23 January 2011

Wireless technologies- appeal to Obama

Posted by inthesenewtimes on January 23, 2011

The Prove-it Initiative

We the people of the United States of America respectfully ask the President to immediately issue an executive order staying the deployments of all new public wireless technologies, including:
  • Wireless smart meters and smart grid technologies.
  • Super WiFi, SuperGig and all new public broadband deployments of digital, modulated, or pulsed microwave signals, especially in the 600 MHz range.
  • Fourth generation (4G) cellular network deployments.
Whereas these technologies have not been adequately tested and the potential for harm from these and other wireless technologies is significant and growing:
  • More than 5000 scientific papers/ studies link biological changes and effects from low-level exposures from microwave/ radio frequency radiation used in wireless signals.
  • More than 165 biological effects, diseases and symptoms have been associated with weak electromagnetic fields (EMF) and low-level microwave signals below existing federally mandated standards.
Whereas the dramatic increase in at least 19 disease groups in the past 25 years cannot be determined:
  • The FCC standards for protection of the American people from microwave radiation are among the weakest in the world, having been developed in the 1950s by engineers and physicists without biological consideration.
  • Current US standards are designed only to protect humans from heating – the so-called thermal effect – caused by high levels of microwaves/ radio frequencies.
  • Standards for low-levels of microwaves/ radio-frequencies have never been established.
We respectfully ask the US Congress and the President to enact federal legislation to:
  • Allocate sufficient funds to thoroughly test these new wireless technologies for health safety.
  • Appoint a Blue-ribbon commission to review the science, such as the BioInitiative Report and establish a more prudent set of safety standards for public exposures to microwave and radio-frequency radiation from wireless.
 

22 January 2011

Climate experts call for moratorium on UK shale gas extraction (Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences - The University of Manchester)

Climate experts call for moratorium on UK shale gas extraction (Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences - The University of Manchester)

20 Jan 2011

The Government should impose an immediate moratorium on the extraction of natural gas from the UK’s shale formations until all the ecological implications are fully understood, University of Manchester scientists have warned.

Blackpool has been mentioned as a possible shale gas extraction site
Blackpool has been mentioned as a possible shale gas extraction site

The report, commissioned by The Co-operative and written by the internationally-respected Tyndall Centre, part of The University of Manchester, the paper highlights evidence from the US, which suggests shale gas extraction brings a significant risk of groundwater contamination.

Moreover, the exploitation of gas shales is bringing new greenhouse gas sources into play and even a mid-range extraction scenario could see carbon dioxide levels rise globally by some 5 parts per million by 2050. This will further reduce any slim possibility of maintaining global temperature changes at or below 2oC and thereby increase the risk of entering a period of ‘dangerous climate change’.

The report concludes that until a sufficient evidence base is developed a precautionary approach to development in the UK is the only responsible action.

With conventional natural gas reserves declining globally, shale gas has emerged as a potential significant new source of “unconventional gas”. In the United States, production of shale gas expanded five fold between 1990 and 2008 and it is predicted that production will expand further to meet a significant proportion of US gas demand in the next 20 years.

The rapid growth of shale gas production in the US has raised interest in the UK, with a number of businesses beginning activities particularly on the Fylde coast of North West England.

In large measure this expansion is possible because of the new technologies of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, which make shale gas extraction more cost effective.

The Report raises serious questions about environmental and human health risks, which include:
• The release, globally, of significant quantities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere;
• Potential groundwater contamination associated with chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process and the mobilisation of heavy metals and hydrocarbons.
• Resource issues including abstraction of significant quantities of water for hydraulic fracturing processes and land use.

The report also looks at the explicit implications of exploiting shale gas within the UK which is likely to give rise to a range of additional challenges, including:

• The UK is densely populated and consequently any wells associated with shale gas extraction are likely to be relatively close to population centres.
• The proximity of such extraction will give rise to a range of local concerns including noise pollution, high levels of truck movements and considerable land use demands.

Neville Richardson, Chief Executive of The Co-operative Financial Services, said: “On the face of it new natural gas finds appear to be good news, but this important report highlights the significant gaps in our knowledge when it comes to understanding the impacts of shale gas extraction.

“That is why we are calling for a moratorium on any further exploitation of shale gas which will allow the wider environmental concerns to be fully exposed and addressed.”

“Our members have been fully supportive of our on-going Toxic Fuels campaign in which we have highlighted the issues associated with tar sands, and as a responsible institutional investor we will continue to engage with energy companies in order to ensure they act responsibly and work to support the development of sustainable energy sources.”

Kevin Anderson, Professor of Energy and Climate Change at the Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester, said: “In an energy hungry world any new fossil fuel resource will only lead to additional carbon emissions. In the case of shale gas there is also a significant risk its use will delay the introduction of renewable energy alternatives. Consequently, if we are serious about avoiding dangerous climate change, the only safe place for shale gas remains in the ground.”

Notes for editors

In looking at global emissions from shale gas consumption, three scenarios were prepared that utilised varying degrees of reserve exploitation. The resulting increase in atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide ranged from 3 to 11 parts per million by 2050.

The full report is available from the Press Office

For media enquiries contact:

Daniel Cochlin
Media Relations Officer
The University of Manchester
0161 275 8387

Secretive plans for nuclear reprocessing at Savannah Rivers Site

Clements will be first on a panel at 10:55 a.m. on Friday, January 7 and will speak to problems with the secretive push by special interest to pursue reprocessing at SRS, which is unsuited to receive more of the nation’s nuclear waste burden.

National Nuclear Waste Commission to Hear from Public, Environmental Groups on Friday in Augusta | WJBF–TV, 5 Jan 2011, Augusta, GA --A national panel established by President Obama to decide the way forward with high-level nuclear waste will meet in Augusta, Georgia on Friday, January 7. The Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC), which is deciding the fate of commercial spent fuel and Department of Energy high-level waste, will meet at the Augusta Marriott (Two Tenth Street in downtown) all day Friday and hear public comment at the end of the day.

Given the problems with proceeding with the Yucca Mountain waste dump, the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina is at risk of becoming an “interim” home for radioactive spent fuel or reprocessing of that dangerous material. “We will watch out for the public interest and strongly oppose efforts to dump high-level nuclear waste in South Carolina,” said Tom Clements, Southeastern Nuclear Campaign Coordinator with the environmental organization Friends of the Earth. “Environmental groups will confront efforts by special interests to reprocess nuclear spent fuel as it leaves behind a huge volume of nuclear waste and would make SRS the nation’s de facto nuclear dump, which is totally unacceptable.”

Reprocessing is a dirty and dangerous chemical process that extracts plutonium and magnifies problems with spent fuel storage. Reprocessing of military materials for plutonium production for nuclear weapons is what has resulted in the 36 million gallons of high-level waste at SRS and with which DOE is struggling to manage.

“While some are pushing on the one hand for a way out of South Carolina of high-level nuclear waste, these same people are lobbying for reprocessing at SRS, which means bringing the nation’s spent fuel to SRS.

This effort to bring radioactive spent fuel to SRS for reprocessing will be confronted for what it is – a dangerous deception that could result in a huge nuclear waste problem in South Carolina. Some label reprocessing as ‘recycling’ but most of the resultant waste streams have no practical use, are dangerous to handle and are costly to manage.”

Read more:
http://nuclear-news.net/2011/01/06/secretive-plans-for-nuclear-reprocessing-at-savannah-rivers-site/
 Read whole Article:

And then there is THIS:  

National Nuclear Waste Commission to Hear from Public, Environmental Groups on Friday in Augusta

Friends of the Earth to Challenge those who Aim to Dump Spent Fuel at SRS

 

A national panel established by President Obama to decide the way forward with high-level nuclear waste will meet in Augusta, Georgia on Friday, January 7. The Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC), which is deciding the fate of commercial spent fuel and Department of Energy high-level waste, will meet at the Augusta Marriott (Two Tenth Street in downtown) all day Friday and hear public comment at the end of the day.Given the problems with proceeding with the Yucca Mountain waste dump, the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina is at risk of becoming an “interim” home for radioactive spent fuel or reprocessing of that dangerous material. “We will watch out for the public interest and strongly oppose efforts to dump high-level nuclear waste in South Carolina,” said Tom Clements, Southeastern Nuclear Campaign Coordinator with the environmental organization Friends of the Earth.

