*****************************************************************
11/05/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.262
*****************************************************************
   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 [NYTr] Iraq Incompetence: US pulls site said to reveal nuke info
2 US: Iraq WMD's "Made in America"
3 [NYTr] Scientists Protested Posting Iraq Nuke Data on Web
4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Says It's Open to Talks With U.S.
5 Gordon Prather: Who's Targeting Iran – and Why? - 
6 AFP: Iran test-fires more new weapons in war games 
7 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Proposes Limited Iran Sanctions
8 AFP: Thousands of Iranians warn US in embassy protest 
9 AFP: Russia asks Europe to revise its plan for Iran sanctions -
10 UPI: Iranian wages war games in Persian Gulf
11 UPI: Russia seeks gradual measures against Iran
12 Korea Herald: U.S. envoys to visit Asia on N. Korea   
13 Korea Herald: Chief of anti-nuclear body on visit   
14 Korea Herald: North blasts U.S. over 'war plans'   
15 Korea Herald: N.K. demands Japan stay out of nuclear talks   
16 Korea Herald: U.S. envoy discusses key regional issues   
17 Korea Herald: Working-level groups to be formed to tackle agenda
18 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [VIEWPOINT]There's no such thing as ¡®Western
19 AFP: Next UN chief meets Japan FM on NKorea nuclear crisis 
20 AFP: Next UN chief urges close ties to resolve North Korean crisis -
21 Korea Times: S. Korea, US Seek Joint Strategy 
22 Korea Times: [Times Forum] Regionalism in the Age of Asia 
23 Korea Times: Kim Jong-il¡¯s Strategy 
24 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Wants Japan Out of Nuke Talks 
25 AFP: US, SKorea, Japan to strategise for six-way talks 
26 Guardian Unlimited: Tourists Still Flock to Korean DMZ 
27 London Times: Pentagon targets Kim’s nuclear sites - 
28 Deseret News: Bennett says 'axis of evil' is weakened but still inta
29 US: washingtonpost.com: Microsoft's Gates Looks to Energy - 
30 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear Debate Splits Japanese Lawmakers 
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
31 At Least 6 Arab Countries Are Developing Nuclear Power Domestically 
32 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear debate on cards - 
33 Sydney Morning Herald: PM puts nuclear power on election agenda - 
34 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear power a 'cop-out': Beazley - 
35 US: Pantagraph.com: Speak out at hearing to oppose reactor
36 AU ABC: Nuclear power a pipedream: Qld Conservation Council
37 thewest.com.au: Debate to follow govt's nuclear policy
38 AFP: Australian government review gives nod to nuclear power
39 US: Oshkosh Northwestern: Nuclear industry sees future with greater 
40 AU ABC: Nuclear report reflects task force make-up - ALP. 
41 AU ABC: Ignoring nuclear power foolish, PM says. 
42 AU ABC: WA Govt says PM's support for nuclear energy 'bizarre'.
43 AU ABC: Nuclear push means plant for WA, says Beazley. 
44 UPI: Six Arab states want nuclear power
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
45 US: [NYTr] Nuclear Terror: Science and Lies
46 US: [NYTr] Scientists protested Web site nuclear data: report
47 US: Guardian Unlimited: Dems Seek Answers About Federal Web Site
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
48 US: Tri-City Herald: 3 workers treated for radiation exposure 
49 US: Spectrum: Nuclear bombshell to hit Utah
50 US: OpEd News: Stairway to Divine Strake
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
51 NLTB: DOE adds Yucca Mountain info session amid state complaints
52 US: The Age: Uranium export safeguards found wanting 
53 US: Caller.com: A hot uranium market revives interest in mines
54 Independent: Serco and Bechtel join forces to bid for Sellafield cle
55 US: DenverPost.com: Residents cheer clean Shattuck
56 US: Caller.com: As uranium mines closed, state altered cleanup goals
57 US: cbs4denver.com: Shattuck Site Cleared Of Radioactive Waste
58 LasVegasNOW.com: Yucca Mountain: 10,000 Year Warning
 
                           PEACE
 
59 Scotsman.com: Nuclear-free Scotland 'will hurt UK'
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
60 AP Wire: Nonradioactive spill at SRS temporarily shuts down highway
61 SF New Mexican: Lab: Classified files not 'most sensitive'   
62 Tri-City Herald: Board: Workers deserve equal benefits 
63 Star Beacon: Clean up complete for former RMI plant
64 UPI: Taken Los Alamos drives held secrets
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 [NYTr] Iraq Incompetence: US pulls site said to reveal nuke info
 
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 08:54:17 -0600 (CST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
MSNBC - Nov 3, 2006
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15540188/

U.S. pulls site said to reveal nuke info

Questions raised about whether Iraq documents gave too much information

NBC News and news services

WASHINGTON - The nation's top intelligence official took down a government
Web site with captured Saddam Hussein-era Iraqi documents, after questions
were raised whether it provided too much information about making atomic
bombs.

In a statement Thursday night, a spokesman for National Intelligence
Director John Negroponte said his office has suspended public access to the
Web site "pending a review to ensure its content is appropriate for public
viewing."

The action came after The New York Times raised questions about the
contents of the government site, called the "Operation Iraqi Freedom
Document Portal." The Times reported Thursday night on its Web site that
weapons experts say documents posted on the government site in recent weeks
provided dangerous detail about Iraq's covert nuclear research before the
1991 Persian Gulf war.

Two intelligence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told NBC
News that outside experts, including the director of the U.N.'s
International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, informed the Bush
administration that it might have inadvertently publicized how-to-manuals
for making nuclear bombs.

A diplomat affiliated with the IAEA said its inspectors were "shocked by
the explicitness of the content" on the Web site and that a senior agency
official conveyed the concerns to U.S. diplomats in Vienna, where the
agency is based.

But Matthew Boland, spokesman for the U.S. mission to the IAEA, said Friday
that "Ambassador (Gregory) Schulte did not receive any protest or
expression of concern from the IAEA on this issue."

16,000 documents

Officials acknowledge that sensitive documents - with information on
nuclear triggers and other technology - could have been on the public Web
site, which had some 16,000 documents in it.

One official working on the problem said that as few as a dozen documents
might be in the sensitive category.

Outside nuclear experts suggested to the New York Times that the documents
could have helped rogue states like Iran with their nuclear programs.

But the U.S. officials were doubtful, telling NBC News that Iran's nuclear
program was already highly sophisticated last spring and summer when it was
cited for violations by U.N. inspectors. The most sensitive captured Iraqi
documents were not posted until September. The sources said that makes it
very unlikely the documents contributed anything to Iran's nuclear program.

The Iraqi documents include information on Saddam's nuclear program - most
of which dates back to the first Gulf War. Two CIA weapons experts - first
David Kay and then Charles Duelfer - concluded in 2004 and 2005 that while
Saddam might have wanted to revive his nuclear program, it effectively
ended with the first Gulf War.

That said, a top official told NBC News that Iraq's program was relatively
sophisticated - and that the documents could have been helpful to
terrorists or others trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Lawmakers wanted release
Pressed by Republican members of Congress, Negroponte's office last March
ordered the unprecedented release of millions of pages of Iraqi documents,
most of them in Arabic, collected by the U.S. government over more than a
decade.

Intelligence officials had objected at the time - but were overruled by
President Bush.

According to the Times, conservative politicians and publications hoped
analysis of the some 48,000 boxes of documents seized in the Iraq invasion
would reinvigorate the search for proof that Saddam had weapons of mass
destruction.

Bush cited concerns about that as a major cause for the Iraq invasion. No
such weapons have been found.

Until this week, the information had been posted gradually on public
Internet servers run by the military. In announcing the postings,
Negroponte's office said the U.S. government had made no determination
regarding the authenticity of the documents, their factual accuracy or the
quality of any translations, when available.
NBC News' chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell as well as

[The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.]

) 2006 MSNBC.com
       
                                *
================================================================
.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 Iraq WMD's "Made in America"
 
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 14:36:47 -0600 (CST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: SPAM-LOW
X-Spam: [SPAM] - LOW

Made in America
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Approved: map@pencil.math.missouri.edu
Organization: ?

http://www.geocities.com/iraqinfo/gulfwar/arms/madeinamerica.html

Excerted from http://www.sfbg.com/News/32/21/Features/iraq.html

February 25, 1998
Made in America

It's no accident that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. U.S.
corporations helped supply them.

By Dennis Bernstein

IN JANUARY 1991 Iraqi president Saddam Hussein launched a barrage
of long-range Scud missiles against Israel and Saudi Arabia. Dozens
of people were wounded or killed -- including 28 U.S. soldiers who
were asleep in their bunks when the Scuds hit. According to
declassified secret nuclear, chemical, and biological logs kept by
the Pentagon, Israeli police "confirmed nerve gas" at the site where
the missile landed in downtown Tel Aviv.

While the incident was widely reported in the press, it was rarely
mentioned that the technology used to increase the range of the
missile that hit Israel, and to create the nerve gas that was
apparently carried inside, was supplied to Iraq by U.S. and western
corporations. Likewise, when U.S.-led allied forces bombed more
than 30 chemical and biological weapons facilities during the 1991
war with Iraq, much of the deadly toxins that were released into
the upper atmosphere, only to fall back down on the heads of U.S.
forces, were created with the generous support of U.S. firms and
America's leading politicians.

At one point, just a year before Iraq invaded Kuwait, Pentagon
officials invited key Iraqi military technicians to a special
conference in Portland, Ore., that amounted to a crash course in
how to detonate a nuclear bomb.

Even today, the chemical, biological, and possibly even nuclear
weapons U.S. troops could face in Gulf War II might as well be
stamped "Made in the USA."

As the United States threatens to bomb Iraq for the third time this
decade, the irony is brutal: Many of the same politicians, news
media outlets, and interest groups that are promoting Gulf War II
either supported or ignored the policies of the Reagan and Bush
administrations that gave Iraq its deadly arsenal.

In fact, the problem goes far beyond the Middle East: If Saddam
Hussein is capable of launching chemical, biological, or nuclear
attacks, it will be the result of a long-standing U.S. policy of
allowing defense contractors and other powerful corporations to
sell the technology of death to almost anyone in the world who is
willing to pay for it.

The Iraqi situation, former CIA military analyst Patrick Eddington
told the Bay Guardian, "goes to the heart of the concept of
nonproliferation and whether something like the international
Chemical Weapons Convention is going to have any credibility."

"It has no chance of working if the countries who are the primary
signatories, and for that matter the primary suppliers of dual-use
technology," Eddington said, referring to technology that can be
used for both civilian and military purposes, "are still cranking
this stuff out and supplying it. It's a two-faced policy -- and
that definitely includes the United States." Our friend Saddam

Documents obtained by the Bay Guardian -- many of which have been
available for years, released during Congressional investigations
-- shed disturbing light on the U.S. policy of arming Saddam Hussein,
a policy that may again result in the exposure of hundreds of
thousands of U.S. soldiers -- and millions of civilians -- to
dangerous chemical and biological weapons.

"If tomorrow the Iraqis fired a missile with biological warheads
on it," Gary Milholland of the Wisconsin Project for Nuclear Arms
Control told the Bay Guardian, "the missile itself would have been
purchased from Russia, upgraded with help from Germany, and the
bacteria would be based on a strain imported from the United States.

"What we're looking at is a program made in the west," said Milholland,
who testified as an expert witness before Congress in 1992 on the
arming of Iraq by the west. "The west supplied the materials, the
knowledge, and the people."

In fact, some critics say that Iraq's deadly arsenal is the best
argument against the Clinton administration's planned bombing
campaign.

"A bombing campaign against suspected chemical and biological storage
sites is literally a game of chemical and biological Russian
roulette," said Eddington, who resigned last year to protest the
agency's refusal to tell Gulf War vets the truth about their potential
exposure to chemical weapons.

"We are looking at potential fallout that can kill a large number
of people. You could be looking at anywhere from hundreds to tens
of thousands of deaths."

In the early 1980s the Reagan administration chose to support Iraq
over Iran in their bloody war. Neither country was exactly an ally,
but the White House considered Iran the worse of the two nations,
and cold war politics (along with a U.S. desire to maintain control
of oil supplies in the Middle East) put us on the side of Iraq.

In accordance with a long and continuing tradition and policy, that
meant the U.S. would arm Iraq to the teeth -- without much concern
for the long-term consequences.

According to a 1990 report, "The Poison Gas Connection," issued by
the L.A.-based Simon Wiesenthal Center (See sidebar), more than 207
companies from 21 western countries, including at least 18 from the
United States, contributed to the buildup of Saddam Hussein's
arsenal. Subsequent investigations turned up more than 100 more
companies participating in the Iraqi weapons buildup.

The frontline cheerleader for America's corporate contributors to
Saddam, the man who paved the way for Iraq to purchase millions of
dollars worth of weapons and dangerous dual-use technology from
U.S. corporations, was none other than the architect of Gulf War
I, former president George Bush.

In a stunning July 27, 1992, speech on the floor of the House of
Representatives, House Banking Committee chair Henry Gonzalez drove
the Bush connection home in no uncertain terms:

"The Bush administration deliberately, not inadvertently, helped
to arm Iraq by allowing U.S. technology to be shipped to Iraqi
military and to Iraqi defense factories," Gonzalez said. "Throughout
the course of the Bush administration, U.S. and foreign firms were
granted export licenses to ship U.S. technology directly to Iraqi
weapons facilities despite ample evidence showing that these factories
were producing weapons." (See sidebar)

Gonzalez, who was accused by administration officials of jeopardizing
national security for going public with his gritty revelations,
also stated: "The president misled Congress and the public about
the role U.S. firms played in arming Iraq."

Documents gathered by Gonzalez and other independent investigators
show that despite U.S. intelligence reports dating back to 1983
documenting Saddam's mass gassing of the Kurds and Iranians in the
ongoing Iran-Iraq war, Bush pressed for support of the Iraqis. In
a damning Oct. 21, 1989, cable from Secretary of State James Baker
to then Iraqi foreign minister Tariq Aziz, only a year after the
mass gassing of the Kurds, Baker assured the Iraqis that the United
States was very eager for a close working relationship with Saddam
Hussein. "As I said in our meeting," Baker wrote, "the U.S. seeks
a broadened and deepened relationship with Iraq on the basis of
mutual respect. That is the policy of our president."

According to Gonzalez, senior Bush aides successfully lobbied against
the concerns of other government officials to allow Iraq to purchase
the technology -- technology that could be adapted for both civilian
and military purposes. These high-level Bush officials, including
Baker, forced this policy through despite substantial available
evidence that the Iraqis were furiously working on developing nuclear
weapons and other devices of mass destruction.

The CIA reported at a top-secret intelligence briefing in November
1989 that Iraq "is interested in acquiring a nuclear explosive
capability" and to this end "is ordering substantial quantities of
dual-use equipment." Nevertheless, Bush and other top U.S. officials
continually pressured the Agriculture Department's Commodity Credit
Corporation (CCC) and the U.S. Export-Import Bank to give Iraq
credit for farm products and manufactured goods. From 1983 to 1990
the CCC provided Iraq with $5 billion in credits and loans to
purchase U.S. exports. Between 1984 and 1990 the Eximbank insured
$297 million of additional exports. As recently as seven months
before the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, Bush issued an order
allowing the bank to provide even more credit to Iraq.  Nuclear
know-how

State Department documents drafted after Bush became president in
1989 warned that Iraq would rise out of the ruins of its eight-year
war with Iran as a "great military and political power, and [Iraq]
is aiming higher." They also indicated that Iraq was planning to
use "a big-stick approach" to the border conflict with Kuwait.

According to Gonzalez's July 27, 1992, floor speech, as late as the
fall of 1989, only months before Iraq invaded Kuwait, George Bush
signed a top secret National Security Decision directive, known as
NSD 26, ordering closer ties with Saddam Hussein and Iraq: "Normal
relations between the United States and Iraq would serve our long-term
interests and support stability both in the Gulf and the Middle
East," stated the top secret directive. "The United States remains
committed to support the individual and collective self-defense of
friendly countries in the area."

The Bush directive also encouraged U.S. firms to participate in the
reconstruction of the Iraqi economy, "particularly in the energy
area, where they do not conflict with our nonproliferation and other
significant objectives."

And participate they did. According to House and Senate Banking
Committee investigations, in the five years preceding the Gulf War,
the U.S. Department of Commerce licensed more than $1.5 billion of
strategically sensitive American exports to Iraq. Many were directly
delivered to nuclear and chemical weapon plants as well as to Iraqi
missile sites. More than 700 licenses were issued to U.S. corporations
doing business in Iraq; many of these licenses were for the shipment
of this dual-use technology to Iraq.

In April 1990, U.S. intelligence reported to the Bush administration
that Hussein "has strengthened his ties to terrorist groups and may
use terrorism to intimidate his Arab and western opponents." But
Bush administration back-channel and international diplomatic and
financial support continued unabated.

The cooperation between U.S. suppliers and Iraqi weapons planners
continued up to the beginning of the war. U.S. technicians and
officials moved back and forth easily between the two countries.

In one of the more stunning incidents, in September 1989, just one
year before the Iraqi military stormed over the Kuwaiti border,
U.S. military officials invited several Iraqi technicians to attend
a "detonation conference" at the Red Lion Inn in Portland, Ore.

The conference -- the Ninth Symposium (International) on Detonation,
was a crash course from the world's experts on how to detonate a
nuclear weapon. Among the named sponsors of the conference were the
Office of Naval Research, the Air Force Armament Laboratory, the
Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, the
Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Naval Sea Systems
Command, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Office of Naval Technology
and Sandia National Laboratories, according to the conference
proceedings.

The three Iraqis attending, M. Ahadd, S. Ibrhim, and H. Mahd, were
all representing Al Qaqaa State Establishment in Iraq. Al Qaqaa,
according to an Oct. 27, 1992, report by the Senate Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, "was Iraq's major explosives
and rocket fuel factory." It was also a "filling station for ballistic
missiles" and home for Iraq's nuclear weapons program.

Joining the Iraqis in this quaint setting on the Columbia River,
learning all about nuclear bomb detonation, were 445 participants
from 20 countries, including Israelis and technicians from South
Korea.

The list of U.S. corporations that teamed up with Saddam reads like
a who's who of America's favorite defense contractors. According
to the Wiesenthal report and the Senate Banking Committee they
include Hewlett-Packard, Honeywell, and Sperry/Unisys among others.
Bush's secret weapons

In a letter dated July 9, 1992, twenty Democratic members of the
House Judiciary Committee petitioned the attorney general to appoint
a special prosecutor to investigate "serious allegations of possible
violations of federal criminal statutes by high-ranking officials
of the Executive Branch."

