***************************************************************** 08/06/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.185 ***************************************************************** 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 US: [NYTr] Half of US STILL Believes Iraq had WMD 2 New York Times: U.S. Treads Softly Over Irans Role in Crisis - 3 IRNA: Larijani: Iran will reject UN resolution, suspension 4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Plans to Expand Nuclear Activities 5 London Times: Iran's plot to mine uranium in Africa - 6 BBC: Iran to ignore nuclear resolution 7 IRNA: Majlis commission to debate nuclear developments in extraordin 8 IRNA: Larijani says Iran shoulders a heavy duty in nuclear fuel cycl 9 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: UNSC resolution has no legal base 10 AFP: Iran insists it will not freeze nuclear work 11 IRNA: US, Europe "rushed" Iran's N-case to UN 12 AFP: Iran tried to import uranium from DR Congo - report - 13 AFP: Iran says could react harshly to UN resolution - report 14 Larijani: Iran's leading role in region has nothing to do with nucle 15 IRNA: Larijani says Iran nuclear case solvable through negotiation - 16 IRNA: Iran will not accept talks under duress - Larijani 17 IRNA: Iran will pursue its nuclear rights within NPT - Larijani 18 US: [smygo] The Hiroshima Myth 19 [southnews] Global Hiroshima The Stakes Have Been Raised 20 US: Simulated nuclear explosion planned for Hawaii in mid-August 05 21 US: [NYTr] Bush Paves the Way for Global Nuclear Expansion 22 The Observer: Treasury admits Bechtel talks 23 [NYTr] Global Hiroshima: The Stakes Have Been Raised 24 The Observer: Tyrant who stands between peace and catastrophe 25 Daily Breeze: A-bombs' lesson unheeded 26 AFP: No big Pakistan nuclear buildup, envoy says - press - NUCLEAR REACTORS 27 [NYTr] Near-meltdown incident at Swedish nuclear reactor 28 US: Knox News: Incentives may boost nuke sites 29 The Observer: Nuclear power links to 'sham' energy review 30 US: Contra Costa Times: Fresno considers nuclear plant 31 Green Left Weekly: Behind Howard's dangerous nuclear push 32 US: Tri-City Herald: DOE to study sites for nuclear facility 33 ABC Asia Pacific: Australian scientist sparks nuclear power debate 34 US: APP.COM: Facts back criticism of drywell at A-plant 35 US: Resource Investor: Energy - Nuclear Power and the Environment 36 AU ABC: Brown slams Flannery's nuclear power suggestions. 37 AU ABC: Heated debate over the warming of the planet NUCLEAR SECURITY 38 Independent: Secret nuclear bases to be shown on public maps NUCLEAR SAFETY 39 Leuren Moret - August 1, 2006 on The 'X' Zone Radio Show - DU & Di 40 US: Deseret News: Cancer victims win small Victory 41 Sunday Herald: Reactors radioactive dirty laundry - 42 US: Salt Lake Tribune: State to fill gaps in Monticello cancer stdy 43 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Probe checks possible link of Monticello canc 44 People's Daily: Norwegian fishermen concerned over planned Russian n 45 Japan Times: Survivor of both A-bombs takes message to U.N. NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 46 US: Iran's plot to mine uranium in Africa 47 US: The Australian: Labor votes against uranium review 48 NRDC: NUCLEAR REPOSITORY BILL IS FATALLY FLAWED 49 US: AU ABC: Tas Labor opposes Beazley's uranium plans 50 US: Decatur Daily: Above-ground nuclear storage potential threat 51 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Appeal on EnergySolutions oversight likely to 52 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Appeal on EnergySolutions oversight likely to 53 Independent: Tim Webb: The Americans will clean up on British nukes 54 Japan Times: Big subsidies eyed for towns interested in nuclear dump 55 US: Portsmouth Herald: Amendment doesn't change 'spent fuel pool' 56 AU ABC: Environment Centre criticises call for nuclear waste dump. PEACE 57 [southnews] Hiroshima remembers atomic attack 58 [southnews] Scrap nuclear weapons, Aussies urge 59 [NYTr] Hiroshima Anniversary: Scrap Nuke Weapons, Urge Aussies 60 [NYTr] Hiroshima: Japan Marks Anniversary of First Atomic Bombing 61 US: Contra Costa Times: Hiroshima survivor to speak at rally 62 Daily Yomiuri: Peace declaration skirts new nuclear threat 63 AFP: Hiroshima marks atom bomb anniversary US DEPT. OF ENERGY 64 ajc.com: Energy secretary talks up nuclear 65 Knox News: 8 arrested at Y-12 protest 66 KnoxNews: Eight arrested during protest at Y-12 plant 67 Guardian Unlimited: 8 Arrested in Tenn. Protest of A-Bomb 68 Amarillo Globe-news: Nuke 'Death Train' rolls into history 69 Houston Chronicle: Nuke 'Death Train' rolls into history ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 [NYTr] Half of US STILL Believes Iraq had WMD Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 18:13:28 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit AP - Aug 6, 5:21 PM EDT http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAQ_BELIEVING_WMD Half of U.S. Still Believes Iraq Had WMD By CHARLES J. HANLEY AP Special Correspondent Do you believe in Iraqi "WMD"? Did Saddam Hussein's government have weapons of mass destruction in 2003? Half of America apparently still thinks so, a new poll finds, and experts see a raft of reasons why: a drumbeat of voices from talk radio to die-hard bloggers to the Oval Office, a surprise headline here or there, a rallying around a partisan flag, and a growing need for people, in their own minds, to justify the war in Iraq. People tend to become "independent of reality" in these circumstances, says opinion analyst Steven Kull. The reality in this case is that after a 16-month, $900-million-plus investigation, the U.S. weapons hunters known as the Iraq Survey Group declared that Iraq had dismantled its chemical, biological and nuclear arms programs in 1991 under U.N. oversight. That finding in 2004 reaffirmed the work of U.N. inspectors who in 2002-03 found no trace of banned arsenals in Iraq. Despite this, a Harris Poll released July 21 found that a full 50 percent of U.S. respondents - up from 36 percent last year - said they believe Iraq did have the forbidden arms when U.S. troops invaded in March 2003, an attack whose stated purpose was elimination of supposed WMD. Other polls also have found an enduring American faith in the WMD story. "I'm flabbergasted," said Michael Massing, a media critic whose writings dissected the largely unquestioning U.S. news reporting on the Bush administration's shaky WMD claims in 2002-03. "This finding just has to cause despair among those of us who hope for an informed public able to draw reasonable conclusions based on evidence," Massing said. Timing may explain some of the poll result. Two weeks before the survey, two Republican lawmakers, Pennsylvania's Sen. Rick Santorum and Michigan's Rep. Peter Hoekstra, released an intelligence report in Washington saying 500 chemical munitions had been collected in Iraq since the 2003 invasion. "I think the Harris Poll was measuring people's surprise at hearing this after being told for so long there were no WMD in the country," said Hoekstra spokesman Jamal Ware. But the Pentagon and outside experts stressed that these abandoned shells, many found in ones and twos, were 15 years old or more, their chemical contents were degraded, and they were unusable as artillery ordnance. Since the 1990s, such "orphan" munitions, from among 160,000 made by Iraq and destroyed, have turned up on old battlefields and elsewhere in Iraq, ex-inspectors say. In other words, this was no surprise. "These are not stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction," said Scott Ritter, the ex-Marine who was a U.N. inspector in the 1990s. "They weren't deliberately withheld from inspectors by the Iraqis." Conservative commentator Deroy Murdock, who trumpeted Hoekstra's announcement in his syndicated column, complained in an interview that the press "didn't give the story the play it deserved." But in some quarters it was headlined. "Our top story tonight, the nation abuzz today ..." was how Fox News led its report on the old, stray shells. Talk-radio hosts and their callers seized on it. Feedback to blogs grew intense. "Americans are waking up from a distorted reality," read one posting. Other claims about supposed WMD had preceded this, especially speculation since 2003 that Iraq had secretly shipped WMD abroad. A former Iraqi general's book - at best uncorroborated hearsay - claimed "56 flights" by jetliners had borne such material to Syria. But Kull, Massing and others see an influence on opinion that's more sustained than the odd headline. "I think the Santorum-Hoekstra thing is the latest 'factoid,' but the basic dynamic is the insistent repetition by the Bush administration of the original argument," said John Prados, author of the 2004 book "Hoodwinked: The Documents That Reveal How Bush Sold Us a War." Administration statements still describe Saddam's Iraq as a threat. Despite the official findings, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has allowed only that "perhaps" WMD weren't in Iraq. And Bush himself, since 2003, has repeatedly insisted on one plainly false point: that Saddam rebuffed the U.N. inspectors in 2002, that "he wouldn't let them in," as he said in 2003, and "he chose to deny inspectors," as he said this March. The facts are that Iraq - after a four-year hiatus in cooperating with inspections - acceded to the U.N. Security Council's demand and allowed scores of experts to conduct more than 700 inspections of potential weapons sites from Nov. 27, 2002, to March 16, 2003. The inspectors said they could wrap up their work within months. Instead, the U.S. invasion aborted that work. As recently as May 27, Bush told West Point graduates, "When the United Nations Security Council gave him one final chance to disclose and disarm, or face serious consequences, he refused to take that final opportunity." "Which isn't true," observed Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a scholar of presidential rhetoric at the University of Pennsylvania. But "it doesn't surprise me when presidents reconstruct reality to make their policies defensible." This president may even have convinced himself it's true, she said. Americans have heard it. A poll by Kull's WorldPublicOpinion.org found that seven in 10 Americans perceive the administration as still saying Iraq had a WMD program. Combine that rhetoric with simplistic headlines about WMD "finds," and people "assume the issue is still in play," Kull said. "For some it almost becomes independent of reality and becomes very partisan." The WMD believers are heavily Republican, polls show. Beyond partisanship, however, people may also feel a need to believe in WMD, the analysts say. "As perception grows of worsening conditions in Iraq, it may be that Americans are just hoping for more of a solid basis for being in Iraq to begin with," said the Harris Poll's David Krane. Charles Duelfer, the lead U.S. inspector who announced the negative WMD findings two years ago, has watched uncertainly as TV sound bites, bloggers and politicians try to chip away at "the best factual account," his group's densely detailed, 1,000-page final report. "It is easy to see what is accepted as truth rapidly morph from one representation to another," he said in an e-mail. "It would be a shame if one effect of the power of the Internet was to undermine any commonly agreed set of facts." The creative "morphing" goes on. As Israeli troops and Hezbollah guerrillas battled in Lebanon on July 21, a Fox News segment suggested, with no evidence, yet another destination for the supposed doomsday arms. "ARE SADDAM HUSSEIN'S WMDS NOW IN HEZBOLLAH'S HANDS?" asked the headline, lingering for long minutes on TV screens in a million American homes. ) 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 2 New York Times: U.S. Treads Softly Over Irans Role in Crisis - By and Published: August 5, 2006 WASHINGTON, Aug. 4 — Despite suspicions that is intimately involved in the current conflict between and , the Bush administration has carefully stopped short of accusing Iran of inciting the crisis. President Bush has said on several occasions that he believes Iran has armed and encouraged Hezbollah, a Shiite militia operating from southern , and is fomenting terrorism in the Middle East and elsewhere through proxies like Hezbollah. But he has shied away from words or actions that could spark an open confrontation with Iran. There are several reasons for the administrations cautious approach. Most significantly, with the American military bogged down in Iraq, the lacks the means and political support to engage in another conflict in the region. Partly because of this, the administration has become involved in a delicate round of negotiations in the seeking to end Irans uranium enrichment work and its presumed nuclear weapons program. Officials also say that available intelligence does not offer proof that Iran inspired or directed the Hezbollah kidnappings and rocket launchings that set off the war with Israel. And, although the administration built its case for war against Iraq with far murkier intelligence about s links to terrorism, intelligence officials said that a sober lesson of Iraq is the peril of building a case for war without ironclad evidence of terrorist links. In some ways, Iran presents a perfect example of the dangers of nuclear proliferation and state sponsorship of terrorism that Mr. Bush has warned against for five years. Irans nuclear program, its support of groups like Hezbollah and its strident anti-Israel and anti-American statements appear to make it a prime target for American retribution. But the administration finds itself relying on Israel to cripple Hezbollah and on the United Nations and an ad hoc alliance of European nations, China and Russia to try to rein in Tehrans nuclear program. Iran is the enemy that best fits the definition of the adversary Bush has defined, said Robert Malley, director of the Middle East program at the International Crisis Group. This is the poster child of what he thinks the U.S. should be going after. And yet, so far, the Bush administration has pulled its punches. They dont have the credibility they had and the means they need to take any real meaningful action beyond what theyre doing at the U.N. and in Lebanon, Mr. Malley said. There is little doubt among American and Israeli officials that Iran has actively supported Hezbollah with money, weapons and training over many years and used it as a proxy force to extend its reach throughout the Middle East and beyond. A lot of the weapons being fired by Hezbollah are Iranian weapons, Defense Secretary said this week. And Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, and Irans their principal financial and military supplier and supporter. But intelligence analysts say there is little evidence that the Hezbollah raid more than three weeks ago that touched off the current fighting was ordered by Tehran, or that Iran is directly coordinating the steady attacks on Israeli targets. Nobody thinks that the Iranians have walked off the field, but we are just not seeing any direct control of things from Tehran, said an intelligence official who was given anonymity to discuss classified intelligence. Another administration official said there was no proof that Iran was pulling the strings in southern Lebanon today, while adding, But its a very convenient distraction away from the nuclear issue, dont you think? And its a way of sending a message about their reach. A third official said that even if Iran did not instigate the attacks, its leaders saw a tactical advantage in encouraging Hezbollah to continue the fight and in demonstrating that it had supplied Hezbollah with rockets that could reach deep into Israel. It introduces a new level of ambiguity into the Iran debate, the official said. If we all missed the degree to which Iran has armed Hezbollah, what else have we missed in their nuclear program? Administration officials say they fear that identifying Iran as an instigator of the current crisis could scare off some countries whose votes are needed at the , and who are already suspicious that the United States is planning a confrontation with Iran if Iran rejects the Councils demands regarding its nuclear program. At the same time, Mr. Bushs aides have rejected sitting down with Iran to discuss Hezbollah, or the nuclear program, before Iran agrees to cease its enrichment program. Mr. Bushs offer to participate in talks, announced 10 weeks ago, carried a major condition: First Iran must agree to shut down the program. They are caught in a bind, said , who was chief Middle East negotiator under the first President Bush and President . They have set tough conditions before they are willing to sit down and talk to the Iranians. But they also know that to get to the roots of the Hezbollah problem — the phrase President Bush keeps using — they have to go through the Iranians. Some experts said that with the war in Iraq going badly, the last thing the administration needs is a new crisis in the Middle East. We have been driven into something we didnt want to do, said Anthony H. Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. Far from Israel being the American proxy in a war against Iran, weve become Israels proxy in its war against Hezbollah, he said. Israels miscalculations have been so serious that its only hope for victory is to have the United States and the international community do for Israel what it cant do militarily, which is defeat Hezbollah, assemble an international force in Lebanon and bring some sort of endgame to all this. David E. Sanger contributed reporting for this article. More ***************************************************************** 3 IRNA: Larijani: Iran will reject UN resolution, suspension Tehran, Aug 6, IRNA UNSC-Nuclear-Resolution-Larijani Iran will reject both the resolution adopted by the United Nations Security Council on Tehran's nuclear case and he suspension of uranium enrichment, said Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani here Sunday. "The resolution is illegal because we have not made any violation (of the NPT) to suspend our enrichment activities," Larijani told domestic and foreign reporters in a press conference. Stressing that Iran has always been ready for talks, Larijani said "We announced that if there is any ambiguity for anyone, it can be removed through negotiations and we stick to the same policy." "The double-standard policy practiced by the Western countries towards Iran's nuclear program has led to a position where they (Western states) have complicated the issue with their own hands," Larijani said. "On the one hand, they offered the package and on the other, issued the resolution. By doing this, they changed the procedure of solving the problem," Larijani stressed. "They (Western states) should understand that they cannot talk to Iran by the language of force. They have to change their approach if they want the package to survive," Larijani stressed. "I'm not saying that there are no more chances," Larijani added. ***************************************************************** 4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Plans to Expand Nuclear Activities From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday August 6, 2006 10:01 AM By ALI AKBAR DAREINI Associated Press Writer TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's top nuclear negotiator said Sunday that Iran will expand uranium enrichment, in defiance of a U.N. Security Council resolution giving the Islamic Republic until Aug. 31 to halt the activity or face the threat of political and economic sanctions. Ali Larijani called the U.N. Security Council resolution issued last week illegal and said Iran won't respect the deadline. ``We reject this resolution,'' he told reporters. ``We will expand nuclear activities where required. It includes all nuclear technology including the string of centrifuges,'' Larijani said, referring to the centrifuges Iran uses to enrich uranium. He said Iran had not violated any of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty, and that the U.N. had no right to require it suspend enrichment. ``We won't accept suspension,'' he said. Larijani said the Security Council resolution contradicted a package of Western incentives offered in June to persuade Tehran to suspend its enrichment activities. He reiterated that Iran would formally respond to the incentives package on Aug. 22. Iran has said it will never give up its right to produce nuclear fuel, but has indicated it may suspend large-scale activities to ease tensions with the West. Larijani said the world should blame the United States and its allies for acting against their proposed package and seeking to deny Iran its rights under the NPT. The United States has accused Iran of seeking nuclear weapons. Tehran maintains its program is peaceful and intended to generate electricity. In February, Iran for the first time produced a batch of low-enriched uranium, using a cascade of 164 centrifuges. The process of uranium enrichment can be used to generate electricity or to create an atomic weapon, depending on the level of enrichment. Iran said it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges at its enrichment plant in Natanz, central Iran, by the end of the year. Industrial production of enriched uranium in Natanz would require 54,000 centrifuges. Hard-liners within Iran's ruling Islamic establishment have called on the government to withdraw from the NPT in response to the U.N. resolution, but the government has not heeded the call. Withdrawal from the treaty could end all international oversight of Iran's nuclear program. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 5 London Times: Iran's plot to mine uranium in Africa - The Sunday Times August 06, 2006 Jon Swain, David Leppard and Brian Johnson-Thomas IRAN is seeking to import large consignments of bomb-making uranium from the African mining area that produced the Hiroshima bomb, an investigation has revealed. A United Nations report, dated July 18, said there was “no doubt” that a huge shipment of smuggled uranium 238, uncovered by customs officials in Tanzania, was transported from the Lubumbashi mines in the Congo. Tanzanian customs officials told The Sunday Times it was destined for the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, and was stopped on October 22 last year during a routine check. The disclosure will heighten western fears about the extent of Iran’s presumed nuclear weapons programme and the strategic implications of Iran’s continuing support for Hezbollah during the war with Israel. It has also emerged that terror cells backed by Iran may be prepared to mount attacks against nuclear power plants in Britain. Intelligence circulating in Whitehall suggests that sleeper cells linked to Tehran have been conducting reconnaissance at some nuclear sites in preparation for a possible attack. The parliamentary intelligence and security committee has reported that Iran represented one of the three biggest security threats to Britain. The UN security council has given Iran until the end of this month to halt its uranium enrichment activities. The UN has threatened sanctions if Tehran fails to do so. A senior Tanzanian customs official said the illicit uranium shipment was found hidden in a consignment of coltan, a rare mineral used to make chips in mobile telephones. The shipment was destined for smelting in the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan, delivered via Bandar Abbas, Iran’s biggest port. “There were several containers due to be shipped and they were all routinely scanned with a Geiger counter,” the official said. “This one was very radioactive. When we opened the container it was full of drums of coltan. Each drum contains about 50kg of ore. When the first and second rows were removed,the ones after that were found to be drums of uranium.” In a nuclear reactor, uranium 238 can be used to breed plutonium used in nuclear weapons. The customs officer, who spoke to The Sunday Times on condition he was not named, added: “The container was put in a secure part of the port and it was later taken away, by the Americans, I think, or at least with their help. We have all been told not to talk to anyone about this.” The report by the UN investigation team was submitted to the chairman of the UN sanctions committee, Oswaldo de Rivero, at the end of July and will be considered soon by the security council. It states that Tanzania provided “limited data” on three other shipments of radioactive materials seized in Dar es Salaam over the past 10 years. The experts said: “In reference to the last shipment from October 2005, the Tanzanian government left no doubt that the uranium was transported from Lubumbashi by road through Zambia to the united republic of Tanzania.” Lubumbashi is the capital of mineral-rich Katanga province, home of the Shinkolobwe uranium mine that produced material for the two atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. The mine has officially been closed since 1961, before the country’s independence from Belgium, but the UN investigators have told the security council that they found evidence of illegal mining still going on at the site. In 1999 there were reports that the Congolese authorities had tried to re-open the mine with the help of North Korea. In recent years miners are said to have broken open the lids and extracted ore from the shafts, while police and local authorities turned a blind eye. In June a parliamentary committee warned that Britain could be attacked by Iranian terrorists if tensions increased. A source with access to current MI5 assessments said: “There is great concern about Iranian sleeper cells inside this country. The intelligence services are taking this threat very seriously.” Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 6 BBC: Iran to ignore nuclear resolution Last Updated: Sunday, 6 August 2006 [Preliminary installation of a turbo generator at Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant. File photo] Iran says it has a right to pursue its nuclear ambitions Iran has vowed to pursue its nuclear programme, in its first official response to last week's UN resolution urging it to curb nuclear activities. Chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said Tehran would continue to develop nuclear energy within the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Last week the Security Council said Iran faced possible sanctions if it did not stop uranium enrichment this month. Some members fear Iran may use the technology to build nuclear weapons. Iran says its motives are peaceful. "Our activities respect the Non-Proliferation Treaty... so we will not accept the suspension [of uranium enrichment]," Mr Larijani said. "They should know that such resolutions will not affect our determination. We will pursue the nuclear rights of Iranians which are enshrined in the NPT." Further discussions Mr Larijani also warned that sanctions would hurt the West more, leaving people there shivering from cold during the winter because of higher oil prices. The UN Security Council passed resolution 1696 by 14 votes to one on 31 July. It gives Iran until the end of August to suspend uranium enrichment and open its nuclear programme to international inspections. If Tehran fails to do so, the council will consider economic sanctions. But following objections by Russia and China to the specific mention of sanctions, further discussions will have to take place about what further steps to take. ***************************************************************** 7 IRNA: Majlis commission to debate nuclear developments in extraordinary session - Tehran, Aug 5, IRNA Majlis-Nuclear-Session Rapporteur of Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Kazem Jalali said here on Saturday that an extraordinary session of his commission is to be held Sunday evening. Announcing this, he told reporters that Iran's nuclear officials will attend the session of the commission. Issues related to Iran's nuclear dossier and the latest developments in Lebanon will be the main topics of discussion in the tomorrow meeting, Jalali added. The officials in charge of nuclear case at the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and the Foreign Ministry have been invited to the meeting, he said. The SNSC Secretary Ali Larijani will probably attend the extraordinary session, Jalali further announced. The session will be held despite the Majlis deputies are on their two-week holidays. ***************************************************************** 8 IRNA: Larijani says Iran shoulders a heavy duty in nuclear fuel cycle , Aug 6, IRNA -- Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said here Sunday that Tehran shoulders a heavy duty and its mastering nuclear duel cycle would mean national independence. "The prerequisite for Iran's independence and prosperity in the field of nuclear technology is resistance to illogical and irrational pressures," said Larijani at a press conference here on Sunday. Larijani said that if Iran fails to master nuclear fuel cycle, it will have to meet its requirements from global nuclear centers in the next two decades when fossil fuel runs out. On the US President George W. Bush's claim of establishment of a nuclear fuel bank, Larijani said, "They want to jeopardize countries' independence. Iranian statesmen are making efforts to guarantee a future in which the country will stand on its own feet." Asked on the vote of China, Russia and Qatar to the UN Security Council resolution, proposed by the westerners, Larijani said all countries, including China and Russia make decision based on their own interests and "of course, we do not like to test our friends just by a single experience." Larijani said that furthermore, international equations too will not help solve issues "and we do not wish to issue orders to other countries." On content of the proposed package, Larijani said, "As we said since the beginning, the package has some ambiguities and separate committees are studying different aspects of it." "The package is potentially worth being discussed and can be a good start for talks," he added. The top nuclear negotiator said Iran wants fair dialogue, believing that the talks should not be held under pressure. He said Iran will respond to the package on August 22. ***************************************************************** 9 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: UNSC resolution has no legal base 2006/08/06 Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said Sunday that the Islamic Republic of Iran has always welcomed negotiations in order to come to a solution. "The anti-Iran resolution adopted by the UN Security Council is not acceptable and has no legal base," Asefi told reporters duringhis weekly press briefing. "The resolution has not recognized the rights of the Islamic Republic of Iran and therefore is not acceptable," he added. Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. ***************************************************************** 10 AFP: Iran insists it will not freeze nuclear work by Hiedeh Farmani Sun Aug 6, 7:51 AM ET TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> has insisted it will not freeze uranium enrichment, in defiance of a UN resolution and warned it could even expand its nuclear programme which the West fears is a cover for efforts to build the bomb. "Our activities respect the Non-Proliferation Treaty... so we will not accept the suspension (of uranium enrichment)," nuclear chief Ali Larijani told a news conference Sunday, in the first formal reaction to the July 31 resolution. "They should know that such resolutions will not affect our determination. We will pursue the nuclear rights of Iranians which are enshrined in the NPT." The UN Security Council resolution requires Iran to halt uranium enrichment and other sensitive nuclear fuel work by August 31 or face the prospect of sanctions. "This resolution has no legal credibility and it negates the purpose of the (International Atomic Energy) Agency," Larijani said. The resolution was pushed through after Iran ignored a previous non-binding deadline and failed to respond to an international offer of a package of incentives in exchange for a moratorium on nuclear fuel work. Iran, OPEC" /> 's second largest oil exporter, insists it wants to enrich uranium only to make reactor fuel for power stations, but there is widespread suspicion the country wants the capacity to make weapons-grade uranium. And Larijani warned world powers against imposing sanctions, suggesting that Iran could use oil as a weapon. "It will have a huge international impact. They will lose more than us. They should not do something that will leave them shivering in winter". Larijani also said that Iran could expand its nuclear activities by increasing the cascade of centrifuges used for uranium enrichment. In April, Iran said it had successfully enriched uranium to 3.5 percent using 164 centrifuges. It also plans to install 3,000 centrifuges at its enrichment plant in Natanz, central Iran, by the end of the Iranian year in March 2007. To reach weapons-grade material, the enrichment level has to reach more than 90 percent. Larijani however said that Iran was still studying the package of incentives offered by Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States on June 6, saying it "had the potential to resolve the nuclear issues". The package, handed to Tehran on June 6, offers trade, technology, diplomatic and other incentives as well as multilateral talks -- also involving the United States -- if Iran agrees to freeze enrichment. Larijani said Iran would respond to the offer by August 22, but that the UN resolution had "badly affected the opportunity (represented by the offer) and our attitude". "The question is not what Iran's response will be, but to create an atmosphere to pursue the process (of negotiations)." "The proposal has positive points as well as ambiguities. Negotiations must be constructive and away from pressure, to enable the ambiguities to be removed," he added. "Even if they (the UN Security Council members) have any reasons to (demand) suspension of enrichment they should address them in negotiations. But they cannot prescribe it before talks," he said. The Security Council has charged IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei with reporting back on Iranian compliance. If it does not comply, the council would consider adopting "appropriate measures" under Article 41 of Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which relates to economic sanctions. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 11 IRNA: US, Europe "rushed" Iran's N-case to UN , Aug 6, IRNA -- Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said here Sunday that Europe and certain Western states led by the US have have rushed Iran's nuclear case to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). "It was Europe that withdrew from the talks and referred Iran's nuclear case to the Security Council all of a sudden," Asefi told reporters during his weekly press briefing. Stressing that Tehran would respond to the incentive package of the 5+1 Group by August 22, Asefi said "It has not taken a long time. The US and Europe should be patient and wait for our response." "The nuclear case has suddenly landed in the UNSC under the pressure of US and certain Western states," the spokesman added. Commenting on the developments in Lebanon, Asefi said Iran was seeking a solution to the ongoing crisis and "has so far used all within its power to put an end to the Zionist regime's crimes." 1394/1414 ***************************************************************** 12 AFP: Iran tried to import uranium from DR Congo - report - Sun Aug 6, 7:08 AM ET LONDON (AFP) - Iran" /> tried to import uranium for its nuclear programme from the Democratic Republic of Congo" /> , but the shipment was intercepted in Tanzania, an English newspaper has reported, citing a senior Tanzanian customs officer. A huge shipment of uranium 238 bound for the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas was intercepted on October 22, 2005, by customs officials in Tanzania making a routine check, the officer told the Sunday Times. The British weekly also cited a United Nations" /> report, due to be considered by the Security Council, which said there was "no doubt" that a large shipment of uranium 238 was transported from the Lubumbashi mines in the DR Congo. The customs official said the uranium shipment was found hidden in a consignment of coltan, a rare mineral, which was destined for smelting in Kazakhstan after being transported through Bandar Abbas. "There were several containers due to be shipped and they were all routinely scanned with a Geiger counter," he said. "This one was very radioactive. When we opened the container it was full of drums of coltan. Each drum contains about 50 kilograms (110 pounds) of ore. When the first and second rows were removed the ones after that were found to be drums of uranium," he said. "The container was put in a secure part of the port and it was later taken away, by the Americans, I think, or at least with their help. We have all been told not to talk to anyone about this." The Sunday Times also quoted a source with access to security service assessments as saying that there was "great concern" about Iranian sleeper cells in Britain conducting reconnaissance at nuclear power plants in preparation for a possible attack. Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said Sunday his country would not suspend uranium enrichment, in a clear rejection of a UN resolution calling for a freeze of the sensitive nuclear work. Iran insists it wants to enrich uranium only to make reactor fuel for power stations but the United States and other countries suspect Tehran wants the capacity to make weapons-grade uranium. The UN resolution requires Iran to halt uranium enrichment and other sensitive nuclear fuel work by August 31 or face the prospect of sanctions. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 13 AFP: Iran says could react harshly to UN resolution - report Sun Aug 6, 3:13 AM ET NEW DELHI (AFP) - Iran" /> Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said his country may react harshly to a UN resolution that seeks suspension of Tehran's nuclear programme by the end of August, a report said. "They want to put pressure on us but it won't have any effect. If anything, it may lead to a very harsh reaction by us," Larijani told the Hindu newspaper in an interview on Sunday. Last week the UN Security Council adopted a resolution that requires Iran to halt uranium enrichment and other sensitive nuclear fuel work by August 31 or face the prospect of sanctions. A defiant President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said a day after the resolution passed on Monday that Iran would not bow to "the language of force and threats." Larijani was dismissive of an international package of incentives to suspend uranium enrichment that had been previously offered. "In an atmosphere where there is no trust, packages are meaningless," he said. Several countries, led by the United States, have accused Iran of attempting to build a nuclear weapon. Tehran says the uranium work is for peaceful purposes. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 14 Larijani: Iran's leading role in region has nothing to do with nuclear issue - Tehran, Aug 6, IRNA Iran-Nuclear-Larijani Secretary of Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani said here Sunday that Iran's leading role in the region has nothing to do with nuclear issues. Addressing domestic and foreign reporters, he said "We are a rich country with numerous blessings and talented individuals and so we do not need to be appeased." "We are to enjoy our own rights and it is totally unacceptable to hear that we cannot take the leadership of the region unless we give up some of our tools," he said. "We do not need others mottos or recommendations," he said adding that it is a double standard policy to investigate Iran's nuclear dossier in the UNSC and IAEA simultaneously. IAEA is an international organization and the way the UNSC has dealt with the issue means that a specialized organization has lost its credibility or importance, he said, adding that when IAEA declares that Iran's nuclear dossier is peaceful and pose no threats to world peace and security, there is no room for interference of UNSC. UNSC is a political organization and is not a legal or professional institution, he said, adding that this indicates that some are trying to politicized the issue. "We have already declared in the past that if Iran's peaceful nuclear dossier is referred to UNSC, we will no longer abide by NPT additional protocol as our Majlis is determined to make decisions to this end and we should wait for such decisions," he said. "We are a member of IAEA and fully observe NPT rules and regulations," he said, adding that UN resolution will affect Iran's behavior. "We will vehemently continue our path and such resolutions can leave no impacts on Iran's peaceful nuclear activities. We are determined to expand our nuclear technology," he underlined. "We do not want to reduce IAEA's supervision but they should avoid forcing us to take such a measure," he said. On role of Russia and China in recent UN resolution, he said "the two countries tried to change the wording of the resolution which should not be ignored and we are to continue our relations with them. "We are to continue our cooperation with Russia in the field of nuclear energy and armament technology and it will be to the benefit of regional countries to maintain their ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran," he said. On change of nuclear negotiating team, he said the decision will be made by the country's high ranking officials and any change in members of the negotiating team would have no impacts on it, he said. On recent rumors of transfer of uranium to the country, he said it is totally fabricated and is considered a psychological warfare staged by the Americans because Iran possess uranium reserves and has just required technological means to change it into yellow cake, he said. ***************************************************************** 15 IRNA: Larijani says Iran nuclear case solvable through negotiation - Tehran, Aug 6, IRNA Iran-Larijani-Nuclear Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Secretary Ali Larijani here Sunday said Tehran's nuclear case is not complicated and could be solved through negotiations. Larijani, who made the statement in a press conference, added, "Those who resort to force are making the issue more perplexed while the region cannot tolerate more complex problems. "Iran is not going to do the same, but if others plan to make regional issues intricate, they have to expect its repercussions." Iran is a country which has acquired the nuclear know-how, boasted the SNSC secretary, adding, "Today Iran is independent in three stages ranging from mine to yellow cake, yellow cake to UF6 gas, and gas to enriched uranium. Still, the country has started the research and enrichment development stage." He vowed that Iran will not use oil as a weapon as the country is seeking good living for all. Larijani, however, added, "Iran naturally reserves the right to defend its rights proportionate to attitudes." ***************************************************************** 16 IRNA: Iran will not accept talks under duress - Larijani Tehran, Aug 6, IRNA UNSC-Resolution-Larijani Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani said here Sunday that Iran is ready for "fair negotiations" but it will not accept talks under duress. "If they are to solve the problem, they should find a solution in fair negotiations. They should not harm the course of the negotiation," he told foreign and domestic reporters. Iran's nuclear activities have a peaceful nature, he said adding that all these activities are under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Iran is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and accepts the IAEA supervision within the framework of its safeguards, Larijani said stressing that Iran will develop its nuclear technology in all fields including the centrifuge chains. By adopting an anti-Iran resolution prior to Tehran's response to the package of incentives, the UN Security Council made an option which was contradictory to the proposed package, he said. "We looked at the proposed package positively and announced that there were some ambiguities that required scrutiny in order to remove them," he said regretting that the anti-Iran resolution had affected Tehran's positive attitude toward the package. The proposed package of incentives was drawn up by the five permanent UN Security Council members -- Britain, France, the United States, China and Russia -- plus Germany (Group 5+1) and was handed over to Iran by the European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana on June 6. The first paragraph of the proposed package has officially recognized Iran's right to pursue peaceful nuclear activities while the UN resolution has urged the Islamic Republic of Iran to cease all its nuclear activities, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator said, adding that these two issues are contradictory. By adopting the resolution they adopted a paradoxical attitude toward Iran which led to distrust of the Iranians, Larijani said. ***************************************************************** 17 IRNA: Iran will pursue its nuclear rights within NPT - Larijani Tehran, Aug 6, IRNA UNSC-Nuclear-Resolution-Larijani Tehran will pursue its rights with respect to the peaceful use of nuclear energy within the framework of the NPT, said a senior Iranian official here Sunday. Referring to the adoption by the UN Security Council of a resolution against Iran, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani said, "Such conducts to deprive Iran (of its rights) will not have any effect on our resolve." "We will revise our policies in the nuclear case if they change their conduct," he told domestic and foreign reporters. In response to a question, he elaborated on a recent SNSC statement which said in case of ratification of a resolution against Iran and pursuance of confrontation in place of negotiation with respect to Iran's nuclear case, Iran would revise its policies. Larijani said Iran's nuclear case was brought up at the Security Council several months ago and the resolution which has been ratified now was raised at that time. America and several European countries stated that they wanted to introduce an initiative and did not want to issue a resolution. They said they intended to resolve the case through diplomatic means and negotiation with Iran which was a rational decision. "After some bargaining, they prepared the package of incentives and forwarded it to Iran. We started to study the package. But they ratified the resolution before waiting for the result of our studies." "Isn't this, from your point of view, controversial that at first they decide to settle the issue in another way and then do what they did not intend to?" "This," he said, "shows that their intention in offering the package and negotiations is questionable and they followed other aims by offering the package. "They should know that such resolutions will not have any effect on our resolve and if they are after depriving Iran of nuclear technology, they are mistaken." This happened one more time last year, he said. "They intended to take Iran's case to the Security Council and we told them if this happens and if the case is taken to the Security Council, based on a decision by the Majlis, implementation of the Additional Protocol would be limited, and this happened." Larijani then said, "What did they gain from this? Because they thought they would be able to influence our determination." 1414/1414 ***************************************************************** 18 [smygo] The Hiroshima Myth Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 18:05:36 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/denson7.html The Hiroshima Myth by John V. Denson Every year during the first two weeks of August the mass news media and many politicians at the national level trot out the "patriotic" political myth that the dropping of the two atomic bombs on Japan in August of 1945 caused them to surrender, and thereby saved the lives of anywhere from five hundred thousand to one million American soldiers, who did not have to invade the islands. Opinion polls over the last fifty years show that American citizens overwhelmingly (between 80 and 90%) believe this false history which, of course, makes them feel better about killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians (mostly women and children) and saving American lives to accomplish the ending of the war. The best book, in my opinion, to explode this myth is The Decision to Use the Bomb by Gar Alperovitz, because it not only explains the real reasons the bombs were dropped, but also gives a detailed history of how and why the myth was created that this slaughter of innocent civilians was justified, and therefore morally acceptable. The essential problem starts with President Franklin Roosevelt's policy of unconditional surrender, which was reluctantly adopted by Churchill and Stalin, and which President Truman decided to adopt when he succeeded Roosevelt in April of 1945. Hanson Baldwin was the principal writer for The New York Times who covered World War II and he wrote an important book immediately after the war entitled Great Mistakes of the War. Baldwin concludes that the unconditional surrender policy ". . . was perhaps the biggest political mistake of the war . . . . Unconditional surrender was an open invitation to unconditional resistance; it discouraged opposition to Hitler, probably lengthened the war, costs us lives, and helped to lead to the present aborted peace." The stark fact is that the Japanese leaders, both military and civilian, including the Emperor, were willing to surrender in May of 1945 if the Emperor could remain in place and not be subjected to a war crimes trial after the war. This fact became known to President Truman as early as May of 1945. The Japanese monarchy was one of the oldest in all of history dating back to 660 B.C. The Japanese religion added the belief that all the Emperors were the direct descendants of the sun goddess, Amaterasu. The reigning Emperor Herohito was the 124th in the direct line of descent. After the bombs were dropped on August 6 and 9 of 1945, and their surrender soon thereafter, the Japanese were allowed to keep their Emperor on the throne and he was not subjected to any war crimes trial. The Emperor, Herohito, came on the throne in 1926 and continued in his position until his death in 1989. Since President Truman, in effect, accepted the conditional surrender offered by the Japanese as early as May of 1945, the question is posed, "Why then were the bombs dropped?" The author Alperovitz gives us the answer in great detail which can only be summarized here, but he states, "We have noted a series of Japanese peace feelers in Switzerland which OSS Chief William Donovan reported to Truman in May and June [1945]. These suggested, even at this point, that the U.S. demand for unconditional surrender might well be the only serious obstacle to peace. At the center of the explorations, as we also saw, was Allen Dulles, chief of OSS operations in Switzerland (and subsequently Director of the CIA). In his 1966 book The Secret Surrender, Dulles recalled that 'On July 20, 1945, under instructions from Washington, I went to the Potsdam Conference and reported there to Secretary [of War] Stimpson on what I had learned from Tokyo - they desired to surrender if they could retain the Emperor and their constitution as a basis for maintaining discipline and order in Japan after the devastating news of surrender became known to the Japanese people.'" It is documented by Alperovitz that Stimpson reported this directly to Truman. Alperovitz further points out in detail the documentary proof that every top presidential civilian and military advisor, with the exception of James Byrnes, along with Prime Minister Churchill and his top British military leadership, urged Truman to revise the unconditional surrender policy so as to allow the Japanese to surrender and keep their Emperor. All this advice was given to Truman prior to the Potsdam Proclamation which occurred on July 26, 1945. This proclamation made a final demand upon Japan to surrender unconditionally or suffer drastic consequences. Another startling fact about the military connection to the dropping of the bomb is the lack of knowledge on the part of General MacArthur about the existence of the bomb and whether it was to be dropped. Alperovitz states "MacArthur knew nothing about advance planning for the atomic bomb's use until almost the last minute. Nor was he personally in the chain of command in this connection; the order came straight from Washington. Indeed, the War Department waited until five days before the bombing of Hiroshima even to notify MacArthur - the commanding general of the U.S. Army Forces in the Pacific - of the existence of the atomic bomb." Alperovitz makes it very clear that the main person Truman was listening to while he ignored all of this civilian and military advice, was James Byrnes, the man who virtually controlled Truman at the beginning of his administration. Brynes was one of the most experienced political figures in Washington, having served for over thirty years in both the House and the Senate. He had also served as a United States Supreme Court Judge, and at the request of President Roosevelt, he resigned that position and accepted the role in the Roosevelt administration of managing the domestic economy. Byrnes went to the Yalta Conference with Roosevelt and then was given the responsibility to get Congress and the American people to accept the agreements made at Yalta. When Truman became a senator in 1935, Brynes immediately became his friend and mentor and remained close to Truman until Truman became president. Truman never forgot this and immediately called on Brynes to be his number-two man in the new administration. Brynes had expected to be named the vice presidential candidate to replace Wallace and had been disappointed when Truman had been named, yet he and Truman remained very close. Byrnes had also been very close to Roosevelt, while Truman was kept in the dark by Roosevelt most of the time he served as vice president. Truman asked Brynes immediately, in April, to become his Secretary of State but they delayed the official appointment until July 3, 1945, so as not to offend the incumbent. Brynes had also accepted a position on the interim committee which had control over the policy regarding the atom bomb, and therefore, in April, 1945 became Truman's main foreign policy advisor, and especially the advisor on the use of the atomic bomb. It was Brynes who encouraged Truman to postpone the Potsdam Conference and his meeting with Stalin until they could know, at the conference, if the atomic bomb was successfully tested. While at the Potsdam Conference the experiments proved successful and Truman advised Stalin that a new massively destructive weapon was now available to America, which Brynes hoped would make Stalin back off from any excessive demands or activity in the post-war period. Truman secretly gave the orders on July 25, 1945 that the bombs would be dropped in August while he was to be in route back to America. On July 26, he issued the Potsdam Proclamation, or ultimatum, to Japan to surrender, leaving in place the unconditional surrender policy, thereby causing both Truman and Brynes to believe that the terms would not be accepted by Japan. The conclusion drawn unmistakably from the evidence presented, is that Brynes is the man who convinced Truman to keep the unconditional surrender policy and not accept Japan's surrender so that the bombs could actually be dropped thereby demonstrating to the Russians that America had a new forceful leader in place, a "new sheriff in Dodge" who, unlike Roosevelt, was going to be tough with the Russians on foreign policy and that the Russians needed to "back off" during what would become known as the "Cold War." A secondary reason was that Congress would now be told about why they had made the secret appropriation to a Manhattan Project and the huge expenditure would be justified by showing that not only did the bombs work but that they would bring the war to an end, make the Russians back off and enable America to become the most powerful military force in the world. If the surrender by the Japanese had been accepted between May and the end of July of 1945 and the Emperor had been left in place, as in fact he was after the bombing, this would have kept Russia out of the war. Russia agreed at Yalta to come into the Japanese war three months after Germany surrendered. In fact, Germany surrendered on May 8, 1945 and Russia announced on August 8, (exactly three months thereafter) that it was abandoning its neutrality policy with Japan and entering the war. Russia's entry into the war for six days allowed them to gain tremendous power and influence in China, Korea, and other key areas of Asia. The Japanese were deathly afraid of Communism and if the Potsdam Proclamation had indicated that America would accept the conditional surrender allowing the Emperor to remain in place and informed the Japanese that Russia would enter the war if they did not surrender, then this would surely have assured a quick Japanese surrender. The second question that Alperovitz answers in the last half of the book is how and why the Hiroshima myth was created. The story of the myth begins with the person of James B. Conant, the President of Harvard University, who was a prominent scientist, having initially made his mark as a chemist working on poison gas during World War I. During World War II, he was chairman of the National Defense Research Committee from the summer of 1941 until the end of the war and he was one of the central figures overseeing the Manhattan Project. Conant became concerned about his future academic career, as well as his positions in private industry, because various people began to speak out concerning why the bombs were dropped. On September 9, 1945, Admiral William F. Halsey, commander of the Third Fleet, was publically quoted extensively as stating that the atomic bomb was used because the scientists had a "toy and they wanted to try it out . . . ." He further stated, "The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment . . . . It was a mistake to ever drop it." Albert Einstein, one of the world's foremost scientists, who was also an important person connected with the development of the atomic bomb, responded and his words were headlined in The New York Times "Einstein Deplores Use of Atom Bomb." The story reported that Einstein stated that "A great majority of scientists were opposed to the sudden employment of the atom bomb." In Einstein's judgment, the dropping of the bomb was a political - diplomatic decision rather than a military or scientific decision. Probably the person closest to Truman, from the military standpoint, was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral William Leahy, and there was much talk that he also deplored the use of the bomb and had strongly advised Truman not to use it, but advised rather to revise the unconditional surrender policy so that the Japanese could surrender and keep the Emperor. Leahy's views were later reported by Hanson Baldwin in an interview that Leahy "thought the business of recognizing the continuation of the Emperor was a detail which should have been solved easily." Leahy's secretary, Dorothy Ringquist, reported that Leahy told her on the day the Hiroshima bomb was dropped, "Dorothy, we will regret this day. The United States will suffer, for war is not to be waged on women and children." Another important naval voice, the commander in chief of the U.S. Fleet and Chief of Naval Operations, Ernest J. King, stated that the naval blockade and prior bombing of Japan in March of 1945, had rendered the Japanese helpless and that the use of the atomic bomb was both unnecessary and immoral. Also, the opinion of Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz was reported to have said in a press conference on September 22, 1945, that "The Admiral took the opportunity of adding his voice to those insisting that Japan had been defeated before the atomic bombing and Russia's entry into the war." In a subsequent speech at the Washington Monument on October 5, 1945, Admiral Nimitz stated "The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace before the atomic age was announced to the world with the destruction of Hiroshima and before the Russian entry into the war." It was learned also that on or about July 20, 1945, General Eisenhower had urged Truman, in a personal visit, not to use the atomic bomb. Eisenhower's assessment was "It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing . . . to use the atomic bomb, to kill and terrorize civilians, without even attempting [negotiations], was a double crime." Eisenhower also stated that it wasn't necessary for Truman to "succumb" to Byrnes. James Conant came to the conclusion that some important person in the administration must go public to show that the dropping of the bombs was a military necessity, thereby saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers, so he approached Harvey Bundy and his son, McGeorge Bundy. It was agreed by them that the most important person to create this myth was Secretary of War, Henry Stimson. It was decided that Stimson would write a long article to be widely circulated in a prominent national magazine. This article was revised repeatedly by McGeorge Bundy and Conant before it was published in Harper's magazine in February of 1947. The long article became the subject of a front-page article and editorial in The New York Times and in the editorial it was stated "There can be no doubt that the president and Mr. Stimson are right when they mention that the bomb caused the Japanese to surrender." Later, in 1959, President Truman specifically endorsed this conclusion, including the idea that it saved the lives of a million American soldiers. This myth has been renewed annually by the news media and various political leaders ever since. It is very pertinent that, in the memoirs of Henry Stimson entitled On Active Service in Peace and War, he states, "Unfortunately, I have lived long enough to know that history is often not what actually happened but what is recorded as such." To bring this matter more into focus from the human tragedy standpoint, I recommend the reading of a book entitled Hiroshima Diary: The Journal of a Japanese Physician, August 6, September 30, 1945, by Michiko Hachiya. He was a survivor of Hiroshima and kept a daily diary about the women, children and old men that he treated on a daily basis in the hospital. The doctor was badly injured himself but recovered enough to help others and his account of the personal tragedies of innocent civilians who were either badly burned or died as a result of the bombing puts the moral issue into a clear perspective for all of us to consider. Now that we live in the nuclear age and there are enough nuclear weapons spread around the world to destroy civilization, we need to face the fact that America is the only country to have used this awful weapon and that it was unnecessary to have done so. If Americans would come to recognize the truth, rather than the myth, it might cause such a moral revolt that we would take the lead throughout the world in realizing that wars in the future may well become nuclear, and therefore all wars must be avoided at almost any cost. Hopefully, our knowledge of science has not outrun our ability to exercise prudent and humane moral and political judgment to the extent that we are destined for extermination. August 2, 2006 John V. Denson is the editor of two books, The Costs of War and Reassessing the Presidency. In the latter work, he has chapters especially relevant for today, on how Lincoln and FDR lied us into war. Copyright ) 2006 LewRockwell.