“Environmental groups will confront efforts by special interests to reprocess nuclear spent fuel as it leaves behind a huge volume of nuclear waste and would make SRS the nation’s de facto nuclear dump, which is totally unacceptable.”

Included on the formal agenda amongst a long list of politicians with little technical or policy expertise in management of nuclear waste or record of closely tracking issues at the Savannah River Site, several SC and GA environmental groups will present testimony to the BRC. Clements will be first on a panel at 10:55 a.m. on Friday, January 7 and will speak to problems with the secretive push by special interest to pursue reprocessing at SRS, which is unsuited to receive more of the nation’s nuclear waste burden. Reprocessing is a dirty and dangerous chemical process that extracts plutonium and magnifies problems with spent fuel storage. Reprocessing of military materials for plutonium production for nuclear weapons is what has resulted in the 36 million gallons of high-level waste at SRS and with which DOE is struggling to manage.

“While some are pushing on the one hand for a way out of South Carolina of high-level nuclear waste, these same people are lobbying for reprocessing at SRS, which means bringing the nation’s spent fuel to SRS. This effort to bring radioactive spent fuel to SRS for reprocessing will be confronted for what it is – a dangerous deception that could result in a huge nuclear waste problem in South Carolina. Some label reprocessing as ‘recycling’ but most of the resultant waste streams have no practical use, are dangerous to handle and are costly to manage.”

DOE itself has raised the possibility of spent fuel storage and reprocessing at SRS, but it is primarily contractors that profit off SRS and nuclear waste management that have been pushing the idea. “As clean-up of SRS continues, we must look for new employment at SRS but those jobs must not be associated with bringing more radioactive waste to SRS,” said Clements. We believe that the public in South Carolina and Georgia will support clean jobs at SRS but not projects that bring yet more deadly nuclear waste to the site.” The charter of the BRC does not directly include consideration of jobs or future use of SRS or any other DOE site.

Friends of the Earth and the South Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club are running ads in local weekly papers and on radio stations in the Aiken/Augusta area, urging members of the public to attend the BRC meeting and speak out against the nuclear waste threat faced by South Carolina.

On Thursday, January 6, members of the public will tour SRS, on a parallel track with members of the BRC, who will have a tour of their own. Staff of the BRC may well be on the bus with the public and available for interaction about the work of the Commission.


 (See BRC website for more information: http://www.brc.gov/)


20 January 2011



JTMPAdmin | January 12, 2011 | likes, 0 dislikes
www.jtmp.org and www.op-critical.com present "Freakin Frackin" by Op-Critical, a protest song against "hydraulic fracturing". Hydraulic fracturing, or "Fracking", is using over 500 toxic chemicals to shatter rock to extract more natural gas from wells, driving profit up. It pollutes our groundwater and the air and is killing us. It is putting profit over the planet. It is time we ban this toxic practice that is harming our planet.

Please order and watch the DVD "Gasland", a great documentary about "Fracking". by filmmaker Josh Fox. Get informed about "Fracking", and we urge you to contact your representatives and say, "No Fracking Way!", and join the call for a moratorium and eventual ban of hydraulic fracturing.

www.gaslandthemovie.com

Category:

Tags:


Tell President Obama: Keep nukes out of the State of the Union!


January 20, 2011

We have learned that President Obama's State of the Union Address on Tuesday, January 25, may include a call for Congress to enact a "Clean Energy Standard" that would support new nuclear reactors and "clean" coal plants.

However, we're told a final decision has not been made by the White House and the issue is still the subject of debate within the Administration.

Your actions now can make a huge difference. Please send a message to President Obama below and tell him that we know nuclear power and coal will never be clean and have no place in a "Clean Energy Standard."

Then please ask your friends and colleagues to send in letters too. You can also easily share this page on Facebook, Twitter and other networking sites (just look for the logos on the upper right).

Every nuclear facility releases toxic radiation on a daily basis, creates lethal radioactive waste and presents constant threat of meltdown--how is that clean? And even if carbon from coal plants could be captured (which is by no means clear), coal still brings us poisonous mercury, toxic ash and mountain top removal.

The Obama Administration--and Congress--must understand that while carbon emissions must be slashed, replacing them with other pollutants is no answer. And, of course, if we're really serious about slashing carbon emissions, then we need to move more quickly to renewables anyway, which release two to six times less carbon per kilowatt of electricity than nuclear power.
 
To our international friends: Our President may listen to you as well, so we encourage you to send a letter too!

Note: You may edit the sample letter to reflect your own concerns and priorities if you'd like.

11 January 2011

Did the Atom Bomb Test Fallout Cause Cancer?: Huff post


Comment from Nuclear Free Virginia blog:  Look at the difference in totals, think the Feds are going to protect us from nukes think again: "2002 U.S. Centers for Disease Control report calculated that fallout caused 15,000 U.S. cancer deaths" but look at this:  "blue ribbon European panel reported 61,600,000 cancer deaths worldwide from fallout."  Now the CDC errors:  "CDC estimate of 15,000 deaths is too low".  I wonder if the NAS which is suppose to study Nuke Plants and Cancer for the NRC, will they collect our teeth and look for Sr-90?  No to killing nuke plants!



Samuel S. Epstein
Cancer prevention expert, Prof. emeritus at U. of IL School of Public Health, Chicago
Posted: December 23, 2010 08:10



The huge mushroom clouds from atom bomb tests of the 1950s and 1960s are an unforgettable part of the American saga. The tests were cloaked in rhetoric typical of the Cold War, i.e. they were needed to achieve "superiority" over the Soviets in the event of a nuclear war.

But all the patriotic nuclear talk couldn't prevent widespread concern that nuclear war would kill tens of millions.

But many were also troubled by fallout in the mushroom clouds, which contained huge amounts of over 100 deadly radioactive chemicals that traveled through the air across the continental U.S.

Precipitation brought this fallout back to earth -- and into the food chain and human bodies.

Concerns became so great that scientists and citizens began calling for studies of how much fallout was entering people's bodies, and how much harm it was causing -- especially to the highly-sensitive fetuses, infants, and children.

Dr. Herman Kalckar of the National Institutes of Health published an article in August 1958, calling for a baby tooth "census" -- a program of collecting teeth and testing them in laboratories for fallout levels. In particular, Kalckar suggested that Strontium-90 be measured.

Of the more than 100 radioactive chemicals in fallout, Sr-90 was the most feared.

Chemically similar to calcium, it attaches to bone and teeth, where it attacks cells, causing cancer.

It can penetrate into the bone marrow, where the red and white blood cells so important to the immune response are formed. In 1956, Presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson made a speech singling out the potency of Sr-90:

"This radioactive fallout, as it is called, carries something that's called strontium-90, which is the most dreadful poison in the world.
In December 1958, a group of visionary scientists at Washington University in St. Louis, working with the citizen group Committee for Nuclear Information, began collecting baby teeth, locally and across the country.

A staggering total of about 320,000 teeth were collected over the next dozen years. Lab tests found that children born in 1963 had about 50 times more Sr-90 in teeth than those born in 1950.

Washington University officials used their results in testimony to the U.S. Senate leading to the Partial Test Ban Treaty signed by President John F. Kennedy, ending all above-ground atom bomb tests.

Testing had ended, but the thorny question of health hazards to Americans -- especially children -- remained.

U.S. childhood cancer rates had climbed in the 1950s and early 1960s, but scientists were stumped as to why.

