***************************************************************** 12/27/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.300 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 [progchat_action] Iran in the Crosshairs 2 [NYTr] More Speculations over US attack against Iran 3 IRNA: Russia proposition, a positive response to Iran call - MP 4 RIA Novosti: Russia's Middle East policy to gather momentum in 2006 5 Xinhua: Moscow awaiting Tehran's reply to nuclear proposal 6 AFP: Iran could have bomb in two years: Israeli intelligence - 7 Los Angeles Times: Reining in Iran - 8 MNA: Russia knows Iran has paid dearly for its nuclear program - MPs 9 Korea Herald: 'N.K. wants normalization with U.S. the most' 10 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Japan, North to resume talks on normal ties 11 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Six-Party Talks Will Resume Next Month - 12 Japan Times: Japan, N. Korea agree on talks' format 13 Korea Times: NK Reports Talks With Japan 14 US: Las Vegas SUN: 'Write your Congressman' more than just a catch p 15 Guardian Unlimited: State Dept. Stands Behind Seoul Envoy 16 IPS-English CHALLENGES 2005-2006: Nuclear Clouds Gather Over 17 IPS: CHALLENGES 2005-2006: Nuclear Clouds Gather Over Asia NUCLEAR REACTORS 18 US: [NukeNet] Lobbying Needed Now For Nuke Plants, Renewable 19 BBC: Public 'split' on nuclear energy 20 US: Rutland Herald: CVPS on hook for $3 million at Mass. reactor 21 US: Rutland Herald: Vt. Yankee site could stay hot for generations 22 AFP: British public split over nuclear energy: poll - 23 China Daily: China to build two new nuclear plants 24 Guardian Unlimited: Voters split over nuclear power 25 US: NRC: Procedures; Notice of Meeting 26 US: NRC: [Docket No. 50-390] Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1; 27 US: MSNBC.com: FPL creates energy giant in $11B deal - Jacksonville 28 US: Oklahoman: Nuclear power: Government must lead the push 29 Guardian Unlimited: Voters split over nuclear power 30 ITAR-TASS: WB to extend aid to Chernobyl-hit areas in Belarus 31 Guardian Unlimited: Renewables key to nuclear future, say experts 32 US: UPI: Poll says half oppose nuclear power plants NUCLEAR SECURITY 33 US: IEER: Missing Plutonium - Index NUCLEAR SAFETY 34 [du-list] Iraq: Depleted uranium aka Baghdad Boils? 35 [du-list] "Pain Ray" to be tested in Iraq 36 [du-list] Iraq: Depleted uranium aka Baghdad Boils? 37 [du-list] Re: Iraq: Depleted uranium aka Baghdad Boils? 38 US: Report: Fed Agents Monitored Muslim Site in D.C. Area WITHOUT 39 US: [du-list] Why are workers having trouble getting compensated? 40 US: Cincinnati Enquirer: Fernald sick claims a long shot 41 US: Hawk Eye: IAAP claims move ahead 42 US: WHO TV: Advocate says more needs to be done for former ammunitio 43 US: AP Wire: Labor Department rejects most claims from uranium plant NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 44 RIA Novosti: Moscow's uranium enrichment proposal only partially sui 45 NewsFromRussia.Com: Ukraine and USA to build nuclear waste storage f 46 Japan Times: New fast-breeder reactor after Monju eyed for '30 47 news | us company awarded nuclear waste contract 48 US: KTVB.COM: No radiation leak, empty nuclear waste transport truck 49 asahi.com: New fast-breeder reactor to replace prototype Monju - 50 UPI: Washington proposes nuclear reprocessing 51 ForUm: U.S to build nuclear depository in Ukraine 52 US: Deseret News: Build refineries in Skull Valley PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 53 AP Wire: Paducah company gets $191 million contract for work at plan ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 [progchat_action] Iran in the Crosshairs Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 00:26:02 -0600 (CST) December 24/25, 2005 Israel's War Deadline Iran in the Crosshairs By JAMES PETRAS http://www.counterpunch.org/petras12242005.html Never has an imminent war been so loudly and publicly advertised as Israel's forthcoming military attack against Iran. When the Israeli Military Chief of Staff, Daniel Halutz, was asked how far Israel was ready to go to stop Iran's nuclear energy program, he said "Two thousand kilometers" - the distance of an air assault. More specifically Israeli military sources reveal that Israel's current and probably next Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered Israel's armed forces to prepare for air strikes on uranium enrichment sites in Iran According to the London Times the order to prepare for attack went through the Israeli defense ministry to the Chief of Staff. During the first week in December, "sources inside the special forces command confirmed that 'G' readiness - the highest state - for an operation was announced" (Times, December 11, 2005). On December 9, Israeli Minister of Defense, Shaul Mofaz, affirmed that in view of Teheran's nuclear plans, Tel Aviv should "not count on diplomatic negotiations but prepare other solutions". In early December, Ahron Zoevi Farkash, the Israeli military intelligence chief told the Israeli parliament (Knesset) that "if by the end of March, the international community is unable to refer the Iranian issue to the United Nations Security Council, then we can say that the international effort has run its course". In other words, if international diplomatic negotiations fail to comply with Israel's timetable, Israel will unilaterally, militarily attack Iran. Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the Likud Party and candidate for Prime Minister, stated that if Sharon did not act against Iran, "then when I form the new Israeli government (after the March 2006 elections) we'll do what we did in the past against Saddam's reactor." In June 1981 Israel bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq. Even the pro-Labor newspaper, Haaretz, while disagreeing with the time and place of Netanyahu's pronouncements, agreed with its substance. Haaretz criticized "(those who) publicly recommend an Israeli military option" because it "presents Israel as pushing (via powerful pro-Israel organizations in the US) the United States into a major war." However, Haaretz adds "Israel must go about making its preparations quietly and securely - not at election rallies." (Haaretz, December 6, 2005). Haaretz's position, like that of the Labor Party, is that Israel not advocate war against Iran before multi-lateral negotiations are over and the International Atomic Energy Agency makes a decision. Israeli public opinion apparently does not share the political elite's plans for a military strike against Iran's nuclear program. A survey in the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, reported by Reuters (December 16, 2005) shows that 58 per cent of the Israelis polled believed the dispute over Iran's nuclear program should be handled diplomatically while only 36 per cent said its reactors should be destroyed in a military strike. All top Israeli officials have pronounced the end of March, 2006, as the deadline for launching a military assault on Iran. The thinking behind this date is to heighten the pressure on the US to force the sanctions issue in the Security Council. The tactic is to blackmail Washington with the "war or else" threat, into pressuring Europe (namely Great Britain, France, Germany and Russia) into approving sanctions. Israel knows that its acts of war will endanger thousands of American soldiers in Iraq, and it knows that Washington (and Europe) cannot afford a third war at this time. The end of March date also coincides with the IAEA report to the UN on Iran's nuclear energy program. Israeli policymakers believe that their threats may influence the report, or at least force the kind of ambiguities, which can be exploited by its overseas supporters to promote Security Council sanctions or justify Israeli military action. A March date also focusses the political activities of the pro-Israel organizations in the United States. The major pro-Israel lobbies have lined up a majority in the US Congress and Senate to push for the UN Security Council to implement economic sanctions against Iran or, failing that, endorse Israeli "defensive" action. On the side of the Israeli war policy are practically all the major and most influential Jewish organizations, the pro-Israeli lobbies, their political action committees, a sector of the White House, a majority of subsidized Congressional representatives and state, local and party leaders. On the other side are sectors of the Pentagon, State Department, a minority of Congressional members, a majority of public opinion, a minority of American Jews and the majority of active and retired military commanders who have served or are serving in Iraq. Most discussion in the US on Israel's war agenda has been dominated by the pro-Israeli organizations that transmit the Israeli state positions. The Jewish weekly newspaper, Forward, has reported a number of Israeli attacks on the Bush Administration for not acting more aggressively on behalf of Israel's policy. According to the Forward, "Jerusalem is increasingly concerned that the Bush Administration is not doing enough to block Teheran from acquiring nuclear weapons" (December 9, 2005). Further stark differences occurred during the semi-annual strategic dialog between Israeli and US security officials, in which the Israelis opposed a US push for regime change in Syria, fearing a possible, more radical Islamic regime. Israeli officials also criticized the US for forcing Israel to agree to open the Rafah border crossing and upsetting their stranglehold on the economy in Gaza. Predictably the biggest Jewish organization in the US, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations immediately echoed the Israeli state line. Malcolm Hoenlan, President of the Conference, lambasted Washington for a "failure of leadership on Iran" and "contracting the issue to Europe" (Forward, December 9, 2005). He went on to attack the Bush Administration for not following Israel's demands by delaying referral of Iran to the UN Security Council for sanction. Hoenlan then turned on French, German and British negotiators accusing them of "appeasement and weakness", and of not having a "game plan for decisive action" - presumably for not following Israel's 'sanction or bomb them' game plan. The role of AIPAC, the Conference and other pro-Israeli organizations as transmission belts for Israel's war plans was evident in their November 28, 2005 condemnation of the Bush Administration agreement to give Russia a chance to negotiate a plan under which Iran would be allowed to enrich uranium for non-military purposes under international supervision. AIPAC's rejection of negotiations and demands for an immediate confrontation were based on the specious argument that it would "facilitate Iran's quest for nuclear weapons" - an argument which flies in the face of all known intelligence data (including Israel's) which says Iran is at least 3 to 10 years away from even approaching nuclear weaponry. AIPAC's unconditional and uncritical transmission of Israeli demands and criticism is usually clothed in the rhetoric of US interests or security in order to manipulate US policy. AIPAC chastised the Bush regime for endangering US security. By relying on negotiations, AIPAC accused the Bush Administration of "giving Iran yet another chance to manipulate (sic) the international community" and "pose a severe danger to the United States" (Forward, Dec. 9, 2005). Leading US spokesmen for Israel opposed President Bush's instruction to his Ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khaklilzad, to open a dialog with Iran's Ambassador to Iraq. In addition, Israel's official "restrained" reaction to Russia's sale to Teheran of more than a billion dollars worth of defensive anti-aircraft missiles, which might protect Iran from an Israeli air strike, was predictably echoed by the major Jewish organizations in the US. Pushing the US into a confrontation with Iran, via economic sanctions and military attack has been a top priority for Israel and its supporters in the US for more than a decade (Jewish Times/ Jewish Telegraph Agency, Dec. 6, 2005). In line with its policy of forcing a US confrontation with Iran, AIPAC, the Israeli PACs (political action committees) and the Conference of Presidents have successfully lined up a majority of Congress people to challenge what they describe as the "appeasement" of Iran. Representative Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Florida), who has the dubious distinction of being a collaborator with Cuban exile terrorist groups and unconditional backer of Israel's war policy, is chairwoman of the US House of Representative Middle East subcommittee. From that platform she has denounced "European appeasement and arming the terrorist regime in Teheran". She boasted that her Iran sanctions bill has the support of 75 per cent of the members of Congress and that she is lining up additional so-sponsors. Despite pro-Israeli attacks on US policy for its 'weakness' on Iran, Washington has moved as aggressively as circumstances permit. Facing European opposition to an immediate confrontation (as AIPAC and Israeli politicians demand) Washington supports European negotiations but imposes extremely limiting conditions, namely a rejection of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which allows uranium enrichment for peaceful purposes. The European "compromise" of forcing Iran to turn over the enrichment process to a foreign country (Russia), is not only a violation of its sovereignty, but is a policy that no other country using nuclear energy practices. Given this transparently unacceptable "mandate", it is clear that Washington's 'support for negotiations' is a device to provoke an Iranian rejection, and a means of securing Europe's support for a Security Council referral for international sanctions. Despite the near unanimous support and widespread influence of the major Jewish organizations, 20 per cent of American Jews do not support Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians. Even more significantly, 61 per cent of Jews almost never talk about Israel or defend Israel in conversation with non-Jews (Jerusalem Post, Dec 1, 2005). Only 29 per cent of Jews are active promoters of Israel. The Israel First crowd represents less than a third of the Jewish community. In fact, there is more opposition to Israel among Jews than there is in the US Congress. Having said that, however, most Jewish critics of Israel are not influential in the big Jewish organizations and the Israel lobby, excluded from the mass media and mostly intimidated from speaking out, especially on Israel's war preparations against Iran. The Myth of the Iranian Nuclear Threat The Israeli Defense Forces Chief of Staff, Daniel Halutz, has categorically denied that Iran represents an immediate nuclear threat to Israel, let along the United States. According to Haaretz (12/14/05), Halutz stated that it would take Iran time to be able to produce a nuclear bomb - which he estimated might happen between 2008 and 2015. Israel's Labor Party officials do not believe that Iran represents an immediate nuclear threat and that the Sharon government and the Likud war propaganda is an electoral ploy. According to Haaretz, "Labor Party officialsaccused Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and other defense officials of using the Iran issue in their election campaigns in an effort to divert public debate from social issues". In a message directed at the Israeli Right but equally applicable to AIPAC and the Presidents of the Major Jewish Organizations in the US, Labor member of the Knesset, Benjamin Ben-Eliezer rejected electoral warmongering: "I hope the upcoming elections won't motivate the prime minister and defense minister to stray from government policy and place Israel on the frontlines of confrontation with Iran. The nuclear issue is an international issue and there is no reason for Israel to play a major role in it" (Haaretz, December 14, 2005). Israeli intelligence has determined that Iran has neither the enriched uranium nor the capability to produce an atomic weapon now or in the immediate future, in contrast to the hysterical claims publicized by the US pro-Israel lobbies. Mohammed El Baradei, head of the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has inspected Iran for several years, has pointed out that the IAEA has found no proof that Iran is trying to construct nuclear weapons. He criticized Israeli and US war plans indirectly by warning that a "military solution would be completely un-productive". More recently, Iran, in a clear move to clarify the issue of the future use of enriched uranium, "opened the door for US help in building a nuclear power plant". Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hamid Reza Asefi, stated "America can take part in the international bidding for the construction of Iran's nuclear power plant if they observe the basic standards and quality" (USA Today, Dec. 11, 2005). Iran also plans to build several other nuclear power plants with foreign help. This Iranian call for foreign assistance is hardly the strategy of a country trying to conduct a covert atomic bomb program, especially one directed at involving one of its principal accusers. The Iranians are at an elementary stage in the processing of uranium, not even reaching the point of uranium enrichment, which in turn will take still a number of years, and overcoming many complex technical problems before it can build a bomb. There is no factual basis for arguing that Iran represents a nuclear threat to Israel or to the US forces in the Middle East. Scores of countries with nuclear reactors by necessity use enriched uranium. The Iranian decision to advance to processing enriched uranium is its sovereign right as it is for all countries, which possess nuclear reactors in Europe, Asia and North America. Israel and AIPAC's resort to the vague formulation of Iran's potential nuclear capacity is so open-ended that it could apply to scores of countries with a minimum scientific infrastructure. The European Quartet has raised a bogus issue by evading the issue of whether or not Iran has atomic weapons or is manufacturing them and focused on attacking Iran's capacity to produce nuclear energy - namely the production of enriched uranium. The Quartet has conflated enriched uranium with a nuclear threat and nuclear potential with the danger of an imminent nuclear attack on Western countries, troops and Israel. The Europeans, especially Great Britain, have two options in mind: To impose an Iranian acceptance of limits on its sovereignty, more specifically on its energy policy; or to force Iran to reject the arbitrary addendum to the Non-Proliferation Agreement and then to propagandize the rejection as an indication of Iran's evil intention to create atomic bombs and target pro-Western countries. The Western media would echo the US and European governments position that Iran was responsible for the breakdown of negotiations. The Europeans would then convince their public that since "reason" failed, the only recourse it to follow the US to take the issue to the Security Council and approve international sanctions against Iran. The US then would attempt to pressure Russia and China to vote in favor of sanctions or to abstain. There is reason to doubt that either or both countries would agree, given the importance of the multi-billion dollar oil, arms, nuclear and trade deals between Iran and these two countries. Having tried and failed in the Security Council, the US and Israel would, on the scenario of the War Party, move toward a military attack. An air attack on suspected Iranian nuclear facilities would entail the bombing of heavily populated as well as remote regions leading to large-scale loss of life. The principal result will be a huge escalation of war throughout the Middle East. Iran, a country of 70 million, with several times the military forces that Iraq possessed and with highly motivated and committed military and paramilitary forces could be expected to cross into Iraq. Iraqi Shiites sympathetic to or allied with Iran would most likely break their ties with Washington and go into combat. US military bases, troops and clients would be under fierce attack. US military casualties would multiply. All troop withdrawal plans would be disrupted. The 'Iraqization' strategy would disintegrate. Most likely new terrorist incidents would occur in Western Europe, North America, and Australia and against US multinationals Sanctions on Iran would not work, because oil is a scarce and essential commodity. China, India and other fast-growing Asian countries would balk at a boycott. Turkey and other Muslim countries would not cooperate. The sanction policy would be destined to failure; its only result to raise the price of oil even higher. Here in the United States there are few if any influential organized lobbies challenging the pro-war Israel lobby either from the perspective of working for coexistence in the Middle East or even in defending US national interests when they diverge from Israel. Although numerous former diplomats, generals, intelligence officials, Reformed Jews, retired National Security advisers and State Department professionals have publicly denounced the Iran war agenda and even criticized the Israel First lobbies, their newspaper ads and media interviews have not been backed by any national political organization that can compete for influence in the White House and Congress. As we draw closer to a major confrontation with Iran and Israeli officials set short-term deadlines for igniting a Middle East conflagration, it seems that we are doomed to learn from future catastrophic losses that Americans must organize to defeat political lobbies based on overseas allegiances. James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50 year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in brazil and argentina and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed). His new book with Henry Veltmeyer, Social Movements and the State: Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina, will be published in October 2005. He can be reached at: jpetras@binghamton.edu This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm ***************************************************************** 2 [NYTr] More Speculations over US attack against Iran Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 11:05:13 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Der Spiegel via Info Clearing House - Dec 23, 2005 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info//article11373.htm Speculations over US attack against Iran Are the USA planing a rocket attack against targets in Iran? In secret discussions Washington was preparing the Allies for appropriate air strikes in 2006, agencies disclosed to day. Especially in the NATO country Turkey, speculations about an attack against Iranian nuclear facilities are taking place. By J|rgen Gottschlich Der Spiegel Istanbul/Berlin - The News exploded like a Bomb in the tranquil prechristmas mood.:Washington was preparing close allies for air strikes against Iran. This was disseminated today by the German Depeschenservice in a text by the former "FAZ" editor - Head and Secret Service Expert Udo Ulfkotte - however substantial doubts on this matter are certainly justified. As source given by the not undoubted journalist Ulfkotte "Western security circles" without naming specifics. According to his statements, CIA-Chief Porter Goss in the Turkish Capital Ankara asked M.P. Recep Tayyip Erdogan to support the air strikes against Iranian Nuclear and Military Installations especially with uninhibited exchange of secret information. At the present plan the attacks were planned for 2006. In recent weeks The governments of Saudi-Arabia, Jordan, Oman and Pakistan have been informed about the implementations of military plans. The air strikes were described as "possible option" a specific point in time was however, not mentioned. CIA Chief Gloss was now to have provided the Turkish Security Administration in Ankara with three information packages, one of which supposedly includes that Teheran cooperate with the terror organization Al-Qaida. A further transferred info pertains to the progress of the Iranian nuclear Armament, it was said. According to statements from German security agencies, in Ankara Goss assured the Turkish Government they would be informed a few hours before the possible Air Strike and to give Turkey already the green light for this particular day to attack depots of the separatist PKK on Iranian territory - a curious "Green Light" however, because the PKK does not maintain any military bases, but operates primarily in North Iraq. The possible critical move in that situation - DDP reports - dependent mainly on the latest antisemitic outbursts of the Iranian president Mahmud Ahmadinedschad, whose scathing verbal attacks against Israel, prompted the American governments stronger impression, that Teheran would not yield in the nuclear - disagreement and were stalling for time. The News Agency cited a high ranking German Military official, anonymously: " I would not surprise me, if the Americans in short would not capitalize on the opportunity delivered by Teheran. The Americans would have to Attack Iran, before they have developed nuclear weapons. Afterwards it would be too late. If US plans for attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities exist, or how detailed they are is hard to estimate. Last the American discovery annalist Seymour Hersh, reported about this in January 2005 in the "New Yorker" that secret US Commando Groups were active in marking military targets. The Bush Government did not deny Hersh's report at that time. They only played it down: The article was full of "false statements" it was said in Washington. That the central issue in the report were false, was not disputed. Bush himself added explicitly, he didn't want to exclude the "War" option. Air attack after New year? Is a military action, possibly a war in the region about to happen? In Berlin the subject is moderated down. During the visit of defense minister Franz Josef Jung with Donald Rumsfeld this week in Washington, the possible Air Attack by the US on Iran did not come up as "a subject", a speaker for SPIEGEL ONLINE said. However, the speculation on US attacks against Iran refers primarily to happenings in Turkey. Last week there was actually a mighty assembly of high ranking Security Personnel from the USA and from NATO in Ankara. Within a couple of days there was first the Chief of the FBI, then the Chief of the CIA and last the Secretary General Scheffer in Turkey. After her visit in Germany Coondoleezza Rize travelled to Turkey, too. In fact Turkey's newspapers in connection with these visits have speculated too, that an attack on Iran was being prepared. But the assumptions in Turkey were not based on hard facts. Following the meeting of Porter Goss with Tayyip Erdogan the leftist Cumhuriyet headlined: "Now its Iran's turn". Substantiations: None. The Paper noted, however, that the meeting between the CIA-Chief and Erdogan lasted unusually over an hour, even though Goss met beforehand with the Chief of the Turkish Secret Service. Because of that the Turkish public deducted that it had to be something very important - detailed facts: Wrong conclusion. Just about all media speculates over the possibility that Erdogan and Goss could have discussed a mutual action against the PKK in North Iraq. Possibly that Goss requested in exchange requested Turkish secret service photographs. A possible Air Attack on Iran would certainly not be staged from the Turkish base Incirlik, it is of course plausible that the USA informed Turkey, to test their reaction. Ankara is skeptical. In the past the government in Ankara was skeptical concerning military actions by the USA to the point of directly opposed. An offensive by US ground troops in Northern Iraq against Saddam's Regime was even prevented by Ankara in 2003 - the lack of this second front was blamed by Donald Rumsfield over and over for military problems in Iraq. Now the Turkish commander in chief and the probable future chief of staff Yasar Buyukanit both spent two weeks in Washington. Afterwards he commented that the relationship between the Turkish Army and the US Army were again excellent. This is therefore remarkable, because Buyukanit is one of the Hawks in the fight against the PKK and in the past had already considered, to himself march into North Iraq - in case the USA and the North Iraqi Kurds would not prevent the PKK from staging attacks against Turkey. The Turkish - Iranian relations have been chilled for a long time. Teheran criticizes for years, that Turkey has good relations with Israel and is even cooperating with the Israeli Military. About the anti Israeli transgressions by Ahmadinedschad, Turkey was still not bombarded by the news media as it was the case in Germany - they just shook their head (shrugged their shoulder). MP Erdogan has, however, just recently called his Israeli college Aril Sharon and congratulated him to his recovery - The long rather withheld contact by Erdogan with Sharon has in recently become much closer. Sharon had recently declared, if in doubt, he would go combat those in-love-with-nuclear Mullahs alone. In spite of that The Turkish government spoke repeatedly against military action against Iran and Syria. Because at least with respect to the Kurdish question Turkey Syria and Iran are united, that there may not be an independent Kurdistan in northern Iraq. An alliance concerning these interests does not seem to exist between Washington and Ankara. However, if the USA plans a missile attack against Iran, Turkey must come aboard - active or passive. But Erdogan and his military harbor the worst fear for the whole region, in case the USA would actually go against Iran. Western experts, too, consider the success of a military action against nuclear installations in Iran in no way guaranteed. Just the opposite: An attack would probably miss its aim to stop the nuclear program and provide Ahmadinedschad with even more supporters. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 3 IRNA: Russia proposition, a positive response to Iran call - MP Tehran, Dec 27, IRNA Iran-Russia-Nuclear MP from Boroujerd said on Tuesday the first part of Russia's proposition for joint uranium enrichment work inside its soil was a positive response to Iran's call for partnership with other states on civilian nuclear program. Talking to IRNA, Head of Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Alaeddin Boroujerdi said Iran stresses the geographical situation of the project should be in Iran in light of investment has been made in Natanz so far for conducting uranium enrichment. He added necessary negotiations should be held with Russia to convince the country to have such a cooperation inside the Iranian soil because the issue, itself, was a positive step towards the Islamic Republic's call. Asked about Russia's proposal and its impact on bilateral ties with Tehran, he said Iran's relations with Russia is broad which will not be affected by a proposal. "Since Iran regards the principle of participation as positive, we can hold talks with Russia on place of the project. We can convince Russia that the Iranian soil is an appropriate place for implementation of the project." ***************************************************************** 4 RIA Novosti: Russia's Middle East policy to gather momentum in 2006 Opinion &analysis - 26/ 12/ 2005 MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Marianna Belenkaya.) The Middle East was a major part of Russia's foreign policy in 2005, which saw a number of crucial events in its relations with the region. Russian President Vladimir Putin made his first visits to Egypt, Israel, and the Palestinian National Authority, and Russia was granted observer status in the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). In 2006, Russia will take the rotating chair of the G8, which advanced the Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative (BMENA) at its summit in the Untied States in 2004. Russia will organize several functions within this program, which may help formulate goals and opportunities in the region more clearly. Russia's Middle East policy should become more transparent, so that the West and the East stop wondering about its goals in the region. Unfortunately, in 2005 Russia had to answer many embarrassing questions. All sides wondered where it was leaning, toward the West or the East, Israel or the Arab (Islamic) world. But Russia does not want to make the unequivocal choice; it wants to cooperate with all sides but is being forced to make a choice. Some people outside the country do not want to accept the fact that Russia is not the Soviet Union and the time when it made friends with somebody against a third country is over. This is the era of business pragmatism, when policy serves economic and security interests. This is why Russia has decided to form closer relations with the OIC. President Putin addressed this issue in his opening speech to the first session of the Chechen parliament in December. "Russia has been and remains the foremost partner of the Islamic states," he said. Making his speech in Chechnya was intentional, as Russia's policy in the Middle East or the Islamic world as a whole, its role in settling regional conflicts, and its balanced policy on some issues that sometimes looks overcautious are rooted in a desire to ensure internal security. Chechnya is only part of this problem; there are seats of other regional conflicts in direct proximity to the Russian borders. This is why Western criticism of Moscow for supporting the alleged "axis of evil" countries, among which the United States also counts Iran and Syria, is merely part of a propaganda campaign. The loudest anti-Russian PR actions were provoked by the sale of the Russian Igla air defense systems to Syria and Russo-Iranian nuclear power cooperation. Israel and the U.S. regularly raised the issue of Iran in its relations with Russia, but its essence has changed when the new Iranian president assumed power. Russia has done its best to maintain standards of cooperation, primarily in the economy, achieved with the previous Iranian government without damaging relations with the West. It has dealt with the situation nobly, though its position was greatly complicated by Tehran's policy and the anti-Israeli statements of President Ahmadinejad. But the main battle for Iran is still ahead; the final decision on forwarding the "Iranian nuclear dossier" to the UN Security Council will be made in March 2006. Russia will again have to choose between voting "for," "against," or abstaining. The situation around Syria will be complicated also. The outgoing year was crucial for Russo-Syrian relations. President Bashar Assad was in Moscow in late January when the problem of Syria's debts to Russia was settled, boosting bilateral economic cooperation. On the whole, Assad's visit and the fact that the two presidents found a common language predetermined Russia's policy in the region for the year. Who knows what would have happened if Assad's visit came later in the year? Barely three weeks after his coming to Moscow, Damascus became embroiled in an international scandal over the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. If not for a firm stance of Russian diplomacy, Syria would have barely avoided international sanctions. However, like in the case of Tehran, Russian diplomacy is not omnipotent and it is sometimes very difficult for it to take the side of Damascus. The Kremlin is worried over the possible appearance of new areas of conflict in Iran and Syria, as well as the situation in Lebanon. The Iran-Syria-Lebanon triangle will be a very hot area next year. At the same time, there are no clear signs promising a settlement of the Palestine-Israel conflict or in Iraq. This year began with the election of the head of the Palestinian National Authority and the first post-Hussein parliamentary election in Iraq. American diplomats say democracy is taking deeper root in the Middle East, but Moscow's assessments have always been more cautious, especially regarding Iraq. Though Moscow respects democratic processes in the region, it is more concerned with its real stability. The situation was not stable in 2005 and the outlook for 2006 is vague. However, the issue of democratic change in the region remains high on the agenda and Russia will highlight it during its G8 presidency. A growing connection between policy and economy, where political initiatives should have a clear-cut material aspect, may become another issue for Russia in the Middle East. Russian companies working in the region should focus their attention on this connection. So far, they are spurring ties with Egypt, Syria, Turkey and Iran and may promote them with Israel and Iraq. But the economic aspect of Russia's policy has not become strong enough, at least not in all directions, though this is crucial in view of the political changes in the Middle East. Russia's relations with the Middle East mirror its policy with regard to emerging countries at large, including in Africa. Russia is the Paris Club's leader for writing off and restructuring the debts of African countries, including those that are part of the Broader Middle East. Russia's writing off debts of Iraq and Syria has propelled their economic development. During Russia's G8 presidency it will raise the issue of economic assistance to Africa and the Middle East, as well as the settlement of military conflicts within the region. But this is only the initial stage of a clearer and stronger regional policy. On the whole, 2006 promises to be an interesting, and most probably, difficult year for the Middle East. Ironically, diplomats say that they do not remember a time when the region was at peace and working there was easy and simple. Every year brings new surprises, most of them unpleasant; 2005 was no different and 2006 will hardly be an exception to this rule either. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 5 Xinhua: Moscow awaiting Tehran's reply to nuclear proposal www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-12-26 19:10:15 MOSCOW, Dec. 26 (Xinhuanet) -- Moscow is waiting for Tehran's reply to Russia's offer to enrich uranium for Iran's nuclear power plant as a compromise to resolve the dispute over its nuclear program, a Russian diplomat said Monday. "We presented an official memo to Iran on Saturday. We are waiting for a reply," Vyacheslav Moshkalo, a counselor in the Russian Embassy in Tehran, told the Interfax news agency. The diplomat's remarks came a day after Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said on Sunday Tehran had not received any specific offer from Moscow. "It is hard to say what Mr. Asefi meant. Probably, they are expecting a detailed plan, as every bid comprises several points,ˇ± the diplomat said. The Russian Foreign Ministry confirmed on Saturday it made an offer to Iran to set up a joint venture in Russia that enriches uranium for Iran. Enriched uranium can be used as fuel in power generation or to make atomic bombs. The proposal is seen as a way to minimize the chances of Iran acquiring the critical nuclear know-how to make weapons-grade components. The United States accuses Iran of running a covert nuclear arms program. Iran, however, says its nuclear work is designed merely to meet its energy needs. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 AFP: Iran could have bomb in two years: Israeli intelligence - Tue Dec 27, 3:57 PM ET JERUSALEM (AFP) - Iran" /> Iranwill be able to build an atom bomb within two years, the head of Israel" /> Israel's Mossad overseas intelligence service, General Meir Dagan, was quoted as saying. "One or two years from now at the latest, Iran will have the fissionable material to make a nuclear bomb. From then on, producing the bomb is just a straightforward technical process," Dagan said, according to Israeli public radio. "In the coming months, without any hindrance, Iran will be independent in terms of nuclear technological material," he added. Dagan was speaking during an annual presentation to Israel's parliamentary defence and foreign affairs committee. Israeli politicians and military commanders have recently stepped up warnings about Iran, which the Jewish state and the United States accuse of trying to develop a nuclear arsenal. Iran denies the charge. Israeli fears were heightened when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in October called for the Jewish state to be "wiped off the map." Israel itself is believed to be the only nuclear power in the Middle East, although it has never admitted to having a non-conventional arsenal. Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 7 Los Angeles Times: Reining in Iran - December 26, 2005 latimes.com : Opinion : Commentary By Bill Frist, BILL FRIST (R-Tenn.) is Senate majority leader. IRAN'S RULING mullahs have waged a 26-year campaign to suppress dissent, support terror and pursue a nuclear weapons program. In recent weeks, it has become clear that international efforts to stop Iran's atomic program have failed to bear fruit. Unless we act quickly, the United States will have a nuclear crisis on its hands. Today's Iran presents a sharp contrast between a ruling class hostile to the world and a populace ready to rejoin the global community. The Iranian people's desire for freedom, however, hasn't stopped the nation's leaders from trying to build a fearsome arsenal. Iran already has missiles capable of striking Israel, parts of Europe and American forces in the Middle East. It also appears that rogue Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan has given Tehran's ruling clerics the blueprints for a nuclear warhead. Veteran Iran-watchers believe that the nation could soon use its supposedly civilian nuclear program to produce weapons-grade fissile material. The world's democracies largely agree that a nuclear-armed Iran presents a threat to Middle East stability and world peace. Meetings between the United States and the other 34 members of the International Atomic Energy Agency's governing board have produced resolutions but no final agreement to end Tehran's illicit nuclear program. Several IAEA board members have blocked serious action out of fear that Iran will pull out of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, suspend international energy sales or even lash out militarily. Late last month, the Bush administration went along with a European recommendation to delay asking the IAEA board members to refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council for action. The nonproliferation treaty calls for such referrals when countries violate their international obligations, and Iran has violated them more than a dozen times. In this case, there may be a good reason to wait: Permanent Security Council members Russia and China have significant commercial and strategic interests in Iran and would probably block U.N. action against the regime. Going ahead with a referral now could drive away allies whose help we will need to stop Iran's nuclear program. Although we should continue IAEA discussions with Iran  a process that has given us insights into its nuclear program  we need to explore other measures. In particular, we should ask allies who trade with Iran to join a sanctions campaign against Tehran. For years, the U.S. has maintained sanctions on Iran that prohibit most trade, investment and assistance. And because Iran is on our list of state sponsors of terrorism, U.S. law requires the president to oppose all multilateral assistance to Iran in international forums and impose sanctions on those who aidits weapons programs or invest in its energy sector. Now, we should persuade other countries to follow our lead. Aside from those covering food and medicine, we shouldn't rule out any type of sanction. A multinational sanctions regime might begin with an embargo on technologies that Iran can use in its nuclear program. If these initial sanctions prove ineffective, the program might escalate in stages to include a ban on arms sales and penalties for suppliers. Further sanctions could include limits on the export of civilian technologies, such as machine tools, that have military applications, and, eventually, the full spectrum of measures the U.S. has in place to isolate Iran and persuade its rulers to give up their nuclear ambitions. If we let Tehran develop nuclear weapons covertly while IAEA negotiations slog forward, Iran's theocrats will have little reason to negotiate with anyone. The U.S. needs to act before a regime that has denied the real Holocaust unleashes another. Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times | Privacy Policy | Terms of ***************************************************************** 8 MNA: Russia knows Iran has paid dearly for its nuclear program - MPs :12,2005/12/28 Tehran: 22:30 , 2005/12/26 TEHRAN, Dec. 25 (MNA) -- Iran-Russia Parliamentary Friendship Group Chairman Kazem Jalali said on Monday that the Russians should bear in mind that Iran has paid a heavy price to conduct uranium enrichment on its soil. “If we wanted to make a deal on enrichment we would have done so months ago; moreover such a deal would have been even more lucrative with Europe,” Jalali told the Mehr News Agency. Russia on Saturday repeated its offer to process uranium for Iran, announcing in a statement that the proposal to create “on Russian soil a joint Russo-Iranian undertaking to enrich uranium still stands.” The Islamic Republic has already announced that it welcomes foreign participation in its nuclear activities, Jalali stated. “But the scope of participation must be determined.” Obviously, any participation that would deprive Iran of its nuclear rights would not be acceptable, said the spokesman for the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee. He added that Iran has not yet received a comprehensive written plan from Russia. “If the proposal suggests enrichment can be carried out in Russia without any involvement by Iran, this means turning a blind eye to all the talks and confidence-building measures carried out so far and is in no way in line with our national interests.” Referring to the West’s insistence on the Russian plan, Jalali said, “It seems that the U.S. is trying to tighten the global consensus against Iran and as a first step it has driven Europe to its side. “The current support for the Russian plan is part of the policy to push Moscow into the Western consensus against Iran.” “We seek a powerful Russia in the international community and believe in a pluralism of power,” he noted, adding that Iran thinks it would not benefit Russia to join the international consensus against Iran. Jalali stressed the need to continue negotiations with Russia. “We have strategic ties with Moscow. However, the country’s involvement in the Iran-European Union nuclear talks would neither benefit Russia nor Iran.” Iran is ready to negotiate with any country that seeks to resolve the nuclear issue, he underlined. Iran's foreign minister said on Monday that Tehran is ready to discuss its nuclear program with any country, but that does not mean it is asking for permission for access to nuclear technology. Iran's right to peaceful nuclear technology was supported by "many countries of the world", Manuchehr Mottaki told a news conference during a one-day visit to the Afghan capital Kabul. "We do not accept global nuclear 'apartheid' and scientific 'apartheid'," Reuters quoted Mottaki as saying. Iran is ready to discuss its program, he added. "But that does not mean that we are waiting for any country's permission for the right of the Iranian nation and the Islamic Republic to enjoy nuclear technology," he said. No reason to accept Russian proposal MP Javad Jahangirzadeh, who also sits on the security committee, said on Monday that the Russian proposal is unprecedented in the world. “What happens behind the scenes is hidden from our eyes and certain security arrangements or the fact that the West has given some concessions to Russia might have led Moscow to present such a proposal,” he told MNA. No logic would support accepting such a proposal that was made to deprive countries of their obvious nuclear rights, Jahangirzadeh asserted. “Although we want to avoid a security crisis, nevertheless we will stand by our principles.” He argued that Russia has not proven its commitments toward the promises it has made to Iran, stating, “Therefore it does not seem logical to transfer our ability to produce nuclear fuel to such a country.” He asserted that Iran must stand by its principled policies and must not allow deprivation of the countries’ nuclear rights to become a norm. HL/MS/HG End MNA ***************************************************************** 9 Korea Herald: 'N.K. wants normalization with U.S. the most' 2005.12.28 Unification Minister Chung Dong-young said yesterday that the "most valuable thing" that North Korea desires to have in exchange for abandoning its nuclear programs is normalized relations with the United States. Chung's remarks came amid U.S. financial sanctions on the communist country, which prompted Pyongyang's threat to boycott the nuclear disarmament talks. Washington has accused Pyongyang of carrying out money laundering, counterfeiting $100 bills and drug dealing. "If North Korea normalizes its relations with the United States and Japan, it will help dismantle the last remaining Cold War structure and create a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula," Chung said in a meeting with foreign journalists in Seoul. He said the issue of recent financial sanctions "should not be linked to the six-party talks," calling on North Korea to return to the talks involving the United States, China, Russia, Japan and the two Koreas, at an earliest date possible. Chung said it is "historically significant" that the directly related nations agreed on Sept. 19 Joint Statement to negotiate a permanent peace regime on the peninsula, where has been an "unstable state of armistice" for more than half a century. Highlighting the expansion of inter-Korean exchanges and cooperation will bring positive impact on the nuclear disarmament talks, Chung said that South and North Korea have been gradually "cracking the wall of the Cold War." He raised the important role of Gaeseong industrial complex in the North, where 15 South Korean companies are running their factories with North Korean labors, that provides mutual benefits for both countries. Chung hopes to create a favorable atmosphere for Korean economic community in the future, hopefully by 2020, when the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation members plan to establish a free economic zone in the region. During his recent meeting with U.S. administration officials in Washington, he proposed U.S. companies to invest in the Gaeseong industrial complex and said the U.S. officials ensured to help the Gaeseong project to be successful. As for the human rights conditions in the North, Chung said South Korea has made "all other efforts" to improve the situation except open criticism. He did not elaborate in details. Chung, a potential presidential candidate who is also head of the National Security Council, plans to return to the ruling Uri Party and is most likely to run for the leadership post at the party's national caucus in next February. (aibang@heraldm.com) By Annie I. Bang ***************************************************************** 10 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Japan, North to resume talks on normal ties December 28, 2005 KST 15:34 (GMT+9) December 27, 2005 ¤Ń In a breakthrough that took more than three years to achieve, Japan and North Korea agreed to resume talks next month to establish diplomatic relations. At a meeting in Beijing, delegates from Tokyo and Pyongyang said Sunday night that they had agreed to hold normalization talks in an unspecified third country before the end of January. They said they would hold three sets of discussions in parallel: one on North Korea's admitted abductions of Japanese citizens, one on North Korean nuclear issues and the third to discuss reparations for Japan's colonial rule in Korea from 1910 until 1945. "North Korea expressed its willingness to resolve the pending issues including the abductions," said Saiki Akitaka, Tokyo's chief delegate to the talks. His counterpart, Sung Il-ho, agreed, saying that not only historical issues would be on the table. One immediate problem is the question of the remains of Megumi Yokota, a Japanese citizen who died in North Korea after being abducted there. Pyongyang returned her purportedly cremated ashes to Japan in late 2004, but Japanese officials said after DNA testing that the remains were not those of the woman, who was kidnapped in 1977. North Korea last year admitted abducting 13 Japanese nationals in the 1970s and 80s. Five have returned to Japan; Pyongyang said the others died in the North, but Tokyo has been unsatisfied with the explanations it has heard so far. Japan's chief cabinet secretary, Shinzo Abe, said the issue was a crucial one. "Our basic, unwavering principle is that we will not normalize ties (with North Korea) unless the abduction issue is resolved," he told the press after the talks. Those abductions, in particular the controversy over Ms. Yokota's remains, hindered efforts to resume the talks after they were broken off in October 2002. by Ser Myo-ja myoja@joongang.co.kr> Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use | ***************************************************************** 11 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Six-Party Talks Will Resume Next Month - Beijing Home> National/Politics Updated Dec.26,2005 20:12 KST China's chief delegate to stalled six-party talks on North KoreaˇŻs nuclear program has said the negotiations are expected to reconvene next month. Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei expressed hope that the involved countries will make joint efforts to resume the current fifth round in January. He made the remark in an interview with the state-run China Central Television over the weekend. Wu said although there are some difficulties in resuming the talks, hopes are high that Washington and Pyongyang will make positive efforts to resolve the nuclear row. Arirang News ***************************************************************** 12 Japan Times: Japan, N. Korea agree on talks' format Monday, December 26, 2005 BEIJING (Kyodo) Japan and North Korea agreed in bilateral talks here Sunday to set up three working groups to address outstanding issues that have stalled negotiations on normalizing diplomatic relations, according to Japan's chief delegate. [News photo] Akitaka Saiki, Japan's chief delegate in talks with North Korea in Beijing, speaks to reporters after the meeting. Under the new format, the two countries will establish three working groups that will address diplomatic normalization, the past abductions of Japanese nationals and North Korea's nuclear and missile programs, Akitaka Saiki said. The two sides will launch the working groups in late January if possible, he said, and the three tracks of discussions will be held on a parallel basis. The agreement paves the way for the two countries to hold normalization talks for the first time since October 2002. According to Saiki, deputy head of the Foreign Ministry's Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau, the normalization negotiations would be held at the ambassadorial level, while the abductions and the nuclear and other security matters will be conducted by senior officials. Other specifics -- including the time and place of the talks and who will be in charge of the negotiations -- will be decided in talks through diplomatic channels, another Foreign Ministry official said. One of the thorniest issues remains the abduction of Japanese nationals by North Korean agents in the 1970s and 1980s. North Korea insists the problem has been resolved. But Japan maintains it has yet to be worked out, and that the two countries cannot normalize diplomatic ties until they are able to settle the matter. The Japanese official said that while North Korea did not change its attitude in a major way during the Beijing talks, Japan believes it effectively promised to tackle the issue by agreeing on the basic principle that they will "take specific measures to resolve issues of mutual concern." That means North Korea has agreed to provide concrete information about Japanese abduction victims who remain unaccounted for, the official said. Meanwhile, Pyongyang's chief delegate, Song Il Ho, vice director of the North Korean Foreign Ministry's Asian Affairs Department, separately said his country will work to settle issues relating to the past and resolve other contentious issues to achieve normalization of diplomatic ties with Japan. Song also told reporters that North Korea wants experts to discuss a Japanese analysis of cremated remains the North handed over in November 2004 that concluded they were not those of abductee Megumi Yokota. He also said North Korea and Japan agreed during the talks on the need to make efforts to improve bilateral ties. The Japan Times: Dec. 26, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 13 Korea Times: NK Reports Talks With Japan Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation SEOUL (Yonhap) _ North Korea reported Monday on its just-ended negotiations with Japan to normalize bilateral diplomatic relations. ˇ°The two sides agreed to put behind their unfortunate past in order to realize normalization of diplomatic relations in the principle of their declaration made in Pyongyang,ˇ± the NorthˇŻs official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said. At the end of their two-day talks in Beijing, the two countries agreed to set up working groups on the normalization process, abductions and nuclear weapons. The two sides will hold further negotiations some time in January, the KCNA reported. ˇ°They agreed to resume ambassadorial- level talks aimed at normalizing diplomatic relations.ˇ± 12-27-2005 19:48 ***************************************************************** 14 Las Vegas SUN: 'Write your Congressman' more than just a catch phrase Photo: Andrea Mendoza December 26, 2005 'Write your Congressman' more than just a catch phrase Aides receive and answer thousands of letters every year By Benjamin Grove Sun Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- Santa may receive a lot of mail before Christmas, but he's got nothing on congressional lawmakers, who get it by the bagful all year. Most correspondence -- Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid receives between 2,000 and 6,000 pieces a week -- arrives via e-mail, fax and phone. But even in the fast-paced world of digital communication, people still take time to pen letters to their lawmakers. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., gets roughly 7,000 "contacts" a month in one form or another, and letter writing is "definitely not a lost art as far as our constituents are concerned," Ensign spokesman Jack Finn said. A letter addressed to Congress can take two to six weeks to make it to a lawmaker's office -- mail destined for Congress is sent to an irradiation center in New Jersey where it is opened and zapped to kill anthrax spores. In Reid's office, the mail is brought in daily by the bundle. Correspondence to Congress varies widely in topic and is often written for the sole purpose of letting lawmakers have it. Messages from constituents on just about every political topic are often passionate, emotional, sometimes angry and even profane. "Folks are not afraid to express their opinion, and the language can be strong, either in its praise or criticism," said David Cherry, spokesman for Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev. "It's a good barometer to measure how feelings are running on an issue." Hot topics this year included the war in Iraq, the Supreme Court nominees, congressional spending and the Patriot Act. "Yucca Mountain is always big," Finn said. Some constituents write about problems they have with federal agencies -- trouble getting a Social Security check or a veterans benefit. Others describe heart-wrenching stories of how an immigration policy is tearing their family apart. "There are so many human stories that come out of the mail," Cherry said. Reid has six full-time, letter-answering aides who handle different legislative topics. Reid's goal is to answer every piece from Nevadans within two weeks. To speed the turnaround time, staffers often rely on form letters, sometimes editing them to fit a particular response. Letter answerers -- most are young aides in their first job on Capitol Hill -- typically do not crave the spotlight. Their bosses don't care for them discussing constituent mail with the media. The legislative assistant who answers Reid's correspondence on health care and Social Security issues received about 1,500 pieces during one week earlier this year as Reid helped lead opposition to President Bush's Social Security proposals. The aide, from Las Vegas, did not want her name published. She said she is often struck by the volume of poignant correspondence from people with no health insurance. "We'll see letters like, 'I need a kidney transplant and I can't afford it -- what should I do?' " the staffer said. "It's very dire in some cases." Benjamin Grove can be reached at (202) 662-7436 or at grove@ lasvegassun.com. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 15 Guardian Unlimited: State Dept. Stands Behind Seoul Envoy From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday December 27, 2005 7:32 PM WASHINGTON (AP) - North Korea's criticism of the U.S. ambassador to Seoul will not result in any change in his assignment, the State Department said Tuesday. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow is an effective representative of the U.S. government and he ``continues to do his job just as any ambassador does his job,'' spokesman Adam Ereli said. North Korea has urged South Korea to expel Vershbow as having slandered North Korea. The ambassador has called the North a ``criminal regime'' for alleged arms dealings, money laundering and counterfeiting. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 16 IPS-English CHALLENGES 2005-2006: Nuclear Clouds Gather Over Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 19:11:29 -0800 ROMAIPS AP WD DV IP ML=20 CHALLENGES 2005-2006: Nuclear Clouds Gather Over Asia Analysis by Praful Bidwai=20 NEW DELHI , Dec 26 (IPS) - The Asia-Pacific region has not only emerged = as one of the main engines of the world economy but it has also taken the= global centre-stage in developments pertaining to nuclear weapons and ef= forts to acquire a capability to make them. =46rom Iran and Israel in West Asia, through India and Pakistan in South = Asia, to North Korea and Japan in the East, the region exhibited, in 2005= , unprecedented activity in the nuclear field that can only intensify in = the coming years. =20 In each of these countries, the United States plays a major role. Its pol= icies of selectively favouring or opposing their nuclear activities will = alter the strategic balance in some of the world's most volatile regions.= =20 =94This is a marked shift from the cold war period, where the global nucl= ear centre of gravity lay in the all-out confrontation between the easter= n and western blocs, which was most intense in Europe,=94 says Achin Vana= ik, professor of international relations and global politics at Delhi Uni= versity. He is also a member of the Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and= Peace and an independent nuclear expert. =94Regrettably, Asia's nuclear = developments are dominated by a superpower that has set its face firmly a= gainst nuclear disarmament.=94 2005 witnessed two landmark nuclear developments-- an attempt by the U.S.= and its allies to censure Iran and prevent it from enriching uranium, ei= ther for military or civilian purposes, and an Indo-U.S. agreement to =94= normalise=94 India's nuclear weapons status and resume civilian nuclear c= ommerce with it.=20 Talks continued in 2005 between North Korea and other nations led by the = U.S., which included China, Russia, Japan, South Korea and the European U= nion, to dissuade Pyongyang from pursuing its nuclear weapons programme. = These did not resolve the issue.=20 Meanwhile, Japan moved closer towards revising its post-World War II comm= itment not to make or acquire nuclear weapons and not to build a large sc= ale standing army. This acquires great significance in the context of wha= t has been called a =94new cold war=94 between Japan and China.=20 In September, the U.S. brought a motion in the board of governors of the = International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) holding Iran =94non-compliant=94= with its obligations under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) an= d paving the way for referring it to the United Nations Security Council = for possible sanctions. The resolution could be passed because India brok= e ranks with the non-aligned movement at the IAEA and voted with Washingt= on.=20 Iran rejected the resolution and reiterated its right under the NPT to en= rich uranium for peaceful purposes. Russia has since proposed a compromis= e, under which Iran can convert yellowcake (oxides of uranium) into hexaf= luoride gas to be sent to Russia for enrichment.=20 Under the compromise, Iran can burn the enriched uranium in a power react= or, being built with Russian help, but would send back the spent fuel to = Russia. Iran will thus, forswear reprocessing to extract plutonium, which= too, like highly enriched uranium, is used to make nuclear bombs.=20 Iran has not formally rejected the proposal, but its talks with the Europ= ean Union-3 (Germany, France and Britain) have not yielded results.=20 Tehran's nuclear posture and activities have drawn a hostile response fro= m Israel and the U.S. President George W. Bush again returned to his =94A= xis of Evil=94 characterisation. The U.S. reportedly has drawn up plans f= or an armed attack on Iran.=20 A war of words meanwhile broke out between Iran and Israel. In October, I= ran's newly elected president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be= =94wiped off the world's map.=94 =20 Israeli leaders have vowed to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons= . Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said on Dec. 1 that Israel would not allow = Iran to do so. =94Israel, and not only Israel, cannot accept a situation= in which Iran would be in possession of nuclear weapons,=94 Sharon said.= =20 Former prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu has held out a scarcely veiled t= hreat to destroy Iran's nuclear installations, approvingly citing Israel'= s 1981 bombing of Iraq's =94Osirak=94 research reactor, then under constr= uction.=20 On Dec. 16, Iran warned Israel that its response to an Israeli attack wou= ld be =94swift, firm and destructive.=94=20 =94What all this highlights is the potential for a dangerous conflict in = the Middle East,=94 says Vanaik. =94The region has already become explosi= vely volatile because of the occupation of Iraq, coming on top of the Pal= estinian crisis. If the U.S. and Israel persist with a hardline approach = to Iran, they could create havoc. U.S. double standards -- hostility to I= ran, coupled with its support to Israel's nuclear weapons programme -- ar= e a source of great popular discontent in the region.=94=20 Washington's double standards are evident in South Asia too. It agreed to= make a one-time exception in the international nuclear non-proliferation= regime for India by accepting that India is a =94responsible=94 nuclear = weapons state, although it has not signed the NPT. The Bush administratio= n offered to persuade the U.S. congress to amend non-proliferation laws a= nd to plead for a similar exception for India in the Nuclear Suppliers' G= roup. India and the U.S. are developing a =94strategic partnership=94, includin= g extensive military cooperation. In March, Washington offered to help In= dia become a great world power in the 21st century.=20 This has rankled Pakistan, which sees the Indo-U.S. =94partnership=94 as = introducing regional strategic asymmetry. Pakistan is likely to demand si= milar treatment for itself in respect of nuclear technology and equipment= , and is drawing up plans for new nuclear power stations.=20 The U.S. is doing little to defuse the Indo-Pakistan nuclear rivalry. It = is embarrassed by disclosures about the clandestine activities of the Abd= ul Qadeer Khan network which sold uranium enrichment technology to Iran, = North Korea and Libya. But Washington needs Pakistan as an ally in the =94= war against terrorism=94, in particular, the Taliban and al-Qaeda. It has= resisted applying pressure on Pakistan to subject Khan to thorough inter= rogation to detail his nuclear transactions.=20 The hardline approach of the U.S. to Iran's nuclear activities contrasts = with its soft approach to North Korea, despite Pyongyang's claim that it= already has a nuclear weapon. It is offering inducements to North Korea,= including a civilian nuclear reactor, and economic aid, although it reje= cts the demand that the reactor's construction should precede the dismant= ling of Pyongyang's nuclear weapons programme.=20 =94Washington's non-proliferation criteria are selective, discriminatory = and inconsistent,=94 says Vanaik. =94It uses non proliferation as a weapo= n when that suits its short-term interests. When it doesn't, it allows nu= clear weapons technologies to proliferate.=94 A worrisome example of this may be Japan. The country's constitution, dic= tated by the U.S. during its post-war occupation, forbids the acquisition= , manufacture or =94bringing in=94 of nuclear weapons. Conservative polit= icians in Japan want the statute amended.=20 Japan has stockpiled huge amounts of plutonium, reprocessed in western Eu= rope, ostensibly to feed its fast breeder reactors but with the potential= for quick diversion to military uses.=20 Should Japan acquire nuclear weapons and continue its military build up, = China will react. Already, China feels threatened by Washington's ballist= ic missile defence programme and by growing Indo-U.S. military collaborat= ion. If present trends continue, Asia could witness two new arms races --= one between Japan and China, and the other between China and India.=20 These rivalries will not be driven entirely by regional factors but be in= fluenced by the U.S. As the Asia-Pacific region transits into 2006, it se= ems headed for turmoil and instability. (END/IPS/AP/WD/IP/ML/DV/PB/RDR/05= )=20 =20 =3D 12261451 ORP002 NNNN ***************************************************************** 17 IPS: CHALLENGES 2005-2006: Nuclear Clouds Gather Over Asia Inter Press Service News Agency Wednesday, December 28, 2005 06:42 GMT Analysis by Praful Bidwai NEW DELHI , Dec 26 (IPS) - The Asia-Pacific region has not only emerged as one of the main engines of the world economy but it has also taken the global centre-stage in developments pertaining to nuclear weapons and efforts to acquire a capability to make them. From Iran and Israel in West Asia, through India and Pakistan in South Asia, to North Korea and Japan in the East, the region exhibited, in 2005, unprecedented activity in the nuclear field that can only intensify in the coming years. In each of these countries, the United States plays a major role. Its policies of selectively favouring or opposing their nuclear activities will alter the strategic balance in some of the world’s most volatile regions. "This is a marked shift from the cold war period, where the global nuclear centre of gravity lay in the all-out confrontation between the eastern and western blocs, which was most intense in Europe," says Achin Vanaik, professor of international relations and global politics at Delhi University. He is also a member of the Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace and an independent nuclear expert. "Regrettably, Asia’s nuclear developments are dominated by a superpower that has set its face firmly against nuclear disarmament." 2005 witnessed two landmark nuclear developments-- an attempt by the U.S. and its allies to censure Iran and prevent it from enriching uranium, either for military or civilian purposes, and an Indo-U.S. agreement to "normalise" India’s nuclear weapons status and resume civilian nuclear commerce with it. Talks continued in 2005 between North Korea and other nations led by the U.S., which included China, Russia, Japan, South Korea and the European Union, to dissuade Pyongyang from pursuing its nuclear weapons programme. These did not resolve the issue. Meanwhile, Japan moved closer towards revising its post-World War II commitment not to make or acquire nuclear weapons and not to build a large scale standing army. This acquires great significance in the context of what has been called a "new cold war" between Japan and China. In September, the U.S. brought a motion in the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) holding Iran "non-compliant" with its obligations under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and paving the way for referring it to the United Nations Security Council for possible sanctions. The resolution could be passed because India broke ranks with the non-aligned movement at the IAEA and voted with Washington. Iran rejected the resolution and reiterated its right under the NPT to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. Russia has since proposed a compromise, under which Iran can convert yellowcake (oxides of uranium) into hexafluoride gas to be sent to Russia for enrichment. Under the compromise, Iran can burn the enriched uranium in a power reactor, being built with Russian help, but would send back the spent fuel to Russia. Iran will thus, forswear reprocessing to extract plutonium, which too, like highly enriched uranium, is used to make nuclear bombs. Iran has not formally rejected the proposal, but its talks with the European Union-3 (Germany, France and Britain) have not yielded results. Tehran’s nuclear posture and activities have drawn a hostile response from Israel and the U.S. President George W. Bush again returned to his "Axis of Evil" characterisation. The U.S. reportedly has drawn up plans for an armed attack on Iran. A war of words meanwhile broke out between Iran and Israel. In October, Iran’s newly elected president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be "wiped off the world’s map." Israeli leaders have vowed to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said on Dec. 1 that Israel would not allow Iran to do so. "Israel, and not only Israel, cannot accept a situation in which Iran would be in possession of nuclear weapons," Sharon said. Former prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu has held out a scarcely veiled threat to destroy Iran’s nuclear installations, approvingly citing Israel’s 1981 bombing of Iraq’s "Osirak" research reactor, then under construction. On Dec. 16, Iran warned Israel that its response to an Israeli attack would be "swift, firm and destructive." "What all this highlights is the potential for a dangerous conflict in the Middle East," says Vanaik. "The region has already become explosively volatile because of the occupation of Iraq, coming on top of the Palestinian crisis. If the U.S. and Israel persist with a hardline approach to Iran, they could create havoc. U.S. double standards -- hostility to Iran, coupled with its support to Israel’s nuclear weapons programme -- are a source of great popular discontent in the region." Washington’s double standards are evident in South Asia too. It agreed to make a one-time exception in the international nuclear non-proliferation regime for India by accepting that India is a "responsible" nuclear weapons state, although it has not signed the NPT. The Bush administration offered to persuade the U.S. congress to amend non-proliferation laws and to plead for a similar exception for India in the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group. India and the U.S. are developing a "strategic partnership", including extensive military cooperation. In March, Washington offered to help India become a great world power in the 21st century. This has rankled Pakistan, which sees the Indo-U.S. "partnership" as introducing regional strategic asymmetry. Pakistan is likely to demand similar treatment for itself in respect of nuclear technology and equipment, and is drawing up plans for new nuclear power stations. The U.S. is doing little to defuse the Indo-Pakistan nuclear rivalry. It is embarrassed by disclosures about the clandestine activities of the Abdul Qadeer Khan network which sold uranium enrichment technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya. But Washington needs Pakistan as an ally in the "war against terrorism", in particular, the Taliban and al-Qaeda. It has resisted applying pressure on Pakistan to subject Khan to thorough interrogation to detail his nuclear transactions. The hardline approach of the U.S. to Iran’s nuclear activities contrasts with its soft approach to North Korea, despite Pyongyang’s claim that it already has a nuclear weapon. It is offering inducements to North Korea, including a civilian nuclear reactor, and economic aid, although it rejects the demand that the reactor’s construction should precede the dismantling of Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons programme. "Washington’s non-proliferation criteria are selective, discriminatory and inconsistent," says Vanaik. "It uses non proliferation as a weapon when that suits its short-term interests. When it doesn’t, it allows nuclear weapons technologies to proliferate." A worrisome example of this may be Japan. The country’s constitution, dictated by the U.S. during its post-war occupation, forbids the acquisition, manufacture or "bringing in" of nuclear weapons. Many conservative politicians in Japan want the statute amended. Japan has stockpiled huge amounts of plutonium, reprocessed in western Europe, ostensibly to feed its fast breeder reactors but with the potential for quick diversion to military uses. Should Japan acquire nuclear weapons and continue its military build up, China will react. Already, China feels threatened by Washington’s ballistic missile defence programme and by growing Indo-U.S. military collaboration. If present trends continue, Asia could witness two new arms races -- one between Japan and China, and the other between China and India. These rivalries will not be driven entirely by regional factors but will have a strong extra-regional influence, that of the U.S. As the Asia-Pacific region transits into 2006, it seems headed for turmoil and instability. (END/2005) Copyright © 2005 IPS-Inter Press Service. All rights ***************************************************************** 18 [NukeNet] Lobbying Needed Now For Nuke Plants, Renewable Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:06:45 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Please call and/or fax or write your Senators [ http://www.senate.gov Phone: 202-224-3121] and tell them to support a beefed up version of this bill [below] as well as a Manhattan Project for renewable energy and the end of commercial nuclear power in the USA now. Tell them that commercial nuclear power plants such as Indian Point are NOT a way of combatting global warming as tremendous amounts of fossil fuels are used in the milling, mining & enrichment of uranium that is part of the commercial nuclear power cycle. Then call and/or fax your Rep [ http://www.house.gov Phone: 202-224-3121] and ask them to push for similar legislation dealing with both protection for chemical plants and a Manhattan Project for renewable energy which also happens to be the best jobs program around as one economic analysis after the other has determined. Please forward this to all interested parties and lists. It's a win/win process for everyone involved except industry. -Bill Smirnow http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/27/opinion/27tues1.html?hp Time for Chemical Plant Security a.. E-Mail This b.. Printer-Friendly c.. Save Article Published: December 27, 2005 It is hard to believe, but more than four years after the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress has still not acted to make chemical plants, one of the nation's greatest terrorist vulnerabilities, safer. Last week, Senators Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, and Joseph Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat, unveiled a bipartisan chemical plant security bill. We hope that parts of the bill will be improved as it works its way through Congress, though even in its current form the bill would be a significant step. If terrorists attacked a chemical plant, the death toll could be enormous. A single breached chlorine tank could, according to the Department of Homeland Security, lead to 17,500 deaths, 10,000 severe injuries and 100,000 hospitalizations. Many chemical plants have shockingly little security to defend against such attacks. After 9/11, there were immediate calls for the government to impose new security requirements on these plants. But the chemical industry, which contributes heavily to political campaigns, has used its influence in Washington to block these efforts. Senator Collins, the chairwoman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, has held hearings on chemical plant security, and has now come up with this bill with both Republican and Democratic sponsors. The bill requires chemical plants to conduct vulnerability assessments and develop security and emergency response plans. The Department of Homeland Security would be required to develop performance standards for chemical plant security. In extreme cases, plants that do not meet the standards could be shut down. Until recently, it appeared that the bill might include pre-emption language, which would block states from coming up with their own chemical security rules. That would have made the bill worse than no bill at all. New Jersey has just imposed its own chemical plant security rules, and other states may follow. These states should be free to protect their citizens more vigorously than the federal government does, if they choose. To Senator Collins's and Senator Lieberman's credit, the bill now expressly declares that it does not prevent states from doing more. The bill's biggest weakness is that it does not address the issue of alternative chemicals. In many cases, chemical plants in highly populated areas are using dangerous chemicals when there are safer, cost-effective substitutes. A strong bill would require chemical companies to investigate alternatives, and to use them when the cost is not prohibitive. Senator Lieberman has said that he hopes to strengthen the bill's approach to alternative chemicals, which would be an important improvement. The burden now falls on the House of Representatives to pass a bill that is at least as tough, and that does not pre-empt the states' authority in this area. A leading antiterrorism expert has described the nation's chemical plants as "15,000 weapons of mass destruction littered around the United States." The American people have waited long enough to be protected from these homegrown W.M.D.'s. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 19 BBC: Public 'split' on nuclear energy Last Updated: Tuesday, 27 December 2005 [Dungeness nuclear power station] Supporters say nuclear power cuts greenhouse gas emissions Public opinion is divided over the development of a new generation of power stations, according to a poll. Some 48% of the 1,004 people interviewed for the Guardian opposed an expansion, while 45% supported it. Tony Blair has promised a decision on whether the government will give the go-ahead for building new nuclear stations by the summer. A group of Labour MPs is to mount a campaign urging the prime minister not to build more nuclear power stations. Future needs The MPs, led by former minister Alan Whitehead, are launching a manifesto to promote investment in renewable energy, saying the government would be taking a "dangerous leap with nuclear". But some reports say Mr Blair sees building more nuclear power stations as the only way to meet future energy needs while sticking to environmental targets. His official spokesman said last month: "The prime minister's view is that we need to look at all the options and everybody knows that is what we are going to do." Supporters of nuclear power say it will cut greenhouse gas emissions. The polling group ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,004 adults by telephone between 15 and 18 December for the Guardian survey. ***************************************************************** 20 Rutland Herald: CVPS on hook for $3 million at Mass. reactor Rutland Vermont News & Information December 26, 2005 By Susan SmallheerHerald Staff Central Vermont Public Service Corp. will have to kick in about $3 million more to help with the decommissioning and decontamination of a nuclear power plant in Massachusetts. CVPS, the state's largest utility, owns a small portion of Yankee Rowe nuclear power plant, which was shut down in 1992 due to aging and cracking problems at what at the time was the smallest and oldest commercial reactor in the country. Decommissioning started in 1993. According to CVPS spokesman Stephen Costello, CVPS owns only 3.5 percent of the plant, and would be responsible for just under $3 million over the next five years. "CVPS rates to retail customers are already in place and will not change until the company makes a new rate case filing before the Public Service Board, which at this time we have no specific plan to do," Costello said. Yankee Rowe, which is owned by a consortium of New England utilities, has filed a rate case with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, asking for $80 million more from its owners. The company has already collected and spent about $650 million to dismantle and clean up the reactor. A spokeswoman for the Vermont Department of Public Service, which acts as the ratepayer's advocate in such cases, said that the state had filed for intervenor status in the case out of concern for the continuing high costs of the decommissioning. Yankee Rowe, which is located less than a mile from the town of Readsboro, Vt., is completely dismantled, but extensive ground contamination has been uncovered at the site, according to Kelley Smith, spokeswoman for Yankee Atomic, the owner of the plant. "We've identified additional soil that needs to be excavated and removed," she said. Smith said the company would have to remove an additional 100 million pounds of contaminated soil and truck it to various waste disposal sites, according to what the contamination is. Smith said the company had already removed 30 million pounds. Most of the contamination comes from PCBs, an oil-based hazardous chemical that was used to harden the paint used in the reactor's large spherical containment dome, Smith said. There is also asbestos contamination, she said, and some low-level radiological contamination. She said the paint chips have been found in Sherman Pond on the Vermont-Massachusetts border. Of the total of $730 million cleanup, decontamination and demolition work, she said $200 million was for the storage of the plant's high-level radioactive waste, including the design and construction of the storage facility. The company built a concrete cask storage facility and transferred its old nuclear fuel into the casks for safekeeping until the Department of Energy opens its national nuclear waste facility. That facility had been planned for Yucca Mountain, Nev., but in the past year has come under increasing attack by Nevada's national politicians, as well as scientists. Earlier this month, legislation was introduced in Congress to abandon Yucca Mountain and have the Department of Energy create or take over individual waste sites at each of the 103 commercial nuclear reactors in the country. "As we all know, the future of Yucca Mountain is still unfolding," Smith said. Yankee Atomic has sued the Department of Energy for its failure to construct the high-level waste facility, despite contracts with the nation's nuclear power companies to do so. The trial was held this year, Smith said, and a decision isn't expected until 2006. Smith said the final cleanup, with the removal of all the contaminated soil, is expected to be completed in August. Cleanup at the site has been suspended for the winter months, she said. Contact Susan Smallheer at susan.smallheer@rutlandherald.com. © 2005 Rutland Herald ***************************************************************** 21 Rutland Herald: Vt. Yankee site could stay hot for generations Rutland Vermont News & Information December 26, 2005 By Herald Staff BRATTLEBORO — Entergy Nuclear may delay the decommissioning of Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant for 60 years after it finally shuts down as a way of earning enough money from the plant's $350 million decommissioning trust fund to pay for the storage of its old, highly radioactive fuel. Meanwhile, the state has gone on the record saying it is dissatisfied with the financial plans offered by Entergy Nuclear about the long-term financing of the nuclear waste facility proposed for the reactor's grounds. "Entergy has not demonstrated that adequate financial assurance exists," wrote William Sherman, the state's nuclear engineer, in his pre-file testimony to the Public Service Board, although it is possible for Entergy "to create conditions which would demonstrate this financial assurance." "If this concern were resolved, the department could recommend Entergy be granted a certificate of public good for the proposed dry cask facility," Sherman added. Entergy spokesman Robert Williams said the company had done the financial analysis for the delay to address the state's concerns. Despite that scenario, he said the company still hoped to complete decommissioning and have all the fuel removed to a federal site by 2042. Williams noted that another Entergy consultant estimated that it might be 50 to 70 years before a national nuclear waste site is ready, but in the plant's own most optimistic scenario, the last waste would leave in 2042, about 30 years after shutdown. In recent filings with the Public Service Board, Entergy consultant William A. Cloutier said the longer period is under consideration because of continued delays by the federal government to build a national facility for the waste. Vermont Yankee's federal license to operate expires in 2012. At Maine Yankee and Yankee Rowe in Massachusetts the company began dismantling the plants and returning them to a "green field" within a couple of years. But Cloutier said that the annual operating costs of the Vermont Yankee waste facility, about $5 million a year, forces Entergy to look at funding alternatives. According to a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, it is Entergy's decision alone on how and when the plant is decommissioned and dismantled. Entergy could put Yankee into what is called "safe store" by removing all the fuel and putting it in concrete casks, draining the plumbing in the plant, and put it under constant monitoring, according to Neil Sheehan of the NRC. The only NRC requirement is that the plant be decommissioned within 60 years of its shutdown, he said. The uncertainty of exactly how long the waste will be left in Vernon and who would pay for it — it remains radioactive as long as 100,000 years — is a concern, especially since the future of the proposed federal site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada is in doubt. Just last week, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada helped introduce legislation to require individual waste facilities at all reactors, which would essentially kill the Yucca Mountain project. Rep. Steve Darrow, D-Putney, a member of the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee, had inserted language in Act 74 that called for "financial assurance" by Entergy that it would take care of the waste for its lifespan. "The problem is, Entergy describes it as temporary storage, but no one can give us any assurances it won't be permanent," Darrow said Wednesday. Darrow also said Entergy's corporate structure left questions unanswered about long-term liability for the fuel because the entity that owns the reactor is a limited liability corporation. "That fuel remains dangerous for 100,000 years," Darrow said, noting that the $350 million decommissioning fund "runs out" in 2035. "The whole issue of storage of high-level waste for 100,000 years is the big lie," he said. "How can you possibly plan to store anything for that long?" Even the concrete casks that Entergy wants to put its old nuclear fuel in would only last 100 years at the most, he said. No one knows how much the new casks would cost, nor about the transfer of the waste, he said. "With an LLC involved, any future liability has to be very clearly assigned now," Darrow said. Darrow noted that Entergy is one of eight companies planning a private high-level waste facility in Skull Valley in Utah, on a Goshute Indian reservation. If Entergy delays decommissioning by 60 years, that means another three generations of Vermonters will have to deal with the issue, he said. Sherman declined to comment on his testimony Wednesday, referring all questions to his pre-filed testimony on the upcoming case before the Public Service Board. Hearings on the proposal start in February. ***************************************************************** 22 AFP: British public split over nuclear energy: poll - Mon Dec 26, 3:03 PM ET LONDON (AFP) - The British public is split virtually 50-50 over whether the country should revive its mothballed nuclear power programme. The ICM opinion poll for the Guardian newspaper, to be published Tuesday, shows 48 percent of people are against expanding Britain's existing nuclear facilities while 45 percent are in favour. Last month, British Prime Minister Tony Blair" /> Tony Blairannounced a sweeping review of the country's energy needs that will specifically look into the option of building new nuclear power stations. Blair is thought to be in favour of resurrecting the nuclear programme and combining it with renewable sources to help meet future energy demands and cut damaging greenhouse gas emissions. Any move towards nuclear would be controversial, with Blair likely to meet opposition within his own ruling Labour party and from environmentalists. A report into the favoured options is due by mid-2006. Britain has about a dozen nuclear power stations, most of them built in the 1960s and 1970s, providing about 25 percent of the country's electricity, compared with natural gas which provides about 40 percent. ICM interviewed 1,004 adults by telephone between December 15 and 18. Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 23 China Daily: China to build two new nuclear plants By Wang Ying (China Daily) Updated: 2005-12-27 06:42 Following the operational start-ups of 11 nuclear reactors in the south and east, China next year will begin building two nuclear plants which contain two reactors each, in Northeast China's Liaoning Province and East China's Shandong Province. The Liaoning plant, consisting of two 1,080-MW (megawatt) reactors, will cost US$2.8 billion. It will be the first nuclear base in Northeast China, located at Hongyanhe, the coastal city of Dalian, a senior official from China Guangdong Nuclear Power Group (CGNPG) said. "We expect to get the final go-ahead (to build the Dalian nuclear plant) from the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) by the end of this year," said the official, who did not want to be identified. CGNPG sources last week said that they plan to start the Dalian project as soon as possible. The Dalian nuclear plant is scheduled to generate electricity in 2011, the company official said. CGNPG plans to begin infrastructure construction and design at the Dalian plant within this month, the official said. According to the investment agreement for the new project in Dalian, CGNPG and China Power Investment Corp (CPI) will each control a 45 per cent stake. The remaining 10 per cent will be equally divided between local companies Liaoning Energy Investment Group and Dalian Construction Investment Co, the CGNPG official said. For the plant in Shandong Province, CPI has reached an initial agreement with the country's biggest nuclear plant constructor, China National Nuclear Corp (CNNC), to jointly build a nuclear plant at Haiyang. The Haiyang plant, which contains two 1,000-MW reactors, will process at the same pace as the Dalian plant, CPI director Liu Changqing told China Daily yesterday. "We have submitted the feasibility study to the NDRC," Liu said. The Chinese Government has included both projects at Dalian and Haiyang in the country's 11th Five-Year Plan (2006-2011), a CNNC spokesman said last week. Further details were not available for the Haiyang plant in Shandong. The Dalian plant will cost less than the previous reactors, since CGNPG will use China's own nuclear technology CPR 1000 in designing the new reactors. This is based on technology adopted in the second phase of the Ling'ao nuclear project in South China's Guangdong Province. The new reactors at the Dalian plant are expected to cost US$1,300 per kilowatt, compared with the US$1,500 per kilowatt for the Ling'ao phase II, which launched construction earlier this month and contains two 1,000-MW reactors. "We will be very competitive in the sale prices due to the lower costs," the CGNPG said. Coal-fired plants, which installed desulphurization facilities, sell their electricity to grid companies at 0.347 yuan (4.28 US cents) per kilowatt-hour in Dalian, according to the CGNPG official. In order to cut pollution caused by the burning of coal, which fuels more than 70 per cent of the country's electricity generators, the government ordered all the installation of desulphurization equipment in China's coal-fired plants to eliminate sulphur pollutants. "We can make profit at the same price with these coal-fired plants," the company official said. Equipment manufacturing and procurement for the new Dalian plant will be open for bid among domestic suppliers, with a small proportion expected to come from foreign companies, the CGNPG official said. "Domestic suppliers will produce 80 per cent of the equipment including the generation turbines designed for the new plant," he said. CPI sources earlier said that as many as 10 reactors would be built at the two coastal places in Liaoning and Shandong, with six built at Dalian and four at Haiyang. Currently, only CNNC and CGNPG are authorized to build nuclear plants in China. Other power companies, including CPI, will only be allowed a stake in the nuclear plant if they intend to participate in the nuclear sector. Foreseeing great potential in nuclear energy, CGNPG, based in Guangdong, is also planning two more nuclear plants at two places called Taishan and Lufeng in the province. "Another in the neighbouring Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region is also under study," the CGNPG official said. (China Daily 12/27/2005 page9) ***************************************************************** 24 Guardian Unlimited: Voters split over nuclear power ICM poll reveals task facing Blair to persuade public of need for more plants David Adam, environment correspondent Tuesday December 27, 2005 The Guardian Almost half of Britons say no new nuclear power stations should be built in the UK, according to a Guardian/ICM poll which comes as ministers consider whether to restart Britain's controversial atomic power programme to meet growing energy demand. The poll finds that neither the pro- nor the anti-nuclear lobby can rely on a clear majority of public support: 48% of people oppose expanding nuclear energy, while 45% support it. The findings show the scale of the public relations exercise required. About 19% of the UK's electricity is generated by its 14 nuclear power stations, but this is expected to drop to 7% by 2020 as older reactors are switched off. A review of Britain's energy policies was announced by Tony Blair last month and a report is expected in the summer. Sir David King, the government's chief scientific adviser, told the Commons environmental audit committee last month: "I do not think that any government could proceed with nuclear new build if there was a sense in which this was unacceptable to the public. Taking the public along is absolutely essential." The poll reveals sharp gender differences: 57% of men but only 33% of women supported building new nuclear power stations; 57% of women and 39% of men were against. For the over 65s 47% approved (39% against) compared with 42% of the 18-24s (57% against). Conservative voters were most likely to be pro-nuclear (56% for and 38% against), with 49% of Labour supporters (48% against), and 41% of Liberal Democrat voters - despite their party's anti-nuclear policy. The review must tackle how Britain should fill a so-called "energy gap" caused by the closure of existing atomic power plants. Half are due to be decommissioned by 2010 and all but Sizewell B in Suffolk by 2023. Nuclear supporters say renewable energy sources cannot plug this gap and reactors do not produce greenhouse gases. Opponents say nuclear power is expensive, disposal of radioactive waste remains unresolved, and that significant carbon dioxide emissions are produced in the building and mining of uranium fuel. The government's decision to look again at nuclear energy marks a shift in position from that outlined in a white paper two years ago, which said: "Current economics make it an unattractive option for new, carbon-free generating capacity and there are also important issues of nuclear waste to be resolved." Ministers have since come under pressure to rethink amid concerns about global warming, security of UK energy supplies as North Sea output declines, and rising fuel prices. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,004 adults aged 18-plus by telephone between 15 and 18 December 2005. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules. Useful links British Energy Department of Trade and Industry British Nuclear Fuels Ltd Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Greenpeace HSE nuclear glossary Come Clean WMD awareness programme UK atomic energy authority National Radiological Protection Board Friends of the Earth World Nuclear Association World Nuclear Transport Institute [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 25 NRC: Procedures; Notice of Meeting FR Doc E5-7838 [Federal Register: December 27, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 247)] [Notices] [Page 76471] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27de05-66] The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will hold a Planning and Procedures meeting on January 11, 2006, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday, January 11, 2006--8 a.m.-9 a.m. The Committee will discuss proposed ACNW activities and related matters. The purpose of this meeting is to gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Michael P. Lee (Telephone: 301/415-6887) between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in the agenda. Dated: December 19, 2005. Michael L. Scott, Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E5-7838 Filed 12-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: [Docket No. 50-390] Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1; Environmental Assessment and FR Doc E5-7867 [Federal Register: December 27, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 247)] [Notices] [Page 76470-76471] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27de05-65] Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, Appendix E, Sections IV.F.2.b and c for Facility Operating License No. NPF-90, issued to Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA or the licensee), for operation of the Watts Bar Nuclear Power Plant (WBN), Unit 1, located in Rhea County, Tennessee. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action, as described in the licensee's application for a one-time exemption to the requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix E, dated October 5, 2005, would allow the licensee to postpone the biennial, full-participation emergency exercise from November 2, 2005, to June 7, 2006. The licensee's letter requested an exemption from sections IV.F.2.b and c of Appendix E to 10 CFR part 50 regarding exercises involving the onsite and offsite emergency plans, as well as TVA's Radiological Emergency Plan Sections 14.2.1.1 and 14.2.1.3. The NRC staff has determined that the requirements of Appendix E to 10 CFR part 50, Sections IV.F.2.b and 2.c are applicable to the circumstances of the licensee's request and that an exemption from those requirements is appropriate. The licensee also stated in its October 5, 2005, letter that WBN will resume its normal biennial exercise cycle in 2007. The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed exemption from 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, sections IV.F.2.b and c is needed because the planned full-participation exercise originally scheduled for November 2, 2005, was not performed. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, which normally participates in the evaluated, full-participation exercise, and the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency were unable to provide the necessary resources for the exercise due to the impact of Hurricane Katrina. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the proposed exemption would not present an undue risk to the public health and safety. The details of the NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption to the regulation. The proposed action relates to the exercising of the emergency response plan, which has no effect on the operation of the facility. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released offsite. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released offsite. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non- radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternative to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, NUREG 0498, dated December 1978, and a supplement to the Final Environmental Statement (NUREG 0498 Supplement No. 1), dated April 1995. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on November 9, 2005, the staff consulted with the Tennessee State [[Page 76471]] official, Elizabeth Flanagan of the Tennessee Bureau of Radiological Health, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated October 5, 2005. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O-1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of December 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Douglas V. Pickett, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-7867 Filed 12-23-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 27 MSNBC.com: FPL creates energy giant in $11B deal - Jacksonville - By Kirstin Dorsch The Business Journal of Jacksonville JUNO BEACH AND BALTIMORE -- In the first power industry merger since the passage of the new energy bill, FPL Group Inc. will acquire Constellation Energy Group Inc. in an all-stock deal worth $11 billion. Both company boards unanimously approved the sale, which will convert one share of Constellation Energy (NYSE: CEG) to 1.444 shares of the new Constellation Energy at the time of the merger, representing a 15 percent premium for the company's shareholders. FPL's stock will remain at a one-to-one ratio. FPL (NYSE: FPL) shareholders will own 60 percent of the new company, while Constellation shareholders will own 40 percent. The merger requires approval by both companies' shareholders, which will be sought in the second quarter of 2006, according to company officials. The companies expect to obtain all regulatory approvals and complete the merger in nine to 12 months. The new energy bill, signed by President Bush in August, repeals a 1935 law limiting mergers among electric and gas utilities. The loosening of regulations is expected to spur a wave of consolidation among utilities. At Constellation's annual meeting in May, Constellation CEO Mayo A. Shattuck III predicted the number of American utility companies will shrink from about 100 today to about 50. FPL Group CEO Lewis Hay III and Shattuck, who have served together on various boards and organizations, believed the power market would undergo a period of mergers, and wanted to pick a partner before it passed them by, Hay said. The new Constellation Energy will be a top energy supplier as the second largest utility in the country. Constellation will have $27 billion in annual revenue and $57 billion in assets. The behemoth will employ about 21,750 workers and serve more than 5.5 million electric customers in Florida and Maryland and 625,000 gas customers in Maryland. Currently, parts or all of 34 Florida counties are served by Florida Power and Light, including parts or all of Northeast Florida's seven counties. The new company will also be the third largest nuclear plant operator in the country, owning and operating seven stations with eleven units -- five in Florida and New Hampshire, five in Maryland and New York and the soon-to-be acquired Duane Arnold unit in Iowa. The headquarters for running the plants will be in Florida. The company will have co-headquarters at each of the present companies' locations. FPL is based in Juno Beach, while Constellation is based in Baltimore. Hay will be the CEO of Constellation Energy while Shattuck will serve as chairman of its 15-member board. Shattuck will also head its competitive wholesale and retail business, which will serve thousands of commercial, industrial and utility customers -- including 72 Fortune 100 companies. The board will comprise nine members named by FPL and six named by Constellation. Hay said at an investment community meeting for both companies on Dec. 19 in New York that most sales will be on the deregulated side, including energy trading. He said the merger will open the door for growth and create a Fortune 100 company. Though JEA also participates in the energy trading market, utility officials said the merger will have no effect on its business. As for the St. Johns River Power Park, which it co-owns with Florida Power & Light Co., a subsidiary of FPL Group, JEA also expects no effect, as the two utilities have a contract in place. "Ultimately," Hay said, "this will translate into expanded opportunities to deploy new capital wisely." And though it won't be reflected immediately in the numbers, Hay is confident the merging companies have the "best growth platform in the business." On paper, FPL Group and Constellation Energy officials said they got exactly what both power companies needed. But to do so, they needed to combine both entities in a $27 billion deal with legal, regulatory and operational hurdles that may take months -- or even years -- to smooth out, experts said. Consumer advocates