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ***************************************************************** 19 [southnews] Global Hiroshima The Stakes Have Been Raised Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 04:29:01 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM Throughout the Nuclear Age there have been accidents, miscalculations and near inadvertent nuclear wars. The Stakes Have Been Raised Global Hiroshima By DAVID KRIEGER Weekend Edition Counterpunch August 5 / 6, 2006 Hiroshima was destroyed by a single atomic weapon, giving rise to the Nuclear Age, an era characterized by humankind living precariously with weapons capable of destroying the human species. Should the incredible dangers of nuclear weapons not have been immediately apparent from the destruction of Hiroshima and, three days later, of Nagasaki, throughout the Nuclear Age there have been repeated warnings of their unprecedented capacity for destruction. These warnings have come from scientists, military leaders, religious leaders and, occasionally, political leaders. Mostly, these warnings have fallen on deaf ears. Sixty-one years after the destruction of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, and 15 years after the ending of the Cold War, there are still some 27,000 nuclear weapons in the world. Over 95 percent of these are in the arsenals of the US and Russia, with some 4,000 of these kept on hair-trigger alert, ready to be fired in moments. In addition, seven other countries now possess nuclear weapons: UK, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea. All of the nuclear weapons states continue to improve and test missile delivery systems for their nuclear warheads. Throughout the Nuclear Age there have been accidents, miscalculations and near inadvertent nuclear wars. The closest we may have come to nuclear war was the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, tense days in which decision makers in the US and USSR struggled to find a way through the crisis without an escalation into nuclear exchange. In the 44 years since that crisis, despite other close calls, humankind collectively has relaxed and let down its guard against the dangers these weapons pose to all. It has been widely accepted that nuclear weapons are illegal and immoral because they are weapons of mass murder that do not distinguish between civilians and combatants. Ten years ago, the International Court of Justice concluded that there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects. Progress toward this goal has not been reassuring. No such negotiations are currently in progress. Most political leaders in the US are more concerned with the reliability of nuclear weapons than with finding a way to eliminate them. To safely navigate the shoals of the Nuclear Age, three key elements are needed: leadership, a plan, and political will. Only one country currently has the capacity to provide this leadership and that is the US. A spark of hope that such leadership might exist briefly flared during the Reagan presidency when Presidents Reagan and Gorbachev came close to an agreement on nuclear disarmament at their summit in Reykjavik, Iceland. Their good intentions faltered on the divisive issue of missile defenses. Since then, no high-ranking American political leader, including members of the Senate, has spoken out for a world free of nuclear weapons. President Bush's leadership on the issue of nuclear disarmament has been non-existent and, in fact, has set up obstacles to achieving this goal. The years pass with the threat of nuclear Armageddon hanging over us, and we wait, seemingly in vain, for political leaders to emerge who are willing to make the abolition of nuclear weapons a high priority on the political agenda. We continue to wait for political leaders who will challenge the nuclear double standards, which assume that some countries can maintain nuclear weapons in perpetuity while other countries must be forever content to forego these weapons. We wait for political leaders who will advance a viable plan for the phased elimination of nuclear weapons. Civil society has been able to devise a Model Nuclear Weapons Convention, a draft treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons, so certainly government leaders should be able to do so as well. After 61 years of the Nuclear Age, it seems clear that the political leaders needed to achieve a nuclear weapons-free world are unlikely to emerge from existing political systems and structures. These leaders will emerge only if ordinary people demand such leadership. The leaders will have to be led by the people toward assuring a future free of nuclear threat. Absent a sustained surge of political pressure from below, humanity will continue to drift toward increased nuclear proliferation, nuclear terrorism and, finally, nuclear annihilation. The choice remains ours: a future free of nuclear threat or a global Hiroshima. The stakes could not be higher. David Krieger is president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, and a leader in the global effort to abolish nuclear weapons. http://www.counterpunch.org/krieger08052006.html ***************************************************************** 20 Simulated nuclear explosion planned for Hawaii in mid-August 05 Aug 2006 Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 15:02:26 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST Breaking News and Commentary from Citizens for Legitimate Government 05 August 2006 http://www.legitgov.org/ All links to articles as summarized below are available here: http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news Simulated nuclear explosion planned for Hawaii in mid-August 11 Jul 2006 (HI) The state plans to hold an exercise [before they "go live?"] in mid-August simulating the explosion of a half-kiloton nuclear device at the entrance of Honolulu Harbor, a mock blast that theoretically would result in 10,000 casualties. Several hundred state and military planners and first responders will take part Aug. 14 to 16 in "Exercise 'A Kele." The Department of Homeland Security about two years ago developed 15 national planning scenarios, including simulating an "improvised nuclear device" explosion. If you live in Illinois, be afraid... be very afraid. You could be Bush bin Laden's next target: More Than 1,000 Take Part In Metro East Disaster Drill 04 Aug 2006 (IL) For the next five days, metro east residents may notice an increase in activity involving military and emergency agencies. What is being called Prairie Thunder began Friday morning with a simulated [Bush bin Laden] terrorist attack on a railroad tanker car. The exercise will culminate Tuesday with the capture of the "terrorists" who launched the fictional attack [before Bush bin Laden launches a non-fictional one]. The exercise is being funded by a federal grant from the Department of Homeland Security. [Capture Bush and Cheney (the real terrorists) before they launch an "actual" attack. Remember all the drills and simulations that took place on 9/11?] Emergency exercise planned locally 03 Aug 2006 (IL) Governor Rod Blagojevich and Madison County officials announced that a major emergency exercise will be conducted in Edwardsville and surrounding areas to test the state's plans for large-scale evacuations and terrorism response. Edwardsville Fire Chief Brian Wilson said the county was the area picked by the National Guard and the Illinois Terrorism Task Force. "We were brought to the table last May," Wilson said. "They came to us." The Illinois National Guard planned the exercise, which is a part of the governors preparedness and antiterrorism program. Wilson said this drill has stemmed from Hurricane Katrina. [Yes, Illinois has hundreds of hurricanes every year, .] Prairie Thunder gets rolling --Mass evacuation plan to be tested 04 Aug 2006 (IL) Several Illinois National Guard units will be located in Madison County for six days during the drill. This exercise will be the second in the past three months for the state, but will be the largest ever conducted in Illinois. NASA removes "to understand and protect the home planet" from its mission statement --Sens. Collins, Lieberman Raise Concerns about Changes to NASA Mission Statement (spaceref.com) 04 Aug 2006 Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Joe Lieberman (D-debatable-CT) sent a letter to National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Administrator Dr. Michael D. Griffin expressing concerns about the organization's elimination from its mission statement of the phrase "to understand and protect the home planet." U.S. threatens suit if Maine probes Verizon ties to NSA 04 Aug 2006 The Bush dictatorship is threatening to sue if Maine regulators decide to investigate whether Verizon Communications illegally turned over customer information to the National Security Agency. Detainees face a long time in Guantanamo 04 Aug 2006 The top law official in the US has held out the prospect of detainees being held indefinitely in Guantanamo Bay. Attorney-General Alberto Gonzales made the suggestion as deep divisions emerged in how the country should handle inmates such as Australian David Hicks. Hicks lawyers reject trial 04 Aug 2006 Lawyers for David Hicks have rejected a proposal by the Bush Administration for a new system of military tribunals to try non-US inmates at Guantanamo Bay. The Australian's lawyers say the new system of tribunals would not guarantee a fair trial. Masses march for Hezbollah in Baghdad 05 Aug 2006 Hundreds of thousands of Shiites chanting "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" marched through the streets of Baghdad's biggest Shiite district Friday in a massive show of support for Hezbollah in its battle against Israel. No violence was reported during the rally in Sadr City. Thousands marching in London, demand Middle East cease-fire 05 Aug 2006 Thousands marched through London to demand a halt to the Lebanon war on Saturday as the British government tried to deflect criticism that it has failed to call for an immediate cease-fire. France and U.S. Agree on UN Resolution on Lebanon 05 Aug 2006 The U.S. and France have agreed on a proposed United Nations Security Council resolution designed to end the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, French President Jacques Chirac's office said. The resolution calls for "a full cessation of hostilities,'' and takes into account both Hezbollah's conduct and Israel's right to defend itself if Hezbollah continues shelling, a person close to the U.S.-French negotiations said by telephone. Thirty-five rockets fired at Israel from south Lebanon 05 Aug 2006 Thirty-five rockets fired from Lebanon hit northern Israel by early afternoon Saturday, with no immediate reports of casualties, police said. Two Israelis killed in Hezbollah rocket attack 04 Aug 2006 Lebanon's Hezbollah renewed Kaytusha attacks on Friday afternoon on northern Israeli towns,killing two people after eight Israeli civilians and four soldiers were killed on Thursday, local media reported. Israeli soldier killed, 8 naval commandos wounded in Lebanon 05 Aug 2006 One Israeli soldier was killed in fierce clashes with Hezbollah militants in Lebanon overnight, the Israeli army said on Saturday. Israel threatens mass push 05 Aug 2006 Israel is threatening to seize most of south Lebanon after at least nine of its civilians and six soldiers were killed in less than 24 hours, the nation's worst death toll in more than three weeks of war. Israeli planes pound Lebanese village, causing casualties 04 Aug 2005 Israeli military planes pounded a Lebanese village near the Lebanon-Syria border on Friday, causing heavy casualties, local media reported. The reports cited police sources as saying that Israeli aircraft struck the northeastern Lebanese village of Qaa, which is near Lebanon's border with Syria. Israeli strike hits farm workers, officials say --At least 28 civilians reported killed as Israel expands air war over Lebanon 04 Aug 2006 An Israeli airstrike Friday hit dozens of farm workers loading vegetables near the Lebanon-Syria border, killing 28, the workers' foreman and a Lebanese official said. Israel bombs Lebanese highway 04 Aug 2006 Israeli aircraft bombed southern Beirut last night and today launched raids on the highway north of the city, threatening to cut Lebanon's only remaining link with the outside world. Four civilians were killed and 10 were wounded as Israeli bombers blew up bridges during the early morning rush hour. Israel hits bridges, expands Lebanon bombing 04 Aug 2006 Israel's pounding of Hezbollah positions across Lebanon expanded Friday with missiles targeting bridges in the Christian heartland north of Beirut for the first time, an attack that further isolates Lebanon from the outside world. New wave of refugees overwhelms Lebanese shelters 05 Aug 2006 A flood of refugees is overwhelming shelters in safe areas of Lebanon after Israeli bombing severed the country's "umbilical cord" for humanitarian aid. Lebanon Oil Spill Threatens Eastern Mediterranean Coasts 04 Aug 2006 An oil spill seeping from a Lebanese power station that was bombed by Israeli jets threatens to pollute countries in the eastern Mediterranean such as Cyprus and Turkey, Lebanon's environment minister said in Beirut. Beirut: Before and after Israeli bombing By Ken Harper, The Electronic Intifada 04 Aug 2006 The destruction of all three runways of Beirut International Airport and the airport fuel tanks took place in the early days of Israel's attack on Lebanon. Before and after pictures of the destruction, as well as the destruction of the Harat Hurayk neighborhood in the southern suburbs of the city are shown in this multimedia piece. Israel kills 3 Palestinians in Gaza -medics 04 Aug 2006 Israel killed three Palestinians in the Gaza Strip on Friday as it launched a series of air strikes on militant targets that wounded four other people, witnesses and medics said. Washington: "Dracula always searching for oil and blood" --Hugo Chavez Venezuela's Chavez compares Israel to Hitler 04 Aug 2006 Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Friday blasted Israel for its attacks against Lebanon and Palestinians, comparing its operations to those of Hitler. In an interview with Qatar-based Al Jazeera television, Chavez also slammed U.S. backing for Israel, describing Washington as a "Dracula always searching for oil and blood". "President Bush took away my son, my only child." New York City soldier slain in Iraq 03 Aug 2006 A New York soldier [Spec. Hai Ming Hsia, 37] who joined the Army at age 33 to help support his newborn son was killed in Iraq Tuesday when a roadside bomb cut him in half, his family said yesterday. "President Bush took away my son, my only child," Hsia's grieving mother, Nelida, 66, said last night. "Now I have none." AP Blog: Driving trucks risky in Iraq By AP Correspondent Rebecca Santana, embedded with the New Jersey National Guard at Camp Anaconda, Iraq 04 Aug 2006 "...[E]very time that something such as Diet Coke doesn't make it to the dining facility or the mail doesn't arrive or there's no sour cream for the baked potatoes, it could mean that a driver out on the roads of Iraq is dead." Gen. Pace: 11,000 Troops to be Sent to Afghanistan 04 Aug 2006 During a press conference on Thursday, General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, announced that the Pentagon will deploy at least 11,000 more US troops to Afghanistan later this year. Clash kills two in S. Afghanistan 05 Aug 2006 One suspected Taliban insurgent and one Afghan police were killed and six others including four militants were wounded as they engaged in Afghanistan's southern Ghazni province, a senior provincial official said Saturday. Lawmaker Sued Over Haditha Remarks --A Marine implicated in the slayings of 24 Iraqi civilians says Rep. John P. Murtha defamed him. 03 Aug 2006 Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), a Vietnam veteran who has emerged as a leading critic of the war in Iraq, defended himself Wednesday against accusations that he had defamed Marines under investigation in the slayings of 24 civilians in Haditha, saying he publicized the incident to illustrate the pressures soldiers face in Iraq. [Shouldn't he be concerned with avoiding a lethal injection for 24 premeditated murders, instead?] Antiwar heckler elected to ruling body 04 Aug 2006 Members of the Labour Party demonstrated their disenchantment with Tony Blair yesterday by electing Walter Wolfgang, the pensioner thrown out of last year's party conference, to its ruling body. Mr Wolfgang, 83, won a place on the party's National Executive Committee (NEC) with a campaign to withdraw British troops from Iraq, oppose a replacement for Trident and reassert the power of ordinary party members. New poll spells woe for Joe, joy for his foe 04 Jul 2006 With just five days to go before the much-watched Connecticut Democratic primary, anti-war protest candidate Ned Lamont has surged to a dramatic 13-point lead over centrist Sen. Joe Lieberman in a new poll. And in a second big blow to LieberBush, the 300,000-strong 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers union in New York endorsed Lamont and promised to mobilize foot soldiers for him this weekend. Heavyweight Democrat on the ropes --Senator who backed Iraq invasion is falling behind challenger 05 Aug 2006 (CT) A new poll suggests that the three-term Democratic [sic] Senator [Joe Lieberman] is trailing his anti-Iraq war challenger [Ned Lamont] by 13 per cent, a 28- point swing since June, in the most closely watched primary election of the year. Uzbekistan seizes US mining giant's assets 04 Aug 2006 Uzbek authorities have frozen gold shipments and seized assets from US group Newmont Mining, one of the biggest gold producers in the world, over a tax dispute, the company said yesterday. Evidence of Election Fraud Grows in Mixico --As the U.S. media distorts the aftermath of the July 2 election, evidence suggests there may be an attempted theft in progress. By Chuck Collins and Joshua Holland 02 Aug 2006 "...[A] growing body of credible evidence from mainstream Mexican journalists, independent election observers and respected scholars indicates that an attempt was made to deliver the presidency to [conservative Felipe] Caldersn. It includes a pattern of irregularities at the polls, interference by the ruling party and some very suspicious statistical patterns in the 'official' results." Book: Sept. 11 Panel Doubted Officials 04 Aug 2006 The Sept. 11 commission was so frustrated with repeated misstatements by the Pentagon and FAA about their response to the 2001 terror attacks that it considered an investigation into possible deception, the panel's chairmen say in a new book. Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton also say in "Without Precedent" that their panel was too soft in questioning former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani - and that the 20-month investigation may have suffered for it. http://www.legitgov.org/9_1_1_oddities.html Alarms in US airports set off by radioactive therapy 04 Aug 2006 A man who flew to Florida for a holiday with his family and friends had a nasty shock at Orlando airport. He triggered an alarm, was taken aside, strip-searched and checked by sniffer dogs while his companions watched in horror. After extensive questioning, when he realised the security guards suspected him of carrying a radioactive bomb, the 46-year-old man remembered his medical treatment for an overactive thyroid gland six weeks earlier. Toxic trailers? FEMA U-Turn On Trailer Tests 03 Aug 2006 Responding to reports that formaldehyde may be sickening hurricane victims living in 'government-provided travel trailers' [detention centers] along the Gulf Coast, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has reversed course and ordered air quality tests to determine if some of the units are emitting unacceptably high levels of the toxic gas. Homeland Security nabs Free Stater from home 01 Aug 2006 For the third time in the last four days, Keene resident Russell Kanning finds himself in Federal custody. The 36-year-old libertarian activist isn't in trouble for selling drugs, threatening officials or endangering anyone. Instead, he's the target of Federal wrath because he attempted to enter the Keene IRS office with.a piece of paper. Task force formed in California for heat wave 04 Aug 2006 Officials in California said Friday they are setting up a take force to help the state's response to heat waves like the recent one that have probably caused over 140 deaths. Health Worries Over Bay Pollution --Uneven Testing, Tourism Concerns Affect Reporting 03 Aug 2006 Dirty water and contaminated fish in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries pose a public health threat, health experts say. The water is so dirty that public health officials warn people who swim in it to wash with soap afterward and to avoid entering the water with an open wound. [04 Aug lead stories:] Bush seeks expanded military tribunal role --The White House is seeking legislation that would allow people not affiliated with terrorism to be prosecuted in military commissions -- with far fewer rights than afforded civilians. 02 Aug 2006 A draft Bush regime plan for special military courts seeks to expand the reach and authority of such ''commissions'' to include trials, for the first time, of people who are not al Qaeda members or the Taliban and are not directly involved in acts of international terrorism, according to officials familiar with the proposal plan. The plan, which would replace a military trial system ruled illegal by the Supreme Court in June, also allows the secretary of defense to add crimes at will to those under the military court's jurisdiction. The two provisions would be likely to put more individuals than previously expected before military juries, officials and independent experts said. Top Military Lawyers Oppose Plan for Special Courts 03 Aug 2006 The military's top uniformed lawyers, appearing at a Senate hearing yesterday, criticized key provisions of a proposed new U.S. plan for special military courts, affirming that they did not see eye to eye with the senior Bush administration political appointees who developed the plan and presented it to them last week. The lawyers' rare, open disagreement with civilian officials at the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the White House came during discussions of proposed new rules for the use of evidence derived from hearsay or coercion [torture] and the possible exclusion of defendants from the trials in some circumstances. Senator Faults Bid to Classify Report on Iraq 04 Aug 2006 The Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee lashed out at the White House on Thursday, criticizing attempts by the Bush administration to keep secret parts of a report on the role Iraqi exiles played in building the case for war against Iraq. CLGers: Please contribute for August's expenses, thank you! And, thank you to all who have donated previously! We are a reader-supported news service, and cannot continue without your help. Thank you. http://www.legitgov.org/#contribute Please forward this Newsletter to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up: http://www.legitgov.org/#subscribe_clg. Please write to: signup@legitgov.org for inquiries. lrp/mdr CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, General Manager. Copyright ) 2006, Citizens For Legitimate Government . All rights reserved. CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D. ***************************************************************** 21 [NYTr] Bush Paves the Way for Global Nuclear Expansion Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 19:08:22 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Counterpunch - Aug 5, 2006 http://www.counterpunch.org/montague08052006.html Nukes Rising Bush Paves the Way for a Global Nuclear Expansion By PETER MONTAGUE President Bush has said many times that nuclear weapons are the greatest threat to U.S. security, particularly nuclear weapons in the hands of hostile groups, like Al Qaeda, or unstable governments. The tight connection between nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants is well-understood, unmistakable and unavoidable. People who want to build nuclear weapons almost always start by building a nuclear power plant. Israel developed a nuclear arsenal starting with components and know-how provided by a nuclear power plant. India did the same. So did India's chief rival, Pakistan. So did India's other major rival, China. So did North Korea, using reactors provided by China and by Switzerland. Iraq was building the Osiraq nuclear power plant until 1981 when Israel blew it to smithereens to prevent the next logical step, an Iraqi A-bomb. Iran is reportedly heading down this same path now, starting with nuclear reactors provided by our ally, Russia. Despite the clear, tight connection between nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons, and despite the President's oft-repeated warning that the greatest threat to our national security is an atomic bomb in the wrong hands, the President is now taking very aggressive steps to expand the number of nuclear power plants worldwide. In February, Mr. Bush announced a major new U.S. program to sell nuclear power plants all around the world. The President's program is called the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). An important first step in the GNEP is to build many more nuclear power plants in the U.S. -- a "nuclear renaissance," as it is being called in nuclear industry puff pieces.. To build more nuclear plants in the U.S., the problem of nuclear waste disposal must be solved and the GNEP offers two ways to do this, a long term solution and a short term solution. The problem is highly-radioactive reactor fuel. To fuel a reactor, slightly-enriched uranium is formed into pellets, which are then packed into long rods. When these rods are placed close to each other in the core of a reactor, the uranium in the rods undergoes a controlled chain reaction, producing heat plus new "fission products" that are intensely radioactive, including plutonium. Eventually these unwanted fission products "poison" the chain reaction and the fuel must be withdrawn from the reactor and replaced. The poisoned fuel rods become "high level radioactive waste" and they must be held securely for upwards of 240,000 years. Because our species, homo sapiens, has only been on the planet for roughly 100,000 years, we have no experience handling long-lived, highly-dangerous problems of this nature. We are flying blind. Scientists have been working on the nuclear waste problem since 1940; however, after 66 years of intense effort, there is still no satisfactory solution in sight. The current plan for handling these wastes is to bury them in a hole in the ground beneath the Nevada desert at a place called Yucca Mountain. Unfortunately, the Yucca Mountain waste dump has been mired in problems, including falsification of data by scientists of the U.S. Geological Survey. The Yucca Mountain dump was supposed to open in 1998, but the government now says there is no way to estimate when the site will be opened because of the many problems it has encountered. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Energy now acknowledges that by 2010 -- 4 years from now -- the existing nuclear power plants in the U.S. will have produced enough high-level waste to fill the Yucca Mountain dump completely. Yucca Mountain will need to be expanded, or a second high-level waste dump will have to be built, and the government has not announced any plans for a second waste dump. Without some solution to this waste problem, nuclear power cannot readily expand in the U.S. A group of private utilities calling itself Private Fuel Storage (PFS) has devised a solution to the high-level waste problem -- "temporary" storage of up to 100 years on Goshute Indian land in Skull Valley, Utah. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a license to PFS in March, but the State of Utah is not enthusiastic about the project, to put it mildly, and numerous stumbling blocks remain, preventing PFS from accepting any wastes. So how can the domestic U.S nuclear industry expand? The long-term solution to the problem of irradiated reactor fuel is embodied in President Bush's GNEP plan -- to develop an entirely new set of machines and processes called an " advanced fuel cycle" to "reprocess" and "recycle" the irradiated reactor fuel, and reduce the volume of waste produced by each nuclear power plant, using complex machines and technologies that do not exist today. At a Congressional hearing on the "advanced fuel cycle" in April, members of Congress estimated that the GNEP could cost upwards of $200 billion. "This would put GNEP in the realm of the U.S. space program in terms of long-term cost," said Representative Al Green (D-Tex.). It seems clear that Mr. Bush and his friends at General Electric and Westinghouse -- the only U.S. firms that still manufacture nuclear power plants -- are serious about tapping the taxpayer in a major way to make this global business venture work for them. Obviously an expensive and experimental program of this nature can expect to encounter significant delays (not to mention cost overruns). Even optimistic estimates have the first test machines starting to operate around 2014 to 2019, so this will not solve the growing high- level waste problem, which is already preventing the U.S. nuclear industry from expanding. So some other short-term solution is needed. As luck would have it, the President's GNEP provides the solution. As a first step toward implementing GNEP, President Bush announced July 8 that he has decided to permit "extensive U.S. civilian nuclear cooperation with Russia for the first time... reversing decades of bipartisan policy," the Washington Post reported. The Post noted that Mr. Bush had resisted such a move for years, insisting that Russia first stop building a nuclear power station for Iran near the Persian Gulf. But the administration has changed its mind, now viewing Mr. Putin, Russia's leader, as a "more constructive partner" in trying to pressure Iran to abandon plans for making A- bombs. Now here's the important part: The Post pointed out that, a nuclear cooperation agreement would clear the way for Russia to import and store thousands of tons of spent nuclear fuel from U.S.-supplied reactors around the world. The Post says this is a critical component of Mr. Bush's plan to spread civilian nuclear energy to power-hungry countries everywhere on earth because Russia would provide a place to send the used radioactive material. Under this scenario, it doesn't matter if the long-term solution ("fast reactors" and all the rest) ever develops -- Russia will become the world's permanent waste dump. The Post noted that some people have criticized Russia's plan to turn itself into the world's nuclear waste dump because Russia has a miserable record of nuclear accidents and horrendous widespread contamination from nuclear wastes. Its transportation network is antiquated and inadequate for moving vast quantities of radioactive material. And the country has not fully secured the nuclear facilities it already has against theft or accidents. Not to mention that it has recently been supplying nuclear technology to Iran. Never mind all that. The Post summarizes: Mr. Bush's new Global Nuclear Energy Partnership envisions promoting civilian nuclear power around the world and eventually finding a way to reprocess spent fuel without the danger of leaving behind material that could be used for bombs. Until such technology is developed, Mr. Bush needs someplace to store the spent fuel from overseas, and Russia is the only volunteer. So there you have it. Mr. Bush has a grand plan for placing nuclear power plants around the globe in every country that wants one. There used to be a major hurdle blocking such proliferation of A-plants, called the Non-Proliferation Treaty. ("Proliferation" is the official term for spreading A-bomb-making capabilities from country to country.) Countries that want nuclear power plants used to have to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), promising not to make any nuclear weapons. The NPT was standing in the way of Mr. Bush's grand plan for a nuke in every country that wants one, so earlier this year he quashed the NPT with great fanfare by announcing that he was ignoring it. He signed a deal providing U.S. nuclear power technology to India -- a nation that has pointedly never signed the NPT. As the New York Times observed, the President has turned the NPT " into Swiss cheese." In direct violation of the NPT, India will now receive nuclear fuel from the U.S., freeing India's home-made nuclear fuel for diversion into A-bombs -- the very situation the NPT was designed to avoid. So the skids are now fully-greased for Mr. Bush's grand global plan for a nuke plant in every garage. The non-proliferation treaty is effectively dead, and the problem of high-level waste has been "solved" by arranging for it all to be sent to Russia. To be sure, some details remain to be worked out, but the outlines of the President's Grand Nuclear Plan are now in place. Only one major question remains. Why would President Bush want to spread nuclear power plants -- and thus the very real threat of nuclear weapons -- around the world? As we search for an answer to this perplexing question, rational thought fails us, so we turn instead to dark humor. On July 19, Mike Peters, the Pulitzer prize winning cartoonist for the Dayton Daily News ran a cartoon of three Presidential figures -- Eisenhower, Nixon, and George W. Bush. The banner above the three reads, "Republican Campaign Slogans." On his chest, Mr. Eisenhower has the words, "I like Ike." Mr. Nixon's slogan is, "Four More Years." George Bush's slogan is "WW III." [Peter Montague is editor of the indispensable Rachel's Health and Democracy, where this essay originally appeared. He can be reached at: peter@rachel.org] * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 22 The Observer: Treasury admits Bechtel talks [UP] Minister goes back on claims that he did not hold secret meetings with US building firm over 2012 Olympic contracts Nick Mathiason Sunday August 6, 2006 The Observer Stephen Timms, a key Treasury minister, held secret meetings with Bechtel in June despite previously denying any contact with the controversial US construction giant. The revelation of the meeting in Timms's London constituency comes at a sensitive time: Bechtel is one of four parties vying to win the most lucrative contract associated with the 2012 London Olympics. The award is expected next month. The Treasury was forced to disclose the meeting after denying two weeks ago to The Observer that any minister held discussions with the firm. Timms has now removed himself from involvement in the award of the Delivery Partner contract. MPs are trying to establish whether Gordon Brown held meetings with Bechtel. Don Foster, the Liberal Democrat culture spokesman, said: 'If the Treasury was more honest about meetings, then we'd be in a better position to judge whether there is any inappropriate conduct here.' Bechtel, known as the working arm of the CIA because of the number of former agency officials who work for it, is the British government's favourite contractor, advising the Treasury on nuclear energy as well as working on the Channel Tunnel rail link, the Jubilee line and the West Coast Main Line rail upgrade. A senior executive who left Bechtel last year described how fellow board member George Schultz had free access to Number 10, Treasury officials and John Prescott and is regularly in the UK to win lucrative contracts. Bechtel is favourite to become the Olympic Delivery Partner, which, if it occurs, will anger UK construction firms. Timms has an influential role in overseeing the award of the Olympic Delivery Partner, which ultimately will be a cabinet decision. The Treasury Chief Secretary also held meetings