Studies of the fallout-cancer link were only conducted after the Cold War had ended.

A 2002 U.S. Centers for Disease Control report calculated that fallout caused 15,000 U.S. cancer deaths, a figure some believed was a gross underestimate.

The following year, a blue ribbon European panel reported 61,600,000 cancer deaths worldwide from fallout.

The St. Louis tooth study was seemingly headed for the history books, until 2001, when Washington University officials stumbled upon 85,000 teeth not used in the study in a remote storage area.

The school donated the teeth to the Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP), a research group conducting its own study of Sr-90 in baby teeth, near U.S. nuclear reactors.

Each tooth is enclosed in a small envelope attached to a card identifying the tooth donor.

Earlier this month, the first results of the RPHP health study were released in an article in the International Journal of Health Services.

Baby teeth of St. Louis baby boomers who died of cancer by age 50 had more than double -- 122 percent more -- the Sr-90 concentration than did Boomers who are alive and healthy.

This research, known as a case-control study, is the first evidence that bomb tests harmed Americans using actual levels of fallout in human bodies.

It is not yet possible to estimate the number of cancer victims from fallout, but it appears that the CDC estimate of 15,000 deaths is too low.

Bomb testing into the atmosphere ended in 1963, and even below-ground tests stopped in 1992.

The study of fallout's impact on cancer, however, is not an idle look into history, but has much current relevance, namely:

1. With 150 million Americans alive who were exposed to above-ground bomb tests, and with 40% expected to be diagnosed with cancer at some point, it is important to understand causes of the disease.

2. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty of 1996, which proposes to end all atom bomb tests, has been ratified by 153 nations - but not the U.S. President Obama has pledged to convince the U.S. Senate to ratify the treaty, and information on health risk is an important aspect supporting the Treaty.

3. The 104 nuclear power reactors in the U.S. produce the same mixture of chemicals as atom bomb tests.

Most of this toxic mixture is stored as high level nuclear waste, but some is emitted into the air and water, and enters human bodies.

The RPHP study of baby teeth showed that Sr-90 levels in children near reactors were 30-50 percent greater than children in distant areas, and that levels were rising sharply over time, as aging reactors corrode.

Studying health risks of radioactive emissions from both weapons and reactors has been a highly politicized issue, as the military and industries producing these chemicals are not eager to present findings of harm.

However, the only way to truly reduce cancer rates is to understand causes and take preventive actions.

Baby teeth, even those from half a century ago, hold the clues to one such cause.

CONTACT:
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.
Professor emeritus Environmental & Occupational Medicine
University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health
Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition
Chicago, Illinois
http://www.preventcancer.com/

Joseph Mangano, MPH, MBA
Executive Director, Radiation and Public Health Project
New York
http://www.radiation.org/

Read more:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/samuel-s-epstein/atomic-bomb-did-the-atom_b_797822.html
Read whole Article:

10 January 2011

A-bomb survivors still getting sick

People who survived the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki during World War II still get radiation-related illnesses, according to a recent Japanese study.
cancercell 
The researchers spent about 20 years analysing data related to myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), in which bone marrow damage prevents blood cell development.

For the study, the researchers looked at about 86,000 people who survived the bombing of Nagasaki.

Not all of the study subjects had lived very close to the blast site at the time, and some of them had normal rates of MDS.

Statistically, the rates of MDS literally radiated outward from the blast site, with people's risk of getting radiation-related MDS rising by up to 88% per kilometre of proximity to the explosion.

In total, 198 of the people who had survived the Nagasaki blast developed MDS between 1985 and 2004.

David Brenner, head of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University in New York, who was not involved in the research, said that the recent study gave credence to the fact that radiation even at moderately low doses was hazardous.

He said the study also showed that the diseases people got from radiation were not limited to cancer.

The study is also relevant for people considering the possible harm of modern radiation sources used to probe the human body, like x-rays and their modern derivative, computed-tomography scanning (CT).

Every CT scanner emits a different level of radiation and, on average, having several CT scans could still theoretically equal the same amount of radiation exposure as people who today live near the site where Nagasaki was hit.

Because the number of CT scans doctors perform has been increasing recently, doctors are worried that this increase might contribute to people getting cancer.

Rebecca Smith-Bindman, of the University of California in San Francisco, said that people who had MDS also had a leukaemia risk, and that the study should increase people's efforts to reduce radiation exposure. 

The atomic bombings of Japan killed an estimated 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki, with roughly half the deaths occurring on the day of the explosion in both cities. Most were civilians.

US researchers estimate that 15–20% died from radiation sickness, 20–30% from flash burns, and 50–60% from other injuries, compounded by illness.

07 January 2011

Observations: Did the U.S. government misuse science to justify torture?

In 2001, Pakistani soldiers captured Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi as he fled Afghanistan. The Pakistani government turned the Libyan paramilitary trainer affiliated with al Qaeda over to the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency requested permission to take al-Libi instead and send him to another country—Egypt—for interrogation, permission the Bush administration granted. While undergoing interrogation—potentially of the "enhanced" variety that includes prolonged sleep or sensory deprivation or painful body positions, among other treatments—al-Libi revealed that Iraq had been providing al Qaeda with training in making weapons of mass destruction.

What al-Libi revealed was false, and a trio of physicians now points to this case as an example of how torture provides information of "questionable reliability," in the January 6 issue of Science.

In fact, the doctors, from Physicians for Human Rights and the Bellevue/New York University Program for Survivors of Torture, argue that science has proven that torture is an unreliable method for obtaining accurate information. In support of their claim, they cite a review paper published in Trends in Cognitive Science in September 2009 by neuroscientist Shane O'Mara of Trinity College in Dublin. Dr. Vincent Iacopino and his colleagues also argue in the latest essay that the "enhanced interrogation techniques" employed by the CIA and explicitly authorized by the Bush administration constitute torture.

Regardless of whether that's true or not, the Bush administration may have misused science to justify such enhanced interrogation, Iacopino and his colleagues note in Science. A memo from the Department of Justice in 2005 explicitly authorized such techniques, noting that CIA doctors observed no long-lasting ill effects in detainees or intent to torture in interrogators during the application of such techniques to 25 detainees.

The actual observations themselves have not been released publicly and may have constituted illegal and immoral scientific research, Iacopino and his colleagues charge. It is also possible that CIA doctors may have "neglected and/or concealed medical evidence of intentional harm" among detainees held after the September 11, 2001 attacks, according to a separate report from Physicians for Human Rights.

The CIA has denied that any such research took place, though the agency's guidelines did call for medical personnel to monitor waterboarding, confinement in a box and other techniques when used. Iacopino and his colleagues assert that such monitoring constitutes a breach of both basic medical ethics—do no harm—and research norms—an international ban on research conducted on non-consenting human beings.

As a result, the authors call for reforms, including requiring military medical personnel to follow all civilian medical ethics standards, as well as an investigation into what role, if any, such CIA or Department of Defense doctors played in torture or human experimentation. At the very least, such an investigation might provide some more useful information than that elicited via enhanced interrogation techniques.

Authors: CIA waited years to stop nuclear proliferation

By David
DOWNLOADS: 57
WMV
PLAYS: 98
Embed
Fallout cover

The US government is guilty of allowing nuclear materials and intelligence to proliferate among to some of the most dangerous regimes in the world for more than 30 years, a new book alleges.

In Fallout, authors Douglas Frantz and Catherine Collins charge that the CIA waited until it was too late to stop the A.Q. Kahn network from disseminating nuclear weapons technology to North Korea, Libya and Iran.

 "They could literally have stopped him in his tracks [in the 1970s]," Franz told NPR's Fresh Air Tuesday.

"It would have done an enormous amount to delay Pakistan building its own nuclear weapon, to delay the arms race on the South Asian continent and to stop Iran from getting where it is on the nuclear front."

