at two public meetings, tonight and Wednesday, so organizers have extended each of them by two hours. The NRC's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards will host meetings at the Quality Inn on Putney Road. There, a panel will hear testimony from Entergy Nuclear, owners of the Vernon plant, and nuclear watchdog groups. In the afternoon, the public will get a chance to voice concerns and get information about the potential uprate. Initially, the meetings were scheduled to go all day until 5:30 p.m., but now they will last until 7:30 p.m. The change was made upon request from U.S. Rep. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt. His aide, Erin Campbell, said Sanders' office heard from constituents that were concerned that they would not be able to make the meeting. In response, Sanders asked the NRC to extend the hours, which they agreed to do. Anyone who'd like to speak at the meeting should contact Ralph Caruso. He can be reached at (301) 415-8065 or by e-mail at rxc@nrc.gov.It's not necessary to sign up in advance, said Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the NRC. Those who would like to speak will also be allowed to register at the meeting. However, the NRC is offering first priority to people who sign up. -------- MILITARY -------- israel / palestine Palestinians Given Control Over Gaza Border w/ Egypt Tuesday, November 15th, 2005 Democracy Now! Headlines http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/15/1632227 U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has announced Israel has agreed to allow Palestinians to reopen the border between the Gaza town of Rafah and Egypt. The Rafah terminal is the only land crossing between Gaza and the rest of the world that bypasses Israel. According to the Israeli newspaper Haqaretz this will mark the first time Palestinians will have control over the border. In return Israel is planning to set up video surveillance to allow it to monitor all movement along the crossing. The agreement came just a day after Middle East envoy James Wolfensohn warned Israel's border policies were turning Gaza into a "giant prison." As part of the agreement Israel will also permit the export of all Palestinian agricultural products from Gaza during the upcoming harvest. This is Condoleeza Rice: -------- prisoners of war Former U.S. Army Interrogator Describes the Harsh Techniques He Used in Iraq, Detainee Abuse by Marines and Navy Seals and Why “Torture is the Worst Possible Thing We Could Do” Tuesday, November 15th, 2005 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/15/1632233 With deep remorse, former U.S. Army interrogator Specialist Tony Lagouranis talks about his own involvement with abusing detainees in Iraq and torture carried out by the Navy Seals. He apologizes to the Iraqi people and urges U.S. soldiers to follow their conscience. Lagouranis returned from Iraq in January and until now had given no live interviews. But Lagouranis says he now feels it his duty to speak out about what he witnessed in Iraq: * His use of harsh interrogation techniques on prisoners in Iraq including dogs, sleep deprivation, prolonged isolation and dietary manipulation. * How Navy SEALS induced hypothermia by using ice water to lower the body temperature of prisoners. * Serving in Fallujah and going through the clothes and pockets of some 500 dead bodies to try and identify them. * The corpses on men, women and children in Fallujah, which had been lying in the streets for days and had been "eaten by dogs and birds and maggots," were then stacked up in a warehouse where U.S. soldiers ate and slept. [includes rush transcript] RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: He joins us from a studio in Chicago. Tony, welcome to Democracy Now!. TONY LAGOURANIS: Good morning, Amy. AMY GOODMAN: It's good to have you with us. Well, why don't you start by telling us how you joined the Army? TONY LAGOURANIS: I had a lot of student loans, so I was looking for a way to pay those off. I also was interested in learning Arabic. I had met a former Army interrogator, who had learned Russian and German in the Army. And it just seemed like an attractive deal to me. AMY GOODMAN: So, where did you first go? Where did you train? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, basic training was at Ft. Benning, Georgia. Then I went to Ft. Huachuca, which is where they do most of the intelligence training. That's where I learned to do interrogations and general human intelligence collecting. After that, I went to Monterey, to DLI, where they teach languages, and I learned Arabic there. AMY GOODMAN: Did you join before or after the September 11 attacks? TONY LAGOURANIS: I joined in May of 2001. AMY GOODMAN: Right before. TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. AMY GOODMAN: Did things change after those attacks, in terms of the climate, when you were training? TONY LAGOURANIS: No. Not really. I mean, certainly, I was in interrogation school at the time of the attacks. So the doctrine stayed the same. They didn't have time to change it. They also didn't know where we'd be fighting. We really didn't have a clear picture of what the enemy would be at that time, so the doctrine just stayed the same. AMY GOODMAN: So talk about going to Iraq, when you went. TONY LAGOURANIS: OK. We flew to Kuwait first and then we convoyed up to Abu Ghraib, which is just outside of Baghdad. We were in humvees with no armor. But it was relatively safe at that time. The insurgency was just beginning. I arrived at Abu Ghraib, and as soon as we arrived there, the events that caused the scandal had already happened, in November of 2003, and I arrived there in January of 2004. So, they told us that bad things had happened, that, MPs had gotten in trouble for detainee abuse and that everything was going to change. But no one was really allowed to talk about it. So, we didn't know what had happened, exactly. AMY GOODMAN: So, you knew as you got there that military police had abused prisoners? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. Yeah, the first briefing we got from the colonel at Abu Ghraib told us this. And, you know, there were interrogators who had been there during the time of the events of the scandal, but they weren't allowed to talk about it, and we really didn't ask them about it. So, we didn't know what was going on. AMY GOODMAN: And the month you arrived at Abu Ghraib? TONY LAGOURANIS: It was January of 2004. AMY GOODMAN: And who were you responsible to? Who was the general in charge as you were military interrogator? TONY LAGOURANIS: Honestly, I don't remember at that time who was in charge. I was only at Abu Ghraib for about a month, month-and-a-half until I got sent off on a mobile team. So, I don't know who it was. AMY GOODMAN: Tell us what happened at Abu Ghraib. TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, you know, things had started to get a lot cleaner there. There was a lot more oversight. That progressed in the month that I was there and also -- all of my friends, my unit was working there the