Among the potential criminal violations cited in the petition were
making false statements, obstruction of justice, concealment or
falsification of records, perjury, mail and wire fraud, conspiracy
to defraud the United States or to commit an offense against the
United States, and financial conflict of interest by high executive
branch officials.

The 1992 letter further cited the Bush administration's "willful
and repeated failure" to comply with requests by the House Judiciary
and other committees for both documents and witnesses.

According to the 27-month Gonzalez Investigation, the Bush
administration set up an "interagency" group after the Gulf War to
prevent Congress from finding out about U.S. aid to Iraq before the
Kuwait invasion.

Gonzalez's concerns centered on the handling by the Justice Department
of the investigation into Banka Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL) in
Atlanta. Most of Iraq's purchases of sensitive technology were
handled by BNL. According to Gonzalez, Iraq had set up a secret
network to buy equipment for missiles and for nuclear, chemical,
and germ weapons. More than $5 billion in soft loans were funneled
through the bank to the Iraqis in the five years leading up to the
war. According to Gonzalez's compelling investigation, almost half
of the $5 billion was funneled directly into Iraq's ambitious weapons
program.

The Bush administration's task was to limit the investigation to
one low-level bank official in Atlanta, resisting any attempt to
connect the Iraqi loans to high administration officials or to BNL's
mother bank in Italy and other shady institutions, such as the Bank
of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), the CIA's bank of
choice.

To this end, at least five federal agencies apparently misled, lied
to, and blatantly stonewalled prosecutors in charge of the BNL
investigation. According to a strongly worded October 1992 statement
by the then chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, David Boren,
in support of the appointment of a special prosecutor, the CIA "with
strong advice" from the Justice Department "authored a misleading
letter to the acting U.S. attorney in Atlanta" regarding the BNL
investigation. "In light of this new information," Boren stated,
"I call on the attorney general to meet his obligations ... and
appoint a special prosecutor."

To make his case, Boren cited the concerns of the federal judge in
the stymied BNL case. In a sharp rebuke of the government's behavior,
Judge Marvin Shoob accused Bush officials of stonewalling and
deception in the BNL case and joined the call for a special prosecutor.

"High-level officials in the Justice Department and the State
Department met with the Italian ambassador," stated the frustrated
federal judge, and "...decisions were made at the top levels of the
United States government and within the intelligence community to
shape this case." Shoob also noted that "the local prosecutor in
this matter received ... highly unusual and inappropriate telephone
calls from the White House Office of Legal Counsel."

Despite the strong words from Boren, Gonzalez, and Shoob, a special
prosecutor was never appointed, and no administration officials
were ever indicted or even forced to testify. Low-level bank officials
ultimately took the rap for a multibillion-dollar, illegal, secret
government scheme, spearheaded by the president of the United States,
to arm Iraq.

And the coverup, thanks to Clinton officials, continues to this
day. During the 1992 presidential campaign, Gore called the coverup
of the secret Bush policy to arm Iraq "bigger than Watergate ever
was," but in a Jan. 16, 1995, report, the Clinton Justice Department
absolved the Bush administration and stated that it had found no
evidence "that U.S. agencies or officials illegally armed Iraq."
War criminals

London Independent reporter Robert Fisk has written movingly about
riding back to Tehran in a train with young Iranian soldiers returning
from the front during the bloody war with Iraq -- a war fueled by
western politicians and western arms dealers. "All of them were
coughing up Saddam Hussein's poisons from their lungs into blood-red
swabs and bandages," writes the veteran Middle East reporter. "And
the mustard gas that was slowly killing them permeated the whole
great 20-carriage train as it thundered up from the desert battlefields
of the first Gulf War." Fisk points out it was not only technology
that the United States and the Europeans provided Saddam with to
create nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, but the means to
efficiently deploy them.

"The Americans had sold him helicopters to spray the crops with
pesticide," Fisk said, "the 'crops,' of course, being human beings."
And in an astounding revelation Fisk stated, "I later met the
[German] arms dealer who flew from the Pentagon to Baghdad with
U.S. satellite photos of the Iranian front lines to help Saddam
kill more Iranians."

Iranians weren't the only victims. Tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers
and military personnel were doused with chemical and biological
warfare agents in the first Gulf War. In fact, Gulf veterans have
filed a billion-dollar class action lawsuit in federal court in
Galveston, Texas, against companies that supplied Iraq with the
dual-use technology to create its weapons of mass destruction. Among
the companies named are Bechtel, M.W. Kellog, Dresser Industries,
and Interchem Inc.

Vic Silvester, a plaintiff in the lawsuit, told the National Law
Journal, "The companies that made the chemicals and biologicals
should pay." Silvester said his son, a Gulf vet, suffers from a
variety of serious medical conditions from exposures, including
nerve damage, rashes, severe headaches, and chronic fatigue. "He
can't sleep," Silvester said, "and when he goes to the store, he
can't remember what he went to get."

Silvester makes a compelling point. After WWII, several German
civilians were hanged for making chemical gas available to the
Nazis. Employees of IG Farben were convicted in a British court in
Hamburg of crimes against humanity because it was shown they had
known that Hitler's regime was using Farben's gas to slaughter
civilians in Nazi concentration camps.

"Two of the principals of that firm were hanged for aiding in crimes
against humanity," wrote Rabbi Marvin Hier in the introduction to
"The Poison Gas Connection," put out by the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
"International legal scholars should look seriously at this relative
precedent."
*****************************************************************
 3 [NYTr] Scientists Protested Posting Iraq Nuke Data on Web
 
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 15:04:22 -0600 (CST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
[But they're scientists!  Who listens to them in the Born-Again
Bush Regime? Especially when there's an election to win. -NYTr]

Reuters - Nov 4, 2006
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-11-04T070105Z_01_N02171090_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-INTERNET-IRAQ.xml&WTmodLoc=NewsHome-C1-topNews-5

Scientists protested Web site nuclear data: report

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Scientists at a U.S. weapons lab complained more than
two weeks ago that captured Iraqi documents containing sensitive nuclear
information were available on the Web site that the government shut down on
Thursday, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

A senior federal official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the
Times that scientists at California's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
protested some of the weapons papers on the site to the National Nuclear
Security Administration, an arm of the Department of Energy, in October. But
the objections "never perked up to senior management," the Times quoted the
official as saying. "They stayed at the mid-levels."

Managers at the security administration passed the warning to their
counterparts at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which
oversaw the Web site, the Times said, citing the official. And as a result,
according to a nuclear weapons expert, the government pulled two nuclear
papers from the Web site last month. The dangers of the documents, which
were captured during the war, had been recognized at Livermore and in the
wider community of government arms experts, he said.

"Those two documents were on everybody's list," the newspaper quoted him as
saying.

The Times said federal officials were conducting a review to better
understand how and when the warnings had originated and how the bureaucracy
had responded.

The Bush administration set up the Web site in March at the urging of
Republicans in Congress who said that public access to such materials from
Iraq could increase the understanding of the danger posed by Saddam Hussein.
It was shut down after the Times inquired about the disclosure of nuclear
information and the experts' complaints. Among documents posted were roughly
a dozen that nuclear weapons experts said constituted a basic guide to
building an atom bomb.

While Democrats have called for an investigation, the scientists'
two-week-old complaints, as outlined by federal officials on Friday,
indicated for the first time that warnings about the site had come from the
government's own arms experts as well as from international weapons
inspectors, the report said.

) Reuters 2006. 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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Says It's Open to Talks With U.S.

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Sunday November 5, 2006 10:46 PM

AP Photo VAH103 

By NASSER KARIMI 

Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran said Sunday it was open to negotiations
with the United States on Iraq and other regional issues but
hinted it would not drop its refusal to talk about its
contentious nuclear program. 

As the U.N. Security Council geared up for a protracted debate
on sanctioning Iran over its nuclear program, Tehran praised
Russia for its ``softer'' stance on the issue. 

Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said Iran would
consider talks with the U.S. over regional issues, including
Iraq, if Washington requested. He would not elaborate, and there
was no immediate response from the United States on the offer. 

``If there is any official request about regional issues, we are
ready to review it,'' Hosseini told reporters. 

However, he said Iran would not change its position regarding
bilateral relations with the U.S., suggesting Tehran would
refuse to talk about the nuclear issue. The U.S. has demanded
Iran stop enriching uranium - a key step in the manufacture of
nuclear weapons - as a precondition to talks about its disputed
program. 

The United States said in May it wanted to hold direct talks
with Iran about its neighbor Iraq - which would have been the
most public exchanges by the countries in years. 

Iran agreed, and U.S. and Iranian officials said at the time
that the talks would focus on the situation in Iraq, not on
broader subjects such as Iran's nuclear program. 

However, Iran then changed its mind, with Foreign Minister
Manouchehr Mottaki rejecting the negotiation on grounds that
Americans had raised ``other issues'' and had tried to use the
decision to hold the talks as propaganda. 

Iran's statement on Sunday seemed to indicate the government was
once again willing to consider the idea of direct talks with the
U.S. over Iraq, which is veering ever closer to civil war. U.S.
officials have long accused Iran of interfering in neighboring
Iraq since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003. 

But Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has also said the White
House believes Tehran has a role to play in stabilizing Iraq,
whose government is dominated by Shiite Muslims like Iran's. 

Some Western experts believe Iran is genuinely worried about
civil conflict in Iraq and its potential to spill over, although
others say Iranian hardliners may have an interest in causing at
least some turmoil. 

Iranian leaders are believed to have close links to some Iraqi
leaders and clerics. 

Sunday's announcement came a few hours after an Iraqi court
sentenced Saddam Hussein to death by hanging for crimes against
humanity in a mass killing of Iraqi Shiites in 1982. 

It also came one day after thousands of Iranians celebrated the
27th anniversary of the U.S. embassy takeover by militant
students in Tehran, when 52 Americans were held hostage for over
a year. 

The U.S., which broke off diplomatic relations with Iran over
the embassy takeover, suspects Iran's uranium enrichment program
is a front for developing weapons. Tehran denies the accusations
and says its program is for peaceful purposes. 

Tehran state-run radio said Sunday the International Atomic
Energy Agency officials inspected Iran's nuclear facilities in
Isfahan and Natanz including a new enrichment cascade. 

The inspection was the first since Tehran announced it had
successfully stepped up its uranium enrichment activities in
October. 

Iran has repeatedly rejected a package of incentives offered by
six world powers because it required it to freeze uranium
enrichment, which can produce fuel for atomic power or material
for a nuclear warhead. 

Hosseini said the U.N. Security Council's push to impose
sanctions on Tehran to punish it for continuing enrichment would
delay any possible compromise. 

``Back to negotiation is the best amendment. Nothing else will
be effective and will bear desirable result,'' he said. ``Russia
clearly has announced that they did not support the current
draft.'' 

The five veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council
have so far failed to agree on a resolution imposing sanctions,
and negotiations could be long and difficult. 

Russia's foreign minister said Saturday that Moscow would only
support sanctions against Iran if they are limited in time and
spell out a clear mechanism for lifting them. 

``Russia's stance is better than other ... countries. They have
a softer policy. Since the beginning, their stance was
different,'' Hosseini said. 

The European draft resolution would order all countries to cease
supplying material or technology that could contribute to Iran's
nuclear and missile programs. It would also impose a travel ban
and asset freeze on companies, individuals and organizations
involved in those programs. 

Russia and China, which both have major commercial ties with
Iran, have continued to publicly push for dialogue instead of
U.N. punishment, despite the collapse last month of an EU
attempt to entice Iran into talks. The United States, meanwhile,
has said the European draft is too lenient. 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 5 Gordon Prather: Who's Targeting Iran – and Why? - 

by Gordon Prather
 
  November 4, 2006   

One of the more interesting revelations elicited by Seymour
Hersh from Scott Ritter during their last month, sponsored by
the New York Society for Ethical Culture, about the Bush-Cheney
administration’s not-so-secret plans to effect regime change in
Iran, was the extent to which Ritter has been – and apparently
still is – intimately associated with Israeli intelligence
analysts. 

According to Ritter, the involvement began during his service as
a US Marine intelligence officer, assigned to the staff of
General Norman Schwartzkopf, during our preparations for – and
execution of – Operation Desert Storm. 

The Iranians and the Iraqis had launched hundreds of Scud
ballistic missiles against each other in the Iran-Iraq war, but
Saddam Hussein was known to have some left. Ritter’s job was to
find out – using on-the-ground human intelligence and
spy-satellite imagery – where those missiles were. Ritter soon
concluded that the Israelis – who correctly feared Saddam might
launch those missiles against them – had already done most of
his job for him. 

During his seven years of post-USMC service as Chief Weapons
Inspector for the UN Special Commission on Iraq, Ritter says he
continued to rely heavily on Israeli intelligence to do his job. 

Furthermore, in response to prompting by Hersh, Ritter revealed
that his latest book, , was heavily informed by ongoing
conversations with Israeli intelligence analysts. 

So, when – host and executive producer of Democracy Now! – was
interviewing Ritter about "Target Iran," she knew Ritter was the
man to describe the similarities "between the lead-up to the
invasion of Iraq [in 2003] and what’s happening now with Iran," 

"The biggest similarity that we need to point out is that in
both cases no evidence was put forward [by the White House] to
sustain the allegations that are being made. 

"Iraq was accused of having weapons of mass destruction
programs, reconstituting chemical, biological, nuclear,
long-range ballistic missile programs. 

There was an [UN] inspection process in place that had access,
full access to the facilities in question, and no data was
derived from these inspections that backed up the Bush
administration's allegations. 

And yet, Iraq was told, it’s not up to the inspectors to find
the weapons. It’s up to Iraq to prove they don't exist. Iraq had
to prove a negative. And they couldn't. 

We now know that in 1991, Saddam Hussein had destroyed the
totality of his weapons programs. There weren’t any left to
find, discover. There was no threat." 

(Ritter did not make in the Goodman interview the accusation he
has made – and provided documentary evidence for – in the past.
Namely, that from 1997 onwards, "we" – Clinton-Gore and
Bush-Cheney – did know that Saddam had totally destroyed his
"weapons of mass destruction" and his capability to produce such
weapons, and had made no attempt to reconstruct that
capability.) 

"We now have Iran. 

It’s alleged [by the White House] to have a nuclear weapons
program. And yet the International Atomic Energy Agency, the
inspectors who have had full access to the sites in Iran, have
come out and said, "Well, we can’t say that there isn’t a secret
program that we don’t know about. What we can say, as a direct
result of our investigations, there is no data whatsoever to
sustain the Bush administration's claims that there is a nuclear
weapons program." 

(Ritter revealed in the public discussion with Hersh that
Israeli intelligence has also been unable – despite considerable
use of on-the-ground human intelligence and analysis of
spy-satellite images – to find any indication that Iran does
have a secret nuclear program.) 

"And yet, the Bush administration once again is putting the onus
on Iran, saying, 'It’s not up to the inspectors to find the
nuclear weapons program. It’s up to the Iranians to prove that
one doesn’t exist.' 

Why do we go down this path? 

Because you can’t prove a negative! 

There’s nothing Iran can do that will satisfy the Bush
administration, because the policy at the end of the day is not
about nonproliferation, it’s not about disarmament. 

It’s about regime change. And all the Bush administration wants
to do is to create the conditions that support their ultimate
objective of military intervention. 

Read the 2006 version of the , where Iran is named sixteen times
as the number one threat to the national security of the United
States of America, because in the same document, it embraces the
notion of pre-emptive wars of aggression as a legitimate means
of dealing with such threats. 

Look, Bush has already said that he doesn’t want to leave Iran
to the next president, that this is a problem he needs to solve
now." 

And why does Bush feel he needs to effect regime change in Iran?
Because of pressure by the Likudniks, here and abroad. 

"Israel has drawn a red line that says, not only will they not
tolerate a nuclear weapons program in Iran, they will not
tolerate anything dealing with nuclear energy, especially
enrichment, that could be used in a nuclear program. 

So, even if Iran is telling the truth – Iran says, 'We have no
nuclear weapons program. We just want peaceful nuclear energy'–
Israel says, 'So long as Iran has any enrichment capability,
this constitutes a threat to Israel,' and they are pressuring
the United States to take forceful action." 

The New York Times has just published an exhaustive [.pdf].
Somewhat to the Grey Lady’s surprise, the issue most on voters
minds is not same-sex marriage; it’s the ongoing war in Iraq,
which most voters now believe was launched under false
pretenses. 

The voters are not much concerned about North Korea’s nuclear
weapons, indeed, do not consider North Korea a "threat." 

But what do the voters think about Bush’s upcoming preemptive
attack against "the number one threat" to our national security? 

The New York Times doesn’t know. You see, there was no mention
of Iran in their exhaustive pre-election poll. 
  
  Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy 
implementing official for national security-related technical 
matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and 
Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army. Dr. 
Prather also served as legislative assistant for national 
security affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. -- ranking 
member of the Senate Budget Committee and member of the Senate 
Energy Committee and Appropriations Committee. Dr. Prather had 
earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence 
Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National 
Laboratory in New Mexico.   

Reproduction of material from any original Antiwar.com pages
 without written permission is strictly prohibited.
 Copyright 2006 Antiwar.com         
*****************************************************************
 6 AFP: Iran test-fires more new weapons in war games 

>Saturday November 4, 03:20

  [Iran's Revolutionary Guards fire a Shahab-2 long-range
ballistic missile]   

TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran has announced it had successfully test-fired
new armour-piercing weaponry and an anti-helicopter missile
system on the third day of its latest war games.

"The new generation of anti-helicopter and anti-armour weapons
were successfully tested on day three of the manoeuvres," an
announcer on state television said as pictures of the
test-firing were broadcast Saturday.

In the "Great Prophet II" war games, due to last 10 days, Iran
has so far fired its Shahab-3 longer (Advertisement)
[Click Here!] [ src=]  range missile for the first time in
manoeuvres as well as new types of land-to-sea and sea-to-sea
missiles.

The armour-piercing weapons tested Saturday include a rifle
equipped with special sights that can identify an enemy seven
kilometres (four miles) away and can penetrate a target wearing
a bullet-resistant vest from a distance of three kilometres
(one-and-a-half miles).

The other new anti-armour weapon tested was a system aimed at
penetrating the armour plate of tanks that "can be carried by a
person, with high accuracy, high speed and high explosive power".