are already worrying about costs for consumers, while utility workers are bracing for the 10 percent workforce cut mentioned in a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing. FPL has prospered because its regulated utility provides 90 percent of its profits and it has benefited from strong population growth. Constellation receives 75 percent of its profits from energy trading and power sales, which have more volatility, said Daniel Morgan, a portfolio manager with Synovus Investment Advisors in St. Petersburg. Synovus follows and holds FPL Group stock. "The good part is the combined company can sell into other markets," Morgan said. "The bad part is that FPL's revenues may be more driven by the unregulated markets it serves. This creates more volatility in the combined company's profit growth." MSNBC.com ***************************************************************** 28 Oklahoman: Nuclear power: Government must lead the push Oklahoman Editorial NewsOK.com | Powered by The Oklahoman and NEWS 9 Tue December 27, 2005 Help Even if you don't believe pessimistic projections on how much oil is left for the world to use, what comes after oil must be on the minds of the nation's policy-makers. Talk to the experts, and only those holding extreme environmental positions think America's energy future can be secure without expanded use of nuclear power. Some think oil production will peak in the next 10 to 15 years. Others think the point at which production begins to decline won't be reached for three, four or five decades. Even so, political uncertainty associated with a number of oil-producing countries makes U.S. dependence on imports risky for its economy and national security. At a recent Knight Center for Specialized Journalism conference at the University of Maryland, U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said the only way for America to meet its future energy needs is by expanding nuclear power's role. Currently, nuclear accounts for about 20 percent of electricity generation. The U.S. has 104 commercial plants in operation across the country. None is located in Oklahoma. Of those, more than half were built before 1978. Existing facilities have been expanded, but no new plants have been built in this country in 30 years. Here's the rub: Just to maintain nuclear's current 20 percent share of electrical generation, 25 to 33 new plants will be needed by 2025, energy department officials say. Even more will be needed to increase nuclear's role. Nuclear power has unique hurdles. New reactors cost billions of dollars to build. Spent fuel has to be properly contained and stored. As importantly, public perceptions must be modified. While government can't address all of these concerns alone, it can point the way and help create a more conducive climate for nuclear expansion. For example, a few years ago the government created "Nuclear Power 2010," under which government and private industry work together on site location and regulatory processes to prompt new nuclear construction. On the waste issue, the government's plan to entomb radioactive materials at Yucca Mountain, Nev., is being tied up by lawsuits. Bodman said the facility probably won't come on line until well into the next decade. It points to the need for a coordinated leadership approach on nuclear that will reassure the private markets and enable investment, as well as convince more Americans that nuclear is a safe and practical resource for the future -- something a number of European countries already have figured out. America has the technology, and the demand for a greater nuclear role is coming. What's needed is government's push to help it come to pass. © 2005, Produced by NewsOK.com ***************************************************************** 29 Guardian Unlimited: Voters split over nuclear power Tony Benn: Atomic hypocrisy ICM poll reveals task facing Blair to persuade public of need for more plants David Adam, environment correspondent Tuesday December 27, 2005 Almost half of Britons say no new nuclear power stations should be built in the UK, according to a Guardian/ICM poll which comes as ministers consider whether to restart Britain's controversial atomic power programme to meet growing energy demand. The poll finds that neither the pro- nor the anti-nuclear lobby can rely on a clear majority of public support: 48% of people oppose expanding nuclear energy, while 45% support it. The findings show the scale of the public relations exercise required. About 19% of the UK's electricity is generated by its 14 nuclear power stations, but this is expected to drop to 7% by 2020 as older reactors are switched off. A review of Britain's energy policies was announced by Tony Blair last month and a report is expected in the summer. Sir David King, the government's chief scientific adviser, told the Commons environmental audit committee last month: "I do not think that any government could proceed with nuclear new build if there was a sense in which this was unacceptable to the public. Taking the public along is absolutely essential." The poll reveals sharp gender differences: 57% of men but only 33% of women supported building new nuclear power stations; 57% of women and 39% of men were against. For the over 65s 47% approved (39% against) compared with 42% of the 18-24s (57% against). Conservative voters were most likely to be pro-nuclear (56% for and 38% against), with 49% of Labour supporters (48% against), and 41% of Liberal Democrat voters - despite their party's anti-nuclear policy. The review must tackle how Britain should fill a so-called "energy gap" caused by the closure of existing atomic power plants. Half are due to be decommissioned by 2010 and all but Sizewell B in Suffolk by 2023. Nuclear supporters say renewable energy sources cannot plug this gap and reactors do not produce greenhouse gases. Opponents say nuclear power is expensive, disposal of radioactive waste remains unresolved, and that significant carbon dioxide emissions are produced in the building and mining of uranium fuel. The government's decision to look again at nuclear energy marks a shift in position from that outlined in a white paper two years ago, which said: "Current economics make it an unattractive option for new, carbon-free generating capacity and there are also important issues of nuclear waste to be resolved." Ministers have since come under pressure to rethink amid concerns about global warming, security of UK energy supplies as North Sea output declines, and rising fuel prices. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,004 adults aged 18-plus by telephone between 15 and 18 December 2005. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules. About this site Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited ***************************************************************** 30 ITAR-TASS: WB to extend aid to Chernobyl-hit areas in Belarus 27.12.2005, 18.31 MINSK, December 27 (Itar-Tass) - The World Bank will extend a-50-million-dollar loan to Belarus to eliminate the effects of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident, the deputy head of the Belarussian Committee on Chernobyl accident consequences, Valery Shevchuk said on Tuesday. “The funds will be spent on laying gas distribution pipelines in the affected areas and introducing energy-saving technologies,” he said. The loan is extended for 15 years with a five-year grace period at an interest rate of 3 to 5 percent. “The technical part of the project has been studied already. At present, the president is considering it,” he said. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 31 Guardian Unlimited: Renewables key to nuclear future, say experts · Blair needs wide-ranging plans to win over public · Backbench opponents warn of huge subsidies Michael White, political editor Tuesday December 27, 2005 The Guardian Tony Blair's energy review must produce a formula to ensure the long-term security of Britain's power supplies that embraces a strong future for renewable energy if it is also to have a serious chance of winning public support for a new civil nuclear power programme, some experts are warning Whitehall. The cabinet is nowhere near as evenly divided as the wider public on the emotive decision whether or not to start building a new generation of nuclear power stations, with today's Guardian/ICM poll showing almost half of voters opposed to a renewed commitment. By contrast, the cabinet is believed to contain no outright opponents of the proposition that nuclear power might resume its place as part of the mix of fuel sources that have kept the lights on and industrial wheels turning for 50 years. There is, however, less unity among backbench MPs. The Guardian reported last week that a group of Labour MPs is determined to face down the pro-nuclear lobby in the run up to the review, claiming that ministers will have to subsidise the nuclear industry heavily to make it viable. It has the tacit support of Elliot Morley, the environment minister. Mr Blair's energy review, chaired by the energy minister, Malcolm Wicks, has a brief to report next summer. The critical part of the formula which could emerge from it is the link between nuclear and the green alternative of renewable energy sources, wind and wave power. "They are not alternatives. When people are asked if they would support nuclear as part of a solution that also supports renewables the levels of public support rises to 62%," Brian Wilson, the former Labour energy minister who is now a consultant across the industry, told the Guardian yesterday. His proof of good intent would be to see the "renewable obligation" certificates - which require the industry to ensure that 10% of new energy comes from renewables by 2010, 15% by 2015 - be extended to 2030 with what the former MP calls "cross-party support" at Westminster. Though still officially neutral, Mr Blair himself has shown signs of swinging behind nuclear to help close the emerging energy gap. Colleagues say that chancellor Gordon Brown's primary concern is that the Treasury should not have to foot the huge bills involved, and Jack Straw, foreign secretary, is "relatively pro". Northern Ireland secretary Peter Hain, as keen on environmental issues as he was in his days as a Young Liberal militant, is no longer against nuclear power in principle. But he is still worried about costs. Industry may be keen to resume the nuclear programme, especially if planning procedures are speeded up, and the nuclear industry is confident that "we'll be back". But Whitehall officials notice no rush of private capital for nuclear. In fact, the steeliest critic could prove to be Margaret Beckett, the environment secretary. Mrs Beckett could fairly be called "sceptical" - especially about the temptation to rig the energy market in favour of nuclear in ways that are denied to renewable energy sources. She agrees with the 2003 energy white paper which stressed the use of renewables plus far greater efficiency by energy users. Critics such as Greenpeace, academics and pressure groups complain that ministers have done far too little to sustain research and development of offshore wind and wave technology, let alone ease the cost of connecting it to the national grid. It will take up to 15 years to build new stations, critics say, so the 2003 route is the only one that will plug the 2020 energy gap. Catherine Mitchell of Warwick Business School, who advised ministers on the 2003 white paper, gives them just two out of 10 for delivery as they struggle to meet their targets to curb greenhouse gas emissions by 2012. Instead critics detect what they dismiss as "nuclear energy re-spun". Mr Wicks's review team has to examine the energy gap that Britain faces as ageing coal and nuclear stations close in the next 15 years and the country again becomes dependent on imported fuel. By coincidence the independent government-backed Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, chaired by Sussex Energy expert Gordon MacKerron, is also due to report in July. Mr Wilson said yesterday that the Guardian's ICM poll result shows how far public opinion can be moved by serious public debate. "A roughly 50-50 result is huge progress in terms of the debate because the presumption encouraged by opponents of nuclear power is that debate makes people more hostile," he said. "Once it is removed from the negative 60s and 70s context when it was the other side of nuclear weapons production nuclear becomes part of the solution to global warming, not part of the problem about something else," said Mr Wilson. Useful links British Energy Department of Trade and Industry British Nuclear Fuels Ltd Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Greenpeace HSE nuclear glossary Come Clean WMD awareness programme UK atomic energy authority National Radiological Protection Board Friends of the Earth World Nuclear Association World Nuclear Transport Institute [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 32 UPI: Poll says half oppose nuclear power plants United Press International - NewsTrack - 12/27/2005 1:09:00 PM -0500 Newstrack: A Sioux Falls school administrator LONDON, Dec. 27 (UPI) -- A poll in Britain says almost half of the respondents opposed building additional nuclear power stations in the country. The ICM/Guardian newspaper poll indicated Prime Minister Tony Blair would face a challenge to convince the population about any need for more plants. The poll comes as the government considers whether to restart Britain's controversial atomic power program to meet growing energy demand, the Guardian reported. The poll said neither the pro- nor the anti-nuclear lobby can rely on a clear majority of public support as 48 percent oppose expanding nuclear energy, while 45 percent support it. About 19 percent of Britain's electricity is generated by its 14 nuclear power stations, but this is expected to drop to 7 percent by 2020 as older reactors are switched off, the report said. © Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 33 IEER: Missing Plutonium - Index IEER| Publications Resources on Plutonium Discrepancies in the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex In reverse chronological order IEER letter to Linton Brooks, Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, December 19, 2005 IEER letter to A.J. Eggenberger, Chairman of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, December 13, 2005 IEER letter to Samuel Bodman, Secretary of the U.S. Dept. of Energy, December 13, 2005 Weapons Plutonium in Los Alamos Soil and Waste: Environmental, Health and Security Implications IEER report, November 29, 2005 IEER letter to LANL Director Pete Nanos re: plutonium discrepancy, August 10, 2004 IEER radio commentary on plutonium discrepancy, August 2004 Follow the Bouncing Data: DOE's Ever-Changing Estimates of Buried TRU Waste, in Science for Democratic Action, vol. 7 no. 2, January 1999 Containing the Cold War Mess: Restructuring the Environmental Management of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex, IEER report, October 1997 Guimond-Beckner DOE memo, "Plutonium in Waste Inventories,"January 30, 1996 Institute for Energy and Environmental ResearchComments to Outreach Coordinator: ieer at ieer.org Takoma Park, Maryland, USA Posted December 25, 2005 ***************************************************************** 34 [du-list] Iraq: Depleted uranium aka Baghdad Boils? Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 19:14:23 -0800 December 25, 2005 Davey Garland England Davey, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the work, "Iraq: Depleted Uranium aka Baghdad Boils?!" It is solid reporting and analysis. It is also a startling display and example of the infinite capacity for lies of the US Military. Make no mistake about it, the United States is the most successful fascist Empire in the history of the world with the most lethal military in history. Now, December 25, 2005 is way past time for the world to commence the political and economic war that will assist the people's forces in the United States and in the US Military itself bring an end to the plague of fascism controlling the US Government. To the World, from inside the United States, I say, drop the hammer, Now! Bob Nichols Project Censored Award Winner Newspaper Correspondent, San Francisco Bay View ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: davey garland < thunderelf@yahoo.co.uk > Date: Dec 24, 2005 6:47 AM Subject: Iraq: Depleted uranium aka Baghdad Boils? To: pandora-project@yahoogroups.com, nucnews@yahoogroups.com, du-list@yahoogroups.com, du-watch@yahoogroups.com, abolition-caucus@yahoogroups.com, gulfwarveterans@groups.msn.com, earthfirstalert@yahoogroups.com, cndyorks@yahoogroups.com, viviane@interpac.net, bob.bobnichols@gmail.com, d_kyne@hotmail.com, ainrashad@yahoo.co.uk, charles@traprockpeace.org http://www.uruknet.info/?p=18948&hd=0&size=1&l=x Iraq: Depleted Uranium aka Baghdad Boils?! jouna, iraq-war.ru December 23, 2005 There's a possibility that the US Department of Defense (DoD) is hiding the US casualties under a disguise of 'Baghdad Boils', a disease plaguing the US troops in Iraq, claimed to be caused by the sand fly bites, but possibly by depleted uranium (DU) radiation. To explore this issue I've forwarded the following article to DU experts in the world to have it checked and I'm now publishing it as a preliminary announcement here in iraq-war.ru. I'll keep you updated on this as soon as I hear of them (if confirmed you can't miss the fat mainstream headlining). *DEPLETED URANIUM* Recent evidence proves that depleted uranium (DU) is the definite cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Fourteen years after its introduction, DU has revealed as a death sentence, lately brought forth by Leuren Moret (cf. e.g. http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml and the sources to this article). The biological particulate effect targets the Master Code in the DNA and causes numerous diseases difficult to define, but in effect devastating the human body for example with multiple malignancies and developing cancers. Out of 580,400 soldiers in first Gulf War, 11 thousand have died and already by 2000 there were 325,000 permanently disabled, the number increasing by 43,000 every year. Besides, DU has internally contaminated their sexual partners, who have developed endometriosis and have been forced to have hysteroctomies due to health problems. 67 percent of a test group of 251 soldiers have had babies with severe birth defects (missing members, organs, immune system diseases). The United States has deliberately developed the DU in order to utilize the deadly properties of the DU and contaminated not only 42 states in United States, Sinai in Yom Kippur war (1973), Yugoslavia, southern Iraq (and areas nearby) in the first Gulf War and from 2003 on again in Iraq. One of the reasons that the US deploys it allies in the southern parts of the Iraq, because it does not want to expose its own troops to the deadly radiation there from the first Gulf War. Thus the British, and the other coalition troops have been generously given the responsibility of the southern Iraq. *BAGHDAD BOIL* In a story 'Skin ulcers plague men from N.C. unit' (cf. http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/13454217.ht m ) we are told: "In addition to the combat casualties suffered during a tour of duty in Iraq last year, an N.C. National Guard brigade also had to medevac 13 men back to a U.S. hospital after volleyball games left them vulnerable to one of the Iraq war's most exotic hazards ­ an outbreak of skin ulcers that can grow for years. The victims, all men from the same small unit, contracted cutaneous leishmaniasis, characterized by weeping sores that refuse to heal, said Lt. Col Tim Mauldin, the brigade's top medical officer. The illness is nicknamed "Baghdad Boil." At the time the guardsmen contracted it last year, the only way to treat it was to fly them back to Walter Reed Army Medical Center for up to three weeks of intravenous treatments with a drug called Pentostam" Using Pentostam in the treatment of sand fly bite is most curious for two main reasons: (1) One is tempted to suspect the US diagnosis, because for leishmaniasis, phlebotomus argentipes (also known as Kala-azar), a disease indeed caused by the bite of sand fly, there is a new, oral drug (Miltefosine( is now available. The medicine is effective (cf. http://www.who.int/tdr/diseases/leish/press_release.htm ), which makes the US use of sodium stibogluconate (commercial names: Pentostam or Stibanate) instead very curious, until we read the comment of Lt. Col Tim Mauldin concerning the sores (rather: 'malignancies') known as Baghdad Boils: "No matter what you do, it just keeps getting bigger and bigger.") (2) Pentostam is administered into veins and "results in a greater than 50% decrease in parasite DNA, RNA protein and purine nucleoside triphosphate levels" (cf. http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/assets/c/html/displaydoc.asp ?documentid=2182, section 5, Pharmacological properties ). It is not immediately obvious how the bites of tiny sandflies could cause changes in the Master Code in the DNA? (3) Although the sand flies are unlikely cause for the Baghdad Boils, we can seek a different, more natural explanation for the disease is from the the unit itself, to which all thirteen man belong. The 30th Enhanced Heavy Separate Brigade (Mech), "Old Hickory", has one battalion of M-1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks and two battalions of M-2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles (cf. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/30in-bde. htm ). The main weapon of the M1A1 is the M256 120mm smoothbore cannon, designed by the Rheinmetall Corporation of Germany. Engagement ranges approaching 4000 meters were successfully demonstrated during Operation Desert Storm. The primary armor-defeating ammunition of this weapon is the armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding sabot (APDS-FS) round, which features a depleted uranium penetrators (cf. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1.htm ). On the other hand, we know already from the first Gulf War that: "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." *CONSEQUENCES:* Having recognized the previous facts we are left with the following consequences: (1) Depleted uranium explains the changes in the Master Code in the DNA caused by Baghdad Boils much better than the 'sand flies' (if the sand flies are not simply considered as an army code word for 'uranium particles' or alike). In fact, the diagnosis of Baghdad Boils as 'leishmaniasis' put forth in several connections by Dr. Roger Bate is itself highly suspicious as Dr. Bate is a visiting fellow at American Enterprise Institute, a front for international armed looting around the world. (2) As the United States treats the cancer developing multiple malignancies of its tank crews with Pentostam (and not Miltefosine), this shows that the US Armed Forces and the Pentagon are indeed aware of the effects of the depleted uranium, which again shows that they are lying in their denials of its cancer-producing effect, thus giving a direct answer to "QUESTION 11. WHAT DOES THE U.S. GOVT. KNOW ABOUT DU?" in http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf. They know everything, even how to slow down the mutations caused by DU. (3) More than 2000 U.S. service members have officially contracted the disease since the Iraq War began in early 2003, most of them in Iraq (though some also in Afghanistan). When these 'walking dead' are added to the current DoD casualty figure (2160) as soon to be dead, the US death toll tops 4,000 with a single jump. The entire US colonial expeditionary force, the 300,000 having served in Iraq are soon to be counted as US Casualties, either dead or disabled by DU. (4) As the depleted uranium penetrators are the main rounds of the US M1A1 tanks, and the extra rounds for the tanks are carried in the M2 Bradleys, there is no doubt, that after 1000 days of war, the entire US armored equipment in Iraq is totally contaminated making these vehicles literarily dead man's chests. Actually the US tank crews are more safe outside than inside of them, despite the current conditions in Iraq. (5) As the US Armed Forces in Iraq are actually living dead, a zombie army soon to follow the destiny of the previous army in the First Gulf War and their Armored Vehiles hopelessly contaminated by DU, the US army actually has no troops nor tanks. This means that its fate is sealed. The United States has lost the war in Iraq as soon as the troops get the information of how they are and have been deceived by an enemy worse than that they face in Iraq, the US government. (6) Despite of this we may have even more to worry: in her recent articles Leuren Moret tell that the US has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity equivalent of 40,000 Nagasagi Bombs, making four nuclear wars together. This, according to her may be enough for a death sentence for all of us, who will die in silent ways. To prevent this from happening we must not listen to Mr. Bush, who claims that the future generations will be grateful for sacrifices in Iraq (cf. http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_3331907 ). The current deception of the US solders themselves by the US Government could not make the issue more clear: no matter whether you are friend or foe, there is nobody the Government of the United States wouldn't betray. To stop them all you have to do is pass this story to the US combat troops in Iraq. Explaining them what exactly stepping into US tanks means, will leave them unmanned. This in turn will stop the armoured brigades, which in turn stops the US divisions and armies ­ and in the end the US government war. As soon as the war is stopped, the entire human kind must step in and help the Iraqi people to clean the country from the depleted uranium. I'm most thankful for your assistance in this already. jouna, iraq-war.ru *Section I: Depleted Uranium* (more sources from articles themselves) 1. Depleted uranium: "Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets: A death sentence here and abroad" LINK: http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml 2. Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm 3. QUESTION 11. WHAT DOES THE U.S. GOVT. KNOW ABOUT DU? LINK: http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf 4. A Monumental War Crime ... DU http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/74185 5. Leuren Moret Speaking on Depleted Uranium LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Leuren-Moret21apr03.ht m 6. Cancer Epidemic Caused by U.S. WMD LINK: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/cancer_epidemic_.html 7. Marin Depleted Uranium Resolution Heats Up GI's Will Come Home To A Slow Death LINK: http://www.coastalpost.com/04/08/01.htm 8. The United States is Actively Engaged in War Crimes and Polluting with Deadly Nuclear Materials LINK: http://www.albasrah.net/en_articles_2005/1205/HRA_141205.htm 9. New Information on Iraq LINK: http://www.albasrah.net/en_articles_2005/1205/du_141205.htm 10. The UNITED STATES of MONSTERS: DEPLETED URANIUM LINK: http://uruknet.info/?p=18218&hd=0&size=1&l=x 11. Iranian president calls for war crimes charges on US LINK: http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/71438 12. Squeezed To Death LINK: http://uruknet.info/?p=18640&hd=0&size=1&l=x 13. World Uranium Weapons Conference 2003 LINK: http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de/speakers.htm 14. International Criminal Tribunal For Afghanistan at Tokyo LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal-Tr ibunal10mar04.htm 15. Leuren Moret: Depleted Uranium Is WMD LINK: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00138.htm 16. Discounted casualties ­ the human cost of depleted uranium LINK: http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html 17. Heads roll at Veterans Administration Mushrooming depleted uranium (DU) scandal blamed LINK: http://www.sfbayview.com/012605/headsroll012605.shtml 18. Casualties in Iraq LINK: http://democracyrising.us/content/view/46/74/ 19. Pentagon Brass Suppresses Truth About Toxic Weapons LINK: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/pentagon_brass.html *Section II: Baghdad Boil* (some samples, google yourself for more hits): Baghdad Boil to Return? (by Dr. Roger Bate, 05/13/2004) LINK: http://www.techcentralstation.com/051304C.html Topic: BAGHDAD BOIL: parasites infect many U.S. troops LINK: http://knoxville.wate.com/sound_off/index.php/topic,132.0.ht ml Baghdad Boil' Afflicting U.S. Troops LINK: http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Baghdad_boil_041804.htm Soldiers, Civilians Returning from Middle East: Be Aware of "Baghdad Boil" LINK: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=27577 RELIEF FROM BAGHDAD BOILS LINK. http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/1346/44/ ------------------------------ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new *Yahoo! Security Centre* . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 35 [du-list] "Pain Ray" to be tested in Iraq Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 19:18:03 -0800 http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002035.html Pain Ray Headed to Iraq? It's been talked about for years. But the Pentagon's microwave-like pain ray may finally be headed to Iraq, Inside the Army reports. Developed by the Air Force, the so-called "Active Denial System" (ADS) fires out milimeter waves -- a sort of cousin of microwaves, in the 95 GHz range. The invisible beams penetrate just a 64th of inch beneath the skin. But that's deep enough to heat up the water inside a person. Which is enough to cause excruciating pain. Seconds later, people have to run away. And that causes mobs to break up in a hurry. It's no wonder, then, why less-lethal weapon guru Charles "Sid" Heal calls the ray the "Holy Grail of crowd control." Raytheon has been developing a Humvee-mountable ADS for the Pentagon over the last couple of years, as part of an ACTD, or "advanced concept technology demonstration." By now, the system was supposed to be in the field. But there have been concerns that the ADS tests weren't sufficiently realistic. The Pentagon ordered additional trials. More than 2,370 ADS shots were fired during a pair of "military utility assessments" over the fall. Now, the head of the Army's Rapid Equipping Force -- the unit in charge of getting gear to the troops in a hurry -- is saying: enough. The system's "capabilities have, to date, been sufficiently demonstrated in the ACTD [advanced concept technology demonstration] to prove its value to the solider," Col. Robert Lovett notes in a memo, obtained by Inside the Army. And the 18th Military Police Brigade has requested ADS "to help 'suppress' insurgent attacks and quell prison uprisings." ADS' technical manager, Diana Loree, said the system "now meets all of the ACTD performance parameters," Inside the Army notes. "Because the system is a hand-built, one-of-a-kind technology demonstrator, it does not meet conventional humvee curb weight requirements... However, the technology team worked closely with [Humvee manufacturer] AM General to ensure the safety of the system and its occupants." There has also been talk, at least, of building an airborne model of ADS -- as well as putting together a Hummer with both pain rays and sonic blasters. Needless to say, neither project is as far along as the basic Active Denial System. December 20, 2005 01:16 PM | Lasers and Ray Guns, Less-lethal ---------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.6/213 - Release Date: 12/23/05 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 36 [du-list] Iraq: Depleted uranium aka Baghdad Boils? Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 19:18:06 -0800 http://www.uruknet.info/?p=18948&hd=0&size=1&l=x Iraq: Depleted Uranium aka Baghdad Boils?! jouna, iraq-war.ru December 23, 2005 There’s a possibility that the US Department of Defense (DoD) is hiding the US casualties under a disguise of 'Baghdad Boils’, a disease plaguing the US troops in Iraq, claimed to be caused by the sand fly bites, but possibly by depleted uranium (DU) radiation. To explore this issue I’ve forwarded the following article to DU experts in the world to have it checked and I’m now publishing it as a preliminary announcement here in iraq-war.ru. I’ll keep you updated on this as soon as I hear of them (if confirmed you can’t miss the fat mainstream headlining). DEPLETED URANIUM Recent evidence proves that depleted uranium (DU) is the definite cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Fourteen years after its introduction, DU has revealed as a death sentence, lately brought forth by Leuren Moret (cf. e.g. http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml and the sources to this article). The biological particulate effect targets the Master Code in the DNA and causes numerous diseases difficult to define, but in effect devastating the human body for example with multiple malignancies and developing cancers. Out of 580,400 soldiers in first Gulf War, 11 thousand have died and already by 2000 there were 325,000 permanently disabled, the number increasing by 43,000 every year. Besides, DU has internally contaminated their sexual partners, who have developed endometriosis and have been forced to have hysteroctomies due to health problems. 67 percent of a test group of 251 soldiers have had babies with severe birth defects (missing members, organs, immune system diseases). The United States has deliberately developed the DU in order to utilize the deadly properties of the DU and contaminated not only 42 states in United States, Sinai in Yom Kippur war (1973), Yugoslavia, southern Iraq (and areas nearby) in the first Gulf War and from 2003 on again in Iraq. One of the reasons that the US deploys it allies in the southern parts of the Iraq, because it does not want to expose its own troops to the deadly radiation there from the first Gulf War. Thus the British, and the other coalition troops have been generously given the responsibility of the southern Iraq. BAGHDAD BOIL In a story 'Skin ulcers plague men from N.C. unit’ (cf. http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/13454217.ht m ) we are told: "In addition to the combat casualties suffered during a tour of duty in Iraq last year, an N.C. National Guard brigade also had to medevac 13 men back to a U.S. hospital after volleyball games left them vulnerable to one of the Iraq war's most exotic hazards ­ an outbreak of skin ulcers that can grow for years. The victims, all men from the same small unit, contracted cutaneous leishmaniasis, characterized by weeping sores that refuse to heal, said Lt. Col Tim Mauldin, the brigade's top medical officer. The illness is nicknamed "Baghdad Boil." At the time the guardsmen contracted it last year, the only way to treat it was to fly them back to Walter Reed Army Medical Center for up to three weeks of intravenous treatments with a drug called Pentostam" Using Pentostam in the treatment of sand fly bite is most curious for two main reasons: (1) One is tempted to suspect the US diagnosis, because for leishmaniasis, phlebotomus argentipes (also known as Kala-azar), a disease indeed caused by the bite of sand fly, there is a new, oral drug (Miltefosine( is now available. The medicine is effective (cf. http://www.who.int/tdr/diseases/leish/press_release.htm ), which makes the US use of sodium stibogluconate (commercial names: Pentostam or Stibanate) instead very curious, until we read the comment of Lt. Col Tim Mauldin concerning the sores (rather: 'malignancies’) known as Baghdad Boils: "No matter what you do, it just keeps getting bigger and bigger.") (2) Pentostam is administered into veins and "results in a greater than 50% decrease in parasite DNA, RNA protein and purine nucleoside triphosphate levels" (cf. http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/assets/c/html/displaydoc.asp ?documentid=2182, section 5, Pharmacological properties ). It is not immediately obvious how the bites of tiny sandflies could cause changes in the Master Code in the DNA? (3) Although the sand flies are unlikely cause for the Baghdad Boils, we can seek a different, more natural explanation for the disease is from the the unit itself, to which all thirteen man belong. The 30th Enhanced Heavy Separate Brigade (Mech), "Old Hickory", has one battalion of M-1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks and two battalions of M-2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles (cf. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/30in-bde. htm ). The main weapon of the M1A1 is the M256 120mm smoothbore cannon, designed by the Rheinmetall Corporation of Germany. Engagement ranges approaching 4000 meters were successfully demonstrated during Operation Desert Storm. The primary armor-defeating ammunition of this weapon is the armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding sabot (APDS-FS) round, which features a depleted uranium penetrators (cf. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1.htm ). On the other hand, we know already from the first Gulf War that: "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." CONSEQUENCES: Having recognized the previous facts we are left with the following consequences: (1) Depleted uranium explains the changes in the Master Code in the DNA caused by Baghdad Boils much better than the 'sand flies’ (if the sand flies are not simply considered as an army code word for 'uranium particles’ or alike). In fact, the diagnosis of Baghdad Boils as 'leishmaniasis’ put forth in several connections by Dr. Roger Bate is itself highly suspicious as Dr. Bate is a visiting fellow at American Enterprise Institute, a front for international armed looting around the world. (2) As the United States treats the cancer developing multiple malignancies of its tank crews with Pentostam (and not Miltefosine), this shows that the US Armed Forces and the Pentagon are indeed aware of the effects of the depleted uranium, which again shows that they are lying in their denials of its cancer-producing effect, thus giving a direct answer to "QUESTION 11. WHAT DOES THE U.S. GOVT. KNOW ABOUT DU?" in http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf. They know everything, even how to slow down the mutations caused by DU. (3) More than 2000 U.S. service members have officially contracted the disease since the Iraq War began in early 2003, most of them in Iraq (though some also in Afghanistan). When these 'walking dead’ are added to the current DoD casualty figure (2160) as soon to be dead, the US death toll tops 4,000 with a single jump. The entire US colonial expeditionary force, the 300,000 having served in Iraq are soon to be counted as US Casualties, either dead or disabled by DU. (4) As the depleted uranium penetrators are the main rounds of the US M1A1 tanks, and the extra rounds for the tanks are carried in the M2 Bradleys, there is no doubt, that after 1000 days of war, the entire US armored equipment in Iraq is totally contaminated making these vehicles literarily dead man’s chests. Actually the US tank crews are more safe outside than inside of them, despite the current conditions in Iraq. (5) As the US Armed Forces in Iraq are actually living dead, a zombie army soon to follow the destiny of the previous army in the First Gulf War and their Armored Vehiles hopelessly contaminated by DU, the US army actually has no troops nor tanks. This means that its fate is sealed. The United States has lost the war in Iraq as soon as the troops get the information of how they are and have been deceived by an enemy worse than that they face in Iraq, the US government. (6) Despite of this we may have even more to worry: in her recent articles Leuren Moret tell that the US has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity equivalent of 40,000 Nagasagi Bombs, making four nuclear wars together. This, according to her may be enough for a death sentence for all of us, who will die in silent ways. To prevent this from happening we must not listen to Mr. Bush, who claims that the future generations will be grateful for sacrifices in Iraq (cf. http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_3331907 ). The current deception of the US solders themselves by the US Government could not make the issue more clear: no matter whether you are friend or foe, there is nobody the Government of the United States wouldn’t betray. To stop them all you have to do is pass this story to the US combat troops in Iraq. Explaining them what exactly stepping into US tanks means, will leave them unmanned. This in turn will stop the armoured brigades, which in turn stops the US divisions and armies ­ and in the end the US government war. As soon as the war is stopped, the entire human kind must step in and help the Iraqi people to clean the country from the depleted uranium. I’m most thankful for your assistance in this already. jouna, iraq-war.ru Section I: Depleted Uranium (more sources from articles themselves) 1. Depleted uranium: "Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets: A death sentence here and abroad" LINK: http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml 2. Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm 3. QUESTION 11. WHAT DOES THE U.S. GOVT. KNOW ABOUT DU? LINK: http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf 4. A Monumental War Crime ... DU http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/74185 5. Leuren Moret Speaking on Depleted Uranium LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Leuren-Moret21apr03.ht m 6. Cancer Epidemic Caused by U.S. WMD LINK: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/cancer_epidemic_.html 7. Marin Depleted Uranium Resolution Heats Up GI's Will Come Home To A Slow Death LINK: http://www.coastalpost.com/04/08/01.htm 8. The United States is Actively Engaged in War Crimes and Polluting with Deadly Nuclear Materials LINK: http://www.albasrah.net/en_articles_2005/1205/HRA_141205.htm 9. New Information on Iraq LINK: http://www.albasrah.net/en_articles_2005/1205/du_141205.htm 10. The UNITED STATES of MONSTERS: DEPLETED URANIUM LINK: http://uruknet.info/?p=18218&hd=0&size=1&l=x 11. Iranian president calls for war crimes charges on US LINK: http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/71438 12. Squeezed To Death LINK: http://uruknet.info/?p=18640&hd=0&size=1&l=x 13. World Uranium Weapons Conference 2003 LINK: http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de/speakers.htm 14. International Criminal Tribunal For Afghanistan at Tokyo LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal-Tr ibunal10mar04.htm 15. Leuren Moret: Depleted Uranium Is WMD LINK: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00138.htm 16. Discounted casualties ­ the human cost of depleted uranium LINK: http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html 17. Heads roll at Veterans Administration Mushrooming depleted uranium (DU) scandal blamed LINK: http://www.sfbayview.com/012605/headsroll012605.shtml 18. Casualties in Iraq LINK: http://democracyrising.us/content/view/46/74/ 19. Pentagon Brass Suppresses Truth About Toxic Weapons LINK: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/pentagon_brass.html Section II: Baghdad Boil (some samples, google yourself for more hits): Baghdad Boil to Return? (by Dr. Roger Bate, 05/13/2004) LINK: http://www.techcentralstation.com/051304C.html Topic: BAGHDAD BOIL: parasites infect many U.S. troops LINK: http://knoxville.wate.com/sound_off/index.php/topic,132.0.ht ml Baghdad Boil' Afflicting U.S. Troops LINK: http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Baghdad_boil_041804.htm Soldiers, Civilians Returning from Middle East: Be Aware of "Baghdad Boil" LINK: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=27577 RELIEF FROM BAGHDAD BOILS LINK. http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/1346/44/ --------------------------------- To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 37 [du-list] Re: Iraq: Depleted uranium aka Baghdad Boils? Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 19:18:08 -0800 December 24, 2005 davey garland davey, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the work. It is solid reporting and analysis. It is also a startling display and example of the infinite capacity for lies of the US Military. Make no mistake about it, the United States is the most successful fascist Empire in the history of the world with the most lethal military in history. Now, December 24, 2005 is way past time for the world to commence the political and economic war that will assist the people's forces in the United States and in the US Military itself bring an end to the plague of fascism controlling the US Government. To the World, from inside the United States, I say, drop the hammer, Now! Bob Nichols Project Censored Award Winner Newspaper Correspondent On 12/24/05, davey garland wrote: > > http://www.uruknet.info/?p=18948&hd=0&size=1&l=x Iraq: Depleted > Uranium aka Baghdad Boils?! jouna, iraq-war.ru > December 23, 2005 > > There's a possibility that the US Department of Defense (DoD) is hiding > the US casualties under a disguise of 'Baghdad Boils', a disease plaguing > the US troops in Iraq, claimed to be caused by the sand fly bites, but > possibly by depleted uranium (DU) radiation. To explore this issue I've > forwarded the following article to DU experts in the world to have it > checked and I'm now publishing it as a preliminary announcement here in > iraq-war.ru. I'll keep you updated on this as soon as I hear of them (if > confirmed you can't miss the fat mainstream headlining). > > > > *DEPLETED URANIUM* > > Recent evidence proves that depleted uranium (DU) is the definite cause of > Gulf War Syndrome. Fourteen years after its introduction, DU has revealed as > a death sentence, lately brought forth by Leuren Moret (cf. e.g. http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml > and the sources to this article). > > The biological particulate effect targets the Master Code in the DNA and > causes numerous diseases difficult to define, but in effect devastating the > human body for example with multiple malignancies and developing cancers. > Out of 580,400 soldiers in first Gulf War, 11 thousand have died and already > by 2000 there were 325,000 permanently disabled, the number increasing by > 43,000 every year. > > Besides, DU has internally contaminated their sexual partners, who have > developed endometriosis and have been forced to have hysteroctomies due to > health problems. 67 percent of a test group of 251 soldiers have had babies > with severe birth defects (missing members, organs, immune system diseases). > > The United States has deliberately developed the DU in order to utilize > the deadly properties of the DU and contaminated not only 42 states in > United States, Sinai in Yom Kippur war (1973), Yugoslavia, southern Iraq > (and areas nearby) in the first Gulf War and from 2003 on again in Iraq. > > One of the reasons that the US deploys it allies in the southern parts of > the Iraq, because it does not want to expose its own troops to the deadly > radiation there from the first Gulf War. Thus the British, and the other > coalition troops have been generously given the responsibility of the > southern Iraq. > > > *BAGHDAD BOIL* > > In a story 'Skin ulcers plague men from N.C. unit' (cf. > http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/13454217.ht > m ) we are told: > > "In addition to the combat casualties suffered during a tour of duty in > Iraq last year, an N.C. National Guard brigade also had to medevac 13 men > back to a U.S. hospital after volleyball games left them vulnerable to one > of the Iraq war's most exotic hazards ­ an outbreak of skin ulcers that can > grow for years. > The victims, all men from the same small unit, contracted cutaneous > leishmaniasis, characterized by weeping sores that refuse to heal, said Lt. > Col Tim Mauldin, the brigade's top medical officer. > The illness is nicknamed "Baghdad Boil." At the time the guardsmen > contracted it last year, the only way to treat it was to fly them back to > Walter Reed Army Medical Center for up to three weeks of intravenous > treatments with a drug called Pentostam" > > Using Pentostam in the treatment of sand fly bite is most curious for two > main reasons: > > (1) One is tempted to suspect the US diagnosis, because for leishmaniasis, > phlebotomus argentipes (also known as Kala-azar), a disease indeed caused by > the bite of sand fly, there is a new, oral drug (Miltefosine( is now > available. The medicine is effective (cf. http://www.who.int/tdr/diseases/leish/press_release.htm > ), which makes the US use of sodium stibogluconate (commercial names: > Pentostam or Stibanate) instead very curious, until we read the comment of > Lt. Col Tim Mauldin concerning the sores (rather: 'malignancies') known as > Baghdad Boils: "No matter what you do, it just keeps getting bigger and > bigger.") > > (2) Pentostam is administered into veins and "results in a greater than > 50% decrease in parasite DNA, RNA protein and purine nucleoside triphosphate > levels" (cf. http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/assets/c/html/displaydoc.asp > ?documentid=2182, section 5, Pharmacological properties ). It is not > immediately obvious how the bites of tiny sandflies could cause changes in > the Master Code in the DNA? > > (3) Although the sand flies are unlikely cause for the Baghdad Boils, we > can seek a different, more natural explanation for the disease is from the > the unit itself, to which all thirteen man belong. The 30th Enhanced Heavy > Separate Brigade (Mech), "Old Hickory", has one battalion of M-1 Abrams Main > Battle Tanks and two battalions of M-2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles (cf. > http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/30in-bde. > htm ). > The main weapon of the M1A1 is the M256 120mm smoothbore cannon, designed > by the Rheinmetall Corporation of Germany. Engagement ranges approaching > 4000 meters were successfully demonstrated during Operation Desert Storm. > The primary armor-defeating ammunition of this weapon is the armor-piercing, > fin-stabilized, discarding sabot (APDS-FS) round, which features a depleted > uranium penetrators (cf. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1.htm ). > On the other hand, we know already from the first Gulf War that: "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." > > > *CONSEQUENCES:* > > Having recognized the previous facts we are left with the following > consequences: > > (1) Depleted uranium explains the changes in the Master Code in the DNA > caused by Baghdad Boils much better than the 'sand flies' (if the sand flies > are not simply considered as an army code word for 'uranium particles' or > alike). In fact, the diagnosis of Baghdad Boils as 'leishmaniasis' put forth > in several connections by Dr. Roger Bate is itself highly suspicious as Dr. > Bate is a visiting fellow at American Enterprise Institute, a front for > international armed looting around the world. > > (2) As the United States treats the cancer developing multiple > malignancies of its tank crews with Pentostam (and not Miltefosine), this > shows that the US Armed Forces and the Pentagon are indeed aware of the > effects of the depleted uranium, which again shows that they are lying in > their denials of its cancer-producing effect, thus giving a direct answer to > "QUESTION 11. WHAT DOES THE U.S. GOVT. KNOW ABOUT DU?" > in http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf. They know everything, even > how to slow down the mutations caused by DU. > > (3) More than 2000 U.S. service members have officially contracted the > disease since the Iraq War began in early 2003, most of them in Iraq (though > some also in Afghanistan). When these 'walking dead' are added to the > current DoD casualty figure (2160) as soon to be dead, the US death toll > tops 4,000 with a single jump. The entire US colonial expeditionary force, > the 300,000 having served in Iraq are soon to be counted as US Casualties, > either dead or disabled by DU. > > (4) As the depleted uranium penetrators are the main rounds of the US M1A1 > tanks, and the extra rounds for the tanks are carried in the M2 Bradleys, > there is no doubt, that after 1000 days of war, the entire US armored > equipment in Iraq is totally contaminated making these vehicles literarily > dead man's chests. Actually the US tank crews are more safe outside than > inside of them, despite the current conditions in Iraq. > > (5) As the US Armed Forces in Iraq are actually living dead, a zombie army > soon to follow the destiny of the previous army in the First Gulf War and > their Armored Vehiles hopelessly contaminated by DU, the US army actually > has no troops nor tanks. This means that its fate is sealed. The United > States has lost the war in Iraq as soon as the troops get the information of > how they are and have been deceived by an enemy worse than that they face in > Iraq, the US government. > > (6) Despite of this we may have even more to worry: in her recent articles > Leuren Moret tell that the US has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity > equivalent of 40,000 Nagasagi Bombs, making four nuclear wars together. > This, according to her may be enough for a death sentence for all of us, who > will die in silent ways. To prevent this from happening we must not listen > to Mr. Bush, who claims that the future generations will be grateful for > sacrifices in Iraq (cf. http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_3331907 ). > The current deception of the US solders themselves by the US Government > could not make the issue more clear: no matter whether you are friend or > foe, there is nobody the Government of the United States wouldn't betray. To > stop them all you have to do is pass this story to the US combat troops in > Iraq. Explaining them what exactly stepping into US tanks means, will leave > them unmanned. This in turn will stop the armoured brigades, which in turn > stops the US divisions and armies ­ and in the end the US government war. As > soon as the war is stopped, the entire human kind must step in and help the > Iraqi people to clean the country from the depleted uranium. > > I'm most thankful for your assistance in this already. > > jouna, iraq-war.ru > > > > *Section I: Depleted Uranium* > (more sources from articles themselves) > > 1. Depleted uranium: "Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets: A death > sentence here and abroad" > LINK: http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml > > 2. Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War > LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm > > 3. QUESTION 11. WHAT DOES THE U.S. GOVT. KNOW ABOUT DU? > LINK: http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf > > 4. A Monumental War Crime ... DU > http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/74185 > > 5. Leuren Moret Speaking on Depleted Uranium > LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Leuren-Moret21apr03.ht > m > > 6. Cancer Epidemic Caused by U.S. WMD > LINK: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/cancer_epidemic_.html > > 7. Marin Depleted Uranium Resolution Heats Up GI's Will Come Home To A > Slow Death > LINK: http://www.coastalpost.com/04/08/01.htm > > 8. The United States is Actively Engaged in War Crimes and Polluting with > Deadly Nuclear Materials > LINK: http://www.albasrah.net/en_articles_2005/1205/HRA_141205.htm > > 9. New Information on Iraq > LINK: http://www.albasrah.net/en_articles_2005/1205/du_141205.htm > > 10. The UNITED STATES of MONSTERS: DEPLETED URANIUM > LINK: http://uruknet.info/?p=18218&hd=0&size=1&l=x > > 11. Iranian president calls for war crimes charges on US > LINK: http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/71438 > > 12. Squeezed To Death > LINK: http://uruknet.info/?p=18640&hd=0&size=1&l=x > > 13. World Uranium Weapons Conference 2003 > LINK: http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de/speakers.htm > > 14. International Criminal Tribunal For Afghanistan at Tokyo > LINK: http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal-Tr > ibunal10mar04.htm > > 15. Leuren Moret: Depleted Uranium Is WMD > LINK: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00138.htm > > 16. Discounted casualties ­ the human cost of depleted uranium > LINK: http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html > > 17. Heads roll at Veterans Administration > Mushrooming depleted uranium (DU) scandal blamed > LINK: http://www.sfbayview.com/012605/headsroll012605.shtml > > 18. Casualties in Iraq > LINK: http://democracyrising.us/content/view/46/74/ > > 19. Pentagon Brass Suppresses Truth About Toxic Weapons > LINK: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/pentagon_brass.html > > *Section II: Baghdad Boil* > (some samples, google yourself for more hits): > > Baghdad Boil to Return? (by Dr. Roger Bate, 05/13/2004) > LINK: http://www.techcentralstation.com/051304C.html > > Topic: BAGHDAD BOIL: parasites infect many U.S. troops > LINK: http://knoxville.wate.com/sound_off/index.php/topic,132.0.ht > ml > > Baghdad Boil' Afflicting U.S. Troops > LINK: http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Baghdad_boil_041804.htm > > Soldiers, Civilians Returning from Middle East: Be Aware of "Baghdad Boil" > LINK: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=27577 > > RELIEF FROM BAGHDAD BOILS > LINK. http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/1346/44/ > > ------------------------------ > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new *Yahoo! > Security Centre* > . > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 38 Report: Fed Agents Monitored Muslim Site in D.C. Area WITHOUT Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 13:55:35 -0600 (CST) X-Fingerprint: owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu-69.50 Report: Fed Agents Monitored Muslim Site in D.C. Area US News and World Report has revealed that the federal government has been secretly monitoring radiation levels at over 100 Muslim sites in the Washington, D.C., area, including mosques, private homes, businesses, and warehouses. Similar efforts have taken place in at least five other cities -- Chicago, Detroit, Las Vegas, New York, and Seattle. The monitoring reportedly required investigators to go on to private property, although no search warrants or court orders were ever obtained. http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/27/1443255 Headlines from http://www.DemocracyNow.org = = = = STILL FEELING LIKE THE MAINSTREAM U.S. CORPORATE MEDIA IS GIVING A FULL HONEST PICTURE OF WHAT'S GOING ON? = = = = Daily online radio show, news reporting: www.DemocracyNow.org More news: UseNet's misc.activism.progressive (moderated) = = = = Sorry, we cannot read/reply to most usenet posts but welcome email FOR MORE INFORMATION: http://EconomicDemocracy.org/wtc/ (peace) http://economicdemocracy.org/eco/climate-summary.html (Climate) And http://EconomicDemocracy.org/ (general) ** ANTI-SPAM NOTE: For EMAIL "info" and "map" DON'T work. Email to ** m-a-i-l-m-a-i-l (without the dashes)at economicdemocracy.org instead ***************************************************************** 39 [du-list] Why are workers having trouble getting compensated? Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:06:43 -0800 Since the EEOICPA ACT has been in place it hasn't paid for the first sick workers with toxic chemical exposure. Even though many of us have been approved for some of the illnesses we still haven't been compensated and many sick workers are still tied up in paper work while many have passed away. Many workers with cancer still haven't been paid. Where is the money going and why isn't the DOL doing any better than DOE with the sick workers claims? We need answers to why in over six years these workers are being left out in the cold.. www.nnwj.com Here is another paper DeForest Moneymaker This is a copy of a letter from N. J.M.A.R.C. To: DeForest Moneymaker, the son of Joseph Edward Moneymaker that was (toxic gas) poisioned at Oak Ridge on 04/24/1944 and died 10/28/1950 age 53. Dear Mr. Moneymaker: This letter is in response to your phone calls, and the package that we received from you earlier this month. While we sympathize with your situation, because your father was never a patient of ours, we cannot write a letter to the DOL regarding his CBD status on your behalf. We are under direct contract with the DOL to review records that they send us. Any request to review additional records in your father's case must be sent to us from the DOL. I suggest that you contact the DOL agaom amd request that they send us any additional records that they may have, along with a request to re-review the case. Unfortunately, unless we receive a request from the DOL, we cannot be of further assistance to you at this time. Kalie VonFeldt, M.S., P.A.-C. Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences National Jewish Medical and Research Center It is this reporters opinion that the first contract you signed was as a (doctor) it was your (oath) as a doctor, the truth and justice for workers at the Nuclear Weapons Production Facilities. You are (Doctors) Lee S. Newman, M.D., M.A., F.C.C.P. Head, Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences "After All" These workers at the D.O.E. and Chemical Plants in the U.S.A. were injuried on their jobs and you are over the Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences National Jewish Medical and Research Center You at the Research Center will not (research) the (records) of these (workers) that is your (first contract) as a doctor. Lee S. Newman, M.D., M.A., F.C.C.P. Head, Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences National Jewish Medical and Research Center Professor Department of Medicine and Department of Preventive Medicine and Biometrics Division of Pulmonary Sciences and Critical Care Medicine University of Colorado School of Medicine Sir I ask where do workers go to get (justice). Name of Firm C E W - T E C Signature G. C. Henderson Title Safety Engineer There is no (justice) here at Y-12 and K-25 Plants. Cause of Injury Joseph was sent to a chemical room where he inhaled toxic chemicals, fumes, dust, mist, or flying particles. He was poisioned from Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant. NOTE: There was an INDIVIDUAL INJURY REPORT from the WAR DEPARTMENT that was filled out. Joseph's injury, and the incident that was checked was inhalation, absorption, ingestion(asphyxiation, poisioning, drowing, etc.). WAR DEPARTMENT INDIVIDAUL INJURY REPORT DISTRICT Manhattan Sir your (contract) should be with these (workers) and (patients) from the (D.O.E.) and other (Chemical Plants) in the (U.S.A.). After all you are the doctor over A.K.A. the (head of the division of environmental and occupational health and the number one rspiratory hospital in the U.S.A., your the doctor). Are you a doctor? Did you take the oath as a doctor? Where do the (workers) and (patients) get (justice)? These workers at the D.O.E. have ask for help at E.E.O.I.C.P.A., and the patients were not (provided justice). I DeForest Moneymaker ask the D.O.E. A.K.A. C.E.W. and T.E.C. O.R.N.L. for the (exposure chart) it (was not provided) by the (E.E.O.I.C.P.A.) or by: D.O.E. A.K.A. C.E.W. and T.E.C. or O.R.N.L.. However Mr. J.E. Moneymaker A.K.A. (Edd) was Toxic Gas Poisoined by the WAR DEPARTMENT UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE MANHATTAN, DISTRICT OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE P.O. Box 388 Oak Ridge A.K.A. C.E.W. O.R.N.L. T.E.C. One or more of the following: A chest radiograph On 4/24/1944 there was (x-ray of Edd's chest) A.K.A. (radiograph). There was at least 45 x-rays for 3 and 1/2 years from the doctors at Oak Ridge Hospital and the T.E.C.-O.R.N.L.-C.E.W. Medical Department = Y-12 plant. The first on May 1, 1944. Then on the 25 of 44 then 06/23/44. On the 06/23/44 x-ray doctor (Asher A. White M.D.) at Oak Ridge Hospital a U.S. Army Doctor. Ahser A. White Major Medical Corps, A. U.S. Army This doctor (A Major in the U.S. Army, Doctor M.D.) at Oak Ridge Hospital make a diagnosis and x-ray of Edd's Chest 06/23/1944. In this (report) to Dr. J.H. Sterner, M.D. makes his diagnosis and dismissed Edd from his care on 06/23/1944. WAR DEPARTMENT UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE MANHATTAN DISTRICT OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE Dr. J. H. Sterner Tennessee Eastman Corportation, Y-12 Medical Department, P.O. Box 388 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 23 June 1944 Dear Dr Sterner: Re: Joseph E. Moneymkaer Hospital No. 32290 Diagnosis X-ray of the chest now shows the pneumonia to be almost resolved. The sedimentation rate, however, remains elevated. I would suggest that this man do light work on half time for about one week, and that thereafter you determine in you department how rapidly to return him to full duties. We will dismiss him from our care. Yours very truly, Asher A. White Doctor made this statement below at that time Re: Joseph E. Moneymaker Hospital No. 32290 Dear Dr. Sterner: 06-23-44 Diagnosis: X-Ray of the ches now shows the pneumonia to be almost resolved. The sedimentation rate, however, remains elevated. I would suggest that this man do ligh work on half time. CBD: may not show up for years even decades after exposure. Dr. Asher A. White also says on 6-23-44 I put him on sulfadizine. It would be my hope that with prolonged avoidance of activity this process would clear up and bronchoscopic examination may become unnecessary. I put him on sulfadiazine, four grams a day, and advised him to return for weekly check-up until he is able to return to work. This is a characteristic of CBD 06-23-44- I put him on (sulfadizine) four grams a day and advised him to return to Y-12 Medical Department for weekly check-ups until he is able to return to work. We(dismissed) him from our care you determine in you department how rapidly to return him to full duties. the (disease slowly down) to (almost resloved) or in (remission). (Chronic Beryllium Disease has a very slow onset) a characteristic of CBD. Edd worked the rest of that year on the (mediation Dr. White put him on) and went to the (Medical Department at Y-12 Plant Oak Ridge). In 1945 the (occupational disease) still in (remission) (however) all x-ray diagnosis of Edd's Chest in 1945 and 1946 (shows no change). the diagnosis of Dr. White M.D. on 06-23-44-the (pneumonia) (was almost resolved). Then on 2-22-45 Dr. B.S. Wolf found the following (diagnosis): Moneymaker, J.E. #2145 8002 X-ray Chest. 2-22-45 Distinct thickening of the appearance of Mr. Joseph Edward Moneymaker's film and his clinical course. Moneymaker, J.E. #2145 8002 X-ray Chest. 2-22-45 Distinct thickening of the pulmonary markings and interstitial tissues. both lungs. B. S. Wolf M.D. DIAGNOSIS: In other words, Joseph was not over the unresolved pneumonitis or the toxic gas poisoning, but "almost" was when Dr. White dismissed him from his carel He let Joseph's department supervisor make the diagnosis of his illness or disease. ASHER A. WHITE Major, Medical Corps, A. U. S. Dr. Ahser A. White said the pneumonia was almost resolved, not resolved or cured. This was the pneumonia almost resolved, not his illness. This is also a characteristic of C.B.D.. On all of the medical records, the doctors that examine J. E. Moneymaker referred to Dr. Asher A. White's diagnosis dated 06-23-44. The examination of 5-11-1945 = 5-7-1945 = 2-22-1945 = and the 06-23-1944 = 09-23-1946 shows no change. The diagnosis was the pneumonia was almost resolved. This is a characteristic of C.B.D.. Please note: (5-11-45) (5-7-45) shows no (change). However on (2-22-45) (Dr. B.S. Wolf's diagnosis) and (x-ray diagnosis) shows the following: Moneymaker, J.E. #2145 8002 X-ray Chest 2-22-45. Distinct thickening of the pulmonary markings and interstitial tissuses, both lungs. B.S. Wolf, M.D. However the (Medical and Health Experts) did not expect the (x-ray diagnosis) and the on (experts diagnosis) a (pathology) and a (expert of C.B.D.). Documented: (Doctor Bernard S. Wolf M.D.) by 1949 was a expert on C.B.D. Eisenbud M, Wanta RC, Dustan C. Steadman LT, Harris WB, Wolf BS Non Occupational Berylliosis. The Journal of Industrial Hyggiene and Toxicology. 1949, 31,282-294. This reporter believes that Dr. B.S. Wolf M.D. was a indiviual who was qualified as a pathologist if these test to determine bodies have become sensitized to beryllium in 1944-1945-1946. These test were not avalible to be used. 1944 No > Immunologic tests showing beryllium sensitivity (skin patch test 1945 or beryllium test). 1946 (Doctor = Donna Cragle) A expert in C.B.D. Most of CBD cases in Oak Ridge have been found among workers at Y-12, where the light-weight metal was used in the manufacture of nuclear warheads during the Cold War. At the Y-12 Plant at Oak Ridge 1943-1944-1945-1946. Dr. James H. Sterner became a expert on C.B.D. in 1951. Blood test to determine C.B.D. were not avalible or used to determine the workers at Y-12 1944-1945-1946 by Doctor James H. Sterner. M.D.. Dr. James H. Sterner on June 23, 1944 at the Y-12 and K-25 Plants at Oak Ridge. 31.Sterner JH, Eisenbud M. The Epidemiology of Beryllium Intoxication. Summary of Presentation at Joint Meeting of American Industrial Hygiene Association and Ameircan Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienests. Atlantic City. April 24, 1951. Received from DOE Nevada; Document 66437. Dr. B.S. Wolf M.D. became a expert on C.B.D. in 1949. At Oak Ridge Medical Department A.K.A. Dr. J.H.Sterner, M.D. 1942 O.R.N.L. C.E.W. and T.E.C. 1942 to 1947. 3.Eisenbud M, Wanta RC, Dustan C, Steadman LT, Harris WB, Wolf BS Non Occupational Berylliosis. The Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology. 1949; 282-294. 1949 B.S. Wolf M.D. A.K.A. Bernard S. Wolf M.D. at Oak Ridge Medical Department A.K.A. C.E.W. and T.E.C. O.R.N.L. Moneymaker, J.E. #2145 8002 X-Ray Chest. 2-22-45. Distinct thickening of the pulmonary markings and interstitial tissues, both lungs. B.S. Wolf, M.D. A.K.A. Bernard S. Wolf M.D. Dr. B.S. Wolf M.D. A.K.A. (Bernard S. Wolf) did they know or not Dr. Wolf and Dr. Sterner at Y-12 1944-1945-1946 my fathers medical reports is classified in 1948. 1948-In fact Wolf, a medical director with the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, had evidence of serious dangers. His staff had done classified studies. Harshaw's restricted "Area C" plant and found that concentrations of radioactive uranium dust in the air reached 200 times the safety limits of the day. USA Today Reports. Dr. J.H. Sterner Wolfs boss in 1948. Having alerted Harshaw to the problems. Wolf wanted workers' urine checked for signs of kidney damage. but company officials worried that the tests might alarm employees, so they asked that he come out first to allay any fears among the men. Is this (justice) to these workers at Y-12 and K-25 Plants? Dr. James H. Sterner on June 23, 1944 to April 24, 1951 "D.O.E. Nevada Document" Here and elsewhere, thousands of workers were left in the dark about the often severe hazards they faced while working for companies that were hired secretly in the 1940s and '50s to process radioactive and toxic material for nuclear weapons. Fifty years later, many of the survivors have increased chances of cancer, as well as kidney, lung and other diseases as a result of their work. But there's been almost no effort to learn whether such illnesses have occurred or contributed to any deaths. And now Dr. Lee S. Newman under direct contract with the D.O.L. a part of D.O.E.. This is on the records of C.E.W. and T.E.C. documented = 1-13-46-3-14-46 INJURY Complain of aching all over. Temp 101.8 Pain in chest and arms 1-13-46 Pain in legs and arm on going to bed. Slept well during day, no trouble. Asprin and some kind of code numbers that can not be made out. 3-14-46 Complains of sore muscles, general body weakness. Requests to see Dr. Boone. Other code words can not be made out. Weak and sick. Edd had pneumonitis. This is dotcors at : C.E.W. and T.E.C. O.R.N.L.. The records from Medical Department at C.E.W. and T.E.C. A.K.A. O.R.N.L. This is on the records of C.E.W. and T.E.C. O.R.N.L. documented 9-20-46. T.E.C. and C.E.W. O.R.N.L. Medical Department Y-12 Plant. 9-20-46 Cold T98 Throat very inflamed, routing treatment C. T. 14. codine MONEYMAKER, J. E. #642-2145 9-23-46 AGE No. 21608 Chest - Healthy Chest - A comparison the previous examinations of 5-11-45, 5-7-45, 2-22-45, and 6-23-44 shows no change. - Tharp, M.D. As you can see all the x-rays go back to Doctor:Asher, A. White M.D. The U.S. Army Doctor at the Oak Ridge Army Hospital in Oak Ridge 1944. However one other "Army Doctor" named: Dr. C.Eimert Oak Ridge Hospital for U.S. Army 1946 Documented: On 09-23-1946 Doctor C. Eimert reports that there were clinical records from C.E.W. and T.E.C. and O.R.N.L.. the physical examination on J.E. Moneymaker was carried out on 09-23-1946. Medical Records show "no change" from 06/23/44-5/7/45-5/11/45. However Dr.B.S. Wolf found: Moneymaker, J.E. #2145 8002 X-Ray Chest. 2-22-45. Distinct thickening of the pulmonary markings and interstitial tissues, both lungs. B.S.Wolf, M.D. For: C.E.W. and T.E.C. A.K.A. O.R.N.L. October 8, 1946 U. S. E. D. Insurance Section Oak Ridge Tennessee Subject, J. E. Moneymaker Attention: Mr. Clyde Wilson Dear Mr. Wilson: On September 25, 1946 J. E. Moneymaker, badge number 2145, terminated. At the time of his termination he stated that he still felt that he was suffering from the effects of an alleged fume exposure in April, 1944. A review of his record does not convince us that he is suffering from the effects of any exposure during his employment, but since he has made the above statement and an Employer's First Reports of Injury has been made out, we are sending this letter in place of the usual Surgeon's Report. We are also photostating his medical record and will supply copies of it to you on their completion. Very truly yours CLINTON ENGINEER WORKS Tennessee Eastman Corporation SIGNED-CHRISTOPHER LEGGO, M.D. Chrisopher Leggo, M.D. Medical Director CL:rb First:Surgeon's Report was removed Final Surgeon's Report removed As you can see in this (letter) dated: October 8, 1946. There were (classified) it names two:"document" by name wer are sending this (letter) in ("palce") of the usual Surgeons Report. These (Surgeons Reports) tow of them are still ("classified") or ("destroyed"). I sent this (classfied) document to the D.O.L. and to the (EEOICPA) and to Dr. Lee S. Newman M.D. at the N.J.M.A.R.C.. It was not accepted. This is a (Medical Document) on: Mr. J. E. Moneymaker the D.O.L. or the (N.J.M.A.R.C.) would not assist me in finding them occupational injury and or disease. Found by: Dr. C. Eimert M.D. ES. CLINICAL RECORD, CLINTON ENGINEER WORKS, TENNESSEE EASTMAN CORPORATION DATE/TIME INJURED/TIME REPORTED/INJURY/TREATMENT/ATTENED BY MEDICAL RECORD SHOWS SOME REFERENCE TO ALLEGED PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENT OR IS ALLEGED CAUSE. MEDICAL RECORD SHOWS FOLLOWING NOTEWORTHY OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES OR DISEASES: YES PHYSICAL EXAMINATION CARRIED OUT: YES COPY IN MEDICAL RECORD These medical records were removed from medical files in 1946. DATE 09-23-1946 BADGE #2145 C EIMERT M.D. E.S. I DeForest Moneymaker explained to the D.O.L. and the D.O.E. E.E.O.I.C.P.A. that I had a (report) a standard form for, (Employer's First Report of Injury). I explained to the D.O.L. - D.O.E. - E.E.O.I.C.P.A. that this (report) was (dated: 10-24-1946) and the C.E.T. and T.E.C. A.K.A. O.R.N.L. corporation was (replacing) the (Employer's First Report of Injury) of (Mr. George C. Henderson) Safety Engineer dated: 04-29-1944-with one filled out in 1946 (by=Paul C. Ziemke) Safety Engineer (stamped and received) Sept 24, 1946 (signed by Paul C. Ziemke). I explained that someone was (changing) the (medical reports) and the (safety engineer reports). The D.O.L. and the E.E.O.I.C.P.A. (payed no attention) to the report I sent them at the D.O.L. and the E.E.O.I.C.P.A., and U.S.A. Government hires claims examiners that are suppose to help these workers. DECLARATION OF PERSON COMPLETING FORM Any person who knowinly makes any false statement, misrepresentation, concealment of fact or any other act of fraud is subject to civil or administrative remedies as well as felony criminal prosecution and may, under appropriate criminal provisions, be punished by a fine or imprisonment or both. This is true for all sick and dying and dead workers at these plants. However: This (declaration) does not apply to the (claim examiners) the D.O.L. the E.E.O.I.C.P.A. or N.J.M.A.R.C. or the U.S. Government Doctors. The D.O.L. uses (Constitution Avenue) as an address it is my opinion that the (D.O.L. needs to move) or believe in Freedom and Justice for all the workers at these plants in the U.S.A.. Cc: U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room C-4511 Attn: Anita Brooks/Deborah Lee, Claims Examiner Washington, DC 20210 NJC file U.S. Department of Labor Employment Standards Administration Office of Workers' Compensation Programs the information in this document is intended to inform an employee, survivor or physician of the medical evidence necessary to establish a diagnosis of the following conditions under the EEOICAP: Beryllium Sensitivity, Chronic Beryllium Disease, Chronic Silicosis and Cancer. Medical evidence may include narrative reports, physician notesk diagnostic test results, imaging studies, laboratory work-ups, pathology reports, operative reports, pulmonary function assessments, autopsy evaluations, death certificates, etc. The completed medical report package should be submitted to the appropriate District Office. Decisions regarding coverage under the EEOICPA are contingent on the submission of appropriate medial and factual evidence. This form provides information regarding medical requirements only. Maintain a copy of all documents for your records. I explained to the D.O.L. the (two) surgeon's were still classified or destroyed in 1948. 16.What is considered proof of exposure to beryllium in the performance of duty? To establish that a claimant was exposed to beryllium in the performance of duty, a claimant needs to establish that the covered employee was either > employed at a DOE facility, or > present at a DOE or beryllium vendor facility because of employment by the United States, a beryllium vendor or a DOE contractor or subcontractor during a period when beryllium dust, particles or vapor may have been present at such facility. Generally proof of employment at such facilities during periods when beryllium was present will be sufficient to establish exposure to beryllium in the performance of duty. How is beryllium used at ORNL (Oak Ridge National Laboratories), and when did they start using it? Beryllium was used in the first reactor at the Y-12 plant in Oak Ridge. Beryllium metal is used in the reactor at the High Flux Isotope Reactor and occasionally in research. The Molten Salt Reactor Experiment remediation project involves the removal, sampling, containerization, transportation, testing, conversion, and storage of beryllium salts. In 1944-1945-1946- Mr. J.E. Moneymaker worked at Y-12 unit in buildings where beryllium was used. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 40 Cincinnati Enquirer: Fernald sick claims a long shot Tuesday, December 27, 2005 Many nuke-plant retirees getting rejection letters By Dan Klepal Enquirer staff writer [Zoom] The Enquirer/Tony Jones Lisa Anderson and her grandfather, Milton Holstein of Hamilton, look over a claims rejection letter from the government. CROSBY TWP. - Milton Holstein saw the worst of the top-secret place called the Feed Materials Production Center, better known to most in Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky as Fernald. Holstein, a pipe fitter at the Cold War uranium foundry for 33 years, worked in every building and with every chemical or solvent used to dissolve raw ore and produce high-grade uranium, which helped fuel the country's nuclear weapons program. But that uranium, along with the toxic soup of chemicals used in the process, also burned up lungs, caused cancers and wrecked the lives of some of the 6,000 employees there. "There wasn't a ditch I didn't crawl in or a dead fish I didn't step over," said the 83-year-old Holstein, who had a tumor the size of a baseball removed from his colon in 1975. Today, Holstein is one of 1,148 retired Fernald workers who have filed claims with the federal government in a compensation program designed to pay them $150,000 each if an analysis of their working conditions reveals a 50 percent or greater chance that the work caused their illness. The program applies to retired workers from Fernald and 300 other nuclear sites throughout the country. After six years of waiting, decisions finally began rolling in this year. The news is bad for most. Of the 802 cases processed thus far by the Department of Labor, 610 have been denied. Here's how the system works: To qualify for the $150,000 payout, a former worker must have a radiation-caused cancer or beryllium disease (a chronic lung condition). Qualified claims are referred to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which performs a "dose reconstruction" that attempts to quantify the chances that working conditions led to the illness. NIOSH scientists use records such as worker urinalysis, dosimetry readings from film badges worn to record radiation, workplace air samples and descriptions of working conditions from the employee. After the dose reconstruction is complete, the calculation is made by computer program. If the odds are 50 percent or better that working conditions caused the illness, the claim is approved. Anything less, and it's denied. Many of the retired workers - even some whose cases have been approved - say the system is flawed and unfair because of poor record keeping, the decades that have passed and the top-secret nature of the work. Men such as Rudy Crawford say the system is betraying heroes who helped the country win the Cold War. Crawford, a 35-year veteran of the plant, leads monthly meetings for retired Fernald workers in Harrison. The meetings are intended to update folks on changes to the compensation programs, notify them of co-worker deaths or talk about discounts the retirees can get on insurance or investments. Crawford used to be a loyal company man, but he said seeing how his co-workers have been treated has changed him, even though his claim was approved. "This program is a rotten egg, although there are other terms for it," Crawford said. "We're getting guys turned down that were bombarded with all kinds of gases and fumes. They're getting turned down because the doctors and scientists say they don't meet the 50 percent criteria. That's a big, fat lie. "These people (at NIOSH) just don't have the background to give a fair estimate of what we were contaminated with." NIOSH representatives admit that it's difficult to perform the dose reconstructions. But Larry Elliott, director of NIOSH's Office of Compensation, Analysis and Support, said the reconstructions are accurate. The system is set up to give the workers every benefit of the doubt, he said. "We have confidence that the dose reconstructions are accurate, to the best of our ability," Elliott said. "And I'm confident we're not seeing anyone denied that should be compensated." In some cases, the fair shake comes by multiplication. After figuring out radiation doses from the available information, those doses are multiplied by a factor of 1.3, to account for missed doses. In addition, the system always assumes the highest possible dose for each exposure. For example, not everyone at Fernald wore film badges to register radiation doses. When dosimetry badges aren't available for a claimant, NIOSH uses badges that had the highest readings at the site, Elliott said. Not all claims are referred to NIOSH for dose reconstruction, because some are immediately bounced from the program. Thus far, 519 Fernald claims have been referred for dose reconstruction, with 313 of those being denied. Holstein found out his claim was rejected in May. His appeal also was denied. All the scientific explanations sound like mumbo-jumbo to him. "There's no doubt that stuff caused my cancer," he said. Holstein started working at Fernald in 1954 for $1.90 an hour and was diagnosed with colon and rectal cancer in 1974. "Whenever they had a clogged pipe, we'd take it out, lay it on the ground and a chemical operator would come in and clean it out," he said. "Then we'd put it back. In fooling with that, the stuff was everywhere. You're walking in it, wiping it on your coveralls. But that was the job, you had to do it or hit the gate." George Bassitt isn't waiting on a check, but he's spent the last six years trying to score a payday for others. Bassitt has made a second career of pestering politicians and government officials to bring attention to the deficiencies he sees in the program. A chemical operator at Fernald for 37 years, Bassitt was lucky enough to escape cancer-free. Still, he lost 25 percent of his lung capacity, has had open-heart surgery and a stroke, and was recently told by his doctor that his gallbladder looks like a "piece of burned steak." Bassitt becomes incensed when he talks about the program. The Department of Labor spent $70 million to set up the program. That's money that could have paid a lot of sick people, he said. "It's foolishness," Bassitt says simply. "Why don't they just pay us?" There could be some help on the way. The Fernald Atomic Trades &Labor Union is working with the widow of a former worker who has petitioned Congress to make the dose reconstructions unnecessary for Fernald employees. They are petitioning for something called Special Exposure Cohort Status, a designation that would cut out a lot of the red tape associated with the program. The status has been given to other plants, such as in Portsmouth, Ohio, and Paducah, Ky. It would allow workers who were employed at the plant for a minimum of 250 days and who have one of 22 cancers to get the payout without going through the dose reconstructions. If granted, the status would apply retroactively to those claims that already have been denied. Ray Beatty, financial secretary for the Atomic Trades &Labor Council, said the designation would likely mean a payday for 90 percent to 95 percent of Fernald's retired workers. He, too, thinks the dose reconstructions are inaccurate. "The system is so flawed," Beatty said. "In a lot of cases, these decisions are made on pure speculation. If we get this status, they're going to have to back up and pay these people." [Cincinnati.Com] ***************************************************************** 41 Hawk Eye: IAAP claims move ahead Monday, December 26, 2005 Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST More work needs to be done, advocate says. By KILEY MILLER kmiller@thehawkeye.com The crusade continues. As the calendar flips on one of the most significant years in the young history of the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant compensation effort, activists are pressing the federal government for broader benefits. Paula Graham, an outspoken leader in the initial push to secure payments for former nuclear weapons workers stricken with cancer, has launched a new letter drive pushing for changes in a separate portion of the compensation program. Graham believes all children of deceased workers, regardless of age, should be eligible for payments under Part E of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program, which covers toxin–induced occupational illnesses. "Right now, it's a discriminatory program, because one family who went through the suffering will get paid, and yet another will not," Graham said last week. Graham is drafting a form letter to senators and congressmen that will be mailed early next year during the run–up to a Capitol Hill visit by Donald Shalhoub, the Department of Labor ombudsman for the compensation program. The 19,000–acre ammunition plant in Middletown and the secret nuclear weapons program there first drew statewide attention in 1999, when past employees began asking questions about the cancers attacking their co–workers. This time a year ago, the spotlight was on an obscure federal advisory board considering whether men and women diagnosed with one of 22 cancers after working at the plant, or their survivors, should automatically receive $150,000 and government medical coverage. The board members recommended in favor of the workers in February, only to have their vote made irrelevant by a bureaucratic flip–flop at the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. They held to their initial position at a follow–up meeting in April, adding with their recommendation an apology for the insensitive treatment the workers had endured. Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt gave his support to the compensation effort in May, and the advisory board recommendation was enacted one month later. The Des Moines Register, citing a staffer for Sen. Tom Harkin, D–Iowa, said in an article last week roughly two–thirds of the 350 former workers and family members approved for cancer compensation have received their checks. The Department of Labor would not confirm those numbers, but a legislative assistant there told Sen. Charles Grassley's office that "recommendations" have been made on 70 percent of cancer claims nationwide. Grassley said Friday he was pleased with the recent "quick process," despite the absence of a definitive number on how many Iowa workers have been compensated. Assuming the "two–thirds" estimate from Harkin's staff is correct, that totals around $360 million in federal money, most of it likely flowing to southeast Iowa. Graham knows several folks who have been compensated in the last six months. Most stuck the money in conservative, low–growth accounts, although some skimmed a little off for house repairs and one bought a new car. "A lot of these people are in their 70s and 80s," Graham said. "They don't need to go plunging into the stock market." Looking into the crystal ball, Part E won't be the only discussion topic over the next 12 months. Physicians at the University of Iowa are knee deep in a massive health screening of conventional weapons workers at the plant, men and women who never handled radioactive materials but who may have been exposed to beryllium and other dangerous materials. Congress has never approved a compensation program for Department of Defense weapons builders. Should that happen, the cost would be enormous. Roughly 4,000 people worked on the nuclear weapons line in Middletown from the 1940s to the 1970s. The number of conventional weapons workers over the same period was many times that. The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com ***************************************************************** 42 WHO TV: Advocate says more needs to be done for former ammunition workers Des Moines: BURLINGTON An advocate for former nuclear weapons workers of a southeast Iowa ammunition plant says a program to compensate the families of affected workers isn't doing enough.After years of struggling to get approval from the federal government to help pay for radiation-related health care problems, about 350 former workers and family members were approved for government benefits last year.Senator Tom Harkin's office says about two-thirds of those families have actually received money.Paula Graham, an advocate for the families, says children of all of those who died from radiation-related cancers should be eligible for federal payments. She says the current program is paying some families while others equally qualified for benefits are not getting paid.Graham is drafting a form letter to members of Congress that will be mailed early next year.The Iowa Army Ammuntion Plant in Middletown housed a secret federal nuclear weapons program, which was only revealed after many former workers developed cancer. Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. All content © Copyright 2001 - 2005 WorldNow and WHO-TV, a division of NYT Broadcast Holdings, LLC. ***************************************************************** 43 AP Wire: Labor Department rejects most claims from uranium plant staff 12/27/2005 | Posted on Tue, Dec. 27, 2005 Associated Press CINCINNATI - The U.S. Department of Labor has rejected nearly three out of four compensation claims from workers who say they were made sick by exposure to materials at a former uranium processing site. The Feed Materials Production Center at Fernald, about 18 miles northwest of Cincinnati, produced enriched uranium for the Defense Department's nuclear weapons program from the 1950s until 1989. The government has set up a compensation program that will pay up to $150,000 to a worker who contracted a radiation-caused cancer or lung disease because of exposure at the plant. The Labor Department uses medical records, badges that measured a worker's exposure to radiation and other records to determine if there is at least a 50 percent likelihood that a worker's illness came from working at the site. The department has received claims from 1,148 workers and, as of Thursday, had rejected 610 claims and approved 192. Rudy Crawford, who worked at Fernald for 35 years, says although his claim for benefits was approved, other deserving claims are being rejected. "We're getting guys turned down that were bombarded with all kinds of gases and fumes," Crawford said. "They're getting turned down because the doctors and scientists say they don't meet the 50 percent criteria." Larry Elliott, director of the Office of Compensation, Analysis and Support for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, said the determinations are as fair as possible. "I'm confident we're not seeing anyone denied that should be compensated," he said. ***************************************************************** 44 RIA Novosti: Moscow's uranium enrichment proposal only partially suits Iran - MP 27/ 12/ 2005 TEHRAN, December 27 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's proposal on joint uranium enrichment is only partially acceptable to Iran, a member of the Iranian parliament said Tuesday. Ala'eddin Borujerdi, head of the Majlis national security and foreign relations committee, said Iran was willing to cooperate with Russia and other countries in the nuclear sector, but could not accept Russia's offer to host Iranian uranium enrichment facilities. Borujerdi suggested that Tehran should try to convince Moscow that Natanz and other enrichment facilities across Iran were the best sites for collaborative projects. On December 24, Moscow, which is assisting Iran in building a nuclear reactor at Bushehr, formally proposed to Tehran that the latter move its uranium enrichment facilities to Russian territory. In a diplomatic note to Iran's government, the Russian Foreign Ministry said, "The earlier Russian offer to Iran to establish a joint Russian-Iranian uranium enrichment venture in Russia remains valid." The ministry said the offer was Russia's contribution to "the search for mutually acceptable solutions in the context of settling the situation surrounding the Iranian nuclear program by political and diplomatic means." The EU troika (Germany, France and Britain) has welcomed the idea of moving Iran's enrichment activities to Russia, as this would reduce the risk of Iran using enrichment technology to produce weapons-grade uranium. Russia is building a nuclear power plant in the Iranian port of Bushehr. The project has attracted strong criticism from the U.S., which has accused Tehran of trying to develop nuclear weapons in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 45 NewsFromRussia.Com: Ukraine and USA to build nuclear waste storage facility 18:58 2005-12-26 The state-run company responsible for managing Ukraine's four nuclear power plants signed a contract with a U.S. enterprise Monday for the development of a storage facility for spent nuclear fuel. The US$152 million project, launched by Ukraine's Energoatom and Marlton, New Jersey-based Holtec International, foresees the development of a facility where spent nuclear fuel rods from Ukrainian nuclear power plants will be stored before being sent for reprocessing in Russia, Energoatom said in a statement. Ukraine was the site of the world's worst nuclear accident when a reactor in the Chernobyl nuclear plant exploded in 1986, spewing radiation over much of northern Europe. Chernobyl's reactors were shut down for good in 2000, and Ukraine has pledged to improve the safety of its operational nuclear plants, the AP reports. V.Y. Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU". When reproducing our materials ***************************************************************** 46 Japan Times: New fast-breeder reactor after Monju eyed for '30 Tuesday, December 27, 2005 The government plans to build a new fast-breeder reactor around 2030 for practical operation, succeeding the existing prototype Monju, sources at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry said Monday. The ministry's Agency for Natural Resources and Energy filed the plan during the day's session of an advisory body on energy and natural resources for discussions. Under the plan, basic research at the Monju reactor will be completed around 2015. Design and development policies for the new reactor, to be named the Post-Monju, will then be worked out. It is to be built around 2030. The plan also envisages construction of a new plant that will reprocess spent nuclear fuel to produce uranium-plutonium mixed oxide fuel (MOX) for use at the fast-breeder reactor. The government plans to put the reprocessing plant into operation around 2045 when the existing reprocessing plant in the village of Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture, is expected to have finished operations. The MOX fuel produced at the new reprocessing plant may be used for plutonium-thermal reactors if the development of the fast-breeder reactor is delayed or global demand for uranium eases. However, if uranium supplies become tight, the government may speed up work on the fast-breeder reactor. The Atomic Energy Commission, in a nuclear energy platform released in September, proposed that commercial-based fast-breeder reactors will be introduced around 2050. But the commission, which works out a long-term program of research, development and use of nuclear energy, did not provide any specific plans in the document to develop fast-breeder reactors. Monju, Japan's sole experimental fast-breeder reactor, has remained shut down since a sodium leak and subsequent fire occurred there in December 1995. It is located in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture, along the Sea of Japan coast. It began producing power in August 1995. But on Dec. 8 that year, the fire broke out after coolant sodium leaked from a fatigued thermometer well. The operator then tried to cover up the extent of the accident. The Japan Times: Dec. 27, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 47 news | us company awarded nuclear waste contract 26.12.2005 21:27 An American company has secured a contract to build storage facilities for Ukrainian nuclear waste. Holtec International will build the facilities for waste from three of Ukraine nuclear reactors. Enerhoatom, the Ukrainian signatory on the contract, claims that the arrangement with the American company will result in several benefits, including stricter environmental controls, savings of budgetary funds and a decrease of dependence on Russia. But the sides did not disclose the exact location of the nuclear waste storage facilities. The value of the contract is 150 million US dollars. Ukraine currently spends 100 million dollar each year on storing nuclear waste in Russian facilities. According to the contract, Holtec should build the facilities in three years time, employing Ukrainian construction companies in the process. The capacity will handle waste from six of Ukraine's fifteen reactors. ©2004-2005 ***************************************************************** 48 KTVB.COM: No radiation leak, empty nuclear waste transport truck rolls near Blackfoot :46 PM MST on Tuesday, December 27, 2005 A truck returning to the Idaho National Laboratory west of Idaho Falls from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, New Mexico was involved in a crash early Tuesday morning. KTVB file photo A truck carrying empty nuclear waste casks like this one, rolled off Interstate 15 near Blackfoot. Idaho State Police say no radiation leaks were detected. Idaho State Police say 64-year-old Mary Thornberg of Carlsbad was northbound on Interstate 15 just south of Blackfoot driving the Tri-State Motor Transit truck loaded with three empty nuclear waste casks when she left the right side of the interstate, overcorrected, and rolled the vehicle.  The three 12,500-pound casks separated from the truck, two of them coming to rest on the east shoulder of the road, the third rolling across the southbound lanes and coming to rest on the west side of the interstate.  The truck and tractor blocked the northbound lanes of the interstate for several hours while Idaho State Police troopers and Commercial Vehicle Safety and Hazardous Materials specialists responded to the scene.  Also in the truck was co-driver 54-year-old Leslie Godin of Carlsbad, who was in the sleeper cab at the time of the crash.  Neither Thornberg nor Godin were seriously injured.   They were both examined and released at a local clinic. ISP-CVS specialists conducted several radiological tests to determine if any radiation was present, but found nothing exceeding normal background levels.  A team from Tri-State responded and were involved in recovering the casks and loading them onto other vehicles for removal from the scene. The casks are a special, double-containment vessel that is approved for waste transport.  Had the casks been loaded, they would have each had fourteen 55-gallon drums of low-level "transuranic waste", typically industrial debris, such as rags, work clothing, machine parts, and tools, as well as soil and sludge, contaminated with transuranic radioactive elements (primarily plutonium). Most of the waste is "mixed waste" contaminated with non-radioactive hazardous chemicals such as oil and solvents. ISP Lt. William Reese said the interstate was wet, but not icy and road conditions do not appear to have been a factor in the crash.  Thornberg was cited for inattentive driving. ©2005 KTVB MEDIA GROUP ***************************************************************** 49 asahi.com: New fast-breeder reactor to replace prototype Monju - asahi.com > ENGLISH >  Nation[µ­»ö] 12/27/2005 The Asahi Shimbun The Agency for Natural Resources and Energy has decided to build a new fast-breeder reactor by around 2030, a plan that will cost about 1 trillion yen. The new reactor will replace the prototype Monju fast-breeder reactor, which has been out of operation for the past decade following a sodium leak accident in 1995 and has come under criticism over safety issues and its price tag of 800 billion yen. The agency's proposal was presented Monday to a nuclear energy subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy. In addition to the new fast-breeder reactor, the agency will work toward the development and construction of a second spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility, slated for completion around 2045. In its long-term plan for atomic energy approved this fall, the Cabinet pledged to maintain its nuclear fuel cycle program, which reuses plutonium extracted from spent nuclear fuel. A fast-breeder reactor, fueled by a combination of extracted plutonium and uranium, is central to the nuclear fuel cycle. Although the Japan Atomic Energy Agency has recently started preparing Monju with an eye toward resuming full operations, officials of the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy have decided to put a shelf life of about 10 years on the facility. They said Monju had been dwarfed by recent nuclear reactors, reducing its economic viability. They added that the Monju reactor would only be used for about a decade in order to develop technology relating to the handling of sodium. If Monju operations are resumed, annual operating expenses are expected to reach about 15 billion yen. The post-Monju fast-breeder reactor would be far more technologically advanced as well as efficient, officials said. It would also be used as a model reactor for about a decade and then commercialized to replace light water reactors from about 2050. Whether a prototype new fast-breeder reactor like Monju will first be constructed has yet to be decided. The energy and natural resources agency is also laying the groundwork for a second fuel reprocessing facility. The present one in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture, is slated to end operations by around 2045. The agency is also leaving open the option of replacing light water reactors with new light water reactors in case development of the fast-breeder reactor is delayed. "Unless we paint a specific course of action, development will not proceed. We have heightened flexibility and become more realistic by employing a number of different scenarios," said an official of the agency's Nuclear Energy Policy Planning Division.(IHT/Asahi: December 27,2005) + The Asahi Shimbun Company ***************************************************************** 50 UPI: Washington proposes nuclear reprocessing United Press International - NewsTrack - 12/27/2005 11:51:00 AM -0500 WASHINGTON, Dec. 27 (UPI) -- Radioactive waste reprocessing from U.S. nuclear power plants, which has never worked in the United States, is being proposed in Washington. Congress earmarked $50 million last month for the Energy Department to explore a new kind of reprocessing, one that would reuse a much larger fraction of the waste than had been attempted in the past, The New York Times reported Tuesday. "Reprocessing, or processing spent fuel before it's put in the repository, is a very good way to buy time," said Roger W. Gale, a former Energy Department official who is now an electricity consultant. "It's a fail-safe in case we continue to have problems with Yucca Mountain." However, there are still questions if Yucca Mountain will be opened as a disposal site and Ernest J. Moniz, a physics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that if the world built enough reactors to provide energy without contributing to global warming, a new Yucca Mountain would be needed every 3.5 years. The only U.S. nuclear reprocessing plant built in the 1960s in West Valley, N.Y., left U.S. taxpayers with a cleanup bill of more than $2 billion. © Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights ***************************************************************** 51 ForUm: U.S to build nuclear depository in Ukraine News / 27 December 2005 | 12:15 National nuclear energy generating company “Energoatom” and American company Holtec International have signed a contract on building of centralized depository of nuclear waste for three Ukrainian nuclear electric power stations (Rovenska, Khmelnitska, Yuzhnoukrainska). The contract provides to place information for further development of technical and economic assessment at the disposal of Energoatom. Expenses for building of centralized depository are planed to make about 400 million euros, value of launching complex – 150 million euros. Expected economic effect (savings on nuclear waste removal to Russia) will make about 1.5 milliard euros. Wachovia and Royal Bank of Scotland will give credits for the building. Ukreksimbank and Alfa-bank will take part in the project from the Ukrainian side. According to Yuri Nedashkovsky, President of Energoatom, development of the technical and economic assessment, ratification of the project by Cabinet of Ministers and the Verkhovna Rada will take about one year, the depository-building itself will take three years. Energoatom intends to return credits during four years after the building completion. Launching complex of the depository will include 94 containers, permissive to keep about 20% out of general volume of nuclear waste of Rovenska, Khmelnitska and Yuzhnoukrainska nuclear electric power stations (taking into account waste fuel assembly, which is kept in cooling ponds). The rest of centralized nuclear waste depository is planned to be build without foreign investors practice. According to Nedashkovsky, Holtec intends to deliver all technologies and licenses after the completion of the depository building. Chornobyl zone rates as an area for the depository’s location. ***************************************************************** 52 Deseret News: Build refineries in Skull Valley [deseretnews.com] Tuesday, December 27, 2005 I have followed the Goshute Indian proposal to contract with the Private Fuel Storage (PFS) to store nuclear waste in Skull Valley. I am pleased at recent news that the consortium is falling apart. I am left to wonder, however, whether the Goshutes' desire for economic development will ever be satisfied. I have an idea that might enable that economic growth. As a sovereign nation, the Goshutes are not subject to the same "red tape" that hampers similar developments on non-Indian properties. Let our state government encourage the Goshutes to partner with businesses to build oil refineries in Skull Valley. The Goshute Tribe seems to have come to terms with the environmental impact of nuclear waste on their tribal lands. They might come to the same terms with potentially cleaner developments. The Goshutes want development. They have sovereignty. The need for new development in the oil refinery industry is great. It could be a win-win situation. Christopher Judd Clearfield © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company [ /] ***************************************************************** 53 AP Wire: Paducah company gets $191 million contract for work at plant 12/27/2005 | Herald-Leader Associated Press PADUCAH, Ky. - The Department of Energy has awarded a $191 million contract for nuclear plant cleanup work to a Paducah-based company. Paducah Remediation Services will begin overseeing waste management and cleanup in April under a contract that expires in September 2009, the government announced Tuesday. Kentucky Sen. Jim Bunning helped in getting the contract awarded to the Paducah company. Bunning has a seat on the Senate Committee on Energy, which has oversight of the Department of Energy. "The contract has been awarded, and now we just need to make sure this work gets done," Bunning said in a statement. "Those living and working in and around Paducah deserved a better environment for their families ..." Bechtel Jacobs, which has the current cleanup contract, will turn the job over to Paducah Remediation in April. The work includes cleanup of groundwater and soil, decontamination, waste management and surveillance. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************