"You know, so this is something that the CIA has been, in our view, guilty of for more than 30 years now," 
 he added.

In 1974, Kahn, who was working at a centrifuge production facility in the Netherlands, approached Pakistani officials with offers to help them with their nuclear program.

The Dutch security service first notified the CIA after they discovered Kahn in 1975, but US officials asked the Dutch to let Kahn go free so they could secretly monitor him.

"In the subsequent years and decades, Khan became clearly the most dangerous proliferator in history," 
 Franz noted.

In 2004, Kahn was finally arrested and put under house arrest in Pakistan. President George W. Bush hailed the arrest as a victory for his administration. 

Fallout details the way the CIA recruited the Tinners, a family of Swiss engineers, to spy on Kahn beginning in the 1970s. The Tinners supplied Kahn with the techniques and materials to make gas centrifuges, which were later sold to Libya and Iran.

The CIA has spent the last seven years trying cover up their role in recruiting the Tinners, and putting halt to a Swiss attempt to prosecute the family.

"Senior CIA and Bush administration officials argued that stopping the Tinner inquiry and destroying the evidence was necessary to protect US intelligence operations and keep nuclear information away from terrorists. But our research uncovered more sinister motives," 
 Franz and Collins wrote in an article the Los Angeles Times.

By stopping the investigation, the CIA had hoped to protect the Bush legacy by covering up evidence showing the true volume of nuclear secrets traded by the Kahn network.

Documents uncovered by the authors show that in February 2008, 
"the Swiss succumbed to US pressure and destroyed a huge cache of evidence seized from the Tinners. Among the material shredded, crushed and incinerated under CIA supervision were plans for two nuclear warheads from Pakistan's arsenal, blueprints for uranium enrichment plants and producing nuclear weapons, and decades of records detailing network transactions."

In the end, the destruction of evidence came too late in stopping evidence from ending up in the hands of criminals. "Copies were found in Thailand, Malaysia and South Africa; no one is sure where else they may have gone in what we regard as the world's first example of cyber proliferation," the authors observed.
The CIA was also successful in stopping a Swiss prosecution of six CIA officers that may have violated Swiss law by recruiting the Tinners and breaking into their house.

Last month, a Swiss magistrate recommended charging the Tinners with trafficking in technology for making nuclear weapons. The New York Times reported that in defense of the Tinners, lawyers could expose CIA secrets and tarnish the Bush legacy.

"The lesson here is clear: Leaders must set aside national interests and work cooperatively to stay ahead of nuclear traffickers," Franz and Collins concluded. "What's needed is a new multilateral legal regime that puts trafficking in nuclear, chemical and biological weapons on a par with crimes against humanity. This won't be easy, but blind adherence to narrow national objectives increases the risk to all of us."

 

31 December 2010

Good link for comments on Gasland ... many of them Canadian

http://forums.beyond.ca/st/323785/the-dangers-of-hydraulic-fracturing-for-natural-gas-gasland-/

Green Glossary: Depleted Uranium (DU) by Mickey Z.


depleted uranium bullets photo Stan Honda/Getty Images

Depleted Uranium (DU) is the byproduct of uranium enrichment or, as described by the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW),

DU is a waste product of the nuclear industry.

The ICBUW adds: "Depleted Uranium itself is a chemically toxic and radioactive compound, which is used in armor piercing munitions because of its very high density. It is 1.7 times denser than lead. This allows it to easily penetrate the steel armor of tanks and other vehicles when fired at high velocity."

Nuclear weapons may be a hot button topic when discussing Iran or North Korea, but how many know that the US regularly uses DU when waging its seemingly endless wars? "Depleted uranium burns on contact," explains Helen Caldicott,

"creating tiny aerosolized particles less than five microns in diameter, small enough to be inhaled." These minute particles can travel "long distances when airborne,

she explains.

"There is no safe dose or dose rate below which dangers disappear. No threshold-dose,'" 

says John Gofman, a former associate director of Livermore National Laboratory, one of the scientists who worked on the atomic bomb, and co-discoverer of uranium-233. "

Serious, lethal effects from minimal radiation doses are not 'hypothetical,' 'just theoretical,' or 'imaginary.' They are real."

Sounds like a situation that calls for education and direct action.

EPA hydrofracking - Weston Wilson whisleblower

30 December 2010

Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War/Leuran Moret

World Affairs – The Journal of International Issues 1jul04

Heat not a furnace for your foe so hot that it do singe yourself.
William Shakespeare (1564-1616)

 

The use of depleted uranium weaponry by the United States, defying all international treaties, will slowly annihilate all species on earth including the human species, and yet this country continues to do so with full knowledge of its destructive potential.

LEUREN MORET

Since 1991, the United States has staged four wars using depleted uranium weaponry, illegal under all international treaties, conventions and agreements, as well as under the US military law. The continued use of this illegal radioactive weaponry, which has already contaminated vast regions with low level radiation and will contaminate other parts of the world over time, is indeed a world affair and an international issue. The deeper purpose is revealed by comparing regions now contaminated with depleted uranium — from Egypt, the Middle East, Central Asia and the northern half of India — to the US geostrategic imperatives described in Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 book The Grand Chessboard

Fig. 1: Brzezinski’s map of the Eurasian Chessboard



SOUTH REGION:  “This huge region, torn by volatile hatreds and surrounded by competing powerful neighbors, is likely to be a major battlefield, both for wars among nation-states and, more likely, for protracted ethnic and religious violence.  Whether India acts as a restraint or whether it takes advantage of some opportunity to impose its will on Pakistan will greatly affect the regional scope of the likely conflicts.  The internal strains within Turkey and Iran are likely not only to get worse but to greatly reduce the stabilizing role these states are capable of playing within this volcanic region.  Such developments will in turn make it more difficult to assimilate the new Central Asian states into the international community, while also adversely affecting the American-dominated security of the Persian Gulf region.  In any case, both America and the international community may be faced here with a challenge that will dwarf the recent crisis in the former Yugoslavia.”  Brzezinski 

The fact is that the United States and its military partners have staged four nuclear wars, "slipping nukes under the wire" by using dirty bombs and dirty weapons in countries the US needs to control. Depleted uranium aerosols will permanently contaminate vast regions and slowly destroy the genetic future of populations living in those regions, where there are resources which the US must control, in order to establish and maintain American primacy.

Described as the Trojan Horse of nuclear war, depleted uranium is the weapon that keeps killing. The half-life of Uranium-238 is 4.5 billion years, the age of the earth. And, as Uranium-238 decays into daughter radioactive products, in four steps before turning into lead, it continues to release more radiation at each step. There is no way to turn it off, and there is no way to clean it up. It meets the US Government’s own definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

After forming microscopic and submicroscopic insoluble Uranium oxide particles on the battlefield, they remain suspended in air and travel around the earth as a radioactive component of atmospheric dust, contaminating the environment, indiscriminately killing, maiming and causing disease in all living things where rain, snow and moisture remove it from the atmosphere. Global radioactive contamination from atmospheric testing was the equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs, and still contaminates the atmosphere and lower orbital space today. The amount of low level radioactive pollution from depleted uranium released since 1991, is many times more (deposited internally in the body), than was released from atmospheric testing fallout.

A 2003 independent report for the European Parliament by the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), reports that based on Chernobyl studies, low level radiation risk is 100 to 1000 times greater than the International Committee for Radiation Protection models estimate which are based on the flawed Atomic and Hydrogen Bomb Studies conducted by the US Government. Referring to the extreme killing effects of radiation on biological systems, Dr. Rosalie Bertell, one of the 46 international radiation expert authors of the ECRR report, describes it as:
"The concept of species annihilation means a relatively swift, deliberately induced end to history, culture, science, biological reproduction and memory. It is the ultimate human rejection of the gift of life, an act which requires a new word to describe it: omnicide."