whole time. They saw things progress. So, Abu Ghraib became a pretty sterile interrogation facility by the time we left Iraq. AMY GOODMAN: Did you interrogate prisoners at Abu Ghraib? TONY LAGOURANIS: I did, yes. I was on a team that was -- we were the special projects team at that time we were working on people who were arrested with Saddam Hussein, and arrests that surrounded that case. AMY GOODMAN: And who did you interrogate? Do you remember their names? TONY LAGOURANIS: I can't say that. AMY GOODMAN: And how did you interrogate them? TONY LAGOURANIS: It was totally straightforward at Abu Ghraib. It was just like we were trained in the schoolhouse, right out of the Army field manual. We would just talk to them, ask them questions, maybe, you know, use some psychological approaches but nothing -- nothing too serious. But I knew that some interrogators there were still at that time, in January of 2004, using a little bit harsher techniques. Like, they -- if a prisoner wasn't cooperating, they could adjust his diet. People were in deep, deep isolation for months there, which I believe is illegal, according to Army doctrine. They would also take their clothes and their mattress so they would be cold in their cells if they weren't cooperating. AMY GOODMAN: Naked? TONY LAGOURANIS: I don't know if naked, but they would take blankets and take extra clothes that they would need to stay warm. AMY GOODMAN: Tony, can you talk about the use of dogs? TONY LAGOURANIS: We were using dogs in the Mosul detention facility which was at the Mosul airport. We would put the prisoner in a shipping container. We would keep him up all night with music and strobe lights, stress positions, and then we would bring in dogs. The prisoner was blindfolded, so he didn't really understand what was going on, but we had the dog controlled. He was being held by a military police dog handler on a leash, and the dog was muzzled, so he couldn't hurt the prisoner. That was the only time I ever saw dogs used in Iraq. AMY GOODMAN: Did the prisoner know that there was a muzzle on the dog? TONY LAGOURANIS: No, because he was blindfolded. So, the dog would be barking and jumping on the prisoner, and the prisoner wouldn't really understand what was going on. AMY GOODMAN: What did you think of this practice that you were engaging in? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I knew that we were really walking the line, and I was going through the interrogation rules of engagement that was given to me by the unit that we were working with up there, trying to figure out what was legal and what wasn't legal. According to this interrogation rules of engagement, that was legal. So, when they ordered me to do it, I had to do it. You know, as far as whether, you know, I thought it was a good interrogation practice, I didn't think so at all, actually. We never produced any intelligence. AMY GOODMAN: At this point when you got there, the photos were out. If not out to the public, they came out in April of 2004, certainly being circulated among soldiers. Had you seen pictures? TONY LAGOURANIS: I only saw the pictures when they came out on the news. In fact, I was up there using the dogs like at the very time that the scandal broke. But I don't think those pictures were being circulated among soldiers. I mean, I certainly never saw them before they came out on 60 minutes. AMY GOODMAN: So, when you saw them, and you yourself were engaging in this practice, what were your thoughts? TONY LAGOURANIS: I think my initial reaction was that these were bad apples, like the White House line, but you know, it's funny, like I didn't really tie it to what we were doing up there. We were using some pretty harsh methods on the prisoners. I had seen other units that were using -- like, really severe methods, but I didn't tie it to the scandal. It just seemed like -- I don't know why. I don't know. AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean by really harsh methods? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, we were an army detention facility, and we would get prisoners from other units that were arresting people up there. For instance, the Navy SEALS. TONY LAGOURANIS: When the Navy SEALS. Would interrogate people, they were using ice water to lower the body temperature of the prisoner and they would take his rectal temperature in order to make sure that he didn't die. I didn't see this, but that's what many, many prisoners told me who came out of the SEAL Compound, and I also heard that from a guard who was working in our detention facility, who was present during an interrogation that the SEAL had done. AMY GOODMAN: Where is the SEAL Compound. TONY LAGOURANIS: It was in the same place. It was at the Mosul airport, but I never actually went inside the compound myself. AMY GOODMAN: Did you use hypothermia as a means of interrogating? TONY LAGOURANIS: We did. Yeah, we used hypothermia a lot. It was very cold up in Mosul at that time, so we -- it was also raining a lot, so we would keep the prisoner outside, and they would have a polyester jumpsuit on and they would be wet and cold, and freezing. But we weren't inducing hypothermia with ice water like the SEALS were. But, you know, maybe the SEALS were doing it better than we were, because they were actually even controlling it with the thermometer, but we weren't doing that. AMY GOODMAN: At what point did you start to ask questions? When you say about the pictures that you didn't associate what you did with the scandal of the photographs that had come out, but when did you start to say -- is this right? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I always was, and it's funny, Amy, because I was sort of pushing to back away from the harsh tactics, but at the same time I was-- in a way, I sort of wanted to push, because we were frustrated by, you know, not getting intel. I don't know why. So, I was on both sides of the fence. I don't know. AMY GOODMAN: Were you having discussions with other interrogators? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sure. We all talked about it. I discussed this with my team leader all the time. The people I was working with all the time. You know part of the problem back then too, is that I was still under the impression that we were getting prisoners who had intel -- who had intel to give us, and you know, I still thought that these were bad guys. I was believing the intelligence reports that came in with the prisoner. I believed the detainee units, but later it became clear to me that they weren't -- they were picking up just farmers, you know, like these guys were totally innocent and that's why we weren't getting intel. And it just made what we were doing, like, seem even more cruel. AMY GOODMAN: You said that you engaged in abuse, specifically what did you feel was your most egregious abuses that you engaged in? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, as I said, in Mosul, I was using dogs and hypothermia, I was using sleep deprivation, isolation, dietary manipulation, you know, that's all abuse, according to the army field manual, the army doctrine and certainly according to the Geneva Conventions. AMY GOODMAN: Did you understand the Geneva Conventions? TONY LAGOURANIS: No. Particularly because I didn't understand what classification the prisoners that we had were, because, you know, you can get an E.P.W., an Enemy Prisoner of War, you can get a-- I don't know, a Security Internee, you can get Protected Persons. They have different classifications in the Geneva Conventions and they get different treatment by interrogators. I didn't know what their classification was in Iraq. I was being told by my leaders that these people were not enemy prisoners of war, and therefore, we could really sort of do whatever we wanted, but I don't know if that's even true. I don't know. AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Tony Lagouranis, a former U.S. Army interrogator in Iraq, at Mosul, and Abu Ghraib. Where else? TONY LAGOURANIS: I was in north Babel at FOB Calsu, I was also at Al Asad Airforce base which is in the western desert in the north. I was also in Fallujah during the last offensive. AMY GOODMAN: You were in Fallujah? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. AMY GOODMAN: What were you doing there? TONY LAGOURANIS: My job in Fallujah was to go through the clothes and pockets of the dead bodies that we were picking up on the streets, and we would bring them back to a warehouse, and I would go through their pockets and try to identify them, and read whatever intel or anything that they had on them. AMY GOODMAN: Because you spoke Arabic? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. Right. That's why I was sent there. AMY GOODMAN: How many dead bodies, corpses did you go through? TONY LAGOURANIS: 500. AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about that experience? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sure. I mean, you know, obviously it was terrible, you know, like these bodies had been laying out in the street in the sun for days, for sometimes ten days before we picked them up. They had been eaten by dogs and birds and maggots, and the Army thought -- actually, it wasn't the Army, it was the Department of Defense had sent this electronic equipment for us to use to like take the retinal scans and take their fingerprints, but it was just impossible because these guys -- they didn't have eyes anymore. They didn't have fingerprints anymore. Then we couldn't bury the prisoners, either. Because they hadn't really figured out how they were going to do that, so they were just stacking up in the warehouse in Fallujah, and that's where we were living and sleeping and eating. With all of those dead bodies. AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean they didn't have eyes, they didn't have fingerprints, they were burned? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, certainly, some of them were burned. I mean, some of them didn't have arms anymore or whatever, but I mean, they were just so rotten that their eyes were gone. They were just sockets with maggots. AMY GOODMAN: Tony, can you talk about the use of dogs? TONY LAGOURANIS: We were using dogs in the Mosul detention facility which was at the Mosul airport. We would put the prisoner in a shipping container. We would keep him up all night with music and strobe lights, stress positions, and then we would bring in dogs. The prisoner was blindfolded, so he didn't really understand what was going on, but we had the dog controlled. He was being held by a military police dog handler on a leash, and the dog was muzzled, so he couldn't hurt the prisoner. That was the only time I ever saw dogs used in Iraq. AMY GOODMAN: Did the prisoner know that there was a muzzle on the dog? TONY LAGOURANIS: No, because he was blindfolded. So, the dog would be barking and jumping on the prisoner, and the prisoner wouldn't really understand what was going on. AMY GOODMAN: What did you think of this practice that you were engaging in? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I knew that we were really walking the line, and I was going through the interrogation rules of engagement that was given to me by the unit that we were working with up there, trying to figure out what was legal and what wasn't legal. According to this interrogation rules of engagement, that was legal. So, when they ordered me to do it, I had to do it. You know, as far as whether, you know, I thought it was a good interrogation practice, I didn't think so at all, actually. We never produced any intelligence. AMY GOODMAN: At this point when you got there, the photos were out. If not out to the public, they came out in April of 2004, certainly being circulated among soldiers. Had you seen pictures? TONY LAGOURANIS: I only saw the pictures when they came out on the news. In fact, I was up there using the dogs like at the very time that the scandal broke. But I don't think those pictures were being circulated among soldiers. I mean, I certainly never saw them before they came out on 60 minutes. AMY GOODMAN: So, when you saw them, and you yourself were engaging in this practice, what were your thoughts? TONY LAGOURANIS: I think my initial reaction was that these were bad apples, like the White House line, but you know, it's funny, like I didn't really tie it to what we were doing up there. We were using some pretty harsh methods on the prisoners. I had seen other units that were using -- like, really severe methods, but I didn't tie it to the scandal. It just seemed like -- I don't know why. I don't know. AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean by really harsh methods? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, we were an army detention facility, and we would get prisoners from other units that were arresting people up there. For instance, the Navy SEALS. TONY LAGOURANIS: When the Navy SEALS. Would interrogate people, they were using ice water to lower the body temperature of the prisoner and they would take his rectal temperature in order to make sure that he didn't die. I didn't see this, but that's what many, many prisoners told me who came out of the SEAL Compound, and I also heard that from a guard who was working in our detention facility, who was present during an interrogation that the SEAL had done. AMY GOODMAN: Where is the SEAL Compound. TONY LAGOURANIS: It was in the same place. It was at the Mosul airport, but I never actually went inside the compound myself. AMY GOODMAN: Did you use hypothermia as a means of interrogating? TONY LAGOURANIS: We did. Yeah, we used hypothermia a lot. It was very cold up in Mosul at that time, so we -- it was also raining a lot, so we would keep the prisoner outside, and they would have a polyester jumpsuit on and they would be wet and cold, and freezing. But we weren't inducing hypothermia with ice water like the SEALS were. But, you know, maybe the SEALS were doing it better than we were, because they were actually even controlling it with the thermometer, but we weren't doing that. AMY GOODMAN: At what point did you start to ask questions? When you say about the pictures that you didn't associate what you did with the scandal of the photographs that had come out, but when did you start to say -- is this right? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I always was, and it's funny, Amy, because I was sort of pushing to back away from the harsh tactics, but at the same time I was-- in a way, I sort of wanted to push, because we were frustrated by, you know, not getting intel. I don't know why. So, I was on both sides of the fence. I don't know. AMY GOODMAN: Were you having discussions with other interrogators? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sure. We all talked about it. I discussed this with my team leader all the time. The people I was working with all the time. You know part of the problem back then too, is that I was still under the impression that we were getting prisoners who had intel -- who had intel to give us, and you know, I still thought that these were bad guys. I was believing the intelligence reports that came in with the prisoner. I believed the detainee units, but later it became clear to me that they weren't -- they were picking up just farmers, you know, like these guys were totally innocent and that's why we weren't getting intel. And it just made what we were doing, like, seem even more cruel. AMY GOODMAN: You said that you engaged in abuse, specifically what did you feel was your most egregious abuses that you engaged in? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, as I said, in Mosul, I was using dogs and hypothermia, I was using sleep deprivation, isolation, dietary manipulation, you know, that's all abuse, according to the army field manual, the army doctrine and certainly according to the Geneva Conventions. AMY GOODMAN: Did you understand the Geneva Conventions? TONY LAGOURANIS: No. Particularly because I didn't understand what classification the prisoners that we had were, because, you know, you can get an E.P.W., an Enemy Prisoner of War, you can get a-- I don't know, a Security Internee, you can get Protected Persons. They have different classifications in the Geneva Conventions and they get different treatment by interrogators. I didn't know what their classification was in Iraq. I was being told by my leaders that these people were not enemy prisoners of war, and therefore, we could really sort of do whatever we wanted, but I don't know if that's even true. I don't know. AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Tony Lagouranis, a former U.S. Army interrogator in Iraq, at Mosul, and Abu Ghraib. Where else? TONY LAGOURANIS: I was in north Babel at FOB CALSU, I was also at Al Asad Airforce base which is in the western desert in the north. I was also in Fallujah during the last offensive. AMY GOODMAN: You were in Fallujah? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. AMY GOODMAN: What were you doing there? TONY LAGOURANIS: My job in Fallujah was to go through the clothes and pockets of the dead bodies that we were picking up on the streets, and we would bring them back to a warehouse, and I would go through their pockets and try to identify them, and read whatever intel or anything that they had on them. AMY GOODMAN: Because you spoke Arabic? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. Right. That's why I was sent there. AMY GOODMAN: How many dead bodies, corpses did you go through? TONY LAGOURANIS: 500. AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about that experience? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sure. I mean, you know, obviously it was terrible, you know, like these bodies had been laying out in the street in the sun for days, for sometimes ten days before we picked them up. They had been eaten by dogs and birds and maggots, and the Army thought -- actually, it wasn't the Army, it was the Department of Defense had sent this electronic equipment for us to use to like take the retinal scans and take their fingerprints, but it was just impossible because these guys -- they didn't have eyes anymore. They didn't have fingerprints anymore. Then we couldn't bury the prisoners, either. Because they hadn't really figured out how they were going to do that, so they were just stacking up in the warehouse in Fallujah, and that's where we were living and sleeping and eating. With all of those dead bodies. AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean they didn't have eyes, they didn't have fingerprints, they were burned? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, certainly, some of them were burned. I mean, some of them didn't have arms anymore or whatever, but I mean, they were just so rotten that their eyes were gone. They were just sockets with maggots. AMY GOODMAN: We did a piece recently on the use of white phosphorus, “Whiskey Pete,” I think it's referred to in the military. There was an Italian documentary that just came out talking about the use of this, not to light up the sky, but to burn, to incinerate the victims in Fallujah at the time that you were there. Did you see use of this? TONY LAGOURANIS: No, well, not that I know of. I don't know. I mean, I only heard about that recently, probably from your report, but no, I don't know anything about that. AMY GOODMAN: Hmm. You slept with the bodies, meaning that they were at the -- you had to sleep in this warehouse? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about that? And who you understood the people who were dead to be? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, a lot of them were certainly insurgents. You know, a lot of them had weapons. They had hand grenades, they had ammo vests, but a lot of them weren't, either. We had women and children, old men, young boys. So, you know, it's hard to say. I think initially, the reason that we were doing this was they were trying to find foreign fighters. They were trying to prove that there were a lot of foreign fighters in Fallujah. So, mainly, that's what we were going for, but most of them really didn't have I.D.'s but maybe half of them had I.D.'s. Very few of them had foreign I.D.'s. There were people working with me who would -- in an effort to sort of cook the books, you know they would find a Koran on the guy and the Koran was printed in Algeria, and they would mark him down as an Algerian, or you know guys would come in with a black shirt and khaki pants and they would say, well, this is the Hezbollah uniform and they would mark him down as a Lebanese, which was ridiculous, but -- you know. AMY GOODMAN: So, what did you say? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I was only a specialist, so actually, you know, I did say something to the staff sergeant, who was really in charge, and you know, I just got yelled down you know, shot down. AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean shot down? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, he just told me, just put me in my place. He said, this is not for you to decide. I'm saying he's Lebanese, he's Lebanese. That's it. AMY GOODMAN: What about the women and kids? TONY LAGOURANIS: I don't know. I mean, I don't know, I would get a kid burnt to a crisp. I don't know. I don't know what to say. We had women and children. AMY GOODMAN: Did you have discussions about that? TONY LAGOURANIS: Not really. No. I mean, we just sort of like noted it. Too bad, a kid died. Too bad, we had a woman. We didn't really talk about that. AMY GOODMAN: How many people would you estimate died in Fallujah. TONY LAGOURANIS: I have no idea. I don't know. I remember hearing the -- a number of 10,000 out there from the marines, but I don't know if that's accurate. AMY GOODMAN: And could you estimate how many of them were what the U.S. Military calls “insurgents”? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I think we probably got-- we got a small number, we got 500 bodies. And from that sample, I would say about 20% of them actually had weapons on them. But -- so, who knows. I don't know. I imagine, I think most people left Fallujah who weren't going to stay there and fight. But I really don't know. I cannot really say. AMY GOODMAN: Did you ever deal with ghost detainees? This whole issue of people who were brought in, who were not on the books, so that the red cross wouldn't know about them to ask about them? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sure. Yeah. That happened pretty often. In a way, that was a good thing because sometimes they wanted to just, bring somebody in and just get a little bit of information out of them, and then release him, which would have been difficult if they had actually registered him in the prison. Because then he would be caught up in the bureaucracy, and he might be there for weeks. In a way, the ghosting was a good thing. But sometimes it wasn't, like, you know, the SEALS. Or the FBI would put somebody in the prison, and there were no records of what physical damage had been done to him, just nothing. There were no records of it, so it probably made abuse -- you know, a lot more easy to do. AMY GOODMAN: Were you able to get intelligence out of your sessions with these men? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sometimes. Pretty rarely, honestly. I did more than 300 interrogations in Iraq, and I'm guessing like 20 people, I got any like real intel out of. And when I did it was when I would sort of form a rapport with the person and get them to trust me. Nothing ever came out of the harsh interrogation sessions. AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Tony Lagouranis, former U.S. Army interrogator. Time Magazine this week is reporting that CIA Interrogators apparently tried to cover up the death of an Iraqi ghost detainee who died while being interrogated at Abu Ghraib. Autopsy reports showed that the detainee, his name is Manadel al-Jamadi died of blunt force injuries and asphyxiation, believed to have suffocated after an empty sandbag was placed over his head while his arms were secured up and behind his back in a crucifixion-like pose. To cover up the killing, blood was mopped up with chlorine before the scene could be investigated. A blood stained hood that covered his head disappeared. The CIA ruled the killing a homicide, the CIA Interrogator involved in his death remains free and continues to work at the agency. Jamadi was being held in a secret part of the Abu Ghraib prison that's off-limits to international observer, including the Red Cross. Concern has been growing, as you know, about the whole issue of secret CIA prisons and even places within known prisons that are sort of off the books. Do you know about this man, Jamadi? TONY LAGOURANIS: No. I never heard about that case at all. AMY GOODMAN: Does this story sound familiar in other cases that you know, or were involved with? TONY LAGOURANIS: Yeah. North Babel was probably the place where I saw the worst evidence of abuse. This was from August to October of 2004, so, it was well after the Abu Ghraib scandal. And we were no longer using any harsh tactics within the prison, but I was working with a marine unit, and they would go out and do a raid and stay in the detainee's homes, and torture them there. They were far worse than anything that I ever saw in a prison. They were breaking bones. They were smashing people's feet with the back of an axe head. They burned people. Yeah, they were doing some pretty harsh stuff. AMY GOODMAN: Who is they? TONY LAGOURANIS: This particularly was Force Recon. I don't know if they were subordinate to the 24th MEW. 24th MEW was running the detention facility there and running the FOB CALSU and Force Recon was stationed there. I don't know who they were subordinate to. These are marines. AMY GOODMAN: Can you, for people who are not familiar with the military, what these words are short for? What's Force Recon? TONY LAGOURANIS: Oh, FOB? Force Recon is-- they're reconnaissance, so their job is to go out and spy on people, basically. But it's not -- they're not really intel. They're much more like special forces unit. AMY GOODMAN: And FOB? TONY LAGOURANIS: FOB is Forward Operating Base. So, it's Forward Operating Base CALSU that I was at. AMY GOODMAN: That's where, exactly. TONY LAGOURANIS: It’s in north Babel, south of Baghdad. AMY GOODMAN: We're going to go to break and then come back to you. We're talking about Tony Lagouranis US Army interrogator from 2001 to 2005 in Iraq. For a year, at Abu Ghraib, at al Asad, at Mosul and at North Babel. We'll talk more in just a minute. [break] AMY GOODMAN: If it you could once again repeat what it is you saw there in Babel. Who were the forces involved, and what they were doing? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I was interrogating at the detention facility at Forward Operating Base, CALSU. I was getting prisoners that were arrested by Force Recon marines, and they -- every time Force Recon went on a raid, they would bring back prisoners who were bruised with broken bones, sometimes with burns. They were pretty brutal to these guys, and I would ask the prisoners what happened, you know, how they received these wounds, and they would tell me that it was after their capture, while they were subdued, while they were handcuffed and they were being questioned by the force recon marines. AMY GOODMAN: And what did they say happened to them? TONY LAGOURANIS: They were being punched, kicked, you know, hit with -- as I said the back of an axe head. One guy was forced to sit on an exhaust pipe of a humvee. I would check out that story with other people that they had been arrested with, and they were consistent. So, I tended to believe what they were telling me. AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean one was forced to sit on the exhaust pipe on the back of a humvee. So, what would happen to him? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, he had a giant blister, third degree burn on the back of his leg. AMY GOODMAN: Because it was so hot? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. AMY GOODMAN: And then at this point, you're supposed to question them? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. So I was supposed to interrogate these guys. Yeah. AMY GOODMAN: And how do you go about doing that, as they're in front of you with broken bones, beaten, smashed, punched, burned? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, as you know, as I said, this was really late in the year, and I had really sort of given up using any harsh tactics, so, I was trying to get these guys to trust me, telling them I'm going to help them out, which I really couldn't help anybody out at that place, because everyone they arrested, innocent or guilty, no matter what I said, they would just send them to Abu Ghraib anyway. But -- AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, you know, the interrogators-- I’m the only person who is going to talk to this guy. There's no officer that's going to talk to him. The person who decides whether to let them go or keep them is not going to interrogate them. So, my recommendation should count for something, you know, but it didn't at FOB CALSU with the 24th MEW Marines. Basically everybody who came to the prison, they determined, they were a terrorist, they were guilty and they would send them to Abu Ghraib. AMY GOODMAN: What did you determine? TONY LAGOURANIS: That like 98% of these guys had not done anything. I mean, they were picking up people for the stupidest things like -- there's one guy they picked up, they stopped him at a checkpoint, just a routine stop, and he had a shovel in his trunk, and he had a cell phone in his pocket. They said, well, you can use the shovel to bury an IED, you can use the cell phone to detonate it. He didn't have any explosives in his car, he had no weapons, nothing. They had no reason to believe that he was setting IED’s other than the shovel and cell phone. That was the kind of prisoner they were bringing us. AMY GOODMAN: Did you ever call for a stop to this, or ask to speak to a higher up? Tony Lagouranis. TONY LAGOURANIS: I did all the time. You know, at that point, I was like so pissed at the military for what they were doing, you know. And you know, I was yelling at the chief warrant officer marine who was in charge of the defense facility. I was making an issue about it to the major of the Marines, and the lieutenant colonel who was the JAG guy who was in charge of release, who organize keeping the prisoners. I mean, but they just wouldn't listen. You know? They wanted numbers. They wanted numbers of terrorists, apprehended at FOB CALSU, so they could brief that to the general? AMY GOODMAN: Who was the general? TONY LAGOURANIS: I don't know. Who knows. But you know, they were trying to impress somebody, so they wanted to say that we arrested this many terrorists. When I would say they were innocent in my interrogation reports, they would send the prisoner up to Abu Ghraib without my interrogation report. They would just send him up with no paperwork. AMY GOODMAN: Who was in charge there, who was your immediate superior? TONY LAGOURANIS: My immediate superior was an army -- my team leader, an army sergeant, the guy in charge of the detention facility or rather the intelligence operations was Chief Warrant Officer Kern. He was a marine. AMY GOODMAN: And he was holding back your interrogation reports? TONY LAGOURANIS: Whether it was him or somebody higher up, I don't know. But I know that he was the guy we were submitting the interrogation reports to. I was also submitting abuse reports at FOB CALSU. I really suspected that those didn't really get investigated. AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean by abuse reports? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, any time I see abuse or prisoner tells me about abuse, I'm supposed to write a report about it. So that it can be investigated, and you know, see who abused them or whatever. I would send that up through the chain of command, but I don't think they were doing anything with these abuse reports. In the army, when you send this up, it should go to C.I.D., which is Criminal Investigations Division, I don't know what the 'D' stands for, division or department. I talked to those departments, those guys, five times in Iraq. I talked to them after I came back to Fort Gordon, Georgia. After I did an interview with Frontline, and told Frontline the same things that I told you, the C.I.D. Called me up and said we ran your name through the system, and we don't have any reports from you. Why didn't you report this stuff? So, like, I don't know what's happening to these abuse reports but I don't think they have been investigated. AMY GOODMAN: Who called you? TONY LAGOURANIS: His name was special agent Kerr from C.I.D. AMY GOODMAN: From here in the United States? TONY LAGOURANIS: Right. But he was in Iraq while I was there. Actually, I had filed one abuse report about the Navy SEALs that I told you about in Mosul with this guy's roommate in Iraq while that guy was there, and he still had no idea, you know, that I had ever filed a report. AMY GOODMAN: So, what did you tell him? TONY LAGOURANIS: I told him everything that I had reported on before, which is ridiculous, because I filed -- you know, I filed multiple reports about these things before. AMY GOODMAN: About how many, roughly. TONY LAGOURANIS: I don't know how many I filed at CALSU, I think it was three, but I know for sure, two. AMY GOODMAN: And at Abu Ghraib? TONY LAGOURANIS: In Abu Ghraib, I filed two reports, and -- AMY GOODMAN: Mosul? TONY LAGOURANIS: In Mosul, I don't remember. I actually don't think I ever actually filed a report in Mosul. I filed it when I came back to Abu Ghraib, so that was sort of included in one of the reports that I filed in Abu Ghraib. AMY GOODMAN: So, now that they tell you that they don't have any of your reports, on abuse, have you re-filed? TONY LAGOURANIS: Yes. Yeah. When special agent Kerr called me up after the Frontline interview, he came out to Chicago, and we had like a six-hour interview, in my house, and I re-filed all of these sworn statements. AMY GOODMAN: Are they being investigated now? TONY LAGOURANIS: I don't know. They wouldn't really tell me about that. I don't know. My guess is no, since they didn't do it before. AMY GOODMAN: There's a term in the military, but also in civilian society, Tony, called 'moral courage.' Can you talk about what that means to you? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I don't know if I'm really the right person to talk about that, Amy. I don't know. AMY GOODMAN: Well -- TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I sort of feel like, you know, I didn't really have enough of it over there. You know? Don't know. AMY GOODMAN: What when you look back now, do you wish you had done? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, you know, we were trained to do interrogations according to the Geneva Conventions with enemy prisoners of war. And we trained using role players using a conventional army prisoner, and also a terrorist organization, and we treated both of them as though they were enemy prisoners of war. We weren't allowed to cross any lines. So, I don't know why I allowed the army to order me to go against my training, and against my better judgment and against my own moral judgment. But I did. I should have just said no. AMY GOODMAN: Do you feel like there's something that you can do now? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I guess talking about it on television is one thing. I don't know. AMY GOODMAN: Would you say when you see the court-martial of a few low-level soldiers, would you say that will start to stop the abuse, or how high up do you feel it goes? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, it obviously goes right up to the Pentagon, because they were issuing the interrogation rules of engagement, and the interrogation rules of engagement are not in accordance with the army field manual and not in accordance with the Geneva conventions. So, it's all the way up. You know, obviously, Lindsey England and Grainer, these guys -- you know, they needed to be punished, but it's not just them. It's -- it should have gone all the way up the chain. AMY GOODMAN: Did you see Donald Rumsfeld in Iraq? He went to al Assad. He went to Abu Ghraib, and in fact when we had former general Karpinski in our studio, now demoted, who was in charge of the military police at Abu Ghraib, she said she took him on a tour, and he went to the Saddam Hussein torture cells and she was taking him beyond, but he didn't want to go beyond. He just left after that photo op. Did you see him? TONY LAGOURANIS: I didn't. Actually, I was convoying back from Mosul when he was flying in. I would have gone to see him, but I didn't get a chance. AMY GOODMAN: Vice president Dick Cheney is trying to get an exemption for CIA officers to be allowed to torture. What do you have to say to ice president Cheney? TONY LAGOURANIS: I think that using torture is the worst possible thing we could do. You cannot win a war against terrorism with bombs and force. It doesn't work. You have to win hearts and minds and we're really failing. You know, using torture is absolutely the wrong way to go. And we're not getting any intel out of it, either. Like how many people did we get intel out of in Guantanamo? You know, a small handful, and in Abu Ghraib also. I didn't work there for that long, but many of my friends did they worked there all of 2004, and they told me, they got nothing. They got no intel out of that place. AMY GOODMAN: Sexual abuse? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I can't even understand like how anybody thinks that that's a good interrogation procedure, like what -- who is going to talk to you if you are going to like sexually abuse somebody? That's not -- that doesn't make any sense. AMY GOODMAN: What about giving false so-called intelligence just to stop the abuse? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sure. Yeah. I'm sure that happens, too. AMY GOODMAN: Did you witness sexual abuse? TONY LAGOURANIS: No. No. We never participated in anything like that. AMY GOODMAN: Are you concerned about being retaliated against for speaking out? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sure. Yeah. I think, you know, that when C.I.D. called me, when special agent Kerr called me after the Frontline interview is that the army was going to try to prosecute me. I'm a little bit more worried about some, just, like a navy SEAL. Or some marine is going to decide he hates me because I'm talking about this stuff, and come in to my house. I have been getting hate emails. My mom has received hate phone calls. AMY GOODMAN: Yet you're speaking out? TONY LAGOURANIS: Sure. Yeah. AMY GOODMAN: Because -- TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I feel like that's what my duty is right now, and I sort of want to correct some wrongs that I might have done. AMY GOODMAN: And to someone who is in Iraq right now, what would you say to them, and what would you say to Iraqis? TONY LAGOURANIS: Well, I'd like to apologize to Iraq honestly, because I think we have done so many things wrong over there. I think the military guys wanted to go over there and really liberate Iraq, and we have just really screwed it up. So, that's terrible, but to the military guys in Iraq, I would say, follow your conscience, and don't do what everybody else is doing just because it seems like that's the right thing to do. It's not. AMY GOODMAN: Tony Lagouranis, I want to thank you very much for being with us, former US Army interrogator in Iraq for a year. Thanks for speaking out. TONY LAGOURANIS: Thank you, Amy. -------- us Pentagon confirms using white phosphorous in Iraq Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:05 PM ET (AFP) http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051115/pl_afp/usiraqbritainitaly_051115220512 LONDON - A US military official confirmed white phosphorous bombs were deployed against insurgents in Iraq last year but denied media reports they used against civilians. "White phosphorus is a conventional munition. It is not a chemical weapon. They are not outlawed or illegal," Lieutenant-Colonel Barry Venable, a Pentagon spokesman, told the BBC in an interview. "We use them primarily as obscurants, for smokescreens or target marking in some cases. However, it is an incendiary weapon and may be used against enemy combatants." Italy's state television RAI claimed last week the highly flammable munitions were used against insurgents and civilians in the Iraqi town of Fallujah in November last year. Radical left-wing Italian politicians joined a protest at the US embassy on Monday, including communist deputy Piero Folena, who called for a United Nations inquiry into the alleged use of such weapons in Fallujah. The RAI documentary, "Fallujah -- The Hidden Massacre", said the US military used a kind of napalm and white phosphorus in the battle, a claim denied by the US State Department. Robert Tuttle, US ambassador to Britain, wrote in a letter published by The Independent newspaper on Tuesday that "US forces do not use napalm or white phosphorus as weapons". But Venable said white phosphorous was useful to shift insurgents from positions that could not be targeted by normal artillery. "It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants," he told the BBC. "When you have enemy forces that are in covered positions that your high explosive artillery rounds are not having an impact on... one technique is to fire a white phosphorus round into the position," he said. "The combined effects of the fire and smoke -- and in some case the terror brought about by the explosion on the ground -- will drive them out of the holes so that you can kill them with high explosives." -------- OTHER -------- health Lab Tests Find 60 Toxic Chemicals in Canadians' Blood November 15, 2005 OTTAWA, Ontario, Canada, (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/nov2005/2005-11-15-05.asp Only 11 Canadians had their blood tested for toxic chemicals in a new study by an environmental nonprofit organization, but they came from across the country and every person's blood tested positive for a wide range of chemicals. Stain repellants, flame retardants, mercury and lead, DDT, and PCBs are among the 60 contaminants detected