with one other consortiumon the Olympic shortlist but that was last year before he was Treasury minister. A Treasury spokesman said: 'As part of regular constituency business, representing the people of East Ham, Stephen Timms has met with two organisations involved in bidding for the Olympic Delivery Partnership, this is entirely proper.' It admitted it made a mistake not disclosing the meeting to The Observer last week. Plans are emerging of what will happen to the Olympic stadium and media centre after the games. The stadium is likely to remain a UK centre of athletics incorporating a national academy of sport. A major London football club becoming a tenant is unlikely. Insiders say a new secondary school will be built next to it and several new primary schools in the Lower Lea Valley will use the Stratford stadium to ensure it does not become a white elephant. Current thinking is centring on using the media centre as a new campus for a London university. There is currently a £2bn 2012 Olympic funding gap. Initial cost projections failed to account for steel price rises, wage inflation and increased security costs. Extra money is likely to come from budgets currently allocated for the Thames Gateway house-building plan, which was supposed to see 200,000 new homes built either side of the Thames. Sales of Olympic Lottery tickets, meanwhile, are increasing. Camelot, the Lottery operator, says that during the last quarter the public has increased ticket purchases by 28 per cent to £13.4m. Lottery ticket sales in support of the London Olympics have risen in each of the last four quarters. Send us your views Email letters@observer.co.uk [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 23 [NYTr] Global Hiroshima: The Stakes Have Been Raised Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 12:54:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Dave Muller (southnews) CounterPunch - Aug 5, 2006 http://www.counterpunch.org/krieger08052006.html Global Hiroshima: The Stakes Have Been Raised Throughout the Nuclear Age there have been accidents, miscalculations and near inadvertent nuclear wars. By DAVID KRIEGER Hiroshima was destroyed by a single atomic weapon, giving rise to the Nuclear Age, an era characterized by humankind living precariously with weapons capable of destroying the human species. Should the incredible dangers of nuclear weapons not have been immediately apparent from the destruction of Hiroshima and, three days later, of Nagasaki, throughout the Nuclear Age there have been repeated warnings of their unprecedented capacity for destruction. These warnings have come from scientists, military leaders, religious leaders and, occasionally, political leaders. Mostly, these warnings have fallen on deaf ears. Sixty-one years after the destruction of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, and 15 years after the ending of the Cold War, there are still some 27,000 nuclear weapons in the world. Over 95 percent of these are in the arsenals of the US and Russia, with some 4,000 of these kept on hair-trigger alert, ready to be fired in moments. In addition, seven other countries now possess nuclear weapons: UK, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea. All of the nuclear weapons states continue to improve and test missile delivery systems for their nuclear warheads. Throughout the Nuclear Age there have been accidents, miscalculations and near inadvertent nuclear wars. The closest we may have come to nuclear war was the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, tense days in which decision makers in the US and USSR struggled to find a way through the crisis without an escalation into nuclear exchange. In the 44 years since that crisis, despite other close calls, humankind collectively has relaxed and let down its guard against the dangers these weapons pose to all. It has been widely accepted that nuclear weapons are illegal and immoral because they are weapons of mass murder that do not distinguish between civilians and combatants. Ten years ago, the International Court of Justice concluded that there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects. Progress toward this goal has not been reassuring. No such negotiations are currently in progress. Most political leaders in the US are more concerned with the reliability of nuclear weapons than with finding a way to eliminate them. To safely navigate the shoals of the Nuclear Age, three key elements are needed: leadership, a plan, and political will. Only one country currently has the capacity to provide this leadership and that is the US. A spark of hope that such leadership might exist briefly flared during the Reagan presidency when Presidents Reagan and Gorbachev came close to an agreement on nuclear disarmament at their summit in Reykjavik, Iceland. Their good intentions faltered on the divisive issue of missile defenses. Since then, no high-ranking American political leader, including members of the Senate, has spoken out for a world free of nuclear weapons. President Bush's leadership on the issue of nuclear disarmament has been non-existent and, in fact, has set up obstacles to achieving this goal. The years pass with the threat of nuclear Armageddon hanging over us, and we wait, seemingly in vain, for political leaders to emerge who are willing to make the abolition of nuclear weapons a high priority on the political agenda. We continue to wait for political leaders who will challenge the nuclear double standards, which assume that some countries can maintain nuclear weapons in perpetuity while other countries must be forever content to forego these weapons. We wait for political leaders who will advance a viable plan for the phased elimination of nuclear weapons. Civil society has been able to devise a Model Nuclear Weapons Convention, a draft treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons, so certainly government leaders should be able to do so as well. After 61 years of the Nuclear Age, it seems clear that the political leaders needed to achieve a nuclear weapons-free world are unlikely to emerge from existing political systems and structures. These leaders will emerge only if ordinary people demand such leadership. The leaders will have to be led by the people toward assuring a future free of nuclear threat. Absent a sustained surge of political pressure from below, humanity will continue to drift toward increased nuclear proliferation, nuclear terrorism and, finally, nuclear annihilation. The choice remains ours: a future free of nuclear threat or a global Hiroshima. The stakes could not be higher. [David Krieger is president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, and a leader in the global effort to abolish nuclear weapons.] * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 24 The Observer: Tyrant who stands between peace and catastrophe Comment | [UP] Curbing the martial and political aims of President Ahmadinejad of Iran should be the paramount concern of Western leaders Henry Porter Sunday August 6, 2006 The Observer With a shudder, I realise I am writing this on 4 August, 92 years to the day that my grandfathers, both serving officers and in the same regiment, learned they would probably be going to war. I do not know how long they thought they would be fighting for or if they expected to survive (both did), but I am fairly sure that neither had an exact idea of the complex forces that brought them to France and Mons by the end of month. Few people in 1914 saw things as clearly as we do now... the building of alliances, the accumulating tension in Europe and the setting of numerous invisible hair triggers across the Continent and the colonies. Without being alarmist, I wonder if, in future, students will look back on 2006 and observe similar developments and point to some of the same drift, blindness and ambition that characterised the beginning of the last century. Whatever the horrors of Lebanon, it is possible to see it as a minor skirmish on the way to a much bigger confrontation which occupies the policy-making lobe of conservative America and probably of our Prime Minister. One view suggests that America's failure to call for an immediate ceasefire allows Israel to try to deal with at least one of the Iranian proxies that will turn on the West if things come to a head over Iran's continued enrichment of uranium. In Washington's mind, there is no doubt that Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad and the Iranian-backed factions in Iraq could set the Middle East alight in the event of showdown with Tehran. So dealing a blow to Hizbollah in Lebanon would appear to the hawkish mind to reduce part of that threat. However, it is Iraq that would be the focus of Iranian President Ahmadinejad's retaliation. Iran's Revolutionary Guard military training camps have been made available to Moqtada al Sadr's Mahdi Army. Money flows over the border to support attacks and it would only take a word from Tehran to activate what is believed to be a fully formed plan. In extremis, Hizbollah might take action outside the Middle East. It is often forgotten that Hizbollah has interests in the tri-border region of South America, running drugs and doing drugs-for-arms deals between Paraguay, Brazil and Argentina. As to the confrontation with Iran over its enrichment programme, things have speeded up since the start of the Lebanese war. The Security Council has set an 31 August deadline for Ahmadinejad to comply or face sanctions. Iranians are becoming resigned to isolation and economic hardship, says Sanam Vakil, an Iranian-born American academic who advises Western governments on conditions in Iran, while Ahmadinejad increasingly sees himself as a new Nasser and is unlikely to back down. The Bush administration insists that Ahmadinejad has no one to hide behind now that he is subject to a Security Council resolution, but that is simply not true. With the West focused on Iraq and Lebanon, few have noticed the strengthening ties between Russia, China and Iran. Essentially, they are bonded by the need for natural gas and oil, which, incidentally, reached an incredible $78 a barrel in July. Russia and Iran are considering a partnership that would co-ordinate gas supplies so that they would run 40 per cent of the world's known resources, Russia supplying the West and Iran the East. China's oil giant Sinopec has signed a $70bn oil and natural gas deal with Iran which goes over 30 years. Besides these deals, Russia and China have invested heavily in Iran and are committed to improving its infrastructure and refining capacity. So attacking Iran before it can build nuclear weapons, an option openly discussed in the US, even among Democrats, is a more complicated and infinitely riskier proposition than launching a war against Iraq, which is saying something. Quite apart from the mayhem that would spread across the Middle East, there are two permanent members of the Security Council which take a very close interest in Iran's future. This is to say nothing of the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz, which separates Iran from the Arabian peninsular. More than 40 per cent of the world's oil supplies pass through this gateway. There is a fault line on which the world's future depends, but it passes through Tehran and the Strait of Hormuz, not Lebanon and Israel. Across this line, East and West face each other in a new contest; upon this line are concentrated the majority of the world's energy supplies, Islamic ambition and the crucibles of Shia terror. Reason enough to move cautiously, but if the interpretation of America's failure to call for a ceasefire are right - that Israel has America's tacit encouragement and perhaps Tony Blair's - then we may be witnessing the beginning of something that will define the first half of the 21st century. The American administration believes Israel has a right to defend itself - so do I - but Israel has gone too far. The attacks on the infrastructure and civilians of the nascent democracy, ironically the only country to achieve anything like the democratic revolution Bush and Blair have called for in the Middle East, are deplorable. For Israel, I believe it is also a disaster. Hizbollah has gained enormous prestige in the Middle East, both among Sunni and Shia. Its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, has become a hero. He has launched rockets into the heart of Israel, demonstrating that a prosecution of asymmetric war is within the grasp of every well-organised terrorist group. He has provoked Israel into retaliatory raids that have killed women and children and made the country look monstrous, even though his rockets were aimed at civilians. Meanwhile, in Tehran, Ahmadinejad knows that any cost of the war will be offset by the rise in oil revenue: for every $5 rise in the oil price, Iran gains $85m per week. Mr Blair made an interesting speech at the World Affairs Council in Los Angeles, in which he described the struggle between the values of democracy and the tyranny of violent fundamentalism: a vision of a primordial conflict between the forces of light and darkness worthy of the ancient Persian prophet Mani. But there was little of practical nature, little to give us hope that he and his American partners are thinking seriously how to solve the Israeli-Palestinian problem. This can only can be solved, as Sir Christopher Meyer said, by a huge diplomatic effort with all concerned taking part. That is not the thinking of neocon policy makers, so it is well to remind Mr Blair what Henry Kissinger said to the World Affairs Council in 1999. 'In America, there has been a tendency to divide foreign policy into two schools of thought. One that identifies foreign policy as a subdivision of psychiatry and another that treats it as a subdivision of theology. The psychiatrists think relations among nations are like relations among people and you bring peace through this strenuous exercise of goodwill. The theologians believe that all foreign policies are a struggle between good and evil and the thing to do is to destroy the wrongdoer once and for all, after which normalcy returns.' Kissinger was psychiatrist; the Prime Minister and President Bush are theologians. Unfortunately, they do not hear the guns of August. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 25 Daily Breeze: A-bombs' lesson unheeded Updated Sunday, August 06, 2006 Today marks the 61st anniversary of the atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima. By Roger Dingman It was a gorgeous Sunday morning in June. The tropical sea sparkled with waves and flashes of sunlight as the hovercraft sped me toward Tinian. I wanted to visit that tiny island, 1,200 miles southeast of Japan and 300 miles farther east of the Philippines, to see the very spot from which the B-29s carrying atomic bombs destined for Hiroshima and Nagasaki had departed. I rented a car and headed north toward what in 1945 had been the largest airport in the world. I found it -- a maze of cracked asphalt filled with crushed coral and criss-crossed by towering tropical vegetation. Suddenly I came to a clearing. No one was there. I got out of the car and walked toward two glass boxes that rose from the ground. They covered the pits from which the bombs had been loaded onto the B-29s. Only sunburned wreaths of plastic flowers and plaques inscribed with a few words about pilots, weapons and targets provided any hint of the significance of this place. After gazing at them, I turned away, anxious to escape the withering heat. Taking refuge in the shade of a solitary tree, I was overcome by conflicting emotions. In my mind's eye, I could see the thousands of men sweating in the hot sun. They had built and run and flown to and from this airfield. I understood as never before what I had seen years earlier at the Smithsonian Institution's Enola Gay exhibit in Washington, D.C. -- the pride and patriotism of those men and their unshakable conviction that dropping atomic bombs was the only, and the right, way to have ended their war. But then a different feeling swept over me. I plunged into a pit of emptiness deeper than any I had ever known. How many lives -- American as well as Japanese -- had been lost as a consequence of the bombing missions -- conventional as well as atomic -- that had taken off from here? What must it have been like to have gone from the fullness of life to the nothingness of death in a few instants? And how had the families and friends of those who perished managed to deal with the emptiness, the loss, that they bore for the rest of their lives? I had then, and have now, no answers to those questions. But I am sure that they are the right ones to be asking 61 years after the Enola Gay and Bock's Car took off from Tinian bound for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Yes, we need museums like those in the Japanese cities that were incinerated to commemorate the dead and warn ourselves and future generations against the perils of nuclear weapons. Indeed, only two weeks before I went to Tinian, I took a group of USC students to the atom-bombed cities for that very reason. And yes, we need places like the shiny new Atomic Testing Museum just off the Las Vegas Strip that my wife and I recently visited. It rightfully reminds us of the risks taken and the sacrifices and errors made to transform nuclear weapons into instruments for preserving the long, perilous peace of the Cold War era. But we must not let such places, crowded with high-tech simulations, the detritus of the atomic past and various political messages obscure the emptiness that Tinian evokes. That tiny island, which most of us will never see, teaches an enduring lesson: War is deliberate collective death. It creates a profound emptiness that those who wage it, whether aggressors or defenders, combatants or spectators, victims or survivors, cannot escape. Wherever and however and for whatever purpose it may be fought, it will exact greater human costs by and beyond its end than anyone can imagine at its beginning. Sixty-one years after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, three years and more into war in Iraq, and facing yet another Middle East crisis whose end no one can predict, that is a lesson we Americans would do well to remember. Roger Dingman is a history professor at USC and a Harbor City resident. He has written numerous books and articles about U.S.-Japan relations. media.dailybreeze.com ©2006 Copley Press, Inc. ***************************************************************** 26 AFP: No big Pakistan nuclear buildup, envoy says - press - Saturday August 5, 07:15 [A Pakistani labourer walks with his donkeys past a replica of Chaghi mountain where Pakistan held it's first nuclear explosive tests] WASHINGTON (AFP) - A new Pakistani nuclear reactor could be used for "military purposes" as well as for civilian power needs but will not lead to a massive increase in the country's nuclear arsenal, according to Pakistan's new ambassador to Washington, The Washington Times reports. Ambassador Mahmud Ali Durrani, in an interview Thursday with The Washington Times, dismissed a private Washington-based think tank's report on the reactor under construction at the Khushab nuclear complex as "grossly exaggerated." He denied the report's estimate that the new plant could produce enough weapons-grade plutonium to boost Pakistan's production from an estimated two nuclear bombs a year to as many as 50. But he gave the first official acknowledgment that the heavy-water reactor would bring at least some increase in Pakistan's military nuclear capability at a time of heightened fears of a South Asia arms race with rival India, the newspaper said in its online edition. "The plutonium may certainly be used for military purposes, but it is simply not the case that it will increase our capability X-fold," Durrani was quoted as saying. The ambassador, a former top defense adviser to the Pakistani president and chairman of the country's military industrial complex for much of the 1990s, declined to give production figures for the new plant, the newspaper said. But he said it would be far less powerful than the 1,000-megawatt estimate given last month by the Institute for Science and International Security. Pakistan's current reactor, located near the new one, is a 50-megawatt unit completed in 1998. "I would love it to be 1,000 megawatts, because we certainly have the power needs," he was quoted as saying. But the Khushab site has sparked international concerns as the United States and India move to ratify a nuclear cooperation deal that critics warn could allow India to greatly accelerate its own military nuclear program, The Washington Times noted. Durrani, who presented his credentials to US President George W. Bush a month ago, said Pakistan had conveyed its "deep concerns" about the India accord to the Bush administration, while saying it was unlikely the deal could be derailed. "We know your administration is very keen for this deal, but we also don't want to see an imbalance with India that we would have to match," Durrani said. Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved. AFP ***************************************************************** 27 [NYTr] Near-meltdown incident at Swedish nuclear reactor Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 17:58:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Rich Winkel (activ-l) Greenpeace via Scoop News (NZ) - Aug 3, 2006 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0608/S00059.htm Near-meltdown incident at Swedish nuclear reactor REENPEACE - Thursday, 3 August 2006, 12:32 pm Call for immediate closure of Sweden's nuclear reactors following near-meltdown incident. Greenpeace demands action as Swedish regulator meets to decide on possible shut-downs. Sweden 2 August 2006. Sweden's nuclear regulator SKI will meet in emergency session tomorrow (3 August) to decide on a possible immediate shut-down of all but one of the country's nuclear power stations supplying up to 50% of Sweden's electricity. Greenpeace has called for the reactors to be shut down following a serious incident last week at Sweden's Forsmark nuclear power station, in which "it was pure luck there wasn't a meltdown" according to a former director of the plant. The Forsmark incident was caused by the failure of back-up generators following a problem with the main power supply. If the backup system fails after a grid cut-off or a whole blackout, the operator loses instrumentation and control over the reactor leading to an inability to cool the core, which can lead to a meltdown (1). In a report published last year, Greenpeace highlighted the widespread and frequent problems of failing power backup systems of nuclear reactors, which have also been reported in the US and Germany. Swedish media reported yesterday that a former director of the Forsmark plant said "It was pure luck that there was not a meltdown. Since the electricity supply from the network didn't work as it should have, it could have been a catastrophe." Without power, the temperature would have been too high after 30 minutes and within two hours there could have been a meltdown. "The Forsmark incident is just another illustration of the nuclear industry and nuclear regulators gambling with the lives of thousands or even millions of people" said Jan Vande Putte of Greenpeace International. "It has proved that a simple power blackout - something which has been happening regularly during the recent heatwaves - can very easily lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown. This is a prime example of why this technology is inherently dangerous, must be phased out worldwide and never allowed to return. A combination of safe, renewable sources of energy and energy efficiency measures are the only sane solution for power generation." ENDS * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 28 Knox News: Incentives may boost nuke sites By Associated Press August 6, 2006 ATLANTA - The nation's energy chief announced a plan Friday to provide incentives to companies willing to build the first new nuclear plants in 30 years, offering $2 billion in federal insurance for construction of six plants. "I think it's time for the nation that invented this technology to reassert its leadership," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said. The United States has 103 nuclear power plants in 31 states, but utilities have not proposed a new reactor since 1973. High costs and debate over where to store radioactive waste bogged down construction efforts, and a partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island plant in 1979 in Pennsylvania put an end to plans for new reactors. Copyright 2006, Associated Press. All rights © 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel ***************************************************************** 29 The Observer: Nuclear power links to 'sham' energy review [UP] Firm that handled submissions 'misrepresented' benefits of atomic power Juliette Jowit, environment editor Sunday August 6, 2006 The Observer Key consultants working on the government's controversial energy review, which recommended a new generation of nuclear power stations, have strong links to the nuclear industry, The Observer can reveal. Experts on both sides of the debate criticised the use of AEA Technology, formed by the privatisation of the Atomic Energy Authority, to handle hundreds of submissions to the review's public consultation earlier this year. The company has sold most of its nuclear businesses, but still has a nuclear waste unit, and senior executives and staff have links to the old authority and other parts of the nuclear industry. Critics claim objections to nuclear energy were ignored or misrepresented in AEA Technology's report. However, The Observer can reveal that the report found nuclear power got by far the lowest support of 15 energy options. The revelations will add to widespread criticism that the review, published last month, was a 'sham', designed to push through nuclear energy because it was favoured by the Prime Minister. Dai Davies, the independent MP whose question in the House of Commons forced ministers to reveal the identity of the consultants, said he was not anti-nuclear but was worried the company's industry links would undermine public confidence in the review. 'I wondered why it [nuclear] was being pushed and pushed and pushed,' said Davies, who stood as an independent after quitting Labour because he felt it had changed too much. 'Vested interests is the worry... Unless we are open and honest and debate openly, that suspicion is going to be with us for a long, long time.' David Moorhouse, chief executive of Lloyd's Register, the risk management group which has analysed risks in the energy industry, said he also does not oppose nuclear, but was worried about using a company 'whose livelihoods depended on nuclear up until their sale into the private industry'. He said: 'While AEA may have given this its absolute best and neutral approach, it doesn't smell like that to the average man.' Other experts who made submissions said they felt their evidence was underplayed and misrepresented; that there were concerns that ministers allowed only 12 weeks for the consultation; and that it was done before other important studies on nuclear waste and safety regulation were published. There was praise, however, for AEA's publication of a summary table of the most-supported low-carbon technologies, which showed that nuclear power was the only one of the 15 to get more opposition than support. The widest support was for wind power, solar and bio-fuels. Of the 18 responses included in the summary which commented on nuclear, 10 were opposed to the nuclear option and eight were in favour. The 10 opposing submissions were all from individuals, the eight favourable responses were all from organisation. 'There's a great gulf between what's in the review and what's in the submissions,' said Bob Everett, lecturer in renewable energy at the Open University. 'When I think of all the people who sent in submissions, I think they'll be very, very angry, but not surprised.' AEA Technology defended its professionalism, saying it wins work around the world because it has wide expertise beyond the nuclear industry and by 'being respected for the quality and independence of our work'. The company's clients include the European Commission, the World Bank and the UN. 'AEA Environment is a large independent environmental and energy consultancy,' it said. 'As well as covering the full breadth of environmental issues, we are acknowledged to be experts in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and clean coal technology. We are also acknowledged to have experience and skills in independently assessing the results of consultations on these and other environmental issues.' The DTI said AEA Technology was chosen to help with the review because of its 'experience of this kind of work and in a broad range of sustainable energy issues'. A spokesman also defended the resulting review. 