1943 MANHATTAN PROJECT BLUEPRINT FOR DEPLETED URANIUM

In a declassified memo to General Leslie R. Groves, dated October 30, 1943, three of the top physicists in the Manhattan Project, Dr James B Conant, A H Compton, and H C Urey, made their recommendation, as members of the Subcommittee of the S-1 Executive Committee, on the ‘Use of Radioactive Materials as a Military Weapon’:
"As a gas warfare instrument the material would be ground into particles of microscopic size to form dust and smoke and distributed by a ground-fired projectile, land vehicles, or aerial bombs. In this form it would be inhaled by personnel. The amount necessary to cause death to a person inhaling the material is extremely small … There are no known methods of treatment for such a casualty … it will permeate a standard gas mask filter in quantities large enough to be extremely damaging."
As a Terrain Contaminant:
"To be used in this manner, the radioactive materials would be spread on the ground either from the air or from the ground if in enemy controlled territory. In order to deny terrain to either side except at the expense of exposing personnel to harmful radiations … Areas so contaminated by radioactive material would be dangerous until the slow natural decay of the material took place … for average terrain no decontaminating methods are known. No effective protective clothing for personnel seems possible of development. … Reservoirs or wells would be contaminated or food poisoned with an effect similar to that resulting from inhalation of dust or smoke."
Internal Exposure:
"… Particles smaller than 1µ [micron] are more likely to be deposited in the alveoli where they will either remain indefinitely or be absorbed into the lymphatics or blood. … could get into the gastro-intestinal tract from polluted water, or food, or air. … may be absorbed from the lungs or G-I tract into the blood and so distributed throughout the body."
Both the fission products and depleted uranium waste from the Atomic Bomb Project were to be utilised under this plan. The pyrophoric nature of depleted uranium, which causes it to begin to burn at very low temperatures from friction in the gun barrel, made it an ideal radioactive gas weapon then and now. Also it was more available because the amount of depleted uranium produced was much greater than the amount of fission products produced in 1943.

Britain had thoughts of using poisoned gas on Iraq long before 1991:
"I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes. The moral effect should be good... and it would spread a lively terror..." (Winston Churchill commenting on the British use of poison gas against the Iraqis after the First World War).
GUIDED WEAPONS SYSTEMS

Depleted uranium weapons were first given by the US to Israel for use under US supervision in the 1973 Sinai war against the Arabs. Since then the US has tested, manufactured, and sold depleted uranium weapons systems to 29 countries. An international taboo prevented their use until 1991, when the US broke the taboo and used them for the first time, on the battlefields of Iraq and Kuwait.

The US military admitted using depleted uranium projectiles in tanks and planes, but warheads in missiles and bombs are classified or referred to as a ‘dense’ or ‘mystery metal’. Dai Williams, a researcher at the 2003 World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference, reported finding 11 US patents for guided weapons systems with the term ‘depleted uranium’ or ‘dense metal’, which from the density can only be depleted uranium or tungsten, in order to fit the dimensions of the warhead.

Figure 2 - Hard target guided weapons in 2002: smart bombs & cruise missiles with "dense metal" warheads (updated September 2002)
Warhead weight
Hard target guided weapons in 2001: smart bombs & cruise missiles with "dense metal" warheads
Warhead weights include explosives (~20%) and casing. Dense metal ballast or liners (suspected to be DU) estimated to be 50-75% of warhead weight - necessary to double the density of previous versions. AUP = Advanced penetrators. S/CH = Shaped Charge. BR = BROACH Multiple Warhead System (S/CH+AUP). P = older 'heavy metal' penetrators. © Dai Williams 2002
source: Depleted Uranium weapons in 2001-2002: Occupational, public and environmental health issues - Mystery Metal Nightmare in Afghanistan? Collected studies and public domain sources compiled by Dai Williams, first edition 31 January 2002

Extensive carpet bombing, grid bombing, and the frequent use of missiles and depleted uranium bullets on buildings in densely populated areas has occurred in Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan. The discovery that bomb craters in Yugoslavia in 1999 were radioactive, and that an unexploded missile in 1999 contained a depleted uranium warhead, implies that the total amount of depleted uranium used since 1991 has been greatly underestimated. Of even greater concern, is that 100 per cent of the depleted uranium in bombs and missiles is aerosolized upon impact and immediately released into the atmosphere. This amount can be as much as 1.5 tons in the large bombs. In bullets and cannon shells, the amount aerosolized is 40-70 per cent, leaving pieces and unexploded shells in the environment, to provide new sources of radioactive dust and contamination of the groundwater from dissolved depleted uranium metal long after the battles are over, as reported in a 2003 report by the UN Environmental Program on Yugoslavia. Considering that the US has admitted using 34 tons of depleted uranium from bullets and cannon shells in Yugoslavia, and the fact that 35,000 NATO bombing missions occurred there in 1999, potentially the amount of depleted uranium contaminating Yugoslavia and transboundary drift into surrounding countries is staggering.

Because of mysterious illnesses and post-war birth defects reported among Gulf War veterans and civilians in southern Iraq, and radiation related illnesses in UN Peacekeepers serving in Yugoslavia, growing concerns about radiation effects and environmental damage has stirred up international outrage about the use of radioactive weapons by the US after 1991. At the 2003 meeting of parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, discussing the U.S. desire to maintain its nuclear weapons stockpile, the Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi AKIBA stated,
"It is incumbent upon the rest of the world ... to stand up now and tell all of our military leaders that we refuse to be threatened or protected by nuclear weapons. We refuse to live in a world of continually recycled fear and hatred".
ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

Four reasons why using depleted uranium weapons violates the UN Convention on Human Rights:
LEGALITY TEST FOR WEAPONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW
TEMPORAL TEST – Weapons must not continue to act after the battle is over.
ENVIRONMENTAL TEST – Weapons must not be unduly harmful to the environment.
TERRITORIAL TEST – Weapons must not act off of the battlefield.
HUMANENESS TEST – Weapons must not kill or wound inhumanly.

International Human Rights and humanitarian lawyer, Karen Parker, determined that depleted uranium weaponry fails the four tests for legal weapons under international law, and that it is also illegal under the definition of a ‘poison’ weapon. Through Karen Parker’s continued efforts, a sub-commission of the UN Human Rights Commission determined in 1996 that depleted uranium is a weapon of mass destruction that should not be used:
RESOLUTION 1996/16 ON STOPPING THE USE OF DEPLETED URANIUM - DU
The military use of DU violates current international humanitarian law, including the principle that there is no unlimited right to choose the means and methods of warfare (Art. 22 Hague Convention VI (HCIV); Art. 35 of the Additional Protocol to the Geneva (GP1); the ban on causing unnecessary suffering and superfluous injury (Art. 23 §le HCIV; Art. 35 §2 GP1), indiscriminate warfare (Art. 51 §4c and 5b GP1) as well as the use of poison or poisoned weapons.
The deployment and use of DU violate the principles of international environmental and human rights protection. They contradict the right to life established by the Resolution 1996/16 of the UN Subcommittee on Human Rights.

FOUR NUCLEAR WARS
"Military Men Are Just Dumb,
 Stupid, Animals To Be Used
 As Pawns In Foreign Policy"
        
Henry Kissinger
Although restricted to battlefields in Iraq and Kuwait, the 1991 Gulf War was one of the most toxic and environmentally devastating wars in world history. Oil well fires, the bombing of oil tankers and oil wells which released millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Arabia and desert, and the devastation from tanks and heavy equipment destroyed the desert ecosystem. The long term and far reaching effects, and dispersal of at least 340 tons of depleted uranium weapons, had a global environmental effect. Smoke from the oil fires was later found in deposits in South America, the Himalayas and Hawaii. Large annual dust storms originating in North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia will quickly spread the radioactive contamination around the world, and weathering of old depleted uranium munitions on battlefields and other areas will provide new sources of radioactive contamination in future years. Downwind from the radioactive devastation in Iraq, Israel is also suffering from large increases in breast cancer, leukemia and childhood diabetes.