"The bullet of this system penetrates the armoured equipment and
then explodes," state television said.

The anti-helicopter weaponry was described as highly portable
and accurate. Four anti-helicopter missiles can be fired from
each system.

"The anti-helicopter weapon can hit helicopters in different
circumstances," the television added.

"The anti-armour weapon has the ability to penetrate different
kinds of advanced bullet-armour vests" as well as the armoured
exterior of tanks, it said.

The war games come against a backdrop of rising international
tension over Iran's nuclear programme, with the United States
leading a drive for UN sanctions against Tehran over its failure
to suspend uranium enrichment.

They also coincide with manoeuvres by a US-led naval force in
the Gulf off Iran in a test of capabilities to halt trafficking
in weapons of mass destruction, the first time such an excercise
has been held in the area.

The head of the Iranian parliament's security commission,
Alaeddin Boroujerdi, on Saturday lashed out at the US-led
manoeuvres, which he said would increase tension in the region.

"The imperialist countries like the United States are here with
bad intentions. They are unwanted guests whose presence is a
source of instability and trouble in the region," he said
according to the IRNA agency. 

AFP 

*****************************************************************
 7 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Proposes Limited Iran Sanctions

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday November 4, 2006 2:01 AM

AP Photo NYFF101 

By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer 

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Russia proposed major amendments Friday to
a European draft resolution on Iran, saying it wants sanctions
limited to measures that will keep Tehran from developing
nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles while keeping the door
open for negotiations. 

China said it had a similar view and supported the proposed
Russian changes which would weaken the European text. The U.S.,
however, contends that the European draft is not tough enough
and U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said he would be distributing
proposed U.S. changes later Friday. 

The rival views of the five veto-wielding permanent members of
the U.N. Security Council set the stage for long and difficult
negotiations on a resolution to punish Iran for continuing
uranium enrichment despite council demands to stop. 

The British, French and German draft orders all countries to ban
the supply of material and technology that could contribute to
Iran's nuclear and missile programs. It also imposes a travel
ban and asset freeze on companies, individuals and organizations
involved in those programs. 

The European draft would exempt the initial nuclear power plant
being built by the Russians at Bushehr, Iran, but not the
nuclear fuel needed for the reactor. It would also limit
assistance to Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency,
the U.N. nuclear watchdog and ban countries from teaching or
training Iranians in disciplines that would contribute to Iran's
nuclear and ballistic missile programs. 

Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin told reporters after a
meeting of the five permanent Security Council members that the
Russian amendments shortened the European text. Bolton said
``the changes were extensive'' and included ``a complete
line-in, line-out version of edits.'' 

Churkin said the resolution should ``preclude situations where
people and countries could be helping Iranians in developing
uranium enrichment, in developing means of delivering nuclear
weapons.'' 

``But at the same time ... it should leave the doors open for
our talks with the Iranians,'' he said. 

While Churkin refused to distribute the proposed Russian
changes, he indicated that they dropped all references to the
Bushehr plant, which he said ``has nothing to do with the
resolution we are discussing'' and is consistent with the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which Iran has signed. 

Both Russia and China have continued to publicly push for
dialogue instead of U.N. punishment, despite the collapse last
month of a European Union attempt to entice Iran into talks. 

The five permanent council members and Germany offered Iran a
package of economic incentives and political rewards in June if
it agreed to consider a long-term moratorium on enrichment and
commit to a freeze on uranium enrichment before talks on its
nuclear program. 

But Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly and
defiantly said his country would continue enrichment, and is not
intimidated by the possibility of sanctions. 	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 8 AFP: Thousands of Iranians warn US in embassy protest 

Saturday November 4, 03:48 PM 

By Farhad Pouladi 

  [Iranians demonstrate in Tehran]   

TEHRAN (AFP) - Thousands of Iranians have demonstrated in Tehran
to mark the 27th anniversary of the seizure of the US embassy by
Islamist students, warning Washington against taking action over
Iran's nuclear programme.

The demonstrators, mainly schoolchildren and students,
brandished banners proclaiming "Death to America" and "Death to
Israel" as they gathered outside the walls of the former
embassy, now known locally as the "Den of Spies".

The US embassy's personnel were held hostage for 444 days after 
the building was stormed on November 4, 1979, shortly after the 
Islamic revolution led by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini 
that toppled the US-backed Shah.

The seizure of the embassy, prompted by anger over the Shah's 
entry into the United States for cancer treatment, caused 
Washington to break off relations with Iran and ties have 
remained severed ever since.

"The Americans should have learned their lesson from the 
occupation of the Den of Spies, but unfortunately they have not," 
parliament speaker Gholam Ali Hadad Adel roared to the cheering 
crowds on Saturday.

Hadad Adel reaffirmed warnings that Iran would hit back if the 
United States succeeds in its wish to impose US Security Council 
sanctions against Tehran, on top of the already existing US 
embargo imposed after the embassy seizure.

"America must know that the Iranians will show a proportionate 
reaction to any attempts to restrict Iran's sovereignty and the 
nation's undeniable right to peaceful nuclear technology," said 
Hadad Adel.

"They should remember that threats and sanctions will not affect
this great nation's determination. We are ready to pay the price
of our independence," he added.

The demonstrators burned US and Israeli flags and also effigies
of Uncle Sam.

A declaration read out at the meeting warned the present US
administration not to impose sanctions on Iran over its nuclear
programme, which the United States alleges is cover for a
weapons drive.

"We tell the world imperialists that we are the children of
Khomeini so do not threaten us with sanctions," the statement
said, adding that the nuclear programme was a source of "pride
and glory" for Iranians.

"We say with a loud voice that we are ready to defend our soil
and independence," it added.

European powers and the United States are currently trying to
persuade the UN Security Council to impose sanctions against
Iran over its nuclear programme, which Tehran insists is solely
aimed at generating energy.

However progress on agreeing the draft resolution has been slow,
with Russia and China both insisting on changes to the text.

Most of the demonstrators appeared to be under the age of 18 but
were nonetheless eager to share their thoughts on the
geopolitical situation and explain the political message of the
demonstration.

"Our presence here is an anti-imperialistic move aimed at the
United States and the Israeli Zionist regime to say we are
united and we support Lebanon and Palestine," said Amir Hossein
Rezaie, 16, dressed in military uniform.

"We are here to tell America and the Zionists that just as our
peers gave their blood for the revolution we are ready to defend
ourselves and we will stand firm behind our leader," added
Fatemeh Bajalan, also 16.

The embassy compound, now run by Iran's elite Revolutionary
Guards, is used as an educational centre with occasional
exhibitions exploring the "crimes" of the United States. 

AFP
*****************************************************************
 9 AFP: Russia asks Europe to revise its plan for Iran sanctions -
     
 Sun Nov 5, 5:00 PM 		 	 

UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - Western countries that want to punish
Iran for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment are again
facing reluctance on the part of Russia and China to grant
support, with Moscow demanding a softening of a draft UN
resolution.  

More than two months after the UN-imposed deadline of August 31
expired, it is still not possible to say when the UN Security
Council will act. 

The United States is pushing for quick sanctions. But according
to many diplomats, the negotiations promise to be long and
difficult. 

China and Russia are reluctant to impose strict penalties on
Iran, with which they maintain important economic and commercial
ties. 

On Friday, Moscow proposed changes to a European draft
resolution that the US Ambassador to the United Nations, John
Bolton, called substantial during an informal meeting of the
five permanent members of the Security Council (China, the
United States, France, Britain, Russia) and Germany. 

Consequently, according to Bolton, the United States would also
like to propose changes, and ambassadors will have to consult
their respective capitals during the weekend to be able to
resume discussions probably next week. 

The draft, drawn by Europeans in cooperation with the United
States, calls for economic and commercial sanctions against
Iran. 

But it has been rejected by Russia in his initial form. 

Russian Foreign Minister Serguei Lavrov, said in Brussels Friday
that Moscow was ready to take reasonable measures against Iran,
but made clear that Russia believed the European proposal had
gone too far. 

Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya, meanwhile, pointed out that
penalties proposed by the Europeans were a little too hard. 

They would risk putting the Iranians' backs against the wall, he
warned, adding that Beijing supported the Russians. 

His Russian counterpart, Vitaly Churkin, also said that the
purpose of any future Security Council action was to encourage
Iran to come back to the negotiating table, not to turn it away
from negotiations. 

He reminded that the UN resolution must leave the open door to
future discussions with the Iranians. 

Churkin also expressed his opposition to any mention in the
resolution of Russia's help to Iran to build a civilian nuclear
power plan in Bushehr. 

Bushehr has nothing to do with concerns about nuclear
proliferation because it is a peaceful nuclear power plant, he
said. 

The initial version of the resolution mentioned the plant, but
only to point out that it will remain outsided the scope of
proposed sanctions. 

According to a diplomatic source, Moscow is equally opposed to
penalties against Iranian individuals such as a ban on travel
and a freeze of financial assets abroad. 

Russia would be ready to accept an embargo only on "sensitive"
equipment while the current draft calls for an ban on all
equipment that could be used for nuclear and ballistic missile
programs in Iran, as well as on all technical or financial
assistance linked to these programs. 

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressed
optimism Friday about chanced to reach a compromise. 

I think that in the last analysis they will not block us, she
told a radio station. We will have a resolution that will punish
Iran, even though it may not be as strong as we would have
wanted it to be. 	 		 			

  Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Canada Co. All Rights Reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 10 UPI: Iranian wages war games in Persian Gulf
     
United Press International - NewsTrack - 

        11/4/2006 3:45:00 PM -0500
 
TERHAN, Iran, Nov. 4 (UPI) -- An Iranian general said the
country's arsenal now has missiles that can travel up to 900
miles and weapons that can pierce protective armor. 

The announcement comes as Iran has come under international
pressure for its nuclear program, CNN said. 

Gen. Mohammad-Reza Zahedi, Iran's ground forces commander, said
Iran has doubled its anti-helicopter's effectiveness and is
using its war games to practice maneuvering with its new
generation anti-helicopter missile system and anti-armor
weaponry, according to Islamic Republic News Agency, the
government's news agency. 

Iran began conducting its 10-day war games Friday in the Persian
Gulf, the Sea of Oman and 10 provinces, CNN said. The United
States conducted military exercises in the Gulf prior to Iran's
exercises. 

Zahedi said the games were intended to show the country's
ability to defend itself against attack, the government news
service said.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 11 UPI: Russia seeks gradual measures against Iran
     
  United Press International - NewsTrack - 

11/4/2006 2:59:00 PM -0500

MOSCOW, Nov. 4 (UPI) -- The Russian foreign minister says Russia
may endorse a U.N. Security Council resolution on Iran's nuclear
program, provided several conditions are met. 

Sergei Lavrov said Russia could agree to a resolution focused on
measures that address transferring technologies for uranium
enrichment, heavy-water reactors or nuclear fuel reprocessing,
plus a time-line and exit strategy, Novosti said. 

Iran's uranium enrichment program raised international concern;
some countries, including the United States, suspect Iran may be
developing nuclear weapons, Novosti said. Iran may face
sanctions for not complying with the U.N. Security Council's
demand that it suspend enrichment operations. 

Lavrov said any action should enforce non-proliferation
regulations but guarantee the right to conduct civilian nuclear
research under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Novosti said. He
said the Iran Six -- the five permanent Security Council members
plus Germany -- previously agreed that measures should be
gradual and consider "the reality of ... the Iranian nuclear
program," Novosti said. 

Britain, France and Germany recently proposed sanctions that
included banning sales of missile and nuclear technologies to
Iran, freezing its military bank accounts and restricting visas
for officials associated with the nuclear industry.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 12 Korea Herald: U.S. envoys to visit Asia on N. Korea   
        
Senior U.S. diplomats will travel to Asia this weekend to
prepare for a resumption of six-way negotiations with North
Korea aimed at ending Pyongyang's newly proven nuclear weapons
program, the State Department said Thursday.

 The envoys will press Japan, China and South Korea to maintain
tough U.N.-mandated sanctions against North Korea in the run-up
to the negotiations and to ensure a united front in insisting
the talks lead to Pyongyang's full denuclearization, department
spokesman Sean McCormack said.

 Under pressure from the sanctions imposed after its first
nuclear test explosion on Oct. 9, North Korea agreed earlier
this week to return to the multilateral disarmament negotiations
it had been boycotting for nearly a year.

 "We don't want this just to be about talk, we want it to be
about getting some concrete, positive outcomes," McCormack said.

 The U.S. team will be led by Nicholas Burns, Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice's senior deputy, and include Robert Joseph, the
hawkish head of the State Department's Nonproliferation Security
Initiative who has been charged with overseeing implementation
of the sanctions against North Korea.

 The U.S. delegation will kick off their tour by arriving in
Tokyo on Sunday and meet Japanese leaders in Tokyo before
heading to Beijing on Monday for two days of talks with both
Chinese and Russian officials, McCormack said. Burns will visit
Seoul Nov. 8 and 9.

 Joseph, however, will not be accompanying Burns on his visit to
Seoul, South Korean government officials said.

 "Joseph has not requested a visit and we have not said whether
we would invite him or not," a Seoul official told reporters on
condition of anonymity.

 "He could have deemed it would be unnecessary to revisit Seoul
after he accompanied Secretary Rice here last month," the
official said.

 The South Korean government is currently mulling ways to expand
its role in the Proliferation Security Initiative following
strong calls from Washington.

 While Burns represents Washington's so-called negotiation
policy, Joseph is in charge of sanctions such as the PSI.

 McCormack said there were no plans for the U.S. envoys to meet
with the North Koreans during next week's trip. "I don't see
that happening," he said.

 North Korea, in the meantime, reiterated the rhetoric of its
right to own nuclear weapons.

 Kim Young-nam, North Korea's No. 2 leader told visiting South
Korean politicians yesterday that the communist country had been
compelled to make nuclear weapons in order to defend itself.

 "During talks with Democratic Labor Party leaders, Kim made
clear that the nuclear device aims to deter sanctions and
pressure being exerted by the United States, and is not meant to
threaten South Korea or its people," said Park Yong-jin, a
spokesperson for the progressive party, citing comments by the
North Korean official. 

South Korea's chief nuclear envoy Chun Yung-woo said he plans to
meet with Hill and his Japanese counterpart Kenichiro Sasae as
early as next week.

 Pyongyang walked away from the six-party talks two months after
Washington slapped sanctions on a Macau-based bank accused of
money laundering and distributing counterfeit U.S. currency.

 As part of this week's deal to resume negotiations, Washington
told North Korea it was willing to discuss the Banco Delta Asia
sanctions as part of the talks.

 The U.N. sanctions on North Korea are the "sticks" the United
States has as it goes into talks with the communist nation on
nuclear issues, Rice said Thursday.

 The "carrots" for Pyongyang are that it can expect economic and
energy assistance and also integrate into the international
financial system, she said in an interview with a local radio
show.

 "The major stick is that we do have under (U.N.) Resolution
1718 sanctions on North Korea, including sanctions on luxury
goods for their elites, who love to get luxury goods while the
people try to scrounge and find food," she said.

 "I think that what we've seen is that when the international
community speaks with one strong voice, perhaps countries begin
to see that they don't have very good options," she said.

2006.11.04
*****************************************************************
 13 Korea Herald: Chief of anti-nuclear body on visit   
        
The top official of an international anti-nuclear weapons regime
arrived in Korea yesterday to promote the banning of all types
of nuclear tests worldwide, the Foreign Ministry said yesterday.

 Tibor Toth, Executive Secretary of the Preparatory Commission
of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, is
planned to pay courtesy calls on Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon,
Minister of Science and Technology Kim Woo-sik and Deputy
Defense Minister Hwang Kyu-sik during his four-day visit until
Wednesday, the ministry said in a statement. 

Toth is also scheduled to visit a seismic wave observatory in
Wonju, Gangwon Province to grant an operation certificate to the
institution.

 The CTBTO Preparatory Commission is an international
organization established by 44 countries in Nov. 1996 to carry
out the "necessary preparations for the effective implementation
of the CTBT" which is aimed at banning nuclear tests in the air,
outer space, underground, and underwater. Korea signed the
treaty in 1996 and ratified it in 1999.

 (davidpooh@heraldm.com)

2006.11.06
*****************************************************************
 14 Korea Herald: North blasts U.S. over 'war plans'   
        
The Pentagon has reportedly stepped up planning for attacks on
North Korean nuclear facilities and is bolstering U.S. nuclear
forces in the region.

 North Korea criticized the United States on Saturday for
preparing attacks against the communist country.

 The Washington Times reported Friday the U.S. plans include
detailed programs for using special operations commando raids or
Tomahawk cruise missile strikes to disable North Korea's
plutonium-processing facility at Yongbyon.

 "Other than nuclear strikes, which are considered excessive,
there are several options now in place. Planning has been
accelerated," a Pentagon official was quoted as saying.

 A Pentagon spokesman said that while the military always plans
for a variety of contingencies, the story "mischaracterized the
approach (to North Korea) within the department."

 "The president has made it clear we are pursuing a diplomatic
approach through the six-party talks and with the international
community to reach a peaceful and diplomatic solution," said
Major David Smith.

 The Times said the military planning was given new impetus by
North Korea's Oct. 9 nuclear test, and by growing opposition to
its nuclear program by China and South Korea.

 The official declined to say what nuclear forces the United
States has in the region, but the report said other officials
said they include bombs and air-launched missiles stored in Guam
that could be delivered by B-52 and B-2 bombers.

 North Korean official media described Washington as "fanatic
warmongers" wreaking havoc on peace and security on the Korean
Peninsula

 "The U.S. military madness opposing the DPRK has been
intensifying the nuclear tension on the Korean Peninsula and its
reckless provocation is driving the situation to a worst-case
scenario," the North's main newspaper, Rodong Shinmun, said in a
commentary, carried by the North's Korean Central News Agency on
Saturday.

 The report accused the U.S. of reaffirming its nuclear umbrella
for South Korea in last month's defense talks, trying to bolster
war operation plans to overthrow the North's regime and pushing
for a multilateral anti-proliferation initiative apparently
targeting Pyongyang.

2006.11.06
*****************************************************************
 15 Korea Herald: N.K. demands Japan stay out of nuclear talks   
        

North Korea called Japanese officials "political imbeciles" for
saying they won't accept Pyongyang as a nuclear power, less than
a week after it agreed to return to international arms talks.