'We considered evidence received on energy policy in the round - both demand and supply - and the outcomes are a balanced package of measures on energy efficiency, on renewables, on cleaning up fossil fuels and on nuclear energy,' he added. Last month Stephen Hale, the former special advisor to the previous Environment Secretary, Margaret Beckett, wrote in The Observer that the energy review was a 'sham' and the Prime Minister 'refused to consider the alternatives'. Since the review, nuclear power has suffered a number of set-backs. The Finnish government announced that construction of the first of a new generation of nuclear power stations in Europe, seen as an important forerunner for the UK, would be delayed by a year. During the recent heatwave nuclear reactors in mainland Europe have had to be shut down, and others allowed to release harmful hot water into rivers. The US-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service opposition group also reported uranium prices have risen 600 per cent in five years, threatening nuclear's traditional operating cost advantage. Useful links British Energy Department of Trade and Industry British Nuclear Fuels Ltd Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Greenpeace 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 2006 ***************************************************************** 30 Contra Costa Times: Fresno considers nuclear plant 08/06/2006 | Electricity would be low-cost or free to meet city residents' needs, sold to PG&E to solve Public Utilities' money problems By George Hostetter FRESNO BEE FRESNO - The Fresno Utility Commission's 11 members were directed last week by City Hall to unleash their imaginations in coming up with ideas to fix the financial mess at the Public Utilities Department. Commission Chairman John Hutson has taken this broad charge to heart -- he wants the city to consider building a nuclear power plant at the city's wastewater treatment plant west of downtown. Hutson is urging the commission to study the feasibility of building a 400- to 600-megawatt plant as a possible long-term solution to the city's energy needs and Public Utilities' money problems. On average, one megawatt can provide electricity for 1,000 homes. Hutson says the plant could cost more than $1 billion to build. The idea is getting a mixed reaction among some commission members and a Fresno environmentalist, who said locally-produced renewable energy is a worthy goal, but nuclear power is the wrong energy source. The wastewater treatment plant is the perfect site because of its size (about five square miles) and abundance of water (about 71 million gallons of treated water per day) for cooling the power plant, Hutson said. The power plant's electricity could be sold at little or no cost to Fresnans, while excess electricity could be sold at higher rates to power companies such as PG&E, he said. The result, according to Hutson: Plenty of cheap juice for Fresno air conditioners when the next heat wave hits, plenty of money to offset the need for future utility rate increases -- he estimates the plant could bring in hundreds of millions of dollars a year -- and another environmentally safe use for the treatment plant's water. The 11-member utility commission, created this summer by Fresno Mayor Alan Autry and the City Council, is charged with recommending solutions for financial problems at the Public Utilities Department. Autry appointed four members and each City Council member appointed one. ***************************************************************** 31 Green Left Weekly: Behind Howard's dangerous nuclear push Mark Diesendorf With growing international concern about global climate change from human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, the nuclear power industry has attempted to change the image of its product into that of an energy source that is “clean, green and cheap”. In reality, all the problems that worried us about the nuclear industry in the 1970s and 1980s are either unchanged or have become worse. In the latter case: + The risk of proliferation of nuclear weapons is worse because the US and Australian governments are undermining the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) by selling uranium to non-signatories, India and Taiwan. While the NPT is far from adequate, it is better than nothing or unilateral US control under its Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP — see <http://www.gnep.gov>). + Since September 11, 2001, the risk of terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities has increased. The fewer the facilities, the safer everyone is. + Now that several countries have created competitive markets for electricity, it is clear that the cost of nuclear electricity is even higher than previously projected (see below). + Detailed recent calculations of the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from the nuclear fuel cycle reveal that nuclear energy, based on existing technology, cannot be a long-term solution to global climate change from the human-induced greenhouse effect. This article addresses the last two of these points and also discusses the possible reasons why the Australian government is promoting the nuclear industry at this time. CO2 emissions The nuclear industry has widely disseminated the false notion that nuclear energy emits no greenhouse gases. The truth is that every step (except reactor operation) in the long chain of processes that makes up the nuclear fuel “cycle” burns fossil fuels and hence emits CO2. The emitting steps are uranium mining, milling fuel fabrication, uranium enrichment, construction and decommissioning of the reactor and waste management. Over the past 20 years there have been several calculations of CO2 emissions from the nuclear fuel cycle. The most detailed come from Van Leeuwen and Smith, 2005 (see <http://www.stormsmith.nl>. Van Leeuwen and Smith find that the CO2 emissions from the nuclear fuel cycle are relatively small when high-grade uranium ore (comprising 0.1% or more yellowcake) is used. But there are very limited reserves of high-grade uranium in the world — most are in Australia and Canada. As these are used up over the next several decades, low-grade uranium ore (comprising 0.01% or less yellowcake) will have to be used. This means that to obtain 1 kilogram of yellowcake, at least 10 tonnes of ore will have to be mined and milled, using fossil fuels and emitting substantial quantities of CO2. Contrary to the claims of the nuclear industry, Van Leeuwen and Smith find that total CO2 emissions from the nuclear fuel chain based on low-grade uranium ore are comparable in magnitude with emissions from a gas-fired power station. In response, the nuclear industry cites a report by Swedish utility, Vattenfall, which only considers a single power station and obtains lower emissions than Van Leeuwen and Smith in the case of high-grade uranium ore and apparently doesn’t address low-grade uranium ore at all. This report has not been published and only a summary is available on the internet (see ) that does not reveal most of the assumptions or results. It is very poor science to cite a report that is unavailable to the public. Very recently Sevior presented data from a few specific uranium mines suggesting that the energy inputs to uranium mining may be lower nowadays than calculated by Van Leeuwen and Smith. It will take some time to compare the assumptions and data in the two studies. Meanwhile, Van Leeuwen and Smith’s qualitative result stands: that if you have to mine and mill 10 times as much ore to obtain 1 kg of uranium, you will have to use at least 10 times as much energy and (in Australia) will emit at least 10 times as much CO2. In summary, nuclear power, based on existing technologies, is a dead-end side-alley on the pathway to reducing CO2 emissions. In most countries where there is a competitive electricity industry, it is clear that nuclear electricity is much more expensive than fossil electricity. In Britain and the US nuclear energy is even more expensive than wind power. More specifically, the pro-nuclear MIT (2003) report (see <http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower>) estimates that the cost of electricity generated by a hypothetical new nuclear power station in the US would be US$0.067 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh), or about A$0.09 per kWh. For comparison, coal power in eastern Australia costs under $0.04 per kWh. Wind power in the US costs about $0.05 per kWh and in Australia $0.075 to $0.08 per kWh, depending upon the site. When the British electricity industry was privatised, the government had to impose a fossil fuel levy to subsidise nuclear electricity. By 1998, the annual subsidy had reached £1.2 billion per year, equivalent to a subsidy of about £0.03 per kWh or A$0.06 per kWh on each unit of nuclear electricity generated. The subsidy to nuclear power is almost as much as the full cost of wind power in Britain, about £0.04 per kWh. In addition, it has recently been estimated by the British Nuclear Decommissioning Authority that dismantling Britain’s existing nuclear power stations will cost £70 billion. Since a full-size nuclear power station (1000 megawatts or more) has never been decommissioned anywhere in the world, costs could turn out to be even higher. The only new “commercial” nuclear power station under construction in a Western country is currently taking shape in Finland. The nuclear industry claims that this demonstrates that nuclear energy is competitive under market conditions. But the power station is being built by a consortium that includes a 40% share by the government of Finland, which will sell its electricity to its own members. Thus the consortium avoids conditions of a competitive market and so has obtained finance at interest rates far below market rates. The European Commission is currently considering a complaint about this anti-competitive practice. Uneconomic On the global scene, consider the following frank summary of the 1998 electricity generating cost study that was published jointly by the International Energy Agency and the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. The raw data were supplied by the nuclear industries in the countries surveyed, so they are hardly likely to be biased against nuclear energy. The summary was presented by Dr Fatih Birol, the chief economist and head of the Economic Analysis Division, International Energy Agency (IEA) at an Annual International Forum of the Uranium Institute (see ): “The results confirm the current cost advantage of fossil-fuelled power generation ... Clearly, under BAU [business-as-usual] assumptions the contribution of nuclear power over the next two decades will be limited.” The harsh reality is that, at market discount rates of 10% real or more, nuclear electricity is uneconomic almost everywhere in the world. It is at least double the cost of coal power in the US and UK, and would be nearly three times the cost of coal power in eastern Australia. The nuclear industry’s solution to these harsh economic realities has been to produce a series of reports on the economics of a “new generation” of nuclear power stations that at present only exists on paper. In theory such reactors would be slightly cheaper and possibly slightly safer than existing models. The latest estimate of “new generation” economics is the report to Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation by leading nuclear industry figure, John Gittus, claiming that a non-existent nuclear power station, AP1000, would be competitive with coal power in eastern Australia under certain conditions (seeA HREF="<. The Gittus report’s conditions are indicated in two alternative scenarios. One involves substantial government subsidies on the capital and operating costs of the proposed power station. The other involves “no subsidy”, according to Gittus, just a massive government guaranteed, unsecured “insured loan, which would be repaid to Government, together with a retrospective premium, out of revenues from the station once it began to generate electricity”. But, what if the untried nuclear power station proves to be more expensive to build and operate than the paper study estimates? That has always been the case with nuclear power in the past. What if the earnings from electricity sales prove to be insufficient to repay the additional costs and the loans? The Gittus report is vague on such details, suggesting that the government (i.e., the taxpayer) would share the risk. If so, this is a subsidy dressed up as a loan and neither of Gittus’s scenarios is anywhere near being economically competitive with conventional coal power. If this proposal is a good deal for the lender, why is it necessary for the government to lend anything? Surely, private financial institutions would be queuing up? It’s strange that no private investors have funded a new nuclear power station in the US for more than a quarter century, despite massive subsidies to the industry estimated at US$90 billion in total. False choice The nuclear industry is offering a false choice between coal and nuclear power, which are both dirty and dangerous technologies. But the real choice is between clean power — comprising a mix of efficient energy use, natural gas and renewable sources of energy — and dirty power — comprising coal and nuclear power. Both coal and nuclear power have severe adverse environmental, health and social impacts. Both offer big financial risks to investors. That’s why the Gittus report requests that the government either pay a direct subsidy or take on much of the financial risk, which is an indirect subsidy. It is essential that the Australian community does not permit the government (i.e., the taxpayer) to take on the financial risk of building new coal-fired or nuclear power stations. Even countries that do not have electricity markets have reservations about nuclear power. China’s target is for renewable energy (mostly wind power) to contribute 12% of electricity and nuclear only 4% by 2020. So why is the Australian government promoting the nuclear industry? The cost of nuclear electricity is so high in a competitive market that we are unlikely to see any of the present generation of nuclear power stations built in Australia. The current “debate” about nuclear power stations is really designed to distract attention from the government’s plan to establish or expand three of the other stages of the nuclear fuel chain. With uranium prices at a high level, there are big profits to be made in uranium mining. From these the government can expect significant company tax revenue and political donations. Hence the moves to expand uranium mining. There is also rhetoric about “value adding” by going into uranium enrichment. The main brake on this is the present global over-capacity for enrichment. It is difficult to imagine enrichment based on existing technology being driven by the market in the near future. However, we have to keep a close watch to ensure that the government doesn’t fund all or part of a new kind of enrichment plant. The government has been involved for years in some kind of partnership with a private company, Silex, to develop laser enrichment. This technology would use much less energy and may turn out to be less expensive than the principal existing methods. Laser enrichment would be highly suitable for secretly making weapons-grade uranium as well as fuel for nuclear power stations. (See the expose at <http://www.greenpeace.org.au/frontpage/pdf/silex_report.pdf >). In addition, the Australian government may attempt to establish a high-level nuclear waste dump for overseas nuclear power under Bush’s GNEP. Keep in mind that Prime Minister John Howard announced the nuclear “debate” immediately after visiting US President George Bush. The world’s richest country has messed up the development of its proposed long-term waste management site at Yucca Mountain, while spending billions, and it’s not obvious that this dump will ever open. Even if it does, its capacity is inadequate for storing US wastes. So Bush is no doubt looking for a “patsy” to take over this environmentally and economically horrific problem. In return, the US government may look the other way if the Australian government moves closer to nuclear weapons’ capability. Reprocessing spent fuel is another route to nuclear weapons. As Richard Broinowski’s book Fact or Fission points out, since WWII there has been a strong behind-the-scenes lobby for Australia to develop nuclear weapons. In the past, the main impediment was US policy. Now there are indications that US policy may have changed. It appears that the current US government wants to replace international nuclear weapons control (such as it is) under the NPT and the International Atomic Energy Agency by the US-controlled GNEP. An expansion of uranium mining and the establishment of uranium enrichment, long-term waste management and nuclear weapons are all on the Australian government’s agenda, even if nuclear power stations may be a decade further down the track. Meanwhile, the government is making every effort to kill off the renewable energy industries in Australia, especially the most successful, wind power. [Abridged from a June 23 discussion paper. Dr Mark Diesendorf teaches at the Institute of Environmental Studies at the University of New South Wales. See <http://www.ies.unsw.edu.au>.] From Green Left Weekly, August 9, 2006. Authorised by K. Miller, 23 Abercrombie St, Chippendale, NSW ***************************************************************** 32 Tri-City Herald: DOE to study sites for nuclear facility Published Saturday, August 5th, 2006 By Elena Olmstead, Herald staff writer The Department of Energy will dedicate $20 million to study potential sites for its Global Nuclear Energy Partnership facilities, officials said. The two facilities include a consolidated fuel treatment center and an advanced burner reactor. The treatment center would be capable of separating used fuel into usable and waste components, and the reactor would convert transuranics into shorter-lived radioisotopes and produce electricity. Benton County Commissioner Claude Oliver is excited about the studies. He said the criteria identified by DOE for locating the new facilities is a good fit for Hanford's 400 Area complex, which includes the Fast Flux Test Facility. "For the first time in years, there is a DOE nuclear energy mission that should use these facilities," Oliver said. "Using the 400 Area energy complex is the pathway to 5,000 to 15,000 jobs for our region, and has the potential for this community to lead the way to achieve U.S. energy independence." But before the 400 Area can be studied, an application will have to be submitted to DOE. The agency then will determine which applicants will receive money from the available $20 million to pay for and conduct site studies. Applications are due by Sept. 7. DOE officials said applicants will have 90 days to complete the site study and submit the information back to their office. Preference for awarding money for the siting studies will be given to places that demonstrate community and state support for the use of the site for energy partnership facilities, DOE officials said. Preference also may be given to sites that have the potential to support both planned facilities. © 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 33 ABC Asia Pacific: Australian scientist sparks nuclear power debate 05/08/2006 18:28:35 An Australian Senator from the minor opposition Greens Party, Bob Brown has rejected a call from prominent scientist Tim Flannery for nuclear power to be used to combat climate change. In a weekend newspaper article Dr Flannery says nuclear power is a clean source of energy. But Senator Brown says nuclear power shouldn't replace fossil fuels. "Energy efficiency and solar power and new energy, renewable modes are the answer and that's where we've got to go. Nuclear is a one per cent answer with a massive hazard price tag attached to it and we shouldn't go there," he said. ABC Asia Pacific TV / Radio Australia ***************************************************************** 34 APP.COM: Facts back criticism of drywell at A-plant | Asbury Park Press Online Sunday, August 6, 2006 BY RICHARD WEBSTER Iam concerned that your Aug. 1 article "Radiation barrier tests inadequate, critics say" may have inadvertently given your readers the mistaken impression that the Coalition to Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek does not have strong evidence to back up its claims. Nothing could be further from the truth. The coalition has been careful not to overstate its case and has always based its assertions on the facts. We know that in some areas, the steel drywell shell at Oyster Creek corroded from 1.154 inches to 0.603 inches between 1969 and 1992. We know that the epoxy coating applied to protect the shell in 1992 had a service life of about 10 years. We know that water has continued to leak onto the outside of the shell. Based on careful analysis of AmerGen documents, we have shown that the shell is less than 0.02 inches from failure, based on AmerGen's own assessment. We also know that corrosion rates of more than 0.03 inches per year were experienced before 1992. Thus, we have concluded based on the evidence that the shell could rapidly corrode to beyond current safety margins during any license extension period. Such corrosion could lead to collapse of the shell and a major accident in the worst-case scenario. We are less certain about the current safety of the shell because AmerGen's current monitoring and assessment methods are inadequate. Specific inadequacies are that AmerGen has monitored only 1 percent of the most degraded area of the shell over time and has therefore failed to measure how much of this area is severely degraded. AmerGen has also never monitored an area at the bottom of the shell termed the embedded region, an area the coalition's corrosion expert believes could now be experiencing the highest corrosion rates. Finally, AmerGen's last round of measurements in 1996 turned out to be inaccurate, so that the only measurements we have are now about 12 years old. Thus, we know the shell could buckle during the license renewal period, but AmerGen has so far avoided doing sufficient monitoring and assessment to determine with reasonable certainty whether the shell is currently safe. Because the plant is currently operating that should be cause for alarm, not a strike against the coalition. The debate about relicensing should not obscure the need for New Jersey and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to require AmerGen to prove that the plant is safe on an ongoing basis. Because no one can be certain about the current safety of the plant, your readers should be asking why it continues to operate. Richard Webster is the attorney for the Coalition to Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek. He is affiliated with the Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic, Newark. Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 35 Resource Investor: Energy - Nuclear Power and the Environment [Absolstats Reporting] By Elliot G. Hue 04 Aug 2006 at 02:01 PM EDT MCLEAN, Va. (EnergyStrategist.com) -- Long-time readers are familiar with my bullish outlook for nuclear power and, by extension, uranium-mining companies. I’ve covered at great length the economic benefits of nuclear power. Specifically, nuclear power is cheaper than natural gas and costs are more stable; the cost of generating nuclear energy isn't as sensitive to uranium fuel costs. A Finnish government study conducted in 2000 examined the change in electricity costs for coal, nuclear and gas fired plants. The study concluded that a doubling in uranium prices would result in a 9 percent jump in the cost of nuclear-generated power. But a doubling in coal and natural gas costs would cause a 31 percent and 66 percent rise in electricity costs, respectively. Even the rapid rise in uranium prices in recent years has done little to change the economics of nuclear power production. This is bullish for uranium prices. Specifically, while producing power from natural gas quickly becomes uneconomic when prices spike, uranium prices could double or triple from current levels with little or no impact on the cost of nuclear power. And the uranium market is currently in a state of extreme disequilibrium; last year, the world consumed some 175 million pounds of natural uranium while only 110 million pounds were mined. With uranium inventories running low, utilities are starting to bid up prices and cost is only one factor that supports nuclear power's growth. Another key element is the environmental benefits of nuclear power. I’m not an environmentalist, scientist or weather expert, nor do I wish to enter the debate on global warming/climate change. That said, these are issues that are currently receiving a good deal of attention, particularly in Europe. But in studying the nuclear power industry, I found that many of the prominent environmental organizations, such as Greenpeace, have long been opposed to the further expansion of nuclear power. But I’ve also found several references to a group of highly respected and prominent environmentalists from all over the world who took the opposite view that nuclear power is actually key to saving the environment and reducing pollution. Many of the most prominent members of the pro-nuclear camp are members of an organization known as Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy (EFN), headed by nuclear physicist Bruno Comby. It’s refreshing to hear a science-based, practical, commonsense approach to protecting the environment while also allowing the world to meet its energy needs and expand economically. Mr. Comby's Web Site is a valuable resource and fascinating read. Copyright © KCI Communications, Inc. 2006 Elliott H. Gue is Editor of “The Energy Letter.” Click ***************************************************************** 36 AU ABC: Brown slams Flannery's nuclear power suggestions. 05/08/2006. ABC News Online Anti-nuclear campaigner Helen Caldicott has also attacked the Flannery article. (Jarrod Watt / ABC) Greens Senator Bob Brown has rejected scientist Tim Flannery's call for nuclear power to be used to combat climate change. In a weekend newspaper article Dr Flannery says nuclear power is a clean source of energy. But Senator Brown says nuclear power should not replace fossil fuels. "Energy efficiency and solar power and new energy, renewable modes are the answer and that's where we've got to go," he said. "Nuclear is a 1 per cent answer with a massive hazard price tag attached to it and we shouldn't go there." Senator Brown says Dr Flannery has also revealed the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to store nuclear waste on the West and South Australian border region in the Officer Basin. "We are going to with open slather uranium exports see nuclear waste ships coming into Australian ports, transcontinental transport and then the hazard of looking after that waste for unimaginable periods into the future." Anti-nuclear campaigner Helen Caldicott has also attacked Dr Flannery's article. Speaking at the Byron Bay Writers Festival, Caldicott says she wished Dr Flannery had been there as she would have loved to debate the issue with him. Sitting on a panel that included Ian Lowe from the Australian Conservation Foundation and Brendan Gleeson from Griffith University, Dr Caldicott says while Dr Flannery was good on climate change, he apparently did not understand the biological implications of radiation. She says her major criticism, however was with Dr Flannery's claim that nuclear power plants had become much safer in recent decades. "I tell you it's a catastrophe waiting to happen. I work with a nuclear scientist who says 'Helen it's not if but when'," she said. ***************************************************************** 37 AU ABC: Heated debate over the warming of the planet ABC North Coast Panel discussing The environment: Climate change and other hot issues. Ian Lowe, Brendan Gleeson and Helen Caldicott | ABC MP3RealMedia 28k+WinMedia 28k+ Last Update: Sunday, August 6, 2006. 1:37pm AEST By Jarrod Watt Australia's internationally known veteran of the anti-nuclear movement, Helen Caldicott, takes the stage with Australian Conservation Foundation head, Ian Lowe, and urban policy academic, Brendan Gleeson, to discuss the battle of ideas in the climate change debate. The title of this mornings session is "The environment: climate change and other hot issues", but what's getting Helen Caldicott hot under the collar is the fact that biologist Tim Flannery has landed on the front page of a daily news magazine with his qualified support for the nuclear industry. Caldicott spares no time in coming out swinging against the author of the acclaimed ecological bookThe Future Eaters. "It's a propitious day to have this panel, because on the front of the Good Weekend magazine today there's an article with Tim Flannery talking about nuclear power could possibly be the answer to global warming. So that goes really well with my book, which is Nuclear power is not the answer to global warming," she chuckles. "The first chapter deals with the fact that nuclear power produces large quantities of carbon dioxide in its own right. There's a study by Storm Van Leeuwen and Phillip Smith from Holland, estimating the amount of fossil fuel which is needed to mine the uranium, to mill it and crush it, to enrich it, build a massive reactor, to then decommission it after 30 or 40 years - which requires more energy input than building the reactor - and then storing and transporting the radioactive waste for half a million years. "At the moment, a nuclear power plant produces 30 per cent of the amount of CO2 [carbon dioxide] as a fossil fuel plant, or gas fired plant. But shortly, as the uranium concentration declines, the amount of CO2 produced by a nuclear reactor will equal the amount of CO2 produced by a gas-fired plant - number one. "Number two; uranium is very finite. If all electricity today was generated by nuclear power, there's only nine years' supply of uranium. Number three; we're at peak oil, and peak gas. How will we keep the radioactive waste cool for thousands of years without any oil or natural gas? That argument has not yet entered the lexicon of the discussion, and that's an extremely important discussion. "The next issue is, is it economically viable? The nuclear industry is a socialised industry; it's an offshoot of the weapons industry; the American Senate just allocated 13 billion dollars to nuclear power last year, which would build five nuclear power plants. A power plant takes 5 to 10 to 15 years to construct, with licenses and the like... and it would make no difference to global warming at all. I would love... Flannery to be on this panel, so we could debate and discuss, and maybe he could learn a few things. I think he's good on climate change, like Lovelock, but he doesn't understand, apparently, the biological implications of radiation. Caldicott's next point is that of the waste generated by the nuclear power industry - she discusses the US plan to store its nuclear waste in a facility under Yucca Mountain, a place of geologically porous rock, intersected by over 30 seismic faults. "They don't know what to do with their waste, and I suspect when our notorious Prime Minister met with the notorious President of the United States recently, that the deal was struck - 'hey listen John, you've got a big desert out there, why don't you take our radioactive waste?' - and I think the notion of having nuclear power plants on the east coast of Australia is a Trojan horse, so we'll all have an anaphylactic reaction to that notion, but then underneath the radar he'll say 'By the way we'll just bring some radioactive waste back from America', which Flannery is actually postulating - bringing our waste back from our uranium, burying it in our desert," she says. She is followed by Brendan Gleeson, Professor of Policy at Griffith University, an experienced advocate of sustainability within the decision-making circles of government, who has just won the John Ironmonger Award for Public Writing for his latest book, Australian Heartlands: Making Space for Hope in the Suburbs. "My point of departure, though not my only interest, is cities... although I thought this morning I should extend that out to human settlements in general; I don't want to let Byron Bay off the hook when we talk about sustainability, although coming from Brisbane, a big dustbowl, it's lovely to have all this rain. I think you should advertise it as a sort of feature in your tourism... I think [cities] are absolutely essential to the sustainability issue, the sustainability imperative for three reasons: firstly, because they're the principal, although not exclusive, sources of environmental stress, including greenhouse emissions. They're also now the principal home of the real authors of the problem, our species, humanity," he says. "The UN estimates we're becoming an urban species - most human beings live in human settlements", though if you look beneath the bright rhetoric of globalisation, if you've looked at the works, of example, of Mike Davis, a U.S scholar, he writes about a planet of slums. Much of the species is now living in miserable urban conditions, and there is no ready evidence that globalisation is simply going to lift them out of those miserable urban conditions, although that's alleged. "In Australia, we live overwhelmingly in cities and large settlements, and mostly in suburbs. We are a suburban people; we have long been - it's an extended love affair we've had with suburbs that's manifest through our history, which has survived all sorts of shifts, including sea change, which is often, not always, simply about the relocation of suburban preferences to where it's more amenable or more affordably applied. "Coming out of my work is raising the importance of suburbia in public discussion; it has been a long love affair in Australia, but it's the love that dare not speak its name; we don't like to talk about the idea that most of us have lived in suburbs, continue to do so and continue to want to do so. If we don't talk about it we can't address the problems of suburbia... sustainability or un-sustainability is central to that discussion. "The third reason why I think human settlements are cental to the question of sustainability is that, for the two reasons I've just given you, they have to be key to the solution of the sustainability crisis. What Phil McManus in a recent book calls the 'vortex city' model - a sort of entropic city, the vast importers of energy and exporters of waste, which is the urban model which we adhere to now has to give way to a more ecologically sustaining model, one that is practically generating its own energy from renewable sources, including food energy, and we're a long way from that ideal right now - a long, long way." Gleeson discusses the 'hellfire cities' such as London in the mid 19th century, and how a crisis in pollution and human disease brought a realisation amongst the middle classes and the growth of a long period of reform which sought to redress living and working conditions as well as the ways cities operated. He claims we are again facing the prospect of 'hellfire cities', but despite all governments and councils mouthing the right words there is still a substantial gap between the rhetoric of sustainability and the reality of what is happening. "My colleague at the University of South Australia, Clive Forster, a geographer, talks of the gulf now between the sort of institutionalised rhetoric of urban sustainability and the reality of ouir vortex cities - he calls it a 'parallel universe problem'... The other dimension of the disconnection is the extent that... we do have urban institutions and regulations that focus on the sustainability of our human settlements, but they're marginalised within our governments and our corporate sector, and I think they're marginalised by what I'd call - it sounds a bit dramatic, but I think it's true - an eco-cidal logic that remains deeply ensconced in politics and institutions." Global genetic mutation as a result of nuclear waste, followed by a call to motivate the suburbs to engender a sustainable future - the president of the Australian Conservation Foundation as well as author of 14 books, Ian Lowe, sees a constant thread amongst all three speakers. "What links what Helen has said with what Brendan has said with what I'm going to say is energy. Energy is the key to a comfortable lifestyle. The reason why we live at a standard of material comfort that our grandparents could only have dreamed of is the huge amounts of fuel energy we use to sustain that lifestyle. The energy that allows us to move around, as someone said to cook our clothes and wash our food, to see in the dark, to do a whole range of things that required human muscle power a hundred years ago. And the sort of cities we live in are only viable because of the import of huge quantities of fuel energy. "There are now two serious threats on the horizon: well, they're not on the horizon, they're high in the sky, but our politicians are behaving as if they're on or below the horizon. We've know since the 1950s about the problem of peak oil, and the fact world oil production would peak some time about now, after which it's downhill all the way, and those of us who can remember the 1970s saw the out of town try-out for the real show that's coming soon to a planet near you - make sure you're sitting comfortably, because a long run is assured - a world where oil gets steadily scarcer and steadily more expensive," he says. "The second problem is climate change, and again we've known for at least 20 years it was a serious problem, although some of our decision makers are still in denial about it; the