by blood tests. The report, released Thursday by Environmental Defence, is the first in Canada to test for a broad range of chemicals in average Canadians from across the country. The testing demonstrates that toxic chemicals contaminate Canadians no matter where they live in the country, how old they are or what they do for a living, concludes the report, "Toxic Nation: A Report on Pollution in Canadians." “If you can walk, talk and breathe, you’re contaminated,” said Dr. Rick Smith, executive director of Environmental Defence. “Canadians are exposed everyday and in incredibly insidious ways to harmful toxic chemicals. We are guinea pigs in a massive, uncontrolled, chemical experiment, the disastrous outcome of which is measured in disease and death.” Many of the chemicals discovered in the bodies of Canadians are associated with cancer, hormone disruption, reproductive disorders, respiratory illnesses and harming the development of children, Smith said. Two volunteers were tested in British Columbia, one in Alberta, one in Manitoba, three in Ontario, three in Quebec and one in Newfoundland and Labrador. Most eat organic foods, and some are vegetarian. Only two smoke tobacco. On average, 44 chemicals were found in each volunteer. “I think of myself as a healthy person, so of course I found my test results to be unsettling," said Nycole Turmel, national president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, based in Ottawa. The tests found 51 chemicals in Turmel's blood. "No one wants to learn that they have heavy metals, PCBs or other toxic chemicals in their blood,” said Turmel. “But more importantly, my tests results have underlined for me the importance of strengthening CEPA." The Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) is Canada’s national pollution law. Qualified laboratories in Quebec and Texas tested the volunteers for 88 different chemicals and found a total of 60 of the 88 chemicals tested (68 percent). Of the chemicals detected, 53 can cause reproductive disorders and harm the development of children, 41 are suspected cancer-causing chemicals, 27 are chemicals that can disrupt the hormone system, and 21 are chemicals associated with respiratory illnesses. “I am very alarmed by the results of my blood tests for pollutants,” said David Masty, Chief of the Whapmagoostui First Nation in northern Quebec. Chief Masty had the highest levels of mercury and persistent organic pollutants such as PCBs and organochlorine pesticides. These findings are further evidence for the fact that many chemicals tend to accumulate in the North, despite its distance from most stationary sources of industrial pollution. “The movement of pollutants through the atmosphere is a reality we are concerned about in the North as it harms our lands, waters and air, and affects the wildlife resources we depend on for our way of life," said Chief Masty. "If other countries have taken action to reduce or eliminate some pollutants, Canada should follow suit." One of the British Columbia volunteers is the renowned artist and naturalist Robert Bateman, who makes his home on Salt Spring Island. “Participating in this testing program was very important to me,” Bateman said. “Not only am I curious about my own chemical contamination, but it is even more vital that the public as a whole pays attention.” The Toxic Nation study found 48 chemicals in Bateman's blood. The Canadian Environmental Protection Act was passed in 1999, and includes a mandated five-year review of the progress Environment Canada and Health Canada have made in assessing and categorizing 23,000 substances during the past five years. Before changes to the law, if any, are finalized, Environmental Defence is using the Toxic Nation report to call on the federal government to virtually eliminate the use of toxic chemicals, starting with some of the most harmful. The organization cites the dangers of brominated flame retardants (PBDEs). Preliminary evidence suggests that high concentrations of PBDEs may cause neurobehavioral alterations and affect the immune system in animals. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has classified one PBDE, decabromodiphenyl ether, as a possible human carcinogen. The report mentions the hazards of phthalates, which are chemicals that make plastics soft. When soft plastic toys are sucked or chewed, the phthalates can leach into the saliva. One phthalate, DEHP, is considered by the U.S. EPA to be a probably human carcinogen, based on the liver cancers developed by rats and mice that were exposed to the substance. Environmental Defence is calling on the government of Canada to make industry accountable for its chemicals and to regulate chemicals in consumer products through the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. The government should create a special section in CEPA to focus on pollution reduction in the Great Lakes basin, the nonprofit group recommends, and most of all the law must be effective. "We need a pollution law with teeth - one that is comprehensive and enforceable. We need a law that will hold polluters accountable and help create a cleaner environment," Turmel said. “Our report demonstrates clearly the urgent need for the federal government to act now to break the cycle of human contamination,” said Smith. “The federal Minister of the Environment has a new deadline: when can we expect, as a society, to be able to produce toxin-free babies?” "Toxic Nation: A Report on Pollution in Canadians," including test results of the individual volunteers, is online at: www.toxicnation.ca. Individual Canadians can act to reduce their exposure to toxic chemicals by taking the Chemical Reduction Pledge on the Toxic Nation site. By filling out the pledge, people can choose five ways to reduce their exposure to chemicals through simple changes in their daily lives. -------- ACTIVISTS German Police To Use 10,000 Officers To Ensure Passage of Nuclear Waste to Storage Site November 15, 2005 — By Associated Press http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=9252 BERLIN — German police announced plans Monday to use 10,000 local and federal officers to ensure the free passage of a train that is to deliver nuclear waste to a disputed northern storage site early next week. Police said they are bracing for about 5,000 protesters, in line with last year's turnout, but representatives from a local protest group said they anticipate closer to 3,000 demonstrators this year. In recent weeks, an arson attempt and two rail-line attacks have occurred in advance of the delivery, police official Friedrich Niehoerster said. The train is scheduled to leave a reprocessing plant in La Hague in northwestern France on Saturday evening and arrive in the northern German town of Gorleben on Monday night. Protesters have staged a total of 28 anti-atomic energy demonstrations and camps along the 1,600-kilometer (nearly 1,000-mile) route, Niehoerster said. At last year's demonstration, a 21-year-old French protester died from injuries he received when he was run over by the train in eastern France.