 In typically harsh rhetoric, the reclusive communist state
demanded Saturday that Japan stay away from the negotiations,
and also condemned the United States as "fanatic warmongers who
destroy peace and security on the Korean Peninsula."

 The North agreed earlier this week to return to the
international disarmament negotiations - which also include
China, Russia, the United States and South Korea - in the first
easing of tension after its Oct. 9 nuclear test. The talks have
been stalled for a year.

 A statement from North Korea's Foreign Ministry carried by the
North's official Korea Central News Agency on Saturday said
"there is no need for Japan to participate in (the talks) as a
local delegate because it is no more than a state of the U.S.
and it is enough for Tokyo just to be informed of the results of
the talks by Washington."

 The Foreign Ministry said most of the international community
had welcomed North Korea's return to the talks, but that "it is
only Japan that expressed its wicked intention," referring to
comments by Tokyo that it will not accept a nuclear North Korea.

 An official from Japan's Foreign Ministry said the government
was aware of North Korea's statement, and was considering a
response. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, citing
protocol.

 Japanese police have confirmed that North Korea used accounts
at a Macau-based bank to pay for equipment that could be used to
produce weapons of mass destruction, a report said Saturday.

 The revelation was the first to detail the flow of illegal
North Korean funds through Banco Delta Asia, allegedly linked to
illicit activities of the reclusive nation, the Yomiuri Shimbun
said, quoting investigative sources.

 "The latest revelation has shown the BDA account was used to
pay for the purchase of weapons-related equipment from Japan,"
the paper said, quoting the sources.

 The fate of the bank accounts now frozen under pressure from
Washington may be high on the agenda of six-party talks on North
Korea that could resume by the end of the month.

 According to the daily, a corporation directly linked to North
Korean leader Kim Jong-il asked a Tokyo-based trading firm to
ship a freeze dryer that could be used to develop biological
weapons.

 On July 29, 2002, the North Korean company sent some 6.15
million yen ($521,000) from the BDA account to an account held
by the trading house at a commercial bank.

 The paper also reported that in 2003, an electric power supply
unit that could be used in the process to enrich uranium, an
essential element in developing high-powered nuclear weapons,
was sold to North Korea by another Japanese company for 1.98
million yen, which was paid from a BDA account held by a North
Korean company.

 In 2002, the United States confronted North Korea with evidence
that the communist country was secretly engaged in a uranium
program, but the accusation was later denied by Pyongyang.
Within months, North Korea expelled international inspectors and
withdrew from the nuclear nonproliferation treaty.

 North Korea has been also suspected of using the accounts to
buy luxuries for Kim and other goods used as gifts from him to
high-ranking North Koran military officers before they were
frozen in February.

 The U.S. government has said Banco Delta Asia's accounts had
been used as vital financial windows for North Korea's illegal
counterfeiting and money laundering.

 Since the BDA accounts were frozen, Pyongyang has sought to
open new accounts in countries including Mongolia, Russia and
Vietnam.
2006.11.06
*****************************************************************
 16 Korea Herald: U.S. envoy discusses key regional issues   
        
Following is the second in a two-part interview with U.S.
Ambassador Alexander Vershbow. - Ed.

By Yoav Cerralbo

Last week, U.S. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow spoke about the
Korea-U.S. FTA and visa issues at the embassy. 

In this interview, with the United States congressional
elections just on the horizon, the ambassador discussed key
issues in U.S.-Northeast Asia relations such as the World Trade
Organization's Doha agreement, the return of land used by U.S.
Forces Korea and the disputes between Korea and Japan over land
claims and historical matters.

 The Doha agreement might be one policy that will be tested with
the U.S. congressional elections.

  U.S. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow [The Korea Herald]  

Vershbow said that the upcoming Doha deadline is crucial for the
agreement's future ambitions. "There's very little likelihood
that Congress will extend that deadline, so we have to finish
the U.S.-Korea FTA and the Doha talks within the next few
months," Vershbow told The Korea Herald. 

In short, what the United States is looking for in the next
round of talks is a sufficient level of ambition in terms of
opening of markets and reducing agriculture export subsidies
from key partners led by the European Union.

 "We hope that hard decisions will be made so that we can
achieve an agreement," he said.

 Vershbow added that to some degree, expanding the network of
bilateral free trade agreements is an alternative path to
opening up the international trading system but FTAs are not a
satisfactory substitute when it comes to the needs of evolving
countries who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of the Doha
talks.

 "They deserve to have the ability to market their products on a
more level playing field by getting the developed countries to
scale back the protection that has disadvantaged the developing
countries."

 Another pressing issue is the realignment of the U.S.-Korea
bilateral defense alliance, in which key points are still
subject to negotiations.

 One big hurdle is the question of burden sharing, in which the
ambassador stated that: "We do think that Korea needs to
contribute more as all of our other allies do, like Europe and
Japan, to share the burden of the stationing of U.S. forces on
the Korean Peninsula." 

He added that what the U.S. military needs is proper
infrastructure and support networks for its soldiers stationed
in Korea.

 "There was a small reduction agreed at the time that Korea
dispatched its forces to Iraq that added to its burden for that
period but we considered that a one-time exception."

 What the U.S. government is looking for in this deal is a "more
equitable solution for the long haul and not to have to
negotiate this one year at a time."

 Vershbow pointed out that the USFK have been good stewards of
the land they've used for the past 50-plus years, and in some
cases gone beyond the deal.

 'We've done what has been required from the Status of Forces
Agreement. We've even done some things that go beyond the SOFA
agreement such as pulling our underground fuel tanks. 

"Also in the case of a few bases where there's been fuel leaks
that have accumulated underground, we are in the process of
pumping that out."

 Regarding the North Korean nuclear test on Oct. 9, the
ambassador reiterated his government's unequivocal defense
commitment to South Korea by bringing in conventional forces if
need be.

 "In extreme cases we are committed to bringing our nuclear
capabilities to bear," he said.

 During the annual defense ministers' meeting in Washington a
few weeks ago, the United States spelled out one additional
phrase that was absent from previous talks on the matter:
extended deterrence.

 "A consistent message of resolve from United States and the
U.S.-South Korean alliance to repel any aggressive acts by the
North is crucial," he said. "We want to make sure that the
Korean people are confident that the deterrence is working."

 Japan has a crucial role to play in this - and any future
deterrent - because the forces that would be brought to bear in
the event of a major crisis would be coming from Japan or flown
over Japan.

 "We've tried to make clear to the Korean side of these debates
that Japan is a partner and disputes like the Yasukuni Shrine
and the historical issues need to be resolved through dialogue,"
he said.

 The ambassador noted that his government is pleased that the
dispute over the Dokdo islets, which Japan calls Takeshima, has
reached a breakthrough in the form of joint maritime surveys. 

"We hope that they can find step-by-step pragmatic ways to at
least manage that dispute even if it may not be easy to resolve
for some time to come."

 (yoav@heraldm.com) 

2006.11.06
*****************************************************************
 17 Korea Herald: Working-level groups to be formed to tackle agenda

Once the six-party talks resume, top negotiators from the two
Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia will be
heading to Beijing with a lot on their minds. 

The Joint Statement that lists off principles of how to
denuclearize the Korean peninsula will finally be put on the
table for discussion after over a year-long hiatus.

 The statement can be described as a long menu of agendas that
need to be addressed.

 "A possible scenario of the talks could be the parties
allocating working-level groups for each agenda item," a
high-rank government source told The Korea Herald on condition
of anonymity.

 The best scenario would be the parties reaching a consensus on
the categories of the working-level talks within the next round
of talks, observers said.

 But the task will be difficult.

 "The key to success of the six-party talks is to set the
expectations low," said Kenneth Quinones, a former U.S. State
Department official during a lecture sponsored by the U.S.-Korea
Institute.

 The main problem is the contrasting intents of North Korea and
the rest of the parties.

 In a broad perspective, North Korea may again raise its
long-standing demand to discuss disarmament on the basis of its
push to join the nuclear club.

 Even if the North agrees to dismantle its program, there will
always remain suspicions that North Korea is clinging to its
nuclear ambitions. The United States remains convinced that
North Korea has been covertly working on the highly enriched
uranium program. Pyongyang has dismissed these suspicions.

 According to Quinones, North Korea is likely to renew its
demand for light-water reactors at the talks, and demand
disarmament negotiations including the withdrawal of U.S. troops
from South Korea.

 "I think at some point, we are going to have to draw a line on
them and tell them, hey, it is time to get realistic," he said.

 All principles on denuclearization of the Joint Statement are
intertwined with each other and are written in diplomatic and
ambiguous ways. It is left to highly imaginative minds on how
the negotiating partners will design their implementation
timetable.

 It is therefore considered key for the United States, South
Korea, Japan and Russia to coordinate their stance to be
presented to the North before the six-party talks actually open.

 "For instance, North Korea will first demand working groups on
the agendas that it deems are most profitable for itself such as
the light water reactor and economic aid, while others will seek
a task force on North Korea's nuclear dismantlement," a
Seoul-based analyst said, wishing to remain anonymous.

 "At these six-party talks, the problem could arise over when
and how to secure North Korea with its right to peaceful uses of
nuclear energy," the analyst said. 

Inside the Joint Statement, the first article reads, "The DPRK
stated that it has the right to the peaceful use of nuclear
energy. The other parties expressed their respect and agreed to
discuss, at an appropriate time, the subject of the provision of
light water reactors to the DPRK."

 The article has been harshly criticized by hardliners in
Washington for leaving too much leeway for North Korea in its
ambition to develop nuclear programs.

 Other less relevant issues can also hinder progress such as
Japan's demand for a prompt resolution on North Korea's
kidnapping of Japanese citizens in the past, and the frozen N.K.
accounts at Banco Delta Asia.

 With their pledges to implement the consensus "in a phased
manner in line with the principle of commitment for commitment,
action for action," the second installment of the fifth round of
talks could also be extended to third and fourth sessions, or
more.

 The Joint Statement was adopted by the member states on Sept.
19, 2005 after nearly two months of intense discussion.

 The main agendas can be roughly summarized into about seven
separate parts. 

The statement pledges North Korea's commitment to abandoning all
nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs, and returning, at
an early date, to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons and to International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.

 The statement also reaffirms the pledges of the 1992 Joint
Declaration of the South not receiving or deploying nuclear
weapons. 

The members also acknowledge the sovereignty of North Korea and
promise to normalize bilateral relations. 

In exchange for the dismantlement of all existing nuclear
programs by North Korea, the members are to promote economic
cooperation and give energy assistance.

 Between the South and the North, the two Koreas must, according
to the Joint Statement, discuss ways to implement the provision
of 2 million kilowatts of electric power in return for the
nuclear abandonment.

 They must also negotiate a permanent peace regime on the
peninsula, but at a separate forum.

 South Korea wishes to exclude Japan and Russia from the peace
regime talks and include only those that are directly involved:
the two Koreas, the United States and China.

 (angiely@heraldm.com)

By Lee Joo-hee 

2006.11.06
*****************************************************************
 18 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [VIEWPOINT]There's no such thing as ¡®Western science'

November 6, 2006 KST 12:08 (GMT+9)                                                      
                       
  Science is value neutral. It's not particular to any place or
culture. So, let's abolish the phrase   

  We laugh at the Soviets for dismissing Einstein's theory of
relativity as a "bourgeois theory." We ridicule the Nazis for
dismissing it as "Jewish science." For we know that "E=mc2" has
nothing to do with class or culture, race or religion. It has
everything to do with science.

 Science is value neutral. Thus, we recognize the contradiction
of "Jewish science" or "bourgeois theory." "Jewish" and
"bourgeois" are terms of cultural value. But "science" and
"theory" are value neutral. Einstein was a Jew. He was
bourgeois. But we commit the ad hominem logical fallacy when we
consider these personal characteristics as relevant to the
truth-value of his scientific theories. We become
laughing-stocks, like Stalin and Hitler.

 So what is this I keep hearing about Western science? Why don't
we recognize the contradiction therein? Especially since Western
cultural values have so often contradicted the neutrality of the
scientific method.

 Look at glorious Athens, which sentenced Socrates to death
because his scientific method of disciplined inquiry supposedly
corrupted the youth. Look at the Roman Catholic Church, which
forced Galileo to recant the heliocentric theory, which
supposedly blasphemed the centrality of man as God's image on
earth. Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake for claiming the
same. Look at the Christian fundamentalists of the American
state of Tennessee, who imprisoned a man for teaching Darwin's
theory of evolution. Even now, in Kansas and in other so-called
"red states," the Christian fundamentalists contradict the
theory of evolution with the religious theory of "Intelligent
Design."

 These are not anomalies. They give historical context to the
attitude that Western culture has had toward science over the
centuries. This is not to pick on Western culture. Human beings
tend toward emotion and sentiment. But science does not admit
emotion. It is pure volition. Its laws and formulas are
ruthlessly impersonal. It takes willpower and perfect hatred of
sophistry and propaganda and all that is false to be a
philosopher or a scientist. It takes a hard, sublimely cool
heart to handle the truth. But science also requires humility,
for, as Sir Francis Bacon said, "Nature, to be commanded, must
be obeyed."

 Most people prefer the comfort of their own subjective truths;
they impose their wills on the world if they are strong and they
are imposed upon if weak. But philosophers and scientists humbly
defer to impersonal objective truth; they compose their wills
with the ways of the world. 

To be a philosopher or scientist, a man or woman must transcend
the accident of his native culture. In Plato's terms, he must
leave the cave. The West is no less a cave than the East, or the
South. Therefore it is not surprising that Western culture,
notwithstanding the prestige of the white race, has emotionally
reacted against science. 

Intelligent Design is only the latest manifestation of Western
culture's deep antipathy toward science and its method. Sure,
Western man has used the products of science for the purpose of
imperialism. The scientific method has won him luxury and
comfort, ease and convenience. Thanks to science, his pursuit of
happiness has culminated in a high standard of living. Science
won him global hegemony. Hence his begrudging admiration for it.

Indeed, relativity won nuclear superpower status for the
Soviets, the same Soviets who had, before Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, dismissed it as a "bourgeois theory." The point here
is that as much as the West loves these end-results of science,
it does not love science itself. Western man's attitude toward
science is like that of the john who loves the pleasure of sex,
but not the prostitute. 

Science is value neutral. It is not particular to any place or
culture. So let's throw Western science into the lexicographical
trash can where it belongs. The proper term is modern science,
or ¡ª since its truths are timeless ¡ª science.

 "E=mc2" is value neutral. "2+2=4" is value neutral. The
syllogism of Aristotle, the heart of deductive logic, is value
neutral. The inductive logic of Sir Francis Bacon, which turned
Aristotle's deductive method on its head and thus made
innovations to the experimental scientific method, is value
neutral.

 As if to underscore syllogism's value neutrality, the treatises
of logic written by Aristotle are compiled under the title "The
Organon," which means "The Tool." Bacon's masterpiece is
likewise called "Novum Organum," or "The New Tool." The
scientific method ¡ª the four pillars of which are the Socratic
method, deductive method, inductive method and mathematics ¡ª is
privy to every man and woman with the patience to master it. It
is a tool for everyone. 

Perhaps the Confucian, true to his world-renowned scholarly
discipline, can master and command the scientific method and
love science for itself, not its utilitarian end. Perhaps he can
put science in perspective as a symbol of objective truth and
thus make the East something more than a cave. Perhaps the
Confucian, unlike his utilitarian counterpart of the West, can
see scientific method for what it is: a tool. 

*The writer is a professor of English at Sangmyung University.

by Taru Taylor   
	  
  2006.11.05       

Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use 
*****************************************************************
 19 AFP: Next UN chief meets Japan FM on NKorea nuclear crisis 

 Sun Nov 5, 6:51 AM ET 		 	 

TOKYO (AFP) - South Korea" /> South Korea's Foreign Minister Ban 
Ki-Moon, the next UN secretary general, held talks with his 
Japanese counterpart Taro Aso here, with the focus on the North 
Korean nuclear crisis. 

 The two ministers sat down to a late working dinner after Ban's
arrival for a two-day visit, Japanese officials said. Aside from
North Korea" /> North Korea, UN reforms were expected to figure
prominently on the agenda. 

The briefing was to be held after the dinner which started at
about 8:00 pm (1100 GMT) at a traditional Japanese restaurant
Sunday. 

Ban, who will take up the top UN post on January 1, is also due
to pay a courtesy call on Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe
Monday, the Japanese foreign ministry said. 

Since being named in October, the secretary general-designate
has travelled to Russia, France and China -- all veto-wielding
permanent members of the UN Security Council. 

North Korea, which carried out an atomic bomb test last month
and test-fired seven missiles in July, agreed last week to
return to the six-nation talks aimed at dismantling its nuclear
arms programs. 

Pyongyang walked out of the talks a year ago in protest at
unilateral US sanctions aimed at blocking its access to the
international banking system. 

The US says some of the North Korean funds in a Macau bank came
from counterfeiting and other illicit activities. 

Pyongyang on Wednesday said it would return to the six-party
talks on the condition that the issue of lifting the financial
sanctions is discussed and settled. North and South Korea,
China, Japan, Russia and the United States are part of the
forum. 

Aso and Ban were expected to reaffirm bilateral cooperation on
the implementation of UN sanctions imposed after North Korea's
nuclear test and prepare for the resumption of the six-way
talks, officials said. 

The Japanese foreign minister was also expected to call for
Ban's help in resolving the issue of North Korea's abductions of
Japanese nationals in the 1970s and 1980s, the officials said. 

But on Saturday, North Korea said that Japan should not attend
the six-party talks after Japanese officials reportedly said
Tokyo would not recognize the communist country as a
nuclear-armed state. 

The Japanese authorities have "clearly proved themselves that
they are political imbeciles incapable of judging the trend of
the situation and their deplorable position," a North Korean
foreign ministry official said. 

At the six-way talks, Japan has persistently raised the
abduction issue, angering North Korea and irritating China,
South Korea and Russia. 

But Washington has supported Tokyo's drive to force Pyongyang to
come clean on the abductions. 

North Korea admitted in 2002 that it had abducted 13 Japanese
nationals to use them for spy training in Japanese language and
culture. Five survivors were later returned. 

Without showing convincing evidence, Pyongyang claimed the eight
others were dead, but Japan suspected they were still alive and
kept under wraps as they might know secrets about the reclusive
communist state. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 20 AFP: Next UN chief urges close ties to resolve North Korean crisis -
    
 by Kyoko Hasegawa Sun Nov 5, 4:57 PM ET 		 	 

TOKYO (AFP) - Japan, South Korea" /> South Koreaand the United 
States must work closely to resolve the North Korean nuclear 
crisis, South Korea's Foreign Minister Ban Ki-Moon, the next UN 
chief, said. 