Murdoch press, remarkably, seems to still have the view at the editorial level that climate change is not yet proven as a serious problem, but is so scary we should be considering nuclear power as an alternative. "Climate change clearly, already, is a serious issue. The world already is three quarters of a degree warmer than it was a hundred years ago, rainfall patterns have changed, we are seeing more frequent extreme weather events, and interestingly the insurance industry was saying 20 years ago that climate change was a serious problem, because we can see it in the red ink on our balance sheets for property damage. "It's already having significant economic effect, whether it's seen in reduced agricultural productivity, as our farmers and graziers battle with a hot and drier climate, whether it's the increased cost of supplying water, as we have water restrictions and desalination plants seriously being considered for commission, and loopy ideas for pipelines thousands of kilometres long shifting water from where it is to where we would like it to be... we're seeing it in health impacts in the human population; the recent heatwave in Europe killed about 25,000 people, and a study commissioned jointly by the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Conservation Foundation found that the annual number of heat-related deaths in Australia - now about 1,100 - will increase to between 5-15,000 this century depending on where we are on the spectrum of possible rates of increase in climate change." The questions posed by both the session's moderator and the crowd come from a range of angles; how does fear become a tool to inspire action, rather than of hopelessness? Is there data on the cancer rates for France, given their massive reliance on nuclear power? What of Cuba - who restructured their economy during the first oil shock and the prevailing economic sanctions from the USA? Are cremations really an environmental and potential radiation hazard? It is, however, Professor Ian Lowe who leaves the crowd with a poignant thought. "It's clear the trajectory we're on is not sustainable, but I believe it's possible to turn the ship around. Pete Seeger, the folk singer, once in the middle of a folk concert, sang the hymn Amazing Grace, and he explained the reason he was singing it was the hymn was written by the captain of a slave-trading ship, who, becalmed in the middle of the Atlantic, had time to think and ponder the morality of what he was doing. He decided it was morally untenable, wrote the hymn, literally turned the ship around, sailed back to Africa and returned the slaves to where they came from. He said that he hoped that we would reflect that what we were doing was morally untenable and would turn the ship around... "I think that in ecological terms we are booked on the Titanic and are sailing towards the iceberg. I don't think there's any doubt those on the bridge are either too stupid or too shortsighted or too greedy to care. Some of them are still urging us to throw more coal in the boilers and speed us on our way there with markets guiding us in an economically optimal fashion. In that sense, in talking about an ecologically sustainable society, we're really organising a mutiny." ***************************************************************** 38 Independent: Secret nuclear bases to be shown on public maps Military sites and spy centres will be revealed by Ordnance Survey By Severin Carrell Published: 06 August 2006 The precise locations of dozens of secret military and spy bases are to be revealed on Ordnance Survey maps for the first time, ending one of the last remaining legacies of the Cold War. For decades, tourists and ramblers have stumbled across secret radar bases, nuclear bomb stores and rocket testing ranges tucked away in quiet woods or remote hillsides because they had been "airbrushed" out of even the most detailed official maps. But the Government's security chiefs have quietly abandoned that policy by scrapping its list of secret military and intelligence facilities - known officially as the "sensitive sites register". The decision was made earlier this year by the Cabinet Office but never formally announced; it acknowledged that the internet had defeated its attempts at secrecy. Aerial and satellite photographs of the country are available on the internet, while web-based mapping services such as Multimap are competing directly with Ordnance Survey (OS). The change in policy means the last remaining 50 sites on the register - including the nuclear warhead factory at Burghfield in Berkshire - will now be marked on all the maps printed by OS. The obsession with secrecy, which deepened once spying by the Soviet Union intensified during the Cold War, has been relaxed recently. The "sensitive sites register" has been slowly whittled down and OS has begun including some sensitive sites on its most detailed Explorer series of maps, but anomalies remain. In western Scotland, buildings and railway tracks for Glen Douglas armament depot near Faslane nuclear submarine base are marked but unnamed on the most detailed Explorer maps, but are "airbrushed" out of the larger-scale touring maps. A rocket testing range in Wyre Forest near Kidderminster, Worcestershire, is shown by an unnamed rectangular field in the detailed maps, but omitted in all large-scale maps. Some of the most sensitive sites will still not be named or will have misleading labels such as "disused airfield" or "depot". But the decision is a victory for anti-secrecy campaigners such as Alan Turnbull, an internet enthusiast who first exposed the availability of this apparently secret mapping data on the web. Mr Turnbull built his own site, www.secret-bases.co.uk, in August 2003 with the reluctant agreement of the military. He said yesterday he was "pleasantly surprised" at the Cabinet Office decision - particularly after Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, said last week he wanted to restrict access under the Freedom of Information Act. "It seems that there's some back-pedalling going on in Government about freedom of information, and this is an important step to counter that," he said. "It's nice to think the Cabinet Office has been pushed along a little bit by my highlighting this in such a public manner." A spokeswoman for the Cabinet Office confirmed: "The decision was taken because of the availability of this information from open sources." © 2006 Independent News and Media Limited ***************************************************************** 39 Leuren Moret - August 1, 2006 on The 'X' Zone Radio Show - DU & Diabetes Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 20:04:34 -0700 MEUREN MORET The DU / Diabetes Connection - Leuren Moret is an independent international radiation specialist and works around the world on radiation issues related to atmospheric testing, nuclear power plants, and depleted uranium. She has a background in the geosciences, specifically atmospheric dust, and is an Environmental Commissioner in the City of Berkeley. She writes and travels widely. Recently she has appeared in three documentary films about depleted uranium - BEYOND TREASON, BAGDAD RAP, and BLOWIN' IN THE WIND. - mailto:leurenmoret@yahoo.com ***************************************************************** 40 Deseret News: Cancer victims win small Victory [deseretnews.com] Saturday, August 5, 2006 State agrees to consider other Monticello cases By Elaine Jarvik Deseret Morning News After years of trying to prove a link between cancer cases and the town's former uranium-processing mill, Monticello residents scored a small victory this week. Deseret Morning News graphic The Utah Department of Health has agreed to look at additional cancer cases not listed in the Utah Cancer Registry. The new names include former Monticello residents who moved out of state, were treated out of state, were diagnosed prior to the registry's debut in 1973 or whose names were inadvertently excluded from the registry. That adds up to 440 names, compiled by members of the Victims of Mill Tailings Exposure committee. A previous health-department study, the findings of which were released at a public hearing in May, evaluated 141 other cancer cases that were part of the Utah Cancer Registry. The findings of that study were inconclusive, partly because the relatively small numbers were not deemed statistically significant. Whether the new evaluation will conclude that the town has "elevated" rates of cancer, compared to the state at large, won't be clear until this evaluation is completed. The department has set a "very aggressive schedule" to finish this work and hopes to announce its findings by December, according to department spokesman Cory Craynor. The department will also conduct a public-health assessment of the Monticello mill site and surrounding neighborhoods. The assessment will include exposure history and pathways to get a sense of how much toxicity Monticello residents were exposed to during the mill's operation and its aftermath. The mill operated on the south side of the southeastern Utah town from 1943 to the beginning of 1960, processing both vanadium and uranium. It is believed that the uranium was used in the manufacture of nuclear weapons for the Manhattan Project. For years, uranium dust blew across town, eating holes in screens and laundry hanging on the line, and was tracked home by workers to unsuspecting family members. After the mill was shut down, uranium tailings were used by townspeople in the mortar and foundations of their homes, in sandboxes and in road construction. "We had almost given up hope," said VMTE committee member Barbara Pipkin on Friday, after receiving a letter from the health department's executive director, Dr. David N. Sundwall, outlining the department's "action steps" in the upcoming months. "We're unbelievably excited." Pipkin said she first realized that the reporting of Monticello cancer cases was "haphazard at best" when she saw a classified list of names from the tumor registry and realized many names weren't on it, including those of her father-in-law and an uncle, both diagnosed after 1973. Both men worked at the mill. In a press release Friday, Sundwall said the community "needs answers, and we are committed to working with them to find those answers using the best science and resources available to us." Monticello residents would like a federally funded treatment clinic and cancer-screening facility in Monticello, and monetary compensation for all victims — not just the miners and mill workers but the children who played in the tailings piles and the wives who washed the clothes of the men who came home covered with uranium dust. In addition to cancers, the uranium mill caused respiratory problems, the residents believe. As for the land and buildings in the town, they were given a clean bill of health following the U.S. Department of Energy's Superfund Site cleanup, which was completed in 2000. E-mail: jarvik@desnews.com © 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 41 Sunday Herald: Reactors radioactive dirty laundry - Scotland By Rob Edwards THE nuclear industrys attempt to clean up its image in support of Tony Blairs promised programme of new reactors has been marred by some dirty washing. The Sunday Herald can reveal that the laundry at Hunterston nuclear power station in North Ayrshire has sprung a leak. Radioactive water escaped from a tank, causing it to be shut down. The revelation is described as very worrying by anti-nuclear campaigners, who are calling for an independent investigation. But British Energy, the company that runs Hunterston, dismisses the leak as a relatively minor occurrence. Overalls worn by workers in contaminated areas have to be washed in Hunterstons laundry to remove traces of radioactivity. Dirty water from the wash is pumped into two tanks, where it is stored before being disposed of. But on the night of 18-19 July one of the tanks started leaking. As a result, British Energy has stopped using it while it carries out repairs. According to the company, waste water leaked only into a contained area around the tank and the levels of radioactivity in the water were negligible. But this was little comfort to Rita Holmes, who represents Fairlie Community Council on the Hunterston Site Stakeholder Group. It makes it sound like Hunterston is falling to bits, she said. British Energy cant even seem to do its dirty laundry without making a radioactive mess. The incident casts doubt on the competence of the nuclear industry and should be immediately investigated by the safety regulators. According to British Energy, however, the incident did not breach any regulations so did not have to be formally notified to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency or the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate. The leak was identified quickly and immediate action taken, stressed the companys spokeswoman, Sue Fletcher. At no time did water leak outside the building. She said: Laundry water is currently being stored in and discharged from the second tank only until repairs are completed. We are one tank down, but the procedure for discharges remains the same, and we continue to be well within consented discharge limits. 06 August 2006 © newsquest (sunday herald) limited. all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 42 Salt Lake Tribune: State to fill gaps in Monticello cancer stdy Article Last Updated: 08/05/2006 02:47:58 PM MDT By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune Posted: 2:55:18 PM- State health officials have launched a new phase of their health probe in Monticello, where residents suspect a government uranium mill is to blame for decades of cancer cases and deaths. "We hope that these next steps will bring us closer to understanding the cancer incidence in Monticello and any possible connection to the mill," said David N. Sundwall, state health executive director. "The community needs answers, and we are committed to working with them to find those answers using the best science and resources available to us." Sundwall's team promised in May to look for ways to fill in information gaps in the state's data about cancer in the area. Residents had been complaining for years that too many children had died of leukemia and residents had an unusually high incidence of many cancers. But a recent Health Department review of the state cancer registry was inconclusive, just like a similar, earlier study. The data turned up no evidence that residents had higher-than-usual cancer cases between 1973 and 2003, compared with Utahns statewide. The government's mill at the south end of town made radium, vanadium and uranium for war efforts. Residents blame the mill for more than 400 cancer cases in the town of 2,000. It turns out that standard health study practices excluded much information. They would not allow the Health Department to count the cancers of people who had moved out of the southeastern Utah community and people who had died before the cancer registry began. "We're ecstatic," said Barbara Pipkin, whose husband, a lifelong Monticello resident, is battling leukemia. "It means a lot to us. I think [the expanded study] is going to change the figures a lot." She said new health data already has been received from former residents now in California, Colorado and Arizona, and the number of reported cancer cases had grown from 407 in May to 444. In addition, the agency had made available via computer a database that accepted information about respiratory illnesses, as well. The health department plans to complete its data-gathering by the year's end. Department spokesman Cody Craynor said costs of the new study would be absorbed with existing staffs and budgets. fahys@sltrib.com © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 43 Salt Lake Tribune: Probe checks possible link of Monticello cancers to mill Article Last Updated: 08/06/2006 01:02:08 AM MDT By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune State health officials have launched a new phase of their health probe in Monticello, where residents suspect a government uranium mill is to blame for decades of cancer cases and deaths. “We hope that these next steps will bring us closer to understanding the cancer incidence in Monticello and any possible connection to the mill,” said David Sundwall, state health executive director. Sundwall's team promised in May to look for ways to fill in information gaps in the state's data about cancer in the area. Residents had been complaining for years that too many children had died of leukemia and residents had an unusually high incidence of many cancers. But a recent Health Department review of the state cancer registry was inconclusive, just like a similar, earlier study. The data turned up no evidence that residents had higher-than-usual cancer cases between 1973 and 2003, compared with Utahns statewide. The government's mill at the south end of town made radium, vanadium and uranium for war efforts. Residents blame the mill for more than 400 cancer cases in the town of 2,000. It turns out that standard health study practices excluded much information. They would not allow the Health Department to count the cancers of people who had moved out of the southeastern Utah community and people who had died before the cancer registry began. “We're ecstatic,” said Barbara Pipkin, whose husband, a lifelong Monticello resident, is battling leukemia. “It means a lot to us. I think [the expanded study] is going to change the figures a lot.” She said new health data already have been received from former residents now in California, Colorado and Arizona, and the number of reported cancer cases had grown from 407 in May to 444. The Health Department plans to complete its data-gathering by the year's end. fahys@sltrib.com © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 44 People's Daily: Norwegian fishermen concerned over planned Russian nuclear tests UPDATED: 10:21, August 06, 2006 The Norwegian Fisheries Association has asked the Norwegian Government to launch a strong protest against alleged n plans to resume nuclear tests on the island of Novaja Semlja in the Barents Sea, said reports reaching Stockholm from Oslo on Saturday. According to Norwegian Broadcasting (NRK), in a recent speech the Russian defense minister opened for the possibility of resuming nuclear tests on the island. The Russians have also spoken openly about plans for building floating nuclear power plants, and transport spent nuclear fuel on ships along the Norwegian coast for repossession in England and France, NRK reported. If the plans are carried out, the nuclear tests would be negative for both Norwegian and Russian fisheries industry, said head of the Norwegian Fisheries Association, Reidar Nilsen. The then Soviet Union tested 132 nuclear bombs on Novaja Semlja from 1955 to 1996, according to the report. Source: Xinhua Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 45 Japan Times: Survivor of both A-bombs takes message to U.N. Sunday, Aug. 6, 2006 'THERE SHOULD NOT BE A THIRD' By SEANA K. MAGEE NEW YORK (Kyodo) As long as there is breath in his frail body, 90-year-old Tsutomu Yamaguchi vows to keep pressing for peace. And now the survivor of both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings has taken his message to the United Nations for the first time. Arriving by wheelchair but then descending the stairs on foot with a cane to an auditorium at the U.N. headquarters, the lithe, energetic man wowed the audience with his emotional tale of survival. "What I mean to say here is that as a double atomic bomb survivor I experienced the bomb twice, and I sincerely hope that there will not be a third," he told the gathering Thursday at the Dag Hammarskjold auditorium to watch a screening of "Niijuuhibaku" ("Twice Bombed, Twice Survived"), a 50-minute documentary in which he is featured along with other double atomic bomb survivors. Yamaguchi was clearly emotional as he delivered his message of peace. "My message is that the use of atomic weapons should be abandoned completely and my wish is that each and every one of you here will think about this and agree with my message to support world peace," he said. As a 29-year-old employee of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries working in Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945, he had just stepped off a tram when he was suddenly knocked unconscious by what he described as a tremendous "ball of fire." Just 3 km from the epicenter, he came to with burns that seared his body and saw his singed hair fall out. After the initial shock, his thoughts quickly turned to his young wife and 5-month-old child he left behind in his native Kyushu. As he made his way through Hiroshima he encountered horrific scenes of frantic survivors, whose flesh seemed to melt off their arms and hung like "giant gloves." Still haunted by what he described in his poetry as the "human raft," he cried uncontrollably during a segment of his interview in the film while remembering the swollen corpses that he stepped on to cross a river and escape the city. After a long journey the determined husband and father finally made his way to Nagasaki, where his family lived. When his surprised mother returned home after an air raid she thought a ghost was sitting at her table because Yamaguchi was covered in gauze from head to toe except for openings over his eyes and mouth. When Yamaguchi went to his supervisor's office later to describe his ordeal and how Hiroshima had been flattened, he witnessed the bright flash after the second bomb was detonated. As he took cover under a desk he first thought that "the mushroom cloud had chased him to Nagasaki." After seeing the film and listening to the elderly survivor's powerful words, Randy Rydell, a senior political officer at the U.N. department of disarmament, said he believes the film gives viewers "lessons not just about the horrors of the past, but also a vision for a better world in the future." As someone whose professional life is dedicated to helping rid the world of nuclear weapons, he was especially inspired by Yamaguchi's message. Rydell said he wishes Yamaguchi could speak with leaders in countries such as North Korea, which is suspected of having built a nuclear arsenal and test-fired seven missiles on a single day. Toshiko Matsukawa, an Osaka native who has spent more than 25 years in the United States, said after watching the presentation that she believes more people could benefit from exposure to Yamaguchi's story of survival. Although too young to have lived through World War II, Matsukawa said she remembers growing up watching many antiwar films and believes Americans should learn more about the negative impact of the atomic bombings and the great human toll it took. Yamaguchi still suffers physically from the aftereffects of the two atomic bombs and points to his "badge of courage" (burns on his arms), but he is confident he is carrying out a mission that destiny has carved out for him. "God planted the path for me so it was my destiny that I experienced this twice and I am still alive to convey the message to the younger generation," he said. Matthew Lee, a reporter for Inner City Press, said he was impressed with the simplicity of Yamaguchi's message and the positive path he has chosen in life. "His message is a simple yet necessary one and he is the perfect person to deliver the message." The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 46 Iran's plot to mine uranium in Africa Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 23:38:40 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST Look at this little gem below from the Murdoch (News International) owned Sunday Times in London. Despite the fact that Iran has it's own uranium deposits as many scholars, articles and news or analysis Web sites attest, the hoary old story of bad Muslim countries smuggling Uranium from Africa is still trotted out. Just Google and you get 311,000 hits. This Sunday Times story is so clearly a fabrication (no doubt based on some black op sting operation to provide plausibility) that one wonders why they bother... Why don't they tell more plausible lies... Like "Iranians busy mining uranium ore in Iran according to latest satellite resonance", they could even given us photo-shopped images like the ones they provided to Saudi Arabia purporting to show Iraqi tanks massed on their border in 1991. It just reeks of the transparent manipulation of public opinion... This is what journalism has descended to in the UK and on The Times under Murdoch. It seems that they are not cautioned by the failure of Niger-Iraq uranium forged evidence fiasco but encouraged to use the same old trope, this time without even showing us the forged documents to lend it any credibility at all. I guess the way you do it is to supply some training and Geiger counters to African port customs officials, then fly in some yellow cake and put it in a container along with some coltan, then get some local haulage company to take it to the port with some paperwork than can link it up with a shipping consignment to Iran.. And Bingo... The article weaves several disparate threads of disinformation into a seamless ball of lies, the theme is nuke terror Iran cheat nuke terror. USrael has hundreds of nuclear weapons plus delivery systems and even successfully hijacked a uranium shipment on the high seas in the 1968 "Plumbat Affair", a clandestine collaboration with West Germany in acquiring 200 tons of yellow cake (uranium oxide) but don't look at that, look at a country which has it's own uranium deposits and doesn't need to steal or import it but nevertheless is caught doing so. At least according to someone who will not reveal proof of this assertion for detailed scrutiny. After the last little joke using this line of fiction, do they think anyone would actually believe them unless they wanted to pretend it was credible as part of a get Iran now campaign? Maybe Nauru and the Marshall Islands will be shocked and awed with this dastardly plot, along with the UK of course. If they intercepted one shipment... there must have been others that got through... I bet George Galloway hired the boat and rowed it across the sea... and that Osama Bin Laden, disguised a Bedouin carpet trader, smuggled the uranium across the desert, stuffed up the asses of his camels. Seriously though, the main worry is that there is another WOT inside job/provocation in the pipeline... another 911/Reichstag fire... As if Lebanon is not enough. They are going to hit Iran... It is clear... When they do Bush's poll rating will double. =========== August 06, 2006 The Sunday Times www.timesonline.co.uk Iran's plot to mine uranium in Africa By Jon Swain, David Leppard and Brian Johnson-Thomas IRAN is seeking to import large consignments of bomb-making uranium from the African mining area that produced the Hiroshima bomb, an investigation has revealed. A United Nations report, dated July 18, said there was "no doubt" that a huge shipment of smuggled uranium 238, uncovered by customs officials in Tanzania, was transported from the Lubumbashi mines in the Congo. Tanzanian customs officials told The Sunday Times it was destined for the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, and was stopped on October 22 last year during a routine check. The disclosure will heighten western fears about the extent of Iran's presumed nuclear weapons programme and the strategic implications of Iran's continuing support for Hezbollah during the war with Israel. It has also emerged that terror cells backed by Iran may be prepared to mount attacks against nuclear power plants in Britain. Intelligence circulating in Whitehall suggests that sleeper cells linked to Tehran have been conducting reconnaissance at some nuclear sites in preparation for a possible attack. The parliamentary intelligence and security committee has reported that Iran represented one of the three biggest security threats to Britain. The UN security council has given Iran until the end of this month to halt its uranium enrichment activities. The UN has threatened sanctions if Tehran fails to do so. A senior Tanzanian customs official said the illicit uranium shipment was found hidden in a consignment of coltan, a rare mineral used to make chips in mobile telephones. The shipment was destined for smelting in the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan, delivered via Bandar Abbas, Iran's biggest port. "There were several containers due to be shipped and they were all routinely scanned with a Geiger counter," the official said. "This one was very radioactive. When we opened the container it was full of drums of coltan. Each drum contains about 50kg of ore. When the first and second rows were removed,the ones after that were found to be drums of uranium." In a nuclear reactor, uranium 238 can be used to breed plutonium used in nuclear weapons. The customs officer, who spoke to The Sunday Times on condition he was not named, added: "The container was put in a secure part of the port and it was later taken away, by the Americans, I think, or at least with their help. We have all been told not to talk to anyone about this." The report by the UN investigation team was submitted to the chairman of the UN sanctions committee, Oswaldo de Rivero, at the end of July and will be considered soon by the security council. It states that Tanzania provided "limited data" on three other shipments of radioactive materials seized in Dar es Salaam over the past 10 years. The experts said: "In reference to the last shipment from October 2005, the Tanzanian government left no doubt that the uranium was transported from Lubumbashi by road through Zambia to the united republic of Tanzania." Lubumbashi is the capital of mineral-rich Katanga province, home of the Shinkolobwe uranium mine that produced material for the two atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. The mine has officially been closed since 1961, before the country's independence from Belgium, but the UN investigators have told the security council that they found evidence of illegal mining still going on at the site. In 1999 there were reports that the Congolese authorities had tried to re-open the mine with the help of North Korea. In recent years miners are said to have broken open the lids and extracted ore from the shafts, while police and local authorities turned a blind eye. In June a parliamentary committee warned that Britain could be attacked by Iranian terrorists if tensions increased. A source with access to current MI5 assessments said: "There is great concern about Iranian sleeper cells inside this country. The intelligence services are taking this threat very seriously." ======== http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2300772,00.html ======== ***************************************************************** 47 The Australian: Labor votes against uranium review This story is from our news.com.aunetwork Source: AAP By Robyn Grace August 05, 2006 THE Tasmanian Labor Party conference has voted against a federal move to review the party's policy on uranium mines. A motion to support the current three-mines policy was passed today by a show of hands after a heated debate amongst delegates. The motion supported the status quo until further studies were completed into alternative sustainable energy options and the safe disposal of waste. Opposition leader Kim Beazley wants next year's national conference to endorse a new party platform allowing new mines. Mr Beazley will address the conference tomorrow. The mover of today's resolution, Sharon Carnes, of the ALP's Glenorchy branch, said the current policy should be supported until there was evidence change was needed. Supporters of the motion were sceptical that Australia could ensure other countries would use uranium only for peaceful purposes. "The greatest danger to this planet today is global warming and nuclear weapons," said Fay Gervasoni (Launceston). "I don't think we can sit back and say we're all right and bugger the rest of the world." Speaking against the motion, Senator Helen Polley said establishing new mines would ensure Australia remained competitive on the international export market. "Mr Beazley is not pushing for nuclear energy or nuclear enrichment in Australia. The ALP will not support either," she said. "This is about jobs and apprenticeships and export earnings and it will prove to be exceptionally important for Australia's economic future." The conference also supported a motion ruling out a nuclear power plant in Tasmania. Earlier today, Premier Paul Lennon announced a parliamentary committee to scrutinise the implementation of the Federal Government's new industrial relations legislation in Tasmania. The Work Choices watchdog will use parliamentary privilege to provide a forum for frank and open investigation of workplace relations. Mr Lennon told delegates the committee would protect Tasmanian working families. "It will uncover abuses of workers' rights in Tasmania," he said. "It will expose the rorts of Work Choices. It will stop people from being victimised and intimidated." Mr Lennon said the committee would have power to summons people to give evidence under oath. "People will be frightened to come forward; we know that," he said. "But by establishing the committee under the umbrella of parliament, we will provide legal protection to people." Mr Lennon will move to establish the five-member committee when parliament resumes at the end of this month. "We will do whatever it takes to make sure that Tasmanian workers are always treated fairly and compassionately," he said. Mr Lennon provided a show of support for his embattled deputy, Bryan Green, following his speech, stepping off stage to offer a surprise public hug. Mr Green has stepped down from his ministerial responsibilities pending inquiries into his dealings with the Tasmanian Compliance Corporation. © The Australian ***************************************************************** 48 NRDC: NUCLEAR REPOSITORY BILL IS FATALLY FLAWED [Natural Resources Defense Council] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Press contact: Edwin Chen, NRDC, 202-289-2373 nrdcinfo@nrdc.org Bush's Plan to Weaken Yucca Mountain Standards Should be Buried, NRDC Says WASHINGTON (Aug. 3, 2006) -- A Bush Administration bill designed to weaken public health and environmental standards at the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository is fatally flawed and should not be enacted, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) said today. In congressional testimony, Geoffrey H. Fettus, senior attorney in NRDC's nuclear program, said the Nuclear Fuel Management and Disposal Act represents "yet another effort to relax or remove appropriate environmental oversight and standards that must apply if the proposed repository is to meet the twin goals of protecting human health for the length of time the waste is dangerous and public acceptance of the federal solution to the nuclear waste problem." Fettus testified at a hearing of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. (Click here for the full testimony.) Fettus said S. 2589 would weaken licensing procedures, pre-empt state environmental regulations and undercut the current legal framework by doing away with transparent, deliberate proceedings. "If we are ever to have a robust repository program that both follows the original intent of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and gains the trust of the American public, then the federal government, in both its executive and legislative incarnations, must cease efforts to weaken meaningful and protective health and environmental standards application to the program," Fettus testified. "Congress should not be deciding issues of ultimate certainty in health and safety judgments, nor should it be resolving technical disagreements with the stroke of a pen." "In contrast with the provisions of S. 2589, our national focus should be on promulgating adequate environmental standards and then testing whether Yucca Mountain meets those standards through a fair, thorough and transparent licensing process," Fettus said. "That process is required by existing law." The Natural Resources Defense Council is a national, nonprofit organization of scientists, lawyers and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. Founded in 1970, NRDC has 1.2 million members and online activists nationwide, served from offices in New York, Washington, Los Angeles and San Francisco. © Natural Resources Defense Council ***************************************************************** 49 AU ABC: Tas Labor opposes Beazley's uranium plans ABC Tasmania | Local News | Story Saturday, 5 August 2006. 