RADIATION RESPECTS NO BORDERS, NO SOCIOECONOMIC CLASS, AND NO RELIGION

The expendability of the sanctity of life to achieve US political ends was described by US soldiers on the ground, and from the air, along the Highway of Death in Iraq in 1991:
"Iraqi soldiers [whether they] be young boys or old men. They were a sad sight, with absolutely no fight left in them. Their leaders had cut their Achilles’ tendons so they couldn’t run away and then left them. What weapons they had were in bad repair and little ammunition was on hand. They were hungry, cold, and scared. The hate I had for any Iraqi dissipated. These people had no business being on a battlefield."
(S Hersh, New Yorker, May 22, 2000)
American pilots bombing and strafing, with depleted uranium weapons, helpless retreating Iraqi soldiers who had already surrendered, exclaimed:
"We toasted him…. we hit the jackpot….a turkey shoot….shooting fish in a barrel….basically just sitting ducks… There’s just nothing like it. It’s the biggest Fourth of July show you’ve ever seen, and to see those tanks just ‘boom’, and more stuff just keeps spewing out of them… they just become white hot. It’s wonderful."
(L A Times and Washington Post, both February 27, 1991)
Nearly 700,000 American Gulf War Veterans returned to the US from a war that lasted just a few weeks. Today more than 240,000 of those soldiers are on permanent medical disability, and over 11,000 are dead. In a US Government study on post-Gulf War babies born to 251 veterans, 67 per cent of the babies were reported to have serious illnesses or serious birth defects. They were born without eyes, ears, had missing organs, fused fingers, thyroid or other malfunctions. Depleted uranium in the semen of the soldiers internally contaminated their wives. Severe birth defects have been reported in babies born to contaminated civilians in Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan and the incidence and severity of defects is increasing over time. Women in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq are afraid now to have babies, and when they do give birth, instead of asking if it is a girl or a boy, they ask ‘is it normal?’.

KNOWN ILLNESSES INFLICTED BY INTERNALIZATION OF DEPLETED URANIUM PARTICLES

Table 1: Compiled by Leuren Moret from Interviews with Gulf War Vets and their families
GENERAL
abnormal births and birth defects
abnormal metabolism of semen: contains
amine & ammonium alkaline
acute autoimmune symptoms
(lung-, liver-, kidney failure)
acute myeloid leukemia
(deadly within days or weeks)
acute immune depression
acute respiratory failure
asthma
auto-immune deficiencies
Balkan-syndrome
blood in stools and urine
body function control loss
bone cancer
brain damage
brain tumors
burning semen
burning sensations
calcium loss in body
cardiovascular signs or symptoms
chemical sensitivities
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
chronic kidney and liver disorders
chronic myeloid leukemia
chronic respiratory infections
colon cancer
confusion
diarrhea
digestive problems
dizziness
Epstein Barr Syndrome
fluid buildup
fibromyalgia
gastrointestinal signs/symptoms
general fatigue
genetic alterations
glandular carcinoma
Gulf war-syndrome
headaches (severe)
heart attack/disease
high blood pressure
high frequency of micturition
Hodgkin lymphoma
immune system deficiency
infections
insomnia
involuntary movements
joint/muscle/leg pain
kidney failure/damage
leukemia
liver carcinoma
loss of feeling in fingers
Lou Gehrigs Disease -ALS
low blood oxygen saturation
( low HbO2)
low lung volume
lung damage
lung cancer
lymph cancer
lymphoma
melanoma
memory loss
metallic taste
Microplasma fermentans/
incognitis infections
mood swings – violence
homicide/
suicide
multiple cancers
multiple myeloma
myeloma
muscle pain
nerve damage
neuro-muscular degenerative
disease
non-Hodgkin lymphoma
other malignancies
pancreas carcinoma
Parkinsons disease
petit & grand mal fits
rashes
reactive airway disease
reduced IQ
respiratory ailments
shortness of breath
sinus diseases
skin cancer
skin damage: sweat glands
with trapped du-particles
skin infections
skin spotting
smell, loss of
sleep disturbances
stiffening of fingers
teeth crumbling
thyroid cancer
thyroid disease
unable to walk
unusual fevers/night sweats
unusual hair loss
vision problems
weight loss
CHILDREN

alimentary disorders
asthma
bladder & sphincter paralysis
blindness
complete range of known and
unknown Congenital Defects
deafness
dyspraxia
headache
kidney disease
leukemia
lymphoma
malformations of legs, arms,
toes & fingers
respiratory disorders
stillbirth
neural tube defects
FEMALE

abdominal pain
breast cancer
breast cancer at very young
age (20)
cervix cancer
endometriosis
headaches
incontinence
joint pain
lung cancer at age 20 and
non-smoker
menstrual problems
miscarriages
nausea
ovarian cancer
paralysis of digestive system
thyroid problems
uterine cancer
MALE

(acute) headache
acute myeloid leukemia
arthritis
avoiding people
breathing problems
(stridor)
chemical sensitivity
chronic myeloid leukemia
endometriosis in partners
gastrointestinal disorder
hip and leg pain
joint pain
lung cancer at young age
lymphoma
skin cancer
skin eruptions
stomach pain
suicide
testicular cancer
unable to walk 

Soldiers who served in Bradley fighting vehicles, where it was common to sit on ammunition boxes where depleted uranium ammunition was stored, are now reporting that many have rectal cancer.
For the first time, medical doctors in Yugoslavia and Iraq have reported multiple in situ unrelated cancers developing in patients, and even in families who are living in highly contaminated areas. Even stranger, they report that cancer was unknown in previous generations. Very rare and unusual cancers and birth defects have also been reported to be increasing above normal levels prior to 1991, not only in war torn countries, but in neighbouring countries from transboundary contamination.

Dr. Keith Baverstock, a senior radiation advisor who was on the staff of the World Health Organization, co-authored a report in November 2001, warning that the long-term health effects of depleted uranium would endanger Iraq’s civilian population, and that the dry climate would increase exposure from the tiny particles blowing around and be inhaled for years to come. The WHO refused to give him permission to publish the study, bowing to pressure from the IAEA. Dr. Baverstock released the damning report to the media in February 2004. Pekka Haavisto, Chairman of the UN Environment Program’s Post-Conflict Assessment Unit in Geneva, shares Baverstock’s anxiety about depleted uranium but UNEP experts have not been allowed into Iraq to assess the pollution. 

"DEPLETED URANIUM SCARE" - Claimed by President George W. Bush on the official White House website:
"During the Gulf War, coalition forces used armor-piercing ammunition made from depleted uranium, which is ideal for the purpose because of its great density. In recent years, the Iraqi regime has made substantial efforts to promote the false claim that the depleted uranium rounds fired by coalition forces have caused cancers and birth defects in Iraq. Iraq has distributed horrifying pictures of children with birth defects and linked them to depleted uranium. The campaign has two major propaganda assets:"
"Uranium is a name that has frightening associations in the mind of the average person, which makes the lie relatively easy to sell; and Iraq could take advantage of an established international network of antinuclear activists who had already launched their own campaign against depleted uranium."