 Ban made the comments during talks with his Japanese
counterpart Taro Aso that focused on North Korea" /> North
Korea's nuclear test which has sparked international
condemnation and strong UN sanctions. 

Ban said he would make resolving the crisis, which has sparked
jitters throughout the region, a priority when he took over as
UN secretary general from Kofi Annan" /> Kofi Annanin January. 

"This is a grave issue for a secretary general," Ban told Aso,
according to a Japanese foreign ministry official. 

"With regards to the North Korea's nuclear problem, close
cooperation between Japan and South Korea, and between Japan,
South Korea and the United States, have to be kept unchanged,"
he said. 

The two ministers sat down to a late working dinner after Ban's
arrival for a two-day visit. 

Aso welcomed North Korea's decision to return to six-party party
talks aimed at dismantling Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program.
But he said the reclusive regime must honour the UN resolution
passed after its October 9 test, and other international
treaties restricting weapons of mass destruction. 

"North Korea should observe the United Nations" /> United
Nationsresolution and the joint statement declared at the (last)
six-party talks," Aso was quoted as saying by the official. 

North Korea agreed last week to return to the talks which it
abandoned 12 months ago in protest at US sanctions aimed at
blocking its access to the international banking system. 

The US says some of the North Korean funds in a Macau bank came
from counterfeiting and other illicit activities. 

Pyongyang on Wednesday said it would return to the six-party
talks on the condition that the issue of lifting the financial
sanctions is discussed and settled. North and South Korea,
China, Japan, Russia and the United States are part of the
forum. 

Ban is expected to pay a courtesy call on Japanese Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe on Monday, the Japanese foreign ministry
said. 

Since being named in October, the secretary general-designate
has travelled to Russia, France and China -- all veto-wielding
permanent members of the UN Security Council. 

North Korea said on Saturday Japan should not attend the
six-party talks after Japanese officials reportedly said Tokyo
would not recognize the communist country as a nuclear-armed
state. 

Japanese authorities have "clearly proved themselves that they
are political imbeciles incapable of judging the trend of the
situation and their deplorable position," a North Korean foreign
ministry official said. 

On Sunday, Ban also pledged, as secretary general, to help Japan
resolve the issue of abductions of Japanese nationals by North
Korean agents in the 1970s and 1980s. 

"I understand the Japanese concerns over the abduction issue
more than anyone else. I will cooperate on the issue as the
United Nations Secretary General," the Japanese official quoted
Ban as saying. 

Japan has persistently raised the abduction issue at the six-way
talks, angering North Korea and irritating China, South Korea
and Russia. 

But Washington has supported Tokyo's drive to force Pyongyang to
come clean on the abductions. 

North Korea admitted in 2002 that it had abducted 13 Japanese
nationals to use them for spy training in Japanese language and
culture. Five survivors were later returned. 

Pyongyang claimed the eight others were dead, but Japan
suspected they were still alive and kept under wraps as they
might know secrets about the reclusive communist state. 

Japan and the European Union" /> European Unionon Thursday
submitted a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly
condemning North Korea for "systemic, widespread and grave"
human rights violations, particularly relating to abductions of
foreigners. 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 21 Korea Times: S. Korea, US Seek Joint Strategy 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times   

By Park Song-wu Staff Reporter

 Robert Joseph, U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control
and international security, and R. Nicholas Burns, U.S.
undersecretary of state for political affairs, will visit Seoul
on Monday, amid harsh rhetoric from North Korea ahead of the
resumption of the six-party talks on its nuclear weapons program.

 During their two-day stay in Seoul, the two Americans are
expected to coordinate measures to execute U.N. Security Council
sanctions and to discuss strategies on how to move forward with
the denuclearization talks that are promised to be held within
the year.

 Ban Ki-moon, South Korean minister of foreign affairs and
trade, will also return to Seoul later in the evening after a
two-day visit to Tokyo, where he held strategic talks with
Japanese leaders on ways to improve bilateral ties and measures
to make substantial progress in the six-party talks. 

Pyongyang said on Oct. 31 that it will return to the negotiating
table ``with no conditions'' after its top nuclear negotiator
Kim Gye-gwan held a secret meeting in Beijing with his U.S.
counterpart Christopher Hill mediated by China's Wu Dawei. 

But the North said a day later that it agreed to resume the
talks to find a negotiated way out of Washington's financial
sanctions, which have almost severed Pyongyang's access to the
international financial system.

 Since announcing its return to the talks, Pyongyang has kept up
harsh rhetoric against Washington, branding it a ``warmonger''
in a recently published editorial in its Rodong Sinmun. 

``The United States has become more fanatic in seeking chances
to attack us, criticizing our war-deterrent measures, which we
were forced to strengthen to protect our sovereignty,'' the
editorial said. 

Pyongyang describes its nuclear weapons program as a measure to
deter Washington from attacking the North. 

The North's No. 2 leader, Kim Yong-nam, also said at a meeting
with a South Korean delegation last week that any progress in
the six-party talks will depend on the United States' attitude.

 These remarks are considered a reaction to Washington's recent
demands that the North scrap one of its nuclear facilities
immediately and accept inspections by the International Atomic
Energy Agency. 

The North also called Tokyo a ``political imbecile,'' urging it
not to participate in the six-party talks anymore.

 In a statement carried by the North's official Korea Central
News Agency, Pyongyang criticized Japan's ``malicious''
intention to not accept a nuclear North Korea, indicating that
it would try to redefine the six-party talks as an arms
reduction dialogue. 

im@koreatimes.co.kr 11-05-2006 19:01         
  
*****************************************************************
 22 Korea Times: [Times Forum] Regionalism in the Age of Asia 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion   

By Kim Dae-jung

 The 21st century is an age where globalization and regionalism
both coexist and compete with each other. Though the tide of
globalization is strong, there is also a countervailing need for
regionalism. Globalization can only succeed on the basis of
healthy regionalism. In this respect, Asia¡¯s rise is highly
significant. The region is emerging as the epicenter of the
world, not only in terms of history and culture, but also in its
economic growth potential and position in international
politics. As the world shifts from an age where Asia was
observed only from the perspective of Western society to an age
where Asia meets the rest of the world from its own perspective,
we are witnessing a future in which Asia will be further
integrated and become truly globalized. The world is shifting
from an age that was long centered on the West to a new age
centered on Asia. 

The task entrusted to us in this ¡°Age of Asia¡± is to expand
democracy and promote peace, to contribute to the welfare of
humanity and global stability. In Asia, there are still
countries where democracy and human rights are under threat and
where the shadows of the Cold War linger, such as on the Korean
Peninsula. There are still places where poverty threatens human
dignity and human security. Without strengthening democracy and
eradicating poverty, we cannot expect to have peace. These tasks
cannot be resolved without dialogue and cooperation within and
among regions. Efforts to establish an East Asian community,
such as the East Asia Forum (EAF) and the East Asia Summit
(EAS), are all responses to the challenges of this new age. 

It is true, however, that despite its vast potential and real
capabilities, Asia currently lacks the kind of solidarity that
one sees manifested in the European Union and the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It is also true that a huge gap
exists between some Asian countries in terms of development and
competitiveness. Therefore, Asia should, on the one hand, work
for balanced benefits and development among its countries and,
on the other hand, prepare for cooperation and competition with
other leading regional communities. 

At the ASEAN Plus Three Summit held in Vietnam in November 1998,
I raised the need for an East Asian community and proposed the
establishment of the East Asian Vision Group (EAVG) to pursue
this goal. I believed that East Asia was unable to mount an
effective collective response when the 1997 financial crisis
simultaneously devastated several economies, because there was
not yet an organization for regional economic cooperation _
despite the fact that the world was becoming more integrated
with the emergence of the World Trade Organization (WTO). 

In October 1999, the EAVG was launched in Seoul with the
countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN),
plus Korea, China and Japan, along with representatives from
business and academe. The aim was to promote regional trade and
investment, and strengthen cooperation in industries and
national resources. The EAVG met five times between its founding
and May 2001, and issued a report on the basic direction and
mid- to long-term vision of cooperation in six sectors: the
economy; finance; politics and security; environment and energy;
society, culture and education; and institutions. The EAVG
suggested that the ASEAN Plus Three Summit be developed into the
East Asia Summit and that the East Asia Forum be established.
There have also been various efforts by the East Asian Study
Group, which replaced the EAVG, to establish the East Asia
Summit and the East Asian Free Trade Area as mid- to long-term
goals. 

Despite such considerable achievements, there are still many
obstacles to overcome. In particular, the complicated and often
tense relationships between Korea, China and Japan over
historical issues have combined with domestic political
interests to stir up nationalism, undermining the atmosphere of
cooperation in the region. The international politics of the
North Korean nuclear issue, rather than leading to the
dissipation of Cold War sentiments, is strengthening those
forces that aspire to revive the Cold War. 

Enabling regionalism to take root in Asia and forming the East
Asian community are, in fact, tasks that need much effort and
time. The East Asian Economic Caucus (EAEC) proposed by former
Prime Minister Mahathir of Malaysia met strong opposition from
the United States, which suspected it of having political
intentions. As a result, it failed to progress. Also, when I
proposed the EAVG in 1998, Southeast Asian countries were
apprehensive. They expressed misgivings, feeling that what I was
advocating was aimed at expanding the influence of Northeast
Asian countries in Southeast Asia. However, as the example of
European Union has shown, Asia will eventually take the same
course of integration. I am confident now that there is
widespread understanding of this in Southeast Asia, and already
much progress has been made towards achieving such a goal. 

Resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue and peace on the
Korean Peninsula are very important conditions for achieving an
East Asian community and bringing peace in Asia. Despite reduced
tensions and increased exchanges and cooperation on the
Peninsula since the Inter-Korean Summit and the announcement of
the South-North Joint Declaration on June 15, 2000, military
antagonism still remains. To resolve the nuclear issue, North
Korea must completely give up its nuclear weapons program and
accept thorough inspections. In return, the United States should
provide security assurances and lift economic sanctions from the
North Korean economy. This can be realized through an
improvement of U.S.-North Korean relations and a resumption of
the Six-Party Talks and their real success. The issue of the
Korean Peninsula goes beyond inter-Korean relations. It is an
issue that concerns the whole of Asia and the whole world.
Moreover, peace on the Peninsula is not just limited to the
military level, but directly linked to economic prosperity,
human rights and democracy. 

Back in 1971, when I was the main opposition party¡¯s
presidential candidate, I proposed that the four surrounding
powers _ the U.S., Soviet Union, China and Japan _ should
guarantee peace on the Korean Peninsula. My suggestion was to
encourage the four powers to deter any chance of war and
guarantee security. It was a realistic goal that sought not only
to end the state of war, but also to eliminate the undemocratic
structure of South Korean society at the time, because Cold War
logic and the inter-Korean confrontation justified the existence
of an authoritarian dictatorship. 

The members of the current Six-Party Talks are the same four
powers that I proposed at that time, plus the two Koreas. I
believe the Six-Party framework should not restrict itself to
being just a temporary meeting to resolve the North Korean
nuclear issue. I believe it should develop into a permanent
multilateral organization for the promotion of peace and
democracy on the Korean Peninsula and in East Asia. Such an idea
was reflected in the ``Kwangju Declaration¡¯¡¯ announced on June
17, 2006 after the ``2006 Kwangju Summit of Nobel Peace
Laureates¡¯¡¯ held in Kwangju on June 15-17. Significantly, the
summit was held on the occasion of the sixth anniversary of the
June 15 South-North Joint Declaration. The Nobel Peace Prize
winning individuals and organizations that participated came to
consensus on the issues of democracy, human rights, poverty
reduction, and peace in Asia. Their agreement was reflected in
the Declaration.

 There is no reason to be pessimistic about the future of
democracy and peace in Asia and the establishment of an East
Asian community. Though many obstacles still exist, efforts from
each country will brighten the future of Asia. This is a region
rich in diversity and high standards of culture; it is a vast
area where the experiences of self-achieved, successful
democratization are spreading; and where the development of
information technology and common economic benefits are helping
to hasten the integration of Asia and bring lasting peace. East
Asia can also be a shining example for the rest of the world as
a place where various great religions and cultures _
Confucianism, Buddhism, Catholicism, Protestantism and Islam _¡©
coexist and cooperate. In light of the clash of civilizations
happening in other parts of the world, this remains a source of
great hope for Asian integration. 

Former President Kim Dae-jung contributed this article to the
inaugural issue of the ¡°Global Asia,¡± an English journal on
international politics launched by Prof, Moon Chung-in of Yonsei
University, a former diplomatic advisor to President Roh
Moo-hyun. + Ed. 

11-05-2006 17:47         
*****************************************************************
 23 Korea Times: Kim Jong-il¡¯s Strategy 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion   

By Tong Kim

 Kim Jong-il¡¯s decision to return to the six-party talks after
a year-long hiatus is not a big surprise but certainly a
temporary relief from concerns about the mounting tension on the
Korean peninsula since the Oct. 9 nuclear test. It is only a
tactical decision. It fits into a consistent pattern of North
Korean behavior _ they always came back to talks with the United
States even after they left the table without the promise of a
return.

 In Seoul, a question was raised during a National Assembly
hearing last week regarding whether South Korea was excluded
from the trilateral meetings in Beijing talks that produced a
compromise that the issue of Macau¡¯s Banco Delta Asia will be
discussed by a ¡°separate mechanism or a working group¡± when
North Korea returns to the talks.

 The South Korean vice foreign minister said Seoul had put in
its own two cents through its ¡°common and comprehensive¡±
approach that was explained to the United States.

 However, this question was politically charged for domestic
consumption. It was irrelevant to the core issue of how to bring
about a denuclearized North Korea. Likewise, it is a moot point
that Washington insists that the DPRK agreed to return to the
talks without condition.

 Pyongyang said its decision for return was ¡°on the premise¡± _
on the condition _ that the sanction issue ¡°will be discussed
and settled.¡± The U.S. chief negotiator, Christopher Hill, only
said the issue will be ¡°discussed.¡±

 Pundits speculated Kim Jong-il¡¯s decision as a result of
unbearable pressure from China compounded with the all out
sanctions from the UN Security Council resolution 1718.
President Bush welcomed the development and thanked China for
its role in bringing North Korea to the talks, while vowing to
strictly implement the UN resolution.

 Kim Jong-il still calls the shots. He decides when to walk out
of talks and when to return to talks.

 It was Kim who asked China to tell Washington to come to
Beijing primarily for a bilateral meeting between the DPRK and
the United States. Kim¡¯s comment to Tang Jiaxun, the Chinese
envoy who went to Pyongyang earlier last month, ¡°We will return
to the six party talks if the financial issue gets resolved,¡±
went without the scrutiny it deserved.

 What Kim Jong-il must have meant was that he had a new softened
position that he would return to the talks, not after the issue
has been resolved but if it will be discussed and resolved
within the six party talks. This comment resonated with
Washington¡¯s back down on the issue prior to the nuclear test.

 In addition, the North Korean leader needed to hear directly
from the United States that it accepts his new offer. In the
context of the previous U.S. position that it would not meet
with the North Koreans until they return to the multilateral
talks, the U.S.-DPRK bilateral meeting in Beijing was a
significant face saving development for Pyongyang.

 Call it a breakthrough or a Chinese victory, if you will, but
it did not have to take a year to reach the compromise. Foreign
policy has two aspects _ format and substance. It took one year
to accommodate a compromised format. Format is important in
diplomacy. But the purpose of format lies in substance. You can
imagine how long it is going to take to get to the end state of
substance through negotiation.

 The process of substance has not really begun yet. The
September 2005 joint statement provides only a broad set of
principles toward a nuclear free Korean Peninsula, but not a
road map.

 The United States and others said they will not recognize North
Korea as a nuclear weapons state. Such a position obviously
reflects their common interest in nuclear nonproliferation.

 But that does not alter the North Korean status as a proven
nuclear weapons state now. In reality Kim Jong-il is coming back
to the negotiating table with an enhanced position of strength _
with improved missiles and tested nuclear bombs _ more
bargaining chips.

 Since the North Koreans consistently maintain that they will
abide by the 2005 joint statement and that they will carry out
their duty to achieve a denuclearized peninsula, also as the
will of their ¡°great leader¡± Kim Il-sung, the United States
and other participants will have to operate with the supposition
that they are serious. The whole process of negotiation should
be ¡°distrust and verify.¡±

 In the mean time, Kim Jong-il will deploy his own negotiating
strategy, which may include a protracted approach beyond the
Bush administration, unless there is a higher level meeting with
Washington, through which he may restore his trust in the United
States. His plan may include tackling such peripheral or
bilateral issues as a ¡°permanent peace regime¡± and ¡°steps to
normalize relations¡± with the United States.

 In addition to the Banco Delta issue, the United States and
other parties should be prepared for a new agenda the North
Koreans are likely to bring up; the UN resolutions adopted to
punish North Korea. To abide by the United Nations charter¡¯s
purposes and principles is an agreed item in the 9/19 joint
statement.

 There has been some speculation regarding the timing of Kim
Jong-il¡¯s offer for the resumption of the talks with only one
week left before the midterm elections in the United States.
Many had anticipated that he would wait at least until after the
elections on Nov. 7. Well, Washington denied any relation to the
elections, but Kim Jong-il was aware of its relevance.

 He knew he would have to deal with the United States sooner or
later. He knew he has a bad image and a bad reputation to all
the American people. He probably wanted to show that he is not a
petty politician, while trying to defray the increasing
pressures from the sanctions.

 I am cautiously optimistic about the prospect of progress at
the coming multilateral talks, with bilateral negotiations in
that framework, as neither the United States nor the DPRK has
better options. As everybody agrees, diplomacy is the right way
to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue. What¡¯s your take?

 Tong Kim is former senior interpreter at the U.S. State
Department and now a research professor at Korea University and
a visiting scholar at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced
International Studies (SAIS). 
*****************************************************************
 24 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Wants Japan Out of Nuke Talks 

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday November 4, 2006 4:01 AM

AP Photo SEL110 

By BURT HERMAN 

Associated Press Writer 

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea said Saturday it wants
Japan out of six-party disarmament talks, calling officials in
Tokyo ``political imbeciles'' for saying they will not accept
Pyongyang as a nuclear power. 

Meanwhile, the North's leader Kim Jong Il made his first public
military visit since the Oct. 9 test, the North's official
Korean Central News Agency reported late Friday. He visited an
army unit but it was not clear from the report when it took
place. 

The North agreed earlier this week to return to the
international disarmament negotiations - which also include
China, Russia, the U.S. and South Korea - in the first
relaxation of tension after its Oct. 9 nuclear test. The talks
have been stalled for a year. 

A statement from North Korea's Foreign Ministry on Saturday said
``there is no need for Japan to participate in (the talks) as a
local delegate because it is no more than a state of the U.S.
and it is enough for Tokyo just to be informed of the results of
the talks by Washington.'' 

Japan is a common target for the North's hostile rhetoric,
stemming from Tokyo's imperial occupation of the Korean
peninsula in the early 20th century. Pyongyang has called before
for Japan to be excluded from the nuclear talks. 

The talks have been on hold since November 2005, with Pyongyang
refusing to attend because of a U.S. campaign to cut off its
access to international banks due to alleged illegal activity
such as counterfeiting and money laundering. 

The Foreign Ministry said most of the international community
had welcomed North Korea's return to the talks. 

``But it is only Japan that expressed its wicked intention,''
the ministry said, referring to comments by Tokyo that it will
not accept a nuclear North Korea. ``The Japanese authorities
have thus clearly proved themselves that they are political
imbeciles,'' it added. The statement was carried on KCNA. 

The statement came after North Korea's No. 2 leader said any
progress at the revived talks on the communist nation's nuclear
program will depend on the United States, an indication that any
breakthrough at the negotiations could be difficult. 

``Results of the six-party talks depend on the U.S. attitude,''
Kim Yong Nam told a visiting South Korean delegation in
Pyongyang, Yonhap news agency reported Friday. 

Kim accused the U.S. of seeking the resumed nuclear talks to
bolster the Republicans' popularity ahead of U.S. midterm
elections on Tuesday, casting doubts on Washington's sincerity
in resolving ``fundamental problems between North Korea and the
U.S.'' 

Kim's comments, made in a meeting with members of South Korea's
minor opposition Democratic Labor Party, could not be
immediately confirmed by the party headquarters in Seoul. 

The North Korean official claimed it was Pyongyang that proposed
returning to the negotiations as a way for the U.S. to save face
and not appear to be caving in to the North's demand that the
financial issue be discussed. 

That account contradicts U.S. statements that diplomacy by
China, the North's last major ally, had been instrumental in
luring the North back to the nuclear talks. 

KCNA reported that North leader Kim Jong Il visited the North's
Korean People's Army Unit 1112, inspected the barracks and took
photographs with the soldiers there. 

It was the first report in official media on Kim's activities
since the North agreed to return to the six-nation nuclear
talks. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 25 AFP: US, SKorea, Japan to strategise for six-way talks 

 Sun Nov 5, 5:52 AM ET 		 	 

SEOUL (AFP) - The top nuclear envoys of the United States, South 
Korea" /> South Koreaand Japan were to meet as early as this 
weekend to prepare for six-way talks on North Korea" /> North 
Korea. 

 The trio "have agreed to meet in Washington this weekend or
early next week" after consultations through diplomatic
channels, an unnamed government source told South Korea's Yonhap
news agency Sunday. 

The trilateral meeting will focus on finetuning negotiation
strategies as North Korea last week pledged to return to six-way
nuclear talks, the source said. 

"The six-way talks resume after a year-long hiatus. It is
essential to formulate effective strategies to make the talks
produce achievements," the source was quoted as saying. 

The agenda would include how to handle North Korea's possible
demand for treating itself as a nuclear power, and how to tackle
Pyongyang's demand for lifting US financial sanctions, the
source added. 

Attending the three-way meeting are Assistant Secretary of State
Christopher Hill, US chief negotiator to the six-way talks, and
his South Korean and Japanese counterparts, Chung Yung-Woo and
Kenichiro Sasae. 

North Korea confirmed Wednesday it would return to six-way talks
after boycotting the negotiations since November 2005. 

The overtures from Pyongyang followed its October 9 nuclear
test. 

US officials have feared Pyongyang could use its new nuclear
status as leverage to seek an easing of US and UN sanctions
against the communist state, while stalling on demands that it
verifiably give up its arsenal. 

Officials in Seoul, Washington and Tokyo have publicly refused
to award North Korea nuclear power status despite its first
declared atomic bomb blast. 

North Korea has faced UN Security Council-mandated tougher and
wider sanctions following the blast. 

The six-way talks, which began in 2003, bring together the two
Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the US to disarm North Korea. 

North Korea agreed in September 2005 to scrap its nuclear
programs in exchange for energy and security guarantees. 

But it walked out of the forum just two months later in protest
at US financial sanctions under which North Korean accounts
totaling 24 million dollars were frozen by a Macao bank. 

South Korean Vice Foreign Minister Yu Myung-Hwan said last week
the six-party talks were "most likely to take place" after the
APEC" /> APEC(Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) summit on
November 18-19 in Hanoi. 

  Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 26 Guardian Unlimited: Tourists Still Flock to Korean DMZ 

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday November 4, 2006 6:16 PM

AP Photo SEL111 

By MERAIAH FOLEY 

Associated Press Writer 

PANMUNJOM, Korea (AP) - More than half a century of fragile
peace between North and South Korea has produced one of the
world's most unusual tourist attractions. 

As global leaders struggle to strike a balance between punishing
the communist-led North for its Oct. 9 nuclear test and engaging
the volatile state in arms talks, hundreds of tourists are still
flocking to the front lines each week hoping for a glimpse
across the last Cold War frontier. 

Littered with land mines and encased in razor wire, the
156-mile-long Demilitarized Zone between the rival Koreas is
among the most popular sights for overseas visitors to South
Korea. 

At least 10 companies offer daily bus trips to the DMZ from the
capital, Seoul, offering 24-hour phone reservation lines, free
hotel pickups and customized tours in English, Japanese and
Korean. 

Colorful brochures scattered in hotel lobbies and tourist
information kiosks across the capital promise ``a real
eye-opening experience'' that will ``leave you with a dramatic
sense of the tremendous tragedy of separated families, the
division of the peninsula and the hopes for reunification.'' 

Technically still at war since their 1950-53 war ended in a
cease-fire rather than a peace treaty, the two Koreas are
strictly separated by the 2 mile-wide strip that is often called
the world's most heavily fortified border. 

``There is no other country in the world where people with the
same nationality are divided, aiming guns at each other. So this
makes it a unique sightseeing destination,'' said Choi Suk-bum,
a spokesman for the Korea Tourism Organization, the South's main
tourism body. 

On a trip this week, some two dozen American, Canadian and
European tourists handed over about $42 each to make the 33-mile
journey north from Seoul. 

As the bus rolls into the first DMZ checkpoint - where a South
Korean guard wearing full combat gear and reflective sunglasses
carefully checks each passenger's passport - a large billboard
warns of land mines ahead. 

Each tourist is asked to sign a release which states that their
visit ``will entail entry into a hostile area, and possibility
of injury or death as a direct result of enemy action.'' 

Everyone signs. 

Inside the zone, the tour stops at the truce village of
Panmunjom, a bleak cluster of blue huts that is jointly
administered by the U.S.-led United Nations Command and North
Korea, and a military observation post from which the Northern
village of Kijungdong can be seen. 

Tourists here are strictly controlled - told where to look,
where to stand, where they can and cannot take photographs - for
fear of provoking the North Korean soldiers who keep a constant
vigil over the invisible demarcation line. The DMZ has been the
site of numerous violent confrontations over the decades, but
there have been no fatal clashes since the 1980s. 

At an obligatory stop at a gift store, visitors can take their
pick from a range of DMZ kitsch - hats, T-shirts, tea towels,
key rings, golf balls emblazoned with the U.N. logo, child-sized
combat fatigues and boxes of barbed wire said to have been
removed from the zone on the 50th anniversary of the cease-fire. 

An hour or so later, the tour pulls into a parking lot filled
with at least 10 other buses. Here, tourists are instructed to
don bright yellow hard hats before descending 245 feet
underground to explore part of an extensive tunnel presumably
built by North Korea in the 1970s to stage an invasion into the
South. Crammed with tourists and averaging just 6 feet high and
6 feet across, the tunnel feels dank and claustrophobic. 

Tours to the DMZ run nearly every day of the week, and operators
say they have not seen a drop in visitors since the North's
underground nuclear test last month. 

``I think you could call it a spectacle, maybe a
once-in-a-lifetime thing,'' said 27-year-old Paul Britton from
Vancouver, Canada, explaining why he chose to attend the tour.
``Like people watching the Berlin Wall come down. Maybe this is
the next wall.'' 

``It's that kind of secretive, unknown peak into North Korea,''
agreed Joel Hickson, a 35-year-old applications engineer from
Austin, Texas, who interrupted his five-day business trip to
visit the DMZ. ``There are just very few places like that left
in the world.'' 

Hickson admitted the thought of visiting the DMZ just a few
weeks after Pyongyang's nuclear test was ``kind of intimidating,
but once you're here it feels safe.'' 

The Korea Tourism Organization says it does not keep statistics
on how many foreigners attend the DMZ tour each year. But one of
the more popular companies, Korea Travel Bureau, estimates it
takes as many as 12,000 visitors to the zone annually. 

Another popular tour is run by the United Service Organization -
the nonprofit group best known for its star-studded shows that
entertain U.S. troops abroad - which takes about 8,000 mostly
U.S. tourists a year. 

The USO has been running tours to the DMZ since the early 1970s.
It now runs two to three trips every week, ``and they're always
full,'' said USO Korea's Executive Director Stan Perry. 

``There is a sense of being able to visit and see something that
many others around the world only hear about,'' he said. ``If
you think about this, two countries separated by a thin line -
it's amazing.''	 
		 	 	   
    Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 27 London Times: Pentagon targets Kim’s nuclear sites - 

The Sunday Times                         
November 05, 2006                    

Sarah Baxter, Washington
 		   		 		
THE Pentagon is speeding up plans for possible military strikes 
on North Korea’s nuclear programme as concern mounts that Arab 
states are also looking to acquire nuclear technology. 

US defence officials said detailed planning was under way for 
precision strikes on nuclear facilities such as the North Korean 
plutonium reprocessing plant at Yongbyon. The plant is thought to 
have supplied the plutonium fuel used in an underground nuclear 
test carried out by Kim Jong-il’s pariah regime on October 9. 

A Pentagon official said “various military options” for halting
North Korea’s nuclear programme were under consideration. “Other
than nuclear strikes, which are considered excessive, there are
several options now in place. Planning has been accelerated,”
the official told The Washington Times. 

According to defence sources, one option includes strikes on
Yongbyon by Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from submarines or
ships. Precision-guided bombs and missiles could also be
delivered by B-52 or B-2 stealth bombers. 

Navy Seals and other commandos would be deployed inside North
Korea to help blow up facilities such as Yongbyon. It is
believed such an operation could set back Kim’s nuclear
programme by 10 years. 

The plans emerged as the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) revealed that Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Saudi Arabia
are seeking to join the nuclear club of nations. Tunisia and the
United Arab Emirates were also said to have expressed interest. 

The Arab countries claim to be interested in developing civilian
nuclear power, which they are entitled to do under international
law. But Iran and North Korea have increased concern that
assistance with peaceful nuclear know-how can be used to boost
covert nuclear weapons programmes. 

Michael Rubin, an expert on the Middle East at the
neoconservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington,
said: “Iran and North Korea have shown that non-compliance
equals reward.” 

The United Nations Security Council is still wrangling over
Russian opposition to mild sanctions against Iran, even though
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is defiantly proceeding with
Tehran’s nuclear enrichment programme. 

The threat of a nuclear- armed Iran is encouraging apprehensive
Arab states to reverse their support for a nuclear-free Middle
East and develop atomic technology. In oil-rich countries such
as Saudi Arabia, the benefits of a civilian nuclear power
programme may be hard to fathom. 

David Albright, a nuclear proliferation expert at the Institute
for Science and International Security in Washington, said:
“With Iran moving forward with its nuclear programme, it is
difficult for the IAEA to say to other nations, ‘No, you can’t
have it’, and the United States is not able to stop it.” 

According to Rubin, America is partly responsible for the rush
to acquire civilian nuclear energy. The US has been encouraging
developing nations to embrace nuclear power under the global
nuclear energy partnership (GNEP), launched by the State
Department in February. 

Robert Joseph, US undersecretary for arms control and
international security, said the GNEP aimed to promote clean,
renewable energy while maintaining strict controls on
non-proliferation. “We think that would help us to envision a
future where we can bring the benefits of nuclear power to the
developing world,” he said. 

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said last week that
America had no objection to Egypt’s nuclear programme. And
President Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen also recently announced
plans to generate nuclear power in co-operation with America. 

But Rubin warned: “The idea that we can keep making concessions
to nuclear proliferation and that it won’t spread is a fantasy.
If you cannot answer the question, ‘Who is going to be in charge
of these countries in 10 years’ time?’ it is idiotic to help
them develop these programmes.” 

Once a country acquires nuclear weapons, it becomes difficult to
threaten militarily. McCormack said of North Korea “In terms of
the military and the Pentagon, planners plan. But the president
has made very, very clear that we are committed to finding a
diplomatic solution to the current issues before us.” 

North Korea agreed last week to return to international
disarmament negotiations under pressure from China and UN
sanctions. But it also called Japanese officials “political
imbeciles” for claiming they would not allow Pyongyang to remain
a nuclear power. 

A senior US defence official said America was committed to
protecting South Korea and Japan from North Korean aggression,
if necessary by using US nuclear weapons. “We will resort to
whatever force levels we need to have,” the official said. “That
nuclear deterrence is in place.”   	 		

Copyright 2006                 Times Newspapers Ltd.
*****************************************************************
 28 Deseret News: Bennett says 'axis of evil' is weakened but still intact
 
[deseretnews.com] 

Sunday, November 5, 2006                                 
By Stephen Speckman
Deseret Morning News                                          

The way Sen. Bob Bennett sees it, today's "axis of evil" is still 
connected by its contempt for the West, but it's perhaps less 
evil with Iraq's Saddam Hussein out of power.

       As for whether there is even less evil in the axis with
North Korea's new commitment to resume talks about curtailing
its nuclear objectives, Bennett said Tuesday, "You hope so."

       Invited by the University of Utah's Hinckley Institute of
Politics, the Republican senator last week gave U. students his
own briefing on Iran, Iraq and North Korea, the three countries
that in 2002 President Bush referred to as the axis of evil.

       But first Bennett compared the complexities of dealing
with those countries to the more "simple" days of the Cold War,
a time, he said, when you were either for communism or you were
for the West.

       Then, focusing on Iraq, Bennett described a pre-Iraq war
history in which the West typically ignored Islam's
contributions to the world throughout the centuries and a lack
of effort in the West to understand the religion. And when the
United States invaded in 2003, he said it lifted the lid off
"ancient grudges" within the region that are now flaring up,
referring to conflicts between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

       "Basically, that is what is happening in Iraq," he said.

       The "mess" in Iraq that Bennett outlined also consists of
members of Saddam Hussein's Baath party, criminals Saddam
released from prison during the invasion and al-Qaida all trying
to drive the United States out of Iraq.

       Bennett said there is "no easy way out" of a war that he
reminded students has never been solely about weapons of mass
destruction, which it turned out Saddam didn't have, Bennett
added. Referring to a pre-war briefing by Secretary of State
Condo- leezza Rice, Bennett said invading Iraq was also about
taking down a "tyrant" and a regime that threatened those who
spoke out against it with being shot.

       Pulling out now, he said, would mean enemies in the
region would follow a retreat back to U.S. soil. Bennett added
that's a view taken by top military officials — and followed by
Bush — that the media, singling out the New York Times, isn't
reporting.

       As for Iran and North Korea, Bennett said both countries
appear to be using threats of nuclear pursuits to "blackmail"
the West to get what they want.

       In Iran, the mullahs, or religious leaders, hold all the
real power and at present they are tolerating tough talk from
the country's political leader, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
according to Bennett. The mullahs, he pointed out, could remove
Ahmadinejad from power.

       But in North Korea, there is a Communist regime that is
near to collapsing, an observation that Bennett connected to
renewed six-party talks that are expected to include the United
States, Japan, Russia, China and South Korea. Bennett said that
involving other countries is the "way to go" toward achieving
more productive talks. "That's what we're pinning our hopes on,"
he said.

E-mail: sspeckman@desnews.com			  		 		   

© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company

*****************************************************************
 29 washingtonpost.com: Microsoft's Gates Looks to Energy - 

List of Widely Diversified Holdings Grows as Investment Firm
Adds Utility

By Washington Post Staff Writer

Saturday, November 4, 2006; Page D01

Investing billions of dollars for Bill Gates without attracting
a lot of attention is a bit like tiptoeing an elephant through a
crowded office, but Cascade Investments LLC has managed to go
little noticed in recent years while channeling investments for
the chairman.

The most unwelcome attention it has received was for trying to
avoid attention -- in 2004 Gates paid the government a $800,000
penalty to settle charges for neglecting to report investment
holdings that had crossed the Securities and Exchange Commission
threshold for disclosure.

News leaked out yesterday that Gates's personal investment firm
had agreed to stick a toe a bit further into the energy
business. Though Cascade did not return phone calls, PNM
Resources Inc., a New Mexico utility, revealed that the two had
agreed to become equal partners in a new unregulated electric
power-generation joint venture.

In a conference call yesterday, PNM chief executive Jeff Sterba
said his company would transfer some or all of its unregulated
power plants into a new venture called EnergyCo Ltd. and that
Cascade would provide matching values of cash. Neither Cascade
nor PNM said how much money would be involved, but PNM's
unregulated power plants are worth $700 million or more, judging
from the cost of building or acquiring them.

"The purpose of the joint venture is to accelerate the growth of
our unregulated operations," Sterba said. "The challenge will be
how does that cash get put to work."

It's a long way from the software business, and that's part of
the idea. Gates built his fortune, and the fortune he gave to
the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, on Microsoft stock.
Cascade's job has been to diversify those holdings.

Earlier this year, Cascade paid $84 million for preferred
convertible shares of Pacific Ethanol Inc., a publicly traded
ethanol producer. That is a fast-growing industry and it has
captured the imagination of many West Coast high-technology
financiers.

According to SEC documents, at the end of June, Cascade's
biggest positions included $1.35 billion worth of , $731.3
million worth of solid-waste management firm , $375.4 million
worth of and $371.2 million worth of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.,
which is run by Gates's close friend Warren Buffett.

Cascade has stakes in PNM Resources, broadcaster Inc., Four
Seasons Hotel Inc., diversified utility firm Otter Tail Corp.
and theme-park operator In most of those companies, Cascade is
the largest or second-largest shareholder. It may have invested
in other stocks, but if those holdings amount to less than 5
percent of a company's outstanding shares Cascade does not need
to disclose them.

Investment bankers who have worked with Cascade say that part of
the appeal of working with the managers of Gates's money is that
Gates is looking for long-term investments. That makes them
different from many private equity firms, which look for big
returns and early exits.

"They have a longer-term horizon than many other investors in
private equity space," said one investment banker.

The manager of Cascade is Michael Larson, who did not return a
phone call yesterday. (The person who answers the phone at
Cascade does not identify the firm; she simply says
"investments.") Larson also helps manage the portfolio of the
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Larson has worked for Gates since 1994. According to a Fortune
magazine article, he is the son of an industrial engineer who
grew up in North Dakota and Albuquerque, where PNM has it
headquarters. He went to Claremont College in California and got
an MBA from the University of Chicago at age 21, the magazine
said in a 1999 piece. He worked for Arco and then for Putnam
Investments in Boston.

His investing style is not flashy. He negotiated personally with
PNM Resources, and he does everything from pick investment
opportunities to vote Cascade shares.

He has been buying shares of electric utilities for more than
two years. Cascade owns 6.5 million shares, or 9.4 percent, of
the outstanding shares of PNM Resources. Its stake is worth
about $188 million.

The new venture with PNM should be able to take advantage of the
deregulation of the utility industry. Depression-era legislation
had placed restrictions on utility ownership and for decades it
was a dull but dependable business. State regulatory commissions
set rates of return on their investments to moderate the bills
for homeowners and businesses.

But in the 1990s and in 2005, new legislation and regulatory
rulings made it easier for investors in power generating plants
to sell power into regional grids for the highest possible price.

Unlike a regulated utility, which needs the approval of state
regulators to raise fuel or transmission rates, the new joint
venture will have no guaranteed rate of return but will be able
to sell electricity to industries, commercial customers or
utilities at whatever price the market will bear.

PNM has regulated-utility customers in New Mexico and Texas. In
New Mexico, regulators have insisted that PNM maintain enough of
its own generating capacity to supply customers.

But PNM has interests in other plants and it sells their output.
Those interests include one-third of a natural-gas-fired plant
in Luna, N.M.; 100 percent of a small gas-fired plant in
Lordsburg, N.M.; a large coal-fired plant in Twin Oaks, Tex.,
that it bought for $480 million; and a 10 percent stake in a
three-unit nuclear plant in Palo Verde, Ariz. Altogether, PNM's
interests in those plants amount to 695 megawatts of output.

But PNM, like many utilities, has limited financial ability to
expand.

That's where Cascade came in. Last year, it invested $100
million in PNM Resources equity-linked securities to help fund
the acquisition of TNP Enterprises of Fort Worth. And it was
ready to do more.

PNM chief executive Sterba said, "The rate at which this
[venture] unfolds solely depends on the kinds of transactions we
find in the market." He added, "the financial flexibility of
this venture is broader than what you typically see."

But then, the typical venture doesn't have Bill Gates as a
partner.

1996- The Washington Post Company | |   [ 
*****************************************************************
 30 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear Debate Splits Japanese Lawmakers 

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Sunday November 5, 2006 6:46 AM

By HIROKO TABUCHI 

Associated Press Writer 

TOKYO (AP) - Top Japanese lawmakers squabbled Sunday over
whether to debate acquiring nuclear weapons as a deterrent
against North Korea, exposing widening cracks within Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe's ruling party. 

Several leading party politicians have proposed that Japan
should at least discuss acquiring nuclear weapons after
Pyongyang's Oct. 9 nuclear test - raising fears of a nuclear
arms race in Asia and provoking a widespread backlash, even from
within the ruling party. 

Shoichi Nakagawa, policy chief of the ruling Liberal Democratic
Party, reiterated his stance that the nuclear option should be
debated. 

``There must be debate on contingencies, including what to do
when a nuclear weapon comes flying (from North Korea),''
Nakagawa said on a Fuji TV talk show. 

But the party's strategy chief, Toshihiro Nikai, berated
Nakagawa, telling public broadcaster NHK that Japan was
committed to its postwar principles of not possessing,
developing or allowing nuclear weapons on its soil. 

``Japan is built on those principles ... and has finally begun
to be seen as a pacifist country,'' Nikai said. ``But repeated
remarks by top officials can invite misunderstandings.'' 

Prime Minister Abe has repeatedly insisted his party won't stray
from its long-standing non-nuclear principles, but hasn't been
able to bring hawks like Nakagawa and Foreign Minister Taro Aso
in line with that policy. That has raised doubts about Abe's
ability to keep his lieutenants in check. 

``Abe's Cabinet is obviously divided on this issue,'' lawmaker
Yoshiaki Takaki of the main opposition Democratic Party of Japan
told NHK. ``These are grave remarks and cannot be overlooked.'' 

Possession of nuclear weapons is a sensitive political issue in
Japan, which became the only country to suffer a nuclear attack
when U.S. atomic bombs were dropped on the cities of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki in 1945.	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 31 At Least 6 Arab Countries Are Developing Nuclear Power Domestically  
 
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 23:37:38 -0500

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-nuclear-arabs.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

By REUTERS

DUBAI (Reuters) - At least six Arab countries are developing 
domestic nuclear power programs to diversify energy sources, a 
Middle East economic magazine reported on Saturday.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco and Algeria have shown interest in 
developing nuclear power primarily for water desalination, the 
Middle East Economic Digest (MEED) quoted Tomihiro Taniguchi, 
deputy director-general of the Vienna-based International Atomic 
Energy Agency (IAEA), as saying.

``We held preliminary discussions with these governments. We will 
offer them help under our technical advisory program to conduct a 
study for the power plants,'' he was quoted as saying, adding 
that the interest the four nations had shown was ``at a tertiary 
stage.''

The United Arab Emirates and Tunisia have also shown interest in 
nuclear power, but their plans are at an infant stage, the 
magazine said.

Nobody at the IAEA was immediately available to comment. A 
diplomat close to the IAEA said the plans of Arab countries 
reflected ``renewed interest in nuclear power.''

Analysts say that besides the need for alternative energy 
sources, many Arab countries are concerned about Iran's nuclear 
ambitions.

Western powers are attempting to forge a U.N. resolution to force 
Iran to suspend its nuclear program.

Iran says it has a right to develop nuclear fuel, which it says 
it wants for peaceful goals, but which the West fears will be 
used to make atomic bombs.

Egypt's nuclear program is the Arab world's most advanced. Russia 
is looking to take part in a tender to construct nuclear power 
stations in the country, a Russian official said this week.

Egypt has ordered studies into building atomic power stations 
after President Hosni Mubarak in September called for a national 
dialogue on the issue.

MEED said Algeria's plans were the next most advanced after 
Egypt.

*****************************************************************
 32 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear debate on cards - 

www.smh.com.au

November 4, 2006 - 12:26PM
 	 	
A public debate on nuclear energy will follow the publication of
a taskforce report on the viability of the industry, Resources
Minister Ian Macfarlane says. 

Mr Macfarlane said he had received a briefing from former
Telstra head Ziggy Switkowski, who heads the government's
nuclear energy task force examining the viability of a future
nuclear power industry. 

"What we are seeing in the community is a willingness now to
consider nuclear energy," Mr Macfarlane told reporters. 

"We are seeing reports like the Switkowski report which will
indicate that nuclear energy will be competitive with low
emission coal within 15 years." 

Mr Macfarlane said the next step after receiving the report,
which is expected to be released in the next few weeks, would be
to have a public debate in Australia on nuclear energy, using
facts not fear. 

"We want to see debate that is based in understanding and
knowledge not a debate based on scare tactics," he said. 

AAP 

Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.                                                   
*****************************************************************
 33 Sydney Morning Herald: PM puts nuclear power on election agenda - 

www.smh.com.au

November 4, 2006 - 3:45PM
 	 	
Prime Minister John Howard has put nuclear power on the federal
election agenda, saying Labor is foolish to reject it. 

Mr Howard told 600 delegates at Queensland's Liberal Party state
convention the coalition will take a balanced approach to
climate change, and that includes considering nuclear energy. 

He said he will not put the mining industry, which generates
much of Australia's prosperity, at risk by taking a panicky
approach to cutting greenhouse gas emissions. 

"I believe that the world attitude to nuclear power is changing
and Australia's attitude to nuclear power is changing," he said. 

"Nuclear power is potentially the cleanest and greenest of them
all. 

"And we would be foolish, from the national interest point of
view, with our vast resources of uranium, to say that we are not
going to consider nuclear power, we are not even going to look
at it, we are going to say no to it before the debate even
starts. 

"And yet that is the attitude of the Australian Labor Party." 

Mr Howard also told the convention that the election would be a
struggle and National and Liberal party members should ignore
polls showing 70 per cent of voters think the government will be
returned to power. 

Opposition resources spokesman Martin Ferguson said Labor's
energy policy involves immediate investment in clean coal
technology to address the issue of greenhouse emissions while
supporting growth in the use of gas and renewables such as wind,
solar and geothermal. 

"Nuclear power is a pet subject for the prime minister at the
moment as he tries to catch up with global warming," Mr Ferguson
said. 

"(But) there is no way that nuclear power is going to stack up
in Australia. 

"The truth is Australia-wide we are a fossil fuel dependent
economy. 

"We have to get clean coal technology right, that guarantees our
future while also creating huge export opportunities for
research and development, which will create more jobs in
Australia." 

He rejected claims that nuclear energy proposals would be
economically superior to fossil futures. 

"If the prime minister wants to be economic he has to reveal
details of his proposed carbon tax or his proposed government
subsidy to try and get a entrepreneur to invest in nuclear power
in Australia," he said. 

"We have to work out as a nation how we remain competitive in a
tough global world while also making progress on the issue of
emissions. 

"Other nations will go nuclear ... our responsibility is to
reduce our emissions through clean coal technology while also
promoting the growth of renewables." 

Victoria's Latrobe Valley power stations which, he said, were
among the worst offenders for greenhouse gas emissions, would be
a priority to be retro-fitted with new clean coal technology
included. 	
© 2006 	AAP
Brought to you by [aap] 	 
When news happens:send photos, videos &tip-offs to 0424 SMS SMH
(+61 424 767 764), or us. 

 Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 34 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear power a 'cop-out': Beazley - 

www.smh.com.au

November 5, 2006 - 7:34PM

Federal Opposition Leader Kim Beazley has stepped up his attack
on the government over its nuclear ambitions, with a warning
that his own electorate in Perth could be an ideal site for a
nuclear reactor. 

A federal government task force this week said nuclear energy
could become a viable industry in Australia within 15 years. 

Prime Minister John Howard this week said he expected nuclear
power would play a role in Australia's energy future, as it
already does in much of Europe and the United States. 

Mr Beazley said Perth could not operate off an eastern states
grid and a reactor would therefore have to be built in the city
if Australia embraces a nuclear future. 

"I know darn well as the member for Brand that where you locate
nuclear facilities normally, the proximity to the city, the
proximity to water, you will want to dump that facility right in
my electorate and I won't be having a bit of it," he told
reporters in Perth. 

Mr Beazley said nuclear technology was a "1960s technology" and
Australia should focus on renewable energy. 

"If John Howard goes down the nuclear road it will be both
dangerous to this country and a cop out," he said. 

"We must not send that signal to this region that is the way we
intend to go. 

"It's a security issue, not simply an environmental issue." 	
© 2006 	AAP
Brought to you by [aap] 	 
send photos, videos &tip-offs to 0424 SMS SMH (+61 424 767 764),

| Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.                                                   
*****************************************************************
 35 Pantagraph.com: Speak out at hearing to oppose reactor

Letters to the EditorSaturday, November 4, 2006 2:03 AM CST                                     

On Wednesday, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a
public hearing regarding the early site permit application for a
potential second reactor at Exelon's Clinton nuclear power plant.

The meeting will be from 6 to 10 p.m. at Clinton Junior High
School, 701 Illini Drive. Please join me there to express the
folly of another nuclear reactor!

Nuclear power is unnecessary, very expensive, contributes to
global warming and above all is unsafe.

The NRC's Environmental Impact Statement says that a power plant
will have ``small'' impact. To me, this conclusion is
incomprehensible!

Through nuclear fission, nuclear reactors create radioactive
isotopes which are lethal, carcinogenic and mutagenic. One
millionth of a gram of Plutonium-239 is carcinogenic; its
half-life is 24,300 years.

In the cooling pools of Clinton, near your house and mine,
``spent'' fuel rods contain radioactivity equivalent to
thousands of Hiroshima bombs. In terrorist times, this level of
risk is unacceptable.

Reactors routinely release radiation into the environment - like
tritium into the groundwater - and near-misses of serious
nuclear accidents occur frequently.

There is no method, no place on Earth, for safe storage of the
nuclear waste which already exists, and which will have to be
tended forever. We need no more nuclear power. It bequeaths a
legacy of lethal waste to all future generations.

Alternatives can provide clean, green, far cheaper,
inexhaustible and safe energy.

Energy conservation and energy efficiency are crucial, along
with wind, solar, biomass, hydro and other promising energy
sources. These already exist and deserve to now receive federal
support equivalent to the amount previously given to nuclear
power.

For the sake of life on Earth, join me in telling the NRC you
want your taxes used for safe renewable energy instead of
nuclear power.

Carolyn Treadway

Clinton

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are
solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not
those of the Pantagraph or its staff. 								

 								 								

To Dawn wrote on November 05, 2006 8:31 PM:"The situation at
Three Mile Island was in no way comparable to Chernobyl. No one
died at Three Mile Island and the amount of radioactive
particles released was less than what a typical coal fired plant
belches in a day." 

Dawn wrote on November 05, 2006 7:32 PM:"For everyone who
contends that such an accident could never happen here in the
U.S., you should remember the mishap that occurred at Three Mile
Island in 1979. Nuclear power may be cheap but it does have its
risks. Perhaps we should invest the money and harness more of
our renewable resources for our energy. Instead of thinking
nuclear, think solar, wind, and hydroelectric." 

To Dawn wrote on November 05, 2006 7:22 PM:"Crappy old Soviet
reactor design w/poor staffing vs. modern American reactor
design w/sufficient staffing? I think we're ok." 

mm wrote on November 05, 2006 6:24 PM:"Your statement about
being a greenhouse gas emitter is completely untrue, Nuclear
Energy emits NO greenhouse gases. When you look at a Coal or Gas
plant they emit millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, not
to mention the impact of coal mining on the environment. Nuclear
reactors do have to have uranium mined, yes but it MUCH less
quantities than coal, and only have to be refuled ever 1.5-2
years versus coal which takes trainloads of the stuff every day.
I think Carolyn needs to do her research. Oh and also the
CHernobly accident, was total human error, and their reactors
are not designed like ANYTHING here in the US, so while yes I
agree the chance is still there, its very very very VERY
unlikely, and until windfarms and solar etc are reliable and
cheap, new nuclear plants are the way to go!" 

DB wrote on November 05, 2006 3:06 PM:"I should have been more
specific... I meant that nobody has died in this country.
Nuclear power is very safe. They use it even more in Europe than
we do here. As far as Chernobyl goes... that type of event would
be highly unlikely here." 

LT wrote on November 05, 2006 1:57 PM:"When we all get rid of
our electrical appliances we can eliminate fossil fuel and
nuclear reactors that supply it, in the meantime learn to live
with it. " 

Another DB wrote on November 05, 2006 1:32 PM:"Dawn, the
Russians took way too many liberties with Chernobyl. I won't say
that can NEVER happen here, but the chances are just about nil.
BNM Cynic is absolutely correct. Reprocessing was stopped by
President Carter in his landmark energy policy. Those of you old
enough to remember, his policy was to turn down the thermostat,
wear more sweaters, and change Daylight Savings Time so school
kids waiting for their buses were standing out along the road in
the dark! We have a choice in this country as far as
energy....nuclear, wind farms, clean coal, or going back to the
early 1900's - no electricity in our homes. But then, how could
we make our comments. In addition, I'd challenge any terrorist
to try to make off with a spent fuel rod. " 

Chernobyl? wrote on November 05, 2006 1:32 PM:"Do some research
on Chernobyl and you'll find that the notion that "it could just
as easily happen here" is ridiculous. " 

Dawn wrote on November 05, 2006 11:40 AM:"Have you all forgotten
about the tragedy that occurred at Chernobyl? What happened in
the former Soviet Union could just as easily happen here. Ask
the Russians how safe nuclear power is." 

BN Cynic wrote on November 05, 2006 9:41 AM:"I'd rather have a
nuclear plant than a coal or natural gas fired plant, any day.
Much less polution. Much of the problem with nuclear waste is
political. There's a ban on reprocessing nuclear waste into a
form that could be used to generate more energy. If I'm not
mistaken, the Japanese already do this with great success.
Nuclear power is one of the safest things out there, done
properly. Given the United States' track record, this is one of
those things we do properly. Not to mention that his will create
jobs." 

huh? wrote on November 05, 2006 2:31 AM:"Good letter, lots of
truth. DB and longwaytogo are goofy." 

DB wrote on November 04, 2006 10:43 AM:"Nuclear Power has been
around for 50 years and nobody has died in a civilian nuclear
accident. How much safer do you want?" 

longwaytogo wrote on November 04, 2006 7:31 AM:"The writer
should stick to facts about nuclear power. I suspect the writer
knew that she was taking liberties with the facts, othewise she
would not have used the "mass hysteria" scare tatic that is
common with people who rely on emotions rather than knowledge."
								 							   						 					
200 word maximum. Comments are screened by Pantagraph staff
members, so there will be a delay before your comments are
posted. The delay might be longer on weekends and evenings.
Please read the rules before posting. 								Name:Comments:
							   						 					

| 301 W. Washington St., PO Box 2907, Bloomington, IL 61701-2907 
| Ph. 309-829-9000 | 800-747-7323 Lee Illinois Regional 
Newspapers: | | | Copyright Â© 2006, Pantagraph Publishing Co. 
and Lee Enterprises. All rights reserved. | |                                            
	 
*****************************************************************
 36 AU ABC: Nuclear power a pipedream: Qld Conservation Council
 
ABC Queensland | Local News | Story 

 Saturday, 4 November 2006. 12:36 (AEDT)

 The Queensland Conservation Council has condemned the notion of
Australia developing a nuclear power industry within 15 years. 

The Federal Government's nuclear energy task force, headed by
former Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowski, has released a report
saying Australia could have a commercially viable nuclear
industry in 15 years. 

However, Conservation Council spokesman Toby Hutcheon says it is
a "pipedream". 

"The United Kingdom Government, who's recently announced that
they're considering extending their nuclear power program, have
put a schedule of 2035 before they can possibly do it and this
is a country that already has nuclear power," he said. 

"So I can't see any prospects of nuclear power being in place
for the next 25, 30 years in Australia." 

*****************************************************************
 37 thewest.com.au: Debate to follow govt's nuclear policy

4th November 2006, 10:50 WST

 A public debate on nuclear energy will follow the publication
of a taskforce report on the viability of the industry,
Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane says.

Mr Macfarlane said he had received a briefing from former
Telstra head Ziggy Switkowski, who heads the government's
nuclear energy task force examining the viability of a future
nuclear power industry.

"What we are seeing in the community is a willingness now to
consider nuclear energy," Mr Macfarlane told reporters.

"We are seeing reports like the Switkowski report which will
indicate that nuclear energy will be competitive with low
emission coal within 15 years."

Mr Macfarlane said the next step after receiving the report,
which is expected to be released in the next few weeks, would be
to have a public debate in Australia on nuclear energy, using
facts not fear.

"We want to see debate that is based in understanding and
knowledge not a debate based on scare tactics," he said.        

AAP   

thewest.com.au] 
Australian' is a trademark of West Australian Newspapers Pty Ltd
2006. All Rights Reserved.                                                       

*****************************************************************
 38 AFP: Australian government review gives nod to nuclear power

Saturday November 4, 05:07

  [Ziggy Switkowski]   

SYDNEY (AFP) - The Australian government has announced it would
not force a nuclear industry upon a public opposed to it, after
the prime minister's handpicked taskforce claimed the sector
would be viable in 15 years.

Australia's industry and resources minister Ian Macfarlane
promised a public debate on nuclear energy would follow the
publication of a government review he said showed the commercial
viability of the controversial industry.

"We want to see debate that is based in understanding
(Advertisement)
[Click Here!] [ src=]  and knowledge not a debate based on scare
tactics," Macfarlane told the Australian Associated Press,
previewing the findings of the taskforce headed by former
Telstra head Ziggy Switkowski.

"We are seeing reports like the Switkowski report which will
indicate that nuclear energy will be competitive with low
emission coal within 15 years."

On its release in a few weeks, the review is expected to find
the cost of nuclear power would fall over time as an increase in
energy needs and moves to fight atmospheric pollution caused by
fossil fuels put more of a focus on a technological solution to
climate change, The Australian newspaper reported.

A predicted rise in the cost of carbon fuels over the next
decade would erase the cost difference between carbon and
nuclear energy, The Australian reported a source as saying.

"What we are seeing in the community is a willingness now to
consider nuclear energy," Macfarlane said.

The government's green light to the nuclear industry came as
thousands of people marched through central Sydney to demand a
focus on renewable energy, and protest against global warming.

Before an estimated 10,000 to 12,000 people, opposition leaders
attacked Prime Minister John Howard's policies on climate
change, and demanded leadership on renewable energy.

"I say, and Labor says, renewables not reactors are the solution
to climate change," Labor environment spokesman Anthony Albanese
said.

Wilderness Society nuclear campaigner Imogen Zethoven said
Howard should be transforming Australia into a renewable energy
powerhouse not a "nuclear waste dump for the rest of the world".

However, Howard told party delegates in Queensland state he
would not put the mining industry, which generated much of
Australia's prosperity, at risk by taking a panicky approach to
cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

"We would be foolish, from the national interest point of view,
with our vast resources of uranium, to say that we are not going
to consider nuclear power." 

AFP
*****************************************************************
 39 Oshkosh Northwestern: Nuclear industry sees future with greater demand

Richard Ryman column: 

Posted November 5, 2006

That glow just over the horizon is the U.S. nuclear power
industry warming up for a resurgence. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has not approved a new nuclear 
plant in the United States in more than 30 years, but it has 
established a process for doing so and it seems only a matter of 
time before construction begins somewhere. 

The Nuclear Energy Institute reports there are 442 nuclear power 
plants in operation worldwide, with 28 units under construction 
in 12 countries. 

Nuclear reactors provided 16 percent of the world's electricity 
production and about 20 percent of that in the United States. 

Close to home

This country is home to 104 nuclear reactors at 65 sites in 31
states, most of them east of a line from Minnesota to Louisiana.
That includes the Kewaunee and Point Beach plants between
Kewaunee and Two Rivers. 

Rick Zuercher, a spokesman for Dominion Resources Inc., which
owns the Kewaunee Power Station, said the industry has squeezed
as much power as it can out of the operating reactors. 

"The industry has made quantum leaps in its ability to operate
these nuclear plants more efficiently. It's added effectively
something like 23 1,000-megawatt plants (between 1990 and
2000)," he said. "The plants are running so well we are
essentially getting all the energy we are going to get out of
them." 

Public opinion, according to recent polling, has come around to
the belief that nuclear power has to be part of the nation's
energy mix. 

There are a variety of reasons why, including concern about
global warming and pollution, an ever-increasing upward trend in
electricity demand and the industry's overall safety record. 

Dominion, which also owns reactors in Virginia and Connecticut,
is in the forefront of those preparing for new construction. 

It has submitted an early site permit application and expects to
apply for a combined operating license next year for a possible
additional reactor at its North Anna, Va., site. 

Engineers have learned from the experience of currently
operating systems and that's reflected in the new designs,
Zuercher said. 

"The improvements are very significant," he said. "The older
reactors require a lot of active systems. They require a lot of
motors and things to pump water. There are numerous redundant
systems. 

"The new reactors rely less on active systems, so you don't have
as many things to break down." 

One study predicted that nuclear-generated electricity will
increase five-fold by 2050, but the increase won't be quick.
Zuercher said that even if a decision was made today to build a
plant, it wouldn't go online before 2015. 

Plant approval

The NRC's three-step process for nuclear plant approval
includes: 

+ Early site permitting, which addresses environmental, safety
and site suitability issues. 

+ Certified reactor designs. The NRC is approving a number of
reactor designs which companies can take off the shelf and
build. 

+ Combined operating licenses. 

Zuercher said the new process, unlike the one under which all
the current plants were built, addresses public concerns,
safety, and environmental issues in advance. 

"If and when a company makes a decision to build, it has
resolved all the issues in a public way," he said. 

According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, more than 24 new
reactors are under consideration, though, like Dominion, most
companies haven't committed to actually building them. 

There is no doubt, however, that some eventually will be built. 

"It is a positive development for the future of nuclear energy,"
Zuercher said. 

Contact Richard Ryman at (920) 431-8342 or 

  Contact us at 920-235-7700.        thenorthwestern.com is a 
website. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the , 
updated June 7, 2005.
*****************************************************************
 40 AU ABC: Nuclear report reflects task force make-up - ALP. 

04/11/2006. ABC News Online
 	
The Federal Opposition's environment spokesman, Anthony
Albanese, says he is not surprised a report into nuclear power
has found the technology will be commercially viable in
Australia within 15 years.

 The report comes from the Federal Government's nuclear energy
task force, headed by former Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowski.

 A draft of the report will be handed to the Government in the
next two weeks.

 Mr Albanese says the task force is made up of people who
support nuclear energy and he believes they were always going to
come out in support of the technology.

 "The report isn't surprising that a committee made up of
nuclear advocates has come out advocating nuclear energy," he
said.

 "It was always like asking the AFL commissioners to inquire
into what the best footy code is in Australia.

 "But even they say it won't be viable for at least 15 years, so
even nuclear advocates are acknowledging that nuclear energy
just doesn't stack up economically for Australia."

 Mr Albanese says he believes the Government is determined to
press ahead with nuclear power, when it should be considering
other options such as solar power.

 Federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane says the 15-year time
frame suggested in the report is realistic.

 "Nuclear power will be a price competitive option for Australia
to consider in the years ahead," he said.

 But the Queensland Conservation Council says it is a
"pipedream" that a nuclear power industry will exist in
Australia in 15 years. 
*****************************************************************
 41 AU ABC: Ignoring nuclear power foolish, PM says. 

04/11/2006. ABC News Online

Last Update: Saturday, November 4, 2006. 4:00pm (AEDT) 	 

John Howard believes Australian attitudes to nuclear power are 
changing. 

The Prime Minister says nuclear power production must be an
option in Australia and it would be foolish to ignore the option
with the country's vast reserves of uranium.

 A review by the Federal Government's nuclear energy task force
has found a nuclear power industry could be commercially viable
within 15 years.

 Speaking at the Queensland Liberal Party's annual convention in
Brisbane today, John Howard said the world's attitude toward
nuclear power was changing.

 "Nuclear power is potentially the cleanest and greenest of them
all," he said.

 "We would be foolish from a national interest point of view,
with our vast reserves of uranium, to say that we are not going
to consider nuclear power - not even going to look at it, we are
going to say no to it before the debate even starts.

 "One of the options that has got to be on the table is nuclear
power, I believe that the world's attitudes toward nuclear power
is changing and I believe that Australian attitudes towards
nuclear power are changing."

 Mr Howard says he will not be pressured into making changes
that would place Australia at an economic and competitive
disadvantage.

 "Australia is different from Europe, it is different from
America, it is different from Asia," he said.

 "In many respects the whole debate surrounding the Kyoto
Protocol is being driven out of Europe rather than out of
countries whose economic circumstances are similar to our own."

 But environmental groups say they are concerned by the
assessment made by the nuclear energy task force.

 The Federal Government says it believes the 15-year time frame
is realistic.

 But a spokeswoman for the Wilderness Society is calling on the
Government to rule out using nuclear power and instead
investigate other options for generating baseload electricity -
like the use of natural gas.

 Queensland Conservation Council spokesman Toby Hutcheon does
not believe Australia will have a nuclear power industry by 2021.

 "All the surveys suggest that the Australian people are
considerably opposed to nuclear power in this country," he said.

 "I believe that the Government has got a real hard road to
travel to even get that acceptance.

 "So I would say no, I don't believe that there's any prospect
of nuclear power in Australia in the foreseeable or long-term
future." 
*****************************************************************
 42 AU ABC: WA Govt says PM's support for nuclear energy 'bizarre'.
                   
05/11/2006. ABC News Online
 	
Mr Logan says WA has 120 years worth of coal left. (File photo)

 
Western Australia Energy Minister Fran Logan has described Prime
Minister John Howard's push toward nuclear energy in Australia
as "bizarre".

 Mr Howard told a Liberal conference in Queensland yesterday
that Australia would be foolish to ignore nuclear power
production.

 The Federal Government's nuclear energy task force has found a
nuclear power industry could be commercially viable within 15
years.

 Mr Logan says Australia does not need nuclear power. 
"It is a ridiculous argument for a country like Australia, which
is the largest exporter of coal in the world," she said.

 "Here in Western Australia we've got some of the largest gas
reserves and 120 years worth of coal.

 "That we should even consider nuclear, I mean the whole
argument is just bizarre." 
He rejects Mr Howard's assertion that Australian attitudes to
nuclear power are changing. 
Mr Logan says the costs involved in building and decommissioning
nuclear plants outweighs any economic benefit.

 "What John Howard should do is actually talk to his counterpart
in the UK Tony Blair and the Minister for Energy in the UK and
talk to them about the cost of decommissioning six and seven
nuclear power stations that's going on in the UK at the moment -
it runs into the hundred of billions of pounds," he said. 

*****************************************************************
 43 AU ABC: Nuclear push means plant for WA, says Beazley. 

05/11/2006. ABC News Online

Kim Beazley says he is concerned that his electorate is
earmarked for a nuclear site. (File photo) (ABC TV)   		  [

The Federal Opposition Leader says if the Prime Minister goes
ahead with a push for nuclear energy in Australia, Perth will
become the site of a nuclear power station. 

The Prime Minister says nuclear power production must be an
option in Australia and it would be foolish to ignore the
option, considering the country's vast reserves of uranium.

 Kim Beazley believes John Howard is obsessed with what Mr
Beazley describes as 1960s technology and her says Australia
should instead be looking at a renewable source of energy.

 Mr Beazley says Western Australia could not operate off an
eastern states grid, so there would have to be a power plant in
the west.

 And he says he believes it would be in his electorate of Brand.

 "You can't go down the nuclear road without saying where you'd
site the facilities," he said.

 "And I know darn well as the Member for Brand, and where you
locate nuclear facilities - normally the proximity to the city,
the proximity to water - you'll want to dump that station right
in my electorate.

 "I won't have a bit of it.

 "We must not go down that road, we must not look like we intend
to go down that road," he said.

 "We must not send that signal to this region - it's a security
issue, not simply an environmental issue and a power issue." 

*****************************************************************
 44 UPI: Six Arab states want nuclear power
     
  United Press International - NewsTrack - 

11/4/2006 8:22:00 AM -0500

VIENNA, Nov. 4 (UPI) -- Six Arab nations announced plans to
pursue nuclear energy, which has some experts wondering if the
unstable region could become awash in nuclear bombs. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna said Algeria,
Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and the United Arab
Emirates all expressed interest in obtaining the technology to
provide nuclear-powered energy to citizens, Saturday's Times of
London reported. 

Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute for Strategic
Studies said the six countries are apparently seeking to create
a "security hedge" with Iran openly pursuing the development of
nuclear weaponry and Israel believed to have already achieved
it, the Times said. 

"If Iran was not on the path to a nuclear weapons capability you
would probably not see this sudden rush," he told the Times. 

The six countries have met with officials at the IAEA, who will
offer guidance in developing legal, civilian nuclear programs.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 45 [NYTr] Nuclear Terror: Science and Lies
 
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 16:35:46 -0500 (EST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Red Star (CP India) - Nov, 2006
http://www.cpiml.in/061121.htm


Nuclear Terror: Science and Lies

Greg Adamson 

ON 6 August 2006, the world commemorated the dropping of the atomic bomb
on the historic Japanese city of Hiroshima . While this was a military
triumph for the United States , for scientists, including Albert
Einstein, it was a tragedy.  A new weapon of immense power had been
unleashed on the world, aided by scientists under the misconception that
Nazi Germany was about to develop a nuclear weapon itself. The weak
state of the Nazi programme was partly due to a secret pact by key
German physicists. Scientists working on the US programme, however, were
kept uninformed of the actual state of the Nazi programme.

In August 1939, in the approach to World War II, Albert Einstein signed
a letter to US President Franklin D Roosevelt stating that through
recent work in nuclear physics `it may become possible to set up a
nuclear chain reaction in a large mass of uranium ... This new
phenomenon would also lead to the construction of ... extremely powerful
bombs.' The letter stated that ` Germany has actually stopped the sale
of uranium from the Czechoslovakian mines which she has taken over', and
called for a `watchfulness and, if necessary, quick action on the part
of the [ US ] Administration'.

It was not the threat of Germany at war, but the threat of the German
regime having uncontested control of the atomic bomb that caused concern
to a number of nuclear physicists, including several refugees from
Nazism. The `Einstein letter' was organised by one such physicist, Leo
Szilard, and presented to Roosevelt on 11 October 1939. `I really only
acted as a letter-box. They brought me a letter all ready for signature
and I simply signed it,' Einstein later explained to biographer Antonina
Vallentin. Szilard was afraid of Nazi Germany getting the atomic bomb,
but hadn't been able to convince the US government that the new weapon
was practical. In Brighter Than a Thousand Suns, published in 1959,
Robert Jungk examines the events surrounding the US nuclear programme.
He details the actual state of nuclear weapons' development in Germany
at that time and shows that Hitler's forces were nowhere near developing
the atomic bomb. 

`Four factors must have combined to frustrate the construction of a
German atom-bomb. In the first place the absence of eminent physicists
driven into exile by Hitler now proved to be a severe handicap.
Secondly, the poor organisation by the National Socialists of research
in the interests of war and its inadequate recognition by their
Government, and thirdly, the technical difficulties of so complex a
project, were further obstacles. But above all, in the fourth place, the
actual personal attitudes of the German experts in atomic research who
had remained at home counted against success. `Fortunately they did
nothing to facilitate the construction of such a bomb in the face of
misunderstanding by the authorities and the insufficient technical
resources the latter provided. On the contrary, such physicists were
able successfully to divert the minds of the National Socialist Service
Departments from the idea of so inhuman a weapon.'

Jungk describes how several groups that could have followed up the
possibility of developing nuclear weapons came not to. He states, `There
were at that time [at least 13] prominent German physicists who had
agreed that they must try to avoid working with Hitler's war-machine or
to make only a pretence of doing so. The names of German physicists
unwilling to supply Hitler with supplementary armaments were deposited,
after the war had begun, in Sweden - with Professor Westgren - and in
Holland - with Professor Burgers. It was considered that an open
"strike" of research workers would be dangerous, as it would leave the
field open for unscrupulous and ambitious persons.' Einstein later
stated that, `If I had known that the Germans would not succeed in
constructing the atom-bomb, I would never have moved a finger.'

By 1941 reports were getting through to the US government that Hitler
had no advanced bomb project. These reports, which came from scientists
fleeing Europe, were not conveyed to the physicists working on the US
bomb project, who believed right up to the final defeat of the Nazi
regime that Germany might have been ahead of the US in developing
nuclear weapons. While the scientists were unaware of the weak state of
the German nuclear programme, the US government knew the reality,
including through reports of German scientists' non-cooperation. The US
programme was the largest engineering work undertaken to that time, and
a strong Nazi programme would have had a similar requirement. (While
Britain and Canada participated in the US programme, they were abruptly
excluded at the end of the war.)

At Oak Ridge , Tennessee , the longest factory halls in the country were
constructed. At Hanford , in Washington State , it took 60,000 workers
to build one of the largest chemical works in the country. At Los
Alamos, in New Mexico , seven separate divisions worked on the final
product. In total, the bomb took 150,000 people to build.

The German regime was defeated before the first nuclear weapon was ready
for use. Nevertheless, the US bomb project maintained its frantic
activity. The bomb project organiser at the Los Alamos centre, General
Leslie Groves, continually urged, `We