18:33 (AEDT)Saturday, 5 August 2006. The Tasmanian branch of the Labor Party has voiced its concern over Labor leader Kim Beazley's plans to change his party's policy on uranium mining. The issue was the subject of heated debate at the Labor Party's state conference in Hobart this afternoon. Mr Beazley wants Labor to scrap its ban on the development of new mines, but is pushing for stronger safeguards on uranium exports. At the party's state conference today, Tasmanian members moved to endorse the party's current three mines policy until more work is done to address the safe disposal of waste. The issue has clearly divided Tasmanian ALP members. Tasmanian Federal Labor MP Dick Adams described today's motion as dumb. "The debate on that has moved on considerably," he said. Another conference delegate, Max Brown, says Kim Beazley cannot tell him what to think. "Kim Beazley says this is what we must do. Well I say, nuts to that." The motion passed after a show of hands. In a separate development, school teacher Steve Reissig has won Labor preslection for the northern Tasmanian seat of Bass and trade union official Kevin Harkins has won preselection for Franklin. The announcement was made at the conference in Hobart. ***************************************************************** 50 Decatur Daily: Above-ground nuclear storage potential threat www.decaturdaily.com/ SUNDAY, AUGUST 6, 2006 EDITORIAL Environmentalists opposing nuclear energy sometimes tend to be alarmists, but they do raise prudent concerns over storage of used fuel rods. The issue came up again last week at a meeting at Calhoun Community College during a Nuclear Regulatory Commission hearing on the pending restart of Unit 1 at Browns Ferry in Limestone County. Nationwide, 55,000 metric tons of waste are in temporary storage and growing some 2,000 tons each year. Yet Washington keeps pushing back the opening date of the permanent storage site in Nevada's Yucca Mountain. Environmentalists worry that the 1,400 metric tons of waste stored above ground at Browns Ferry and the 37 tons stored outside are too close to the Tennessee River and poses a potential danger to the water supply. The Tennessee River Authority and NRC repeatedly assure the public that the storage poses no dangers. But accidents do happen. There is the ever-present threat of terrorism, also. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., added perspective to the problem last week. If the storage site meets the most recent opening date of 2017, the waste already stockpiled and that accumulated over the next 11 years will fill the facility. Even so, that would eliminate the present threat. But without expanding Yucca or finding a new site, the problem will begin to build again. The nation has little choice but to move ahead with new nuclear facilities to help feed the nation's energy appetite. One might think that, with the Bush administration's justifiable obsession with national security, it wouldn't have allowed the opening date to slip from 2010 to 2017. The environmentalists are right, only the degree to which the above-ground storage is a threat is debatable. The way to end the debate is to move the waste to permanent storage. Copyright 1999 THE DECATUR DAILY. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 51 Salt Lake Tribune: Appeal on EnergySolutions oversight likely to be filed Article Last Updated: 08/05/2006 02:49:08 PM MDT By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune Posted: 2:56:28 PM- Charles Judd has been dogging state radiation officials all year about his concern that the Tooele County landfill he used to run has taken more hazardous and radioactive waste than the law allows. So, when the Radiation Control Board rebuffed his latest effort on Friday, Judd said he would put the question to a greater authority. "We'll probably appeal [the board's ruling] to court," he said. "The way I interpret [state law], there's a violation." The radiation panel agreed it's worth reviewing waste limits state law imposes on EnergySolutions, formerly known as Envirocare of Utah. Its members voted to have radiation division staff report on how much waste it has permitted at the EnergySolutions landfill in Clive, about 80 miles west of Salt Lake City, and how much waste the company has reported disposing so far. "We ought to know in light of the allegations what the statute permits," said board member Stephen T. Nelson. Only minutes earlier, though, the panel had sided with EnergySolutions, which asked the board to throw out Judd's formal request for the board to review the same question. EnergySolutions' attorney, Craig Galli, told the board Judd and his company, Cedar Mountain Environmental, were not asking the questions at the right time or in the right forum. They could have pressed lawmakers or the radiation board any number of times in the past. "They sat on their rights," he said. Judd, president of Envirocare from 1998 to 2002, points to provisions in the state's 1990 radiation control law that trigger a tough, multi-step approval process for an existing company that is growing by 50 percent or more. He has said state officials have repeatedly ignored those provisions when amending EnergySolutions' original license. The company has never been required to undertake the multi-step approval process, which requires the Legislature and the governor to sign off. Meanwhile, the state radiation director has approved 80 administrative amendments during the company's 17 years of operation. If Judd goes forward, he would file suit in the Utah Court of Appeals. The court recently sent up to the state Supreme Court the radiation board's latest ruling, permission for EnergySolutions to nearly double the size of its boundaries. The higher court asked the appeals court to relinquish a case in which the environment group, the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, said the board had wrongly allowed the expansion. The radiation board plans to review the waste-allowance issue at its October meeting. fahys@sltrib.com © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 52 Salt Lake Tribune: Appeal on EnergySolutions oversight likely to be filed Article Last Updated: 08/06/2006 01:02:14 AM MDT Radioactive waste: Former president says the city has let the landfill company sidestep the process By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune Charles Judd has been dogging state radiation officials all year about his concern that the Tooele County landfill he used to run has taken more hazardous and radioactive waste than the law allows. So, when the Radiation Control Board rebuffed his latest effort on Friday, Judd said he would put the question to a greater authority. “We'll probably appeal [the board's ruling] to court,” he said. “The way I interpret [state law], there's a violation.” The radiation panel agreed it's worth reviewing waste limits state law imposes on EnergySolutions, formerly known as Envirocare of Utah. Its members voted to have radiation division staff report on how much waste it has permitted at the EnergySolutions landfill in Clive, about 80 miles west of Salt Lake City, and how much waste the company has reported disposing so far. “We ought to know in light of the allegations what the statute permits,” board member Stephen T. Nelson said. Only minutes earlier, though, the panel had sided with EnergySolutions, which asked the board to throw out Judd's formal request for the board to review the same question. EnergySolutions' attorney, Craig Galli, told the board Judd and his company, Cedar Mountain Environmental, were not asking the questions at the right time or in the right forum. They could have pressed lawmakers or the radiation board any number of times in the past. “They sat on their rights,” he said. Judd, president of Envirocare from 1998 to 2002, points to provisions in the state's 1990 radiation control law that trigger a tough, multi-step approval process for an existing company that is growing by 50 percent or more. He has said state officials have repeatedly ignored those provisions when amending EnergySolutions' original license. The company has never been required to undertake the multi-step approval process, which requires the Legislature and the governor to sign off. Meanwhile, the state radiation director has approved 80 administrative amendments during the company's 17 years of operation. If Judd goes forward, he would file suit in the Utah Court of Appeals. The court recently sent up to the state Supreme Court the radiation board's latest ruling, permission for EnergySolutions to nearly double the size of its boundaries. The higher court asked the appeals court to relinquish a case in which the environment group, the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, said the board had wrongly allowed the expansion. The radiation board plans to review the waste-allowance issue at its October meeting. fahys@sltrib.com © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 53 Independent: Tim Webb: The Americans will clean up on British nukes As decommissioning deals go out to tender, don't expect a fair fight Published: 06 August 2006 Decommissioning is the ugly duckling of the nuclear industry. Why would anyone want to clear up the country's leaking, worn-out and grimy reactors when spanking new nukes with shiny knobs on will soon be built to replace them? Well, for starters, it costs more to tear down reactors and make them safe than to build them. At the last count, it will cost at least £70bn to decommission the country's state-owned reactors and reprocessing facilities at Sellafield in Cumbria - and that's not even allowing for those plants owned by British Energy, which is publicly quoted. This is not lost on the private sector. Companies that win the decommissioning contracts will also be in pole position to build any new reactors since they will probably be located adjacent to the existing sites. The only trouble is, US companies - and not those from the UK - look set to benefit most from this unglamorous but very lucrative work. And, as we write in these pages, the way things stand now, it won't be a fair fight. The bidding process for the first and largest contract kicks off later this month when an industry day is held for companies wanting to buy BNG. But the Amicus union is concerned that American giants such as Bechtel will grab the lion's share of the work. The union is right to be worried. Some UK executives whisper the same fears. The US companies are the best qualified to carry out the work. That's in large part because their government - the supposed champion of free trade - has made it so difficult for foreign companies, including those from the UK, to carry out any nuclear decommissioning work in the States, as nuclear consultant John Large points out. Over the past 40 years, these American companies have been able to develop the necessary know-how largely without the fear of foreign competition. In contrast, the British government has gone out of its way to make the bidding process transparent and open to foreign companies. And so it should. This looming row isn't about "Johnny Foreigner taking all our jobs"; the best companies for the assignment, wherever they're from, should be selected. But because British groups have in effect been denied access to the largest civil nuclear market in the world - that of the US - it hardly makes for a level playing field. Publicly, UK companies are upbeat about their prospects: Serco has teamed up with Bechtel and Amec has joined forces with the UK Atomic Energy Authority and US firm CH2M Hill to bid for the contracts. The Yanks think having a UK company on board makes them look good and gives them better access to the Government. But unless the bidding terms are clear, the UK companies could find themselves on the sidelines once the contract is in the bag. And as the global nuclear market grows, with India and China looking to atomic power to meet their surging energy needs, UK companies face being left behind by their US "partners". Don't do a Tony, Charles So farewell then, Charles Allen. It's now a question of when - not if - the chief executive of ITV steps down. There is some suggestion that he will hang on at least until January, when he turns 50 and his generous pension scheme gears up. One sharp-tongued analyst warned him not to "do a Tony Blair" and announce that he is stepping down, but not yet. We all know what a mess the Prime Minister has got himself into as a result. Mr Allen should take note and go once a suitable successor can be found - and not a day later. t.webb@ independent.co.uk © 2006 Independent News and Media Limited ***************************************************************** 54 Japan Times: Big subsidies eyed for towns interested in nuclear dump Sunday, Aug. 6, 2006 The energy agency is planning a sharp increase in subsidies for local governments willing to host a storage site for highly radioactive nuclear waste, government sources said Saturday. The measure, planned to kick in next April 1, comes after attempts to select a permanent storage site faltered when municipalities neighboring the targeted towns lodged opposition out of concern over long-term safety. The measure would entitle a local government to a maximum subsidy of more than 1 billion yen per year, up from the current 210 million yen, if it accepts document research that involves only screening of academic papers or archived documents to see if a site is fit for waste storage. It would translate into several billion yen over the multiple years such research typically takes, the sources at the Natural Resources and Energy Agency said. "If the subsidy is expanded at the stage of the survey of documents, it will give added impetus" to site selection, said an official of the Nuclear Management Organization of Japan, which is tasked with disposing of high-level radioactive waste. The organization has been looking for a host city since late 2002. A critic questioned the administrative plan. "If implemented, a huge sum of money will be handed out (to local governments) without them doing anything," said Baku Nishio, a joint chief of the Citizens' Nuclear Information Center. "It just shows the difficulties the central government is facing" in finding a host. A number of local governments have shown strong interest in hosting a disposal site, but none has officially applied because they have incurred opposition from neighboring municipalities and prefectural governments. The central government would like to get a disposal site up and running within 10 years of 2028. The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 55 Portsmouth Herald: Amendment doesn't change 'spent fuel pool' August 06, 2006 Amendment doesn't change 'spent fuel pool' opinion@seacoastonline.com The issue of nuclear waste has again reared its ugly head. This time it is in connection with an amendment to the federal energy appropriations bill proposed by Sen. Pete Domenici, R-New Mexico. The amendment calls for "interim" highly radioactive nuclear spent fuel waste dumps to be established in every state that is home to a commercial nuclear reactor -- and that includes New Hampshire. Many see Domenici's amendment as an attempt to take the pressure off the construction of a centralized federal waste repository slated for Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Political power struggles and technical problems have stalled completion of the Yucca Mountain facility. It was scheduled to be up and running by 1998. Now, the date is 2017 and, from all indications, that is a very optimistic projection. Recently, Gov. John Lynch and the state's 2nd District U.S. Rep. Charles Bass wrote to Domenici complaining about the amendment forcing the establishment of highly radioactive nuclear waste dumps in New Hampshire. First District Congressman Jeb Bradley says he also opposes the idea. We must, however, inform the governor and congressmen that there is already a high-level waste dump in the state, and the indication is it will continue to fill with spent nuclear fuel for some time to come. It is called the "spent fuel pool," and it is on the grounds of the Seabrook Station nuclear power plant, right here on the Seacoast. In fact, even if by some fluke of good fortune Yucca Mountain does open in 2017, the waste generated by Seabrook Station will not be removed from the plant site until much later, because Seabrook was the last U.S. nuclear plant built and older plants will, justifiably, have their spent fuel stockpile removed first. Given that fact, we believe the safety of the people of the Seacoast, as well as those who live in the neighborhood of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in the Connecticut Valley, can be better served with more direct intervention by the governor and congressmen. The governor should get his Office of Emergency Management more involved in the radiological and safety monitoring of Seabrook Station, for example. Massachusetts funds a watchdog organization called the C-10 Foundation, which monitors Seabrook Station using state-of-the-art, real-time equipment. New Hampshire has several dosimeter-type devices randomly spread around the plant on utility polls that are monitored, at best, monthly. Also, the governor and our congressmen, while continuing to work on getting Yucca Mountain open, can push FEMA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to update the evacuation plans for this area. Population and congestion has grown substantially since the current plan was approved by these two agencies in 1998. It is time to update it. The dire predictions of nuclear plant explosions and "China Syndrome" meltdowns have, thankfully, not come true. But the threat posed by an ever-increasing stockpile of radioactive spent fuel continues to grow daily. ­-- Herald Sunday ***************************************************************** 56 AU ABC: Environment Centre criticises call for nuclear waste dump. 06/08/2006. ABC News Online The Northern Territory Environment Centre (NTEC) has dismissed calls by a leading environmental scientist for Australia to consider building nuclear waste dumps. Dr Tim Flannery told weekend newspapers that Australia should store the nuclear waste produced by its uranium exports. He has also called for nuclear power to be embraced in Australia. But NTEC spokesman Peter Robertson says despite Dr Flannery's environmental credentials, his comments are startling. "If Australia opens the floodgates to radioactive waste from overseas - and there's about 300,000 tonnes of the stuff piled up around America, Europe, Asia at the moment - and Australia simply could not look after such a massive quantity of high level waste and nor should we because its far too dangerous to the environment and to future generations," he said. He says Dr Flannery should do his homework. "But we obviously disagree very strongly with him about promoting nuclear as being some part of the solution to global warming and we would certainly urge him to go and have a further investigation about renewable energy and energy efficiency in particular, and the role that they could and should be playing in the world's energy mix." ***************************************************************** 57 [southnews] Hiroshima remembers atomic attack Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 04:28:58 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM Tens of thousands of people from around the world have gathered in Hiroshima to pray for peace and urge the world to abandon nuclear weapons on the 61st anniversary of the first atomic bombing. Hiroshima remembers atomic attack. (Reuters)Sunday, August 6, 2006. A ceremony commemorating the anniversary of atomic attack is held at the Peace Memorial Park each year Hiroshima remembers atomic attack Tens of thousands of people from around the world have gathered in Hiroshima to pray for peace and urge the world to abandon nuclear weapons on the 61st anniversary of the first atomic bombing. In an annual ritual to mourn the more than 220,000 people who ultimately died from the blast, a crowd including survivors, children and dignitaries gathered at the Peace Memorial Park, near ground zero where the bomb was dropped. "Radiation, heat, blast and their synergetic effects created a hell on Earth," Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba said. Lamenting a global trend towards nuclear proliferation, Mr Akiba called for a campaign to free the world of atomic weapons. "Sixty-one years later, the number of nations enamoured of evil and enslaved by nuclear weapons is increasing," Mr Akiba told the crowd. "The human family stands at a crossroads. Will all nations be enslaved? Or will all nations be liberated?" The Peace Bell tolled at 8:15am local time - the moment the Enola Gay B-29 warplane dropped the bomb on August 6, 1945, as the crowd stood and bowed their heads for a moment of silence. The United States dropped a second atomic bomb on the southern city of Nagasaki on August 9. Six days later, Japan surrendered. Pacifist constitution Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi vowed to abide by Japan's pacifist constitution and non-nuclear policy. "Japan, the only country that has suffered atomic bombings in the human history, has the responsibility to keep telling the international community about its experience," Mr Koizumi said. "With the resolve not to let the tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki repeat itself anywhere, Japan has delivered on its pledge not to wage war in the past 61 years." Under Mr Koizumi, Japan has enacted legislation allowing its troops to play a greater security role abroad and sent soldiers to Iraq on a reconstruction and humanitarian mission - the military's largest and riskiest operation since 1945. Mr Koizumi's ruling party and the main opposition party are also seeking to revise the pacifist constitution, whose article 9 prohibits maintaining a military but which has been interpreted as allowing armed forces solely for self-defence. UN fears United Nations secretary-general Kofi Annan expressed fear that nuclear weapons could fall into the hands of "non-state actors". "More than six decades after the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the unspeakable horror of nuclear weapons remain etched in our collective consciousness," Mr Annan said in a message read on his behalf during the 45-minute ceremony. "The worrying possibility of dangerous nuclear material falling into the hands of non-state actors should energise efforts to strengthen the non-proliferation regime." This year's anniversary coincides with renewed concerns about nuclear programs by Iran and North Korea, which last month jolted the region by firing a salvo of missiles. It also comes amid debate, intensified by Mr Koizumi's visit to Yasukuni Shrine for war dead, over how Japan should view its responsibility for the war and the suffering it caused in Asia. Mr Koizumi defended his visits to the controversial Shinto shrine in central Tokyo. "I do not think it is wrong for a Japanese prime minister to visit Japan's facility and express condolences on the war dead," he told reporters in Hiroshima. The atomic bomb had killed some 140,000 people by the end of 1945, out of Hiroshima's estimated population of 350,000. Thousands more succumbed to illness and injuries later. The names of 5,350 people who died recently were added to the list of victims, bringing the total number recognised by the city to 247,787. A few thousand names are added each year. "Cities and citizens of the world have a duty to release the lost sheep from the spell and liberate the world from nuclear weapons," Mr Akiba said. - Reuters ***************************************************************** 58 [southnews] Scrap nuclear weapons, Aussies urge Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 04:28:57 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM A rally in Sydney today to mark the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima calls for peace in the Middle East and the end of nuclear weapons. The 500-strong crowd gathered to remember the horror of the dropping of an atomic bomb on the Japanese city, Hiroshima, in 1945. Waving anti-war flags and banners, the marchers made their way along Market, George, King and Elizabeth Streets before returning to Hyde Park. _________________________________________ Artwork unveiling marks Hiroshima bombing anniversary. ABC News Online: Sunday, August 6, 2006. 1:44pm (AEST) A unique art installation has been unveiled today in Melbourne's Federation Square to mark the 61st anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima in Japan. The artwork features 1,001 paper cranes, which fill a full wall of the Atrium at the Square. The cranes symbolise a public call for peace. Meantime, peace rallies are being held around the country to mark the anniversary of the bombing. Hillel Freedman from Nuclear Free Australia says Australians want to send a clear message to the Federal Government. "We're calling for an end to all Australian uranium mining and export, not just an end to the nuclear power debate," he said. "We've got to close down the nuclear industry in this country." ttp://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1707441.htm ___________________________________________________ Protesters rally for peace AAP August 6, 2006 Protesters rally for peace in the Middle East and the end of nuclear weapons as protesters gathered to mark the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima. Around 500 people heard speakers including Islamic spokesman Keysar Trad and nuclear waste campaigner Eve Vincent at the rally in Hyde Park. Mr Trad, spokesman for Islamic Friendship Association of Australia called for an end to violence in the Middle East. "We are one human race, we are saying what Israel is doing in Lebanon and Gaza is savage ... and has no place in any civilised society," he told the gathering. Waving a Lebanese flag, a tearful Alya Issaoui from Hurstville, said all her friends had come along to show their support. "We are Australians but Lebanon is like our mother country and we want to show we care," the 17-year-old said. Former Australian diplomat, Professor Richard Broinowski, used the anniversary of Hiroshima to call for nuclear weapons to be condemned by all countries, especially Australia. "We in Australia should take the opportunity of having almost half the uranium reserves in the world to insist on a new substitute for the degraded nuclear non-proliferation treaty," he said. The crowd gathered to remember the horror of the dropping of an atomic bomb on the Japanese city, Hiroshima, in 1945. The noisy crowd made its way back to Hyde Park shouting "down, down Israel". Superintendent Paul Carey warned that the march could disrupt traffic in Sydney's CBD. "We're appealing to participants in the march to obey directions from police to ensure there is no disruption to the city," he said in a statement. Supt Carey said New South Wales Police would work with organisers to ensure the protest remains peaceful. "Anti-social or criminal behaviour will not be tolerated, and there will be a speedy response by police against anyone who disobeys the law, or places the welfare of others in danger," he said. Dennis Doherty, of the Hiroshima Day Committee, said nuclear weapons were becoming more sophisticated. "In the 61 years since the dropping of the bomb there has not been a substantial move by nuclear weapons states to drop their reliance on nuclear weapons," he said before the march. "Nuclear weapons have proliferated and there are no moves to diminish these weapons." Similar events are planned for capital cities across the country. ***************************************************************** 59 [NYTr] Hiroshima Anniversary: Scrap Nuke Weapons, Urge Aussies Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 12:53:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Sve Muller (southnews) ABC News Online - August 6, 2006. 