"But scientists working for the World Health Organization, the UN Environmental Programme, and the European Union could find no health effects linked to exposure to depleted uranium."
The US war in Afghanistan made it clear that this was not a war IN the third world, but a war AGAINST the third world. In Afghanistan where 800 to 1000 tons of depleted uranium was estimated to have been used in 2001, even uneducated Afghanis understand the impact these weapons have had on their children and on future generations:
"After the Americans destroyed our village and killed many of us, we also lost our houses and have nothing to eat. However, we would have endured these miseries and even accepted them, if the Americans had not sentenced us all to death. When I saw my deformed grandson, I realized that my hopes of the future have vanished for good, different from the hopelessness of the Russian barbarism, even though at that time I lost my older son Shafiqullah. This time, however, I know we are part of the invisible genocide brought on us by America, a silent death from which I know we will not escape."
(Jooma Khan of Laghman province, March 2003)
In 1990, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) wrote a report warning about the potential health and environmental catastrophe from the use of depleted uranium weapons. The health effects had been known for a long time. The report sent to the UK government warned "in their estimation, if 50 tonnes of residual DU dust remained ‘in the region’ there could be half a million extra cancers by the end of the century [2000]." Estimates of depleted uranium weapons used in 1991, now range from the Pentagon’s admitted 325 tons, to other scientific bodies who put the figure as high as 900 tons. That would make the number of estimated cancers as high as 9,000,000, depending on the amount used in the 1991 Gulf War. In the 2003 Gulf War, estimates of 2200 tons have been given — causing about 22,000,000 new cancer cases. Altogether the total number of cancer patients estimated using the UKAEA data would be 25,250,000. In July of 1998, the CIA estimated the population of Iraq to be approximately 24,683,313.

Ironically, the UN Resolution 661 calling for sanctions against Iraq, was signed on Hiroshima Day, August 6, 1990.

THE PARALLELS
War can really cause no economic boom, at least not directly, since an increase in wealth never does result from destruction of goods.
– Ludwig von Mises
The parallels between Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan are startlingly similar. The weapons used, the unfair treaties offered by the US, and the bombing and destruction of the environment and entire infrastructure. In every city of Iraq and Yugoslavia, the television and radio stations were bombed.
Educational centres were targeted, and stores where educational materials were sold were destroyed on nearly the same day. Under UN sanctions, Iraq was not even allowed pencils for schoolchildren. Cultural antiquities and historical treasures were targeted and destroyed in all three countries, a kind of cultural and historical cleansing, a collective national psychic trauma.

The permanent radioactive contamination and environmental devastation of all three countries is unprecedented, resulting in huge increases in cancer and birth defects following the attacks. These will increase over time from unknown effects due to chronic exposure, increasing internal levels of radiation from depleted uranium dust, and permanent genetic effects passed on to future generations. Clearly, this has been a genocidal plan from the start.

Fig. 3: Map of regions within a 1000 mile radius of Baghdad and Afghanistan which have been contaminated with depleted uranium since 1991. Depleted uranium dust will be repeatedly recycled throughout this dry region, and also carried around the world. More than ten times the amount of radiation, released during atmospheric testing, has been released from depleted uranium weaponry since 1991. In 2002 the US government admitted that every person living in the US between 1957 and 1963 was internally contaminated with radiation. Note that the contaminated region corresponds with the "South" region on the Eurasian chessboard in Fig. 1.

What has happened to Human Rights, to the Rights of the Child, to civil society, and to common humanity?
It is up to the citizens of the world to stop the depleted uranium wars, and future nuclear wars, causing irreversible devastation. There are just a few generations left before the collapse of our environment, and then it will be too late. We can be no healthier than the health of the environment — we breathe the same air, drink the same water, eat food from the same soil.
"Our collective gene pool of life, evolving for hundreds of millions of years has been seriously damaged in less than the past fifty. The time remaining to reverse this culture of ‘lemming death’ is on the wane. In the future, what will you tell our grandchildren about what you did in the prime of your life to turn around this death process?" (Rosalie Bertell, 1982)

THE DEEPER PURPOSE: G*O*D* [Gold, Oil, and Drugs]
"We must become the owners, or at any rate the controllers at the source, of at least a proportion of the oil which we require."
(British Royal Commission, agreeing with Winston Churchill's policy towards Iraq 1913).
"It is clear our nation is reliant upon big foreign oil. More and more of our imports come from overseas."
(US President George W. Bush, Beaverton, Oregon, Sep. 25, 2000).
"If they turn on the radars we're going to blow up their goddamn SAMs (surface-to-air missiles). They know we own their country. We own their airspace... We dictate the way they live and talk. And that's what's great about America right now. It's a good thing, especially when there's a lot of oil out there we need."

(US Brig. General William Looney in 1999, referring to Iraq).
Millions of years ago, before India crashed into the Eurasian continent and uplifted the Himalayas, the ancient shallow Tethys sea stretched from the Atlantic across what is now the Mediterranean, Black, Caspian and Aral seas. Rich oil deposits are now located where ancient life accumulated and ‘cooked’ under just the right conditions to form large oil deposits in the ancient sediments. Long before 1991, Unocal in Afghanistan, Amoco in Yugoslavia, and various oil companies interested in Iraq oil deposits, had conducted extensive exploration and characterisation of oil deposits in the Middle East and Central Asian regions, including the northern half of India.

Britain has maintained an interest in Middle Eastern oil deposits for a century, and has been the staunchest military partner of the US since the first depleted uranium war in 1991 in Iraq. Germany, another military partner in Yugoslavia with forces now in Afghanistan, was one of the major economic beneficiaries of the breakup of Yugoslavia and the colonisation of the Balkans. US interest in Yugoslavia had much to do with building pipelines from Central Asia to the Mediterranean warm water ports in Yugoslavia. A silent and hidden partnership between the US and Japan provided large amounts of cash from Japan to finance the 1991 Iraq and 1995/1999 Yugoslavian wars, with additional help in Afghanistan by providing not only cash, but fuel for the war, from Aegis warships of the Japanese Self Defense Forces in the Indian Ocean. Nippon Steel, Mitsubishi, and Halliburton are now partners in a Central Asian oil pipeline project. In 2004, despite much citizen opposition in Japan, the Japanese government has sent Self Defense Forces to Iraq for ‘reconstruction’. This action taken by the Japanese government, of placing troops on the ground in a war zone, will lead to rescinding Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, which forever prohibits military aggression by Japan.

THE IRON TRIANGLE (all under one roof): MILITARY, BIG BUSINESS, POLITICS
The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism -- ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power.
- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
But what do oil, military partners, depleted uranium wars, and US foreign policy have to do with nuclear weapons? The answer came to me in 1991 when I became a whistleblower at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory near San Francisco, California. Richard Berta, the Western Regional Inspector for the Department of Energy, told me "The Pentagon exists for the oil companies… and the nuclear weapons labs exist for the Pentagon."
Depleted uranium was used beginning in 1991 for three reasons:
  • To test the radiobiological effects of 4th generation nuclear weapons, which are still under development
  • To blur and break down the distinction between conventional and nuclear weapons
  • To make it easier to reintroduce nuclear weapons into the US military arsenal
Today, the US is number one in 4th generation nuclear weapons research and development, followed by Japan and Germany tied for number two, and Russia and other countries follow.

Figure 4: Depleted uranium and 4th generation nuclear weapons
Map by Mika TSUTSUMI 12/12/03

The Carlyle Group, a private massive equity firm, the 12th largest defense business with an obscenely high profit margin, is a business "arrangement" between the Bush and Bin Laden families, wealthy Saudis, former British Prime Minister John Major, James Baker III, Afsaneh Masheyekhi, Frank Carlucci, Colin Powell, other former US Government administrators, and Madeleine Albright’s daughter. The Carlyle Group is the ‘gatekeeper’ to the Saudi investment community. It owns 70 percent of Lockheed Martin Marietta, the largest military contractor in the US, and because Carlyle is privately owned, has no scrutiny or accountability whatsoever. A journalist who calls himself ‘a skunk at the garden party’ described investigating the Carlyle Group, he said ‘it’s like shadow boxing with a ghost’. The Group hires as lobbyists the best known politicians from around the world, in order to influence the politics of war, and privately profit from their previous public policies. The conflict of interest is obvious: President George W. Bush is creating wars as his father, former President George Bush, is globally peddling weapons and "protection". Lockheed Martin Marietta now owns Sandia Laboratories, a private contractor that makes the trigger for nuclear weapons, with a Sandia laboratory facility across the street from Los Alamos and Livermore National Laboratories, where the nuclear bombs are made.