1:44pm (AEST) http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1707441.htm Artwork unveiling marks Hiroshima bombing anniversary. A unique art installation has been unveiled today in Melbourne's Federation Square to mark the 61st anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima in Japan. The artwork features 1,001 paper cranes, which fill a full wall of the Atrium at the Square. The cranes symbolise a public call for peace. Meantime, peace rallies are being held around the country to mark the anniversary of the bombing. Hillel Freedman from Nuclear Free Australia says Australians want to send a clear message to the Federal Government. "We're calling for an end to all Australian uranium mining and export, not just an end to the nuclear power debate," he said. "We've got to close down the nuclear industry in this country." *** AAP August 6, 2006 Protesters rally for peace Protesters rally for peace in the Middle East and the end of nuclear weapons as protesters gathered to mark the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima. Around 500 people heard speakers including Islamic spokesman Keysar Trad and nuclear waste campaigner Eve Vincent at the rally in Hyde Park. Mr Trad, spokesman for Islamic Friendship Association of Australia called for an end to violence in the Middle East. "We are one human race, we are saying what Israel is doing in Lebanon and Gaza is savage ... and has no place in any civilised society," he told the gathering. Waving a Lebanese flag, a tearful Alya Issaoui from Hurstville, said all her friends had come along to show their support. "We are Australians but Lebanon is like our mother country and we want to show we care," the 17-year-old said. Former Australian diplomat, Professor Richard Broinowski, used the anniversary of Hiroshima to call for nuclear weapons to be condemned by all countries, especially Australia. "We in Australia should take the opportunity of having almost half the uranium reserves in the world to insist on a new substitute for the degraded nuclear non-proliferation treaty," he said. The crowd gathered to remember the horror of the dropping of an atomic bomb on the Japanese city, Hiroshima, in 1945. The noisy crowd made its way back to Hyde Park shouting "down, down Israel". Superintendent Paul Carey warned that the march could disrupt traffic in Sydney's CBD. "We're appealing to participants in the march to obey directions from police to ensure there is no disruption to the city," he said in a statement. Supt Carey said New South Wales Police would work with organisers to ensure the protest remains peaceful. "Anti-social or criminal behaviour will not be tolerated, and there will be a speedy response by police against anyone who disobeys the law, or places the welfare of others in danger," he said. Dennis Doherty, of the Hiroshima Day Committee, said nuclear weapons were becoming more sophisticated. "In the 61 years since the dropping of the bomb there has not been a substantial move by nuclear weapons states to drop their reliance on nuclear weapons," he said before the march. "Nuclear weapons have proliferated and there are no moves to diminish these weapons." Similar events are planned for capital cities across the country. * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 60 [NYTr] Hiroshima: Japan Marks Anniversary of First Atomic Bombing Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 16:17:58 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu X-Spam-Class: HAM Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Radio Havana Cuba http://www.radiohc.cu Japan Commemorates Another Anniversary of First Atomic Bombing Hiroshima, August 5 (RHC)-- Japan is commemorating another anniversary of the first atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. On August 6, 1945 -- 61 years ago -- the United States attacked the city of nearly 250,000 people. The atomic weapon, dropped from a U.S. Air Force B-29 bomber which was altered to hold the bomb, killed an estimated 200,000 -- almost every living being -- and heavily damaged 80 percent of the city. In the following months, an estimated 60,000 more people died from injuries or radiation poisoning. After the nuclear attack, Hiroshima was rebuilt as a "peace memorial city" -- and the closest surviving building to the location of the bomb's detonation was designated the "Atomic Bomb Dome," a part of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. Anti-war activists and Japanese citizens gather each year on the anniversary of the atomic bombing to call for the abolition of nuclear weapons and world peace. Every year on August 6th, the mayor of Hiroshima gives a speech called "The Peace Declaration" to commemorate the atomic bombing of the city. It has often been used as an occasion to criticize U.S. foreign policy, which observers say has not really changed much since the first use of nuclear weapons against a civilian population back in 1945. Tens of thousands of people marked the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombing last year. Three days later, on August 9th, U.S. President Harry S. Truman authorized the use of another atomic weapon -- on Nagasaki, Japan -- killing another 74,000 people within seconds. * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 61 Contra Costa Times: Hiroshima survivor to speak at rally | 08/05/2006 | EAST BAY ROUNDUP Livermore HIROSHIMA MEMORIAL: A survivor of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Japan, will speak at a Sunday rally to mark the 61st anniversary of the event. During the week after the bombing, Keiji Tsuchiya served as a rescue worker aiding other victims. Today, the 78-year-old is vice president of the Okayama A-bomb Sufferers Association. He is traveling from Japan to participate in the Livermore rally in protest of nuclear weapons. Demonstrators plan to gather at 8 a.m. at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, on the corner of Vasco Road and Patterson Pass, for speeches and ceremonies. They will march to the laboratory gate at 9 a.m. for a nondenominational ceremony. Other speakers will include activist Daniel Ellsberg, author and media critic Norman Soloman and Marylia Kelley, director of Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment. Another rally is planned for Wednesday, the anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombing of Nagasaki, Japan. Participants will meet at 9 a.m. in front of the Bechtel Corp. headquarters, 50 Beale St. in San Francisco. Bechtel recently joined the University of California in a successful bid for the management of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and is a partner in the management of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. The rallies are linked to events at nuclear weapons sites across the country. Information about the effort is available at the Web site http://august6.org. -- Betsy Mason ***************************************************************** 62 Daily Yomiuri: Peace declaration skirts new nuclear threat Editorial : DAILY The Yomiuri Shimbun Why could the tragic atomic bombings of Japan in 1945 not have been avoided? Today marks the 61st anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, and Wednesday will mark the same for Nagasaki. Is it not time to begin calmly discussing responsibility for the atomic bombings without being swayed by the ideological or political confrontation between conservative and progressive forces? The rules of engagement agreed on by warring parties in World War II prohibited the use of weapons that inflict unnecessary suffering and attacks on defenseless cities. Some observers suggest the atomic bombings could violate this agreement. Just 10 years have passed since the International Court of Justice in The Hague issued an advisory opinion that, in general, the use of nuclear weapons violates international law. Even in the cities obliterated by the atomic bombs in 1945, movements have sprouted that question why the bombs were dropped and where responsibility for their development and the decision to drop them rests. In July, a mock international trial organized in Hiroshima by citizens, mainly atomic bomb victims and lawyers, found 15 Americans treated as defendants, including former U.S. President Harry Truman, who made the final decision to use the atomic bombs, guilty of committing crimes against humanity through their roles in the process that eventually led to the bombs being dropped. === Differing perceptions In the United States, the commonly accepted view is that the atomic bombings helped hasten the end of the war, thereby reducing the number of war casualties that could have been expected had the fighting dragged on. Although a wide perception gap over the atomic bombings remains between Japan and the United States, discussing the matter is imperative. The mock trial likely was held in a mood of anti-U.S. sentiment typical of many conventional antinuclear movements. Calm, rational discussion was at a premium in the trial. Some observers suggest the atomic bombings could have been avoided if the war had ended earlier. Chances for the guns to fall silent sooner they did presented themselves many times, such as the time of Germany's surrender, the end of fighting on Okinawa, and the announcement of the Potsdam Declaration in which the Allied Powers presented Japan with conditions for its surrender. Discussion on responsibility for the destruction wrought by the atomic bombs also must home in on the actions of Japan's leaders and why they dilly-dallied when it come to ending the war. === A missed chance Days commemorating the atomic bombings will come about one month after North Korea test-fired seven missiles, which could be used to carry nuclear warheads, in defiance of warnings from the international community. Hiroshima and Nagasaki officials have a prime opportunity to issue a message conveying the atomic bomb victims' anger over Pyongyang's brazen act. However, Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba will not touch upon such a message in the Peace Declaration he will make Sunday. Instead, the pillar of his declaration will be an action program that urges 1,403 cities in the world belonging to the "Mayors for Peace," an organization headed by Akiba, to press nuclear powers to confirm whether their cities are targets of the weapons and, if they are, to exclude them from the target list. But would any nation realistically disclose top military secrets, such as which cities are in its nuclear sights? If Akiba's declaration throws up only starry-eyed slogans far removed from the current international situation, he will be turning a blind eye to the gravest nuclear attack threat facing Japan. (From The Yomiuri Shimbun, Aug. 6, 2006) (Aug. 6, 2006) ***************************************************************** 63 AFP: Hiroshima marks atom bomb anniversary by Kazuhiro Nogi Sun Aug 6, 3:10 AM ET HIROSHIMA, Japan (AFP) - The Japanese city of Hiroshima has marked the 61st anniversary of the world's first atomic attack with renewed calls for a nuclear-free world. Some 45,000 people recited silent prayers at 8:15 am (2315 GMT Saturday), the exact moment in 1945 when a single US bomb instantly killed more than 140,000 people and fatally injured tens of thousands of others with radiation or horrific burns. Government officials and foreign guests from 35 countries laid wreaths before a memorial to the dead against the backdrop of the famous A-bomb dome, a former exhibition hall burned to a skeleton by the bomb's heat. The peal of a bell echoed at the memorial park, where survivors mostly in their 70s or 80s also gathered, escorted by their children or grandchildren under a scorching sun to say prayers for the dead. "Sixty-one years later, the number of nations enamored of evil and enslaved by nuclear weapons is increasing," Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba said in a speech. Akiba said his city and atomic bomb survivors have long sought the abolition of nuclear weapons. "Yet the world's political leaders continue to ignore these voices," he said. "I call on the Japanese government to ... forcefully insist that the nuclear-weapon states negotiate in good faith for nuclear disarmament," Akiba said. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said: "We promise to continue leading the international society to the goal of abolishing nuclear weapons and achieving permanent peace." The Hiroshima bombing was followed by the dropping of a second atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki on August 9, leaving another 70,000 more dead. Japan surrendered on August 15, ending World War II. The anniversary of the attacks comes amid growing tension in the region with North Korea" /> North Koreaposing a missile threat and sticking to its nuclear ambitions. News reports said last week that Pyongyang had been building new underground missile bases along its east coast, targeting Japan and US military facilities in Japan. The communist nation set off new alarm bells in the region with its July 5 test-firing of seven ballistic missiles that splashed in the Sea of Japan (East Sea). In 1998, it test-launched a missile over Japan. In his speech, Akiba also called for additional measures to support aging survivors of the atomic bomb. "I further request more generous, people-oriented assistance appropriate to the actual situation of the aging hibakusha," he said, using the Japanese word for victims of nuclear bombings. On Friday, survivors of the Hiroshima bombing won a victory with a court ruling that the Japanese government was too inflexible in determining who was eligible for benefits. The Hiroshima District Court said that 41 plaintiffs, aged from 62 to 94, deserved to be recognized as survivors, which would pave the way for them to receive Japan's generous benefits for their illnesses. The government had refused to recognize them as Hiroshima bombing survivors because they did not meet official criteria. In many cases, the plaintiffs were judged not to have been close enough to ground zero of the blast. About 180 people are fighting 16 similar lawsuits across Japan seeking state recognition and compensation, news reports said. Some 260,000 survivors of the two atomic bombs were alive as of March 31, with their average age 73.9, according to Hiroshima city. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 64 ajc.com: Energy secretary talks up nuclear [The Atlanta Journal-Constitution] By MARGARET NEWKIRK The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Published on: 08/05/06 After a week that included speeches on bioenergy in Illinois and windmills in Iowa, U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman came to Georgia Power headquarters Friday to talk up nuclear power and the Atlanta-based company's efforts to build more of it. The talk was part of a brisk tour commemorating the first anniversary of the federal Energy Policy Act, which included big incentives for utilities if they build new nuclear plants. Gene Blythe/AP(ENLARGE) Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman (left) and David Ratcliffe, Southern Co.'s chairman and chief executive, chat at Georgia Power headquarters. Bodman also announced a milestone for what he called one of the most important of those incentives. The Energy Department finalized rules Friday morning that could deliver huge benefits to the first six plants to begin construction, Bodman told a roomful of Georgia Power and Southern Co. officials and employees. The rules allow the utilities that build the first six plants to buy federal insurance of up to $500 million each for the first two plants and $250 million for the next four. The insurance would compensate the companies for regulatory and legal delays they encounter as they go through the permitting system, which has been streamlined in recent years. The insurance is intended to calm boardroom and Wall Street willies about nuclear power. Nuclear construction has been at a standstill for three decades after the Three Mile Island disaster near Middletown, Pa., and a spate of huge cost overruns. Bodman described the insurance program as the "most important thing the government could have done to encourage nuclear, other than getting Yucca Mountain [nuclear waste storage] up and running." "This program is critical to reinvigorating the American nuclear industry," he said. Southern Co. is one of more than a dozen utilities moving forward to build new nuclear plants although the utilities routinely say they haven't actually decided to build those plants. Southern plans to file an early site permit with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission this month for two new units at its Vogtle nuclear plant in eastern Georgia, near the South Carolina border. Southern is slightly behind a few other utilities like Virginia's Dominion and Illinois' Exelon in getting its early site permit filed. It plans to file its construction and operations license application late next year, which would put it neck-and-neck with the other contenders. The insurance program will be available to the first companies that actually begin building new reactors. The rules approved Friday defined what qualifies as starting construction, according to Richard Myers, policy director for the Nuclear Energy Institute in Washington. It means pouring the huge concrete slabs that will be the reactor's base. In theory, and if it pours the first slabs, Southern could get $500 million in insurance for each of the two units proposed in Georgia. Myers said the insurance program finalized Friday was "terribly, terribly important" to any nuclear comeback in the United States. "This is all about managing risks and reducing risks at the various stages of the process," he said. The insurance provides corporate board members with "some confidence that in moving fast and first, that there will be a safety net. The nightmare scenario is that you have a plant completely ready to go, and there's some regulatory breakdown, or some unforeseen litigation and you're prevented from going forward," he said. "It happened with a number of them the first time. We had companies go into Chapter 11 because of it. We've learned a lot since then, but people have a long memory." The insurance alarms critics of the nuclear power resurgence, who say it could dissuade the NRC or other regulators from examining permit applications with enough diligence. "I can see that there's a logical argument that the first players are going to experience more uncertainty," said Sara Barczak, safe energy director for the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. "But we have a big problem with this, and we're not the only ones. "If someone raises a safety issue, and it delays things, why should taxpayers have to pay for that? It puts pressure on regulators, on opponents or on people who aren't even anti-nuclear but are concerned about something like water management. "Now they'll find themselves in a position of costing taxpayers money if they speak up." Sponsored Links [ border=] MOST POPULAR STORIES © 2006 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ***************************************************************** 65 Knox News: 8 arrested at Y-12 protest By FRANK MUNGER, MUNGER@KNEWS.COM August 5, 2006 OAK RIDGE — Eight peace activists were arrested Saturday after they refused to leave the entrance to the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant. They were demonstrating in remembrance of the civilians killed in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II and protesting the continued production of nuclear bombs. Y-12 enriched the uranium used in the A-bomb dropped on Hiroshima, and the Oak Ridge plant now manufactures replacement parts for the U.S. arsenal of nuclear weapons. About 300 people participated in a Saturday rally at Oak Ridge’s Bissell Park and a march to Y-12, where protesters chanted, pinned paper peace cranes to the barricades and fences, and sang songs while the eight sat down on the hot asphalt as an act of civil disobedience. "Y-12 needs to be closed, its buildings and land decontaminated and used for human causes," Erik Johnson, 62, one of those arrested, said in a written statement. "Today I witness to my trust not in death-making bombs but in the God of life," Johnson, a Presbyterian minister from Maryville, said. "I am outraged at the evil and indifference of those who reap fabulous, obscene profits from the planning, designing, manufacturing, maintenance of these weapons of mass destruction." Others arrested on misdemeanor charges for obstructing a roadway were: Tom Shelton, 58, Knoxville; Pam Beziat, 60, Nashville; Bill Nickle, 66, Washburn; Tom Mahedy, 43, Wall, N.J.; Gerald Chojnacki, 67, Shelby Township, Mich.; Dorothy Ritter, 51, Fraser, Mich.; and Tom Lumpkin, Detroit. Today is the 61st anniversary of the A-bomb dropped on Hiroshima, and a ceremony will be held at dawn with the reading of names of those who died from the nuclear blast. Additional events are being planned for Aug. 9, the anniversary of the bomb dropped on Nagasaki, Japan. A handful of counter-protesters were on hand Saturday at Y-12. Stacy Griffin of the Citizen Soldiers for the Atomic Bomb, based in Rhea County, was one of the organizers. "Our event coincides with the communist, tax-exempt, leftover hippies of the ’60s who have protested and long mocked the sacrifices of our veterans and good laws," Griffin said in a statement. Capt. Alan Massengill of the Oak Ridge Police Department said there were no major surprises or problems during Saturday’s protest events. He said those arrested likely would be issued citations and then released unless they had prior convictions. Johnson has been arrested multiple times at protests in Oak Ridge and other sites. Some people traveled hundreds of miles to participate in this weekend’s Hiroshima-linked events in Oak Ridge, and they arrived in different ways. There was a peace walk from Atlanta featuring Buddhist monks, bicyclists from Asheville, N.C., and runners from Portsmouth, Ohio. The runners were part of Footprints for Peace, a Cincinnati-based group whose motto is, "Every step a prayer, every mile a ceremony." About 18 runners participated in the 348-mile relay from Portsmouth to Oak Ridge. Senior Writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. © 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel ***************************************************************** 66 KnoxNews: Eight arrested during protest at Y-12 plant By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com August 6, 2006 OAK RIDGE - Eight peace activists were arrested Saturday after they refused to leave the entrance to the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant. They were demonstrating in remembrance of the civilians killed in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II and protesting the continued production of nuclear bombs. Y-12 enriched the uranium used in the A-bomb dropped on Hiroshima, and the Oak Ridge plant now manufactures replacement parts for the U.S. arsenal of nuclear weapons. About 275 people participated in a Saturday rally at Oak Ridge's Bissell Park and a march to Y-12, where protesters chanted, pinned paper peace cranes to the barricades and fences, and sang songs while the eight sat down on the hot asphalt as an act of civil disobedience. "Y-12 needs to be closed, its buildings and land decontaminated and used for human causes," Erik Johnson, 62, one of those arrested, said in a written statement. "Today I witness to my trust not in death-making bombs but in the God of life," Johnson, a Presbyterian minister from Maryville, said. "I am outraged at the evil and indifference of those who reap fabulous, obscene profits from the planning, designing, manufacturing, maintenance of these weapons of mass destruction." Others arrested on misdemeanor charges for obstructing a roadway were: Tom Shelton, 58, of Knoxville; Pam Beziat, 60, of Nashville; Bill Nickle, 66, of Washburn; Tom Mahedy, 43, of Wall, N.J.; Gerald Chojnacki, 67, of Shelby Township, Mich.; Dorothy Ritter, 51, of Fraser, Mich.; and Tom Lumpkin, of Detroit. Today is the 61st anniversary of the A-bomb dropped on Hiroshima, and a ceremony will be held at dawn with the reading of names of those who died from the nuclear blast. Additional events are being planned for Wednesday, the anniversary of the bomb dropped on Nagasaki, Japan. A handful of counter-protesters were on hand Saturday at Y-12. Stacy Griffin of the Citizen Soldiers for the Atomic Bomb, based in Rhea County, was one of the organizers. "Our event coincides with the communist, tax-exempt, leftover hippies of the '60s who have protested and long mocked the sacrifices of our veterans and good laws," Griffin said in a statement. Capt. Alan Massengill of the Oak Ridge Police Department said there were no major surprises or problems during Saturday's protest events. He said those arrested likely would be issued citations and then released unless they had prior convictions. Johnson has been arrested multiple times at protests in Oak Ridge and other sites. Some people traveled hundreds of miles to participate in this weekend's Hiroshima-linked events in Oak Ridge, and they arrived in different ways. There was a peace walk from Atlanta featuring Buddhist monks, bicyclists from Asheville, N.C., and runners from Portsmouth, Ohio. The runners were part of Footprints for Peace, a Cincinnati-based group whose motto is, "Every step a prayer, every mile a ceremony." About 18 runners participated in the 348-mile relay from Portsmouth to Oak Ridge. Senior Writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. Copyright 2006, Knoxville News Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 67 Guardian Unlimited: 8 Arrested in Tenn. Protest of A-Bomb From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday August 6, 2006 4:01 AM OAK RIDGE, Tenn. - Eight protesters were arrested Saturday, a day before the 61st anniversary of the world's first atomic bomb attack, after refusing to leave the entrance of a nuclear weapons plant. Much of the work that went into producing the bomb was conducted at the Y-12 plant in the once-secret city for the World War II-era Manhattan Project. The U.S. dropped the bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, on Aug. 6, 1945. About 300 people participated in the rally and march, in which activists chanted, pinned paper peace cranes to the barricades and fences, and sang while the eight who were arrested sat on the hot asphalt as an act of civil disobedience. ``Today I witness to my trust not in death-making bombs but in the God of life,'' Erik Johnson, a Presbyterian minister from Maryville, told The Knoxville News Sentinel. ``I am outraged at the evil and indifference of those who reap fabulous, obscene profits from the planning, designing, manufacturing, maintenance of these weapons of mass destruction.'' The 62-year-old Johnson, one of the eight arrested, said he wanted to see Y-12 closed, decontaminated and used for other causes. Another peace ceremony was planned for dawn with the reading of names of those who died in the atomic blast. Additional events are planned for Aug. 9, the anniversary of the bombing of Nagasaki, Japan. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 68 Amarillo Globe-news: Nuke 'Death Train' rolls into history Chron.com: Aug. 5, 2006, 7:45PM By JIM MCBRIDE AMARILLO - Once they served as Cold War sentinels, protecting heavily armed crews who crisscrossed the country with nuclear warheads in tow. But several Pantex railcars recently made their final trek into history as a Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad crew hauled them to a new home at the Amarillo Railroad Museum. The train, operated by the Energy Department's Office of Secure Transportation, shipped nuclear warheads assembled at Pantex to military weapons depots across the country. From 1951 to 1987, the government shipped Navy nuclear weapons by rail to protect the deadly cargo inside and because it was easier than trucking them. Originally, the cars were painted white to protect weapons against the sun's heat. Later, the DOE painted the train in different color schemes to thwart possible attacks and unwanted protests. Eventually, the government began using armored tractor-trailer rigs, or safe-secure transports, to ship weapons and weapons components from weapons plants to U.S. military bases. The train, dubbed the "White Train" or the "Death Train" by some, drew the notice of peace activists who monitored its progress. In the mid-'80s, Oregon protesters once briefly blocked the train with their bodies as it headed to a Trident nuclear submarine base in Bangor, Wash. Bob Roth, president of the Amarillo Railroad Museum, said Pantex planned to rip up some railroad tracks, and museum officials inquired about several cars that stood idle on the southwest corner of the 16,000-acre plant site. Museum officials then hammered out a partnership with the Pantex Site Office, BWXT Pantex and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, which moved the train from Pantex and opened up a closed rail spur to the museum's tracks. "For the life of the train, for the most part, the cars all were in a white color scheme. Our goal is to restore them back to the original white color scheme like they used to be several years ago," Roth said. The museum, on U.S. 60, plans to exhibit the cars next to another piece of historical Panhandle railroad history, a specialized railcar that once hauled helium across the country. Roth said the museum's goal is to preserve railroad cars that have a historic Panhandle link. "Some of this equipment is, in a way, unique to the Texas Panhandle," Roth said. "The DOE train fits right into that scheme because it is unique to the Panhandle, having come out of Pantex." The museum's train, Roth said, has the last remaining safe-secure railcar, a red, heavily armored car that transported warheads. Several other cars are called power-buffer cars because they contained generators and provided a buffer between escort crews and warheads. "People could not ride in a car immediately adjacent to explosives," Roth said. Escort coaches carried the specially trained crews that kept a close eye on the train as it wound along U.S. railways. A look inside one of the escort coaches provided a glimpse into the daily lives of couriers who accompanied shipments. One of the coaches had bunks to sleep eight, a full kitchen, bulletproof windows and protected gun turrets to fire on would-be attackers. A series of open cabinets still housed gas masks couriers could don in case of a poisonous gas attack. zz The cars played a major role in Pantex's history, said Pantex Site Office Manager Dan Glenn. "The work done at Pantex was a significant part of the Cold War," he said. "This donation will provide the public with the opportunity to visit a piece of our nation's recent history." Dan Swaim, BWXT Pantex president and general manager, said students and residents will get a chance to see a little-known aspect of the Cold War. "The partnership between Pantex, BNSF and the Amarillo Railroad Museum makes it possible for the community to learn about the part Pantex played in the Cold War." The museum plans to exhibit the cars as they looked when they transported weapons to the military. Museum officials have not set a schedule for opening the exhibit to the public. [chron.com] ***************************************************************** 69 Houston Chronicle: Nuke 'Death Train' rolls into history Aug. 5, 2006, 7:45PM Museum in Amarillo planning to display railcars that transported nuclear warheads By JIM MCBRIDE Amarillo Globe-news AMARILLO - Once they served as Cold War sentinels, protecting heavily armed crews who crisscrossed the country with nuclear warheads in tow. But several Pantex railcars recently made their final trek into history as a Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad crew hauled them to a new home at the Amarillo Railroad Museum. The train, operated by the Energy Department's Office of Secure Transportation, shipped nuclear warheads assembled at Pantex to military weapons depots across the country. From 1951 to 1987, the government shipped Navy nuclear weapons by rail to protect the deadly cargo inside and because it was easier than trucking them. Originally, the cars were painted white to protect weapons against the sun's heat. Later, the DOE painted the train in different color schemes to thwart possible attacks and unwanted protests. Eventually, the government began using armored tractor-trailer rigs, or safe-secure transports, to ship weapons and weapons components from weapons plants to U.S. military bases. The train, dubbed the "White Train" or the "Death Train" by some, drew the notice of peace activists who monitored its progress. In the mid-'80s, Oregon protesters once briefly blocked the train with their bodies as it headed to a Trident nuclear submarine base in Bangor, Wash. Bob Roth, president of the Amarillo Railroad Museum, said Pantex planned to rip up some railroad tracks, and museum officials inquired about several cars that stood idle on the southwest corner of the 16,000-acre plant site. Museum officials then hammered out a partnership with the Pantex Site Office, BWXT Pantex and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, which moved the train from Pantex and opened up a closed rail spur to the museum's tracks. "For the life of the train, for the most part, the cars all were in a white color scheme. Our goal is to restore them back to the original white color scheme like they used to be several years ago," Roth said. The museum, on U.S. 60, plans to exhibit the cars next to another piece of historical Panhandle railroad history, a specialized railcar that once hauled helium across the country. Roth said the museum's goal is to preserve railroad cars that have a historic Panhandle link. "Some of this equipment is, in a way, unique to the Texas Panhandle," Roth said. "The DOE train fits right into that scheme because it is unique to the Panhandle, having come out of Pantex." The museum's train, Roth said, has the last remaining safe-secure railcar, a red, heavily armored car that transported warheads. Several other cars are called power-buffer cars because they contained generators and provided a buffer between escort crews and warheads. "People could not ride in a car immediately adjacent to explosives," Roth said. Escort coaches carried the specially trained crews that kept a close eye on the train as it wound along U.S. railways. A look inside one of the escort coaches provided a glimpse into the daily lives of couriers who accompanied shipments. One of the coaches had bunks to sleep eight, a full kitchen, bulletproof windows and protected gun turrets to fire on would-be attackers. A series of open cabinets still housed gas masks couriers could don in case of a poisonous gas attack. The cars played a major role in Pantex's history, said Pantex Site Office Manager Dan Glenn. "The work done at Pantex was a significant part of the Cold War," he said. "This donation will provide the public with the opportunity to visit a piece of our nation's recent history." Dan Swaim, BWXT Pantex president and general manager, said students and residents will get a chance to see a little-known aspect of the Cold War. "The partnership between Pantex, BNSF and the Amarillo Railroad Museum makes it possible for the community to learn about the part Pantex played in the Cold War." The museum plans to exhibit the cars as they looked when they transported weapons to the military. Museum officials have not set a schedule for opening the exhibit to the public. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************