At the May 2003 University of California Regents meeting which I attended, Admiral Linton Brooks was present and newly in charge of the nuclear weapons programme under the Department of Energy. Admiral Brooks informed California Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante and the UC Regents that the management contract for the nuclear weapons laboratories, held unchallenged by the University of California for over 60 years, will be put up for competitive bid in 2005. The favoured institution, with a faculty member on the ‘blue ribbon committee’ making the contract award, is the University of Texas. This privatisation and management contract transfer of the US nuclear weapons programme will put control of the US nuclear weapons programme close to the Carlyle Group. The incestuous relationship between the US government, private companies, and the Bush and Bin Laden families in a way answers many of the lingering questions in everyone’s minds about many of the ill fated decisions and policies that have been implemented.

But who is Osama bin Laden really?
Let me rephrase that.  What is Osama bin Laden?
He’s America’s family secret.  He is the American President’s dark doppelganger.  The savage twin of all that purports to be beautiful and civilised.  He has been sculpted from the spare rib of a world laid to waste by America’s foreign policy; its gunboat diplomacy, its nuclear arsenal, its vulgarly stated policy of  "full spectrum dominance," its chilling disregard for non-American lives, its barbarous military interventions, its support for despotic and dictatorial regimes, its merciless economic agenda that has munched through the economies of poor countries like a cloud of locusts.  Its marauding multinationals who are taking over the air we breathe, the ground we stand on, the water we drink, the thoughts we think.

Arundhati Roy
The Algebra of Infinite Justice

Leuren Moret has worked at two US nuclear weapons laboratories as a geoscientist. In 1991 she became a whistleblower at the Livermore nuclear weapons lab, and since then has worked as an independent citizen scientist and radiation specialist in communities around the world, and contributed to the UN subcommission investigating depleted uranium. Her research on the environmental and public health effects of low level radiation from atmospheric testing fallout, nuclear power plants, and depleted uranium weaponry, is available on the internet and at http://www.mindfully.org. In 2003, she testified at the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan held in Japan, and presented at the World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference in Hamburg, Germany, and at the World Court of Women at the World Social Forum in Bombay, India in January 2004. She is a Contributing Editor to GLOBAL OUTLOOK, a City of Berkeley Environmental Commissioner, and the Past President of the Association for Women Geoscientists.

Websites:
  • International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan written opinion of Judge N. Bhagwat: also at http://www.traprockpeace.org/tokyo_trial_13march04.doc
  • Question 11: What does the US Government know about depleted uranium: http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf 
  • World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference: http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de 
  • Radiation and Public Health Project: http://www.radiation.org 
  • "A comparison of delayed radiobiological effects of depleted-uranium munitions versus fourth-generation nuclear weapons" by A. Gsponer, J.-P. Hurni, and B. Vitale, 4th International Conference of the Yugoslav Nuclear Society, Belgrade, September 30-October 4, 2002. http://arXiv.org/abs/physics/0210071
  • "Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons: The Physical Principles Of Thermonuclear Explosives, Inertial Confinement Fusion, And The Quest For Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons" by Andre Gsponer and Jean-Pierre Hurni http://www.inesap.org/publ_tech01.htm
  • 54 minute VPRO Dutch TV "Carlyle Group" documentary on internet: http://www.vpro.nl/info/tegenlicht/index.shtml?7738514+7738518+7738520+11838857 
    • Real Player Video Documentary on the Carlyle Group, by VPRO Dutch television [500 kbps real video]
    • Real Player Video Documentary on the Carlyle Group, by VPRO Dutch television [100 kbps real video]
    • Overview of documentary - Interactive Flash Animation - with links to biographies and articles (Dutch) and specific sections of video.
    • English translation of Dutch introduction Translation of the first one minute forty seven seconds of this program.
      The war in Iraq is over.

      The rubble is still smoking While the first dozers are already entering the country.
      After the coalition forces destroyed Baghdad it is now primarily American companies who are to rebuild Iraq.

      An interesting point is that these companies usually have people on the payroll who have been politicians. Is this a conflict of interests or a new (global) way of doing business?

      One of the corporations that work this way is the Carlyle Group. On their payroll are people like : George Bush (Sr.), James Baker III and old premier John Major.

      The Carlyle Group is a private investment bank which doesn't come to the publics attention very often but it is one of the biggest American (ed: USA) investors of the defense industry, telecom, property and financial services.

      What is the Carlyle Group? Who are the people behind the name? And how much power does Carlyle have?
  • Global Outlook: http://www.globalresearch.de 
  • An interesting response. . .

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Leuren Moret" <leurenmoret@yahoo.com>
    To: < [US Army Col Special Ops Green Beret] >
    Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 12:56 AM
    Subject: Re: Treachery And Treason

    Hi John - Here is an article coming out in July in World Affairs Journal. Can you please tell me what you think and whose decision it could have been to use DU on the Arab world? It looks to me like it was in the 1970s.

    Leuren

    -------- Response ---------

    From: < [US Army Col Special Ops Green Beret] >
    To: "Leuren Moret"  <leurenmoret@yahoo.com
    Subject: Re: Treachery And Treason
    Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:10:01 -0700

    Hi Leuren,

    Your report is very comprehensive and compelling.

    It begs the question WHO and WHY re the responsibility for the decision to create an area of deniability that covers the Arab world.

    It seems credible that the decision to isolate the Arab occupied areas of the world was and is intentional for the express purpose of controlling the flow of oil from Russia, through the mid-east countries of Afghanistan and Iraq (with eventual expansion to Syria and Iran and North Africa, and Saudi Arabia) while simultaneously destroying the current population to preclude resistance.

    Deaths in the contested area as a direct result of DU is, in my opinion, the covert means by which CONTROL over these lands will be accomplished.

    Systems must be in development to eventually provide automated CONTROL of the oil production mechanisms with minimum human exposure for maintenance. High altitude observation will CONTROL the threat of sabotage in ways perfected to secure Area 51 in Nevada.

    Whose Idea was this scenario? Henry Kissinger's fingerprints are all over this project. The Carlyle Group is in perfect position to carry out Henry's design.

    Take for example the exposure of Kissinger's genocidal action by configuring over 3000 secret B-52 strikes (using multiple aircraft) on Cambodia (1969-72) as written in the book "Side Show". B-52's would take off from Guam with assigned targets in North and South Vietnam only to receive in-flight changes of the coordinates to targets in Cambodia. Only the Command Pilot and the Navigator were aware of the changes, by design, to keep the bombing of Cambodia compartmentalized from other crew members to minimize compromising the illegal acts of war on a neutral country. This dovetails with the covert DU attack on the Arab World. It also provides the reason the US. Air Force ran out of 750 bombs during the Vietnam War. This also provides insight as to the diversion of the war on terrorism which began in Afghanistan only to be shifted, without justification, to Iraq, thereby cutting off the available resources to go after bin Laden and al Qaeda strongholds in Afghanistan. It is now apparent that the United States only wanted the appearance of going after bin Laden since he is an integral part of the Carlyle Group. These are the "sources and methods" which must be kept compartmented from the clueless.

    Henry's other quote re military is; "they are mindless cattle". But, then again, the military leadership excepts it's existence as "expendable assets".

    He would have made a wonderful Nazi. Right up there with Goebbels, Eichmann, Erlichman, Haldeman, und Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz.

    We have definitely become the Aggressor Nation. I fear we will pay dearly for the criminal greed of those responsible.

    I will wait until your material is published before passing it on to interested parties.

    Strangely enough, the Trojan Horse inside a shield was the Green Beret emblem of the 10th Special Forces Group in Germany in the fifties and sixties....that was my first exposure to diabolical thinking and the "sources and methods" of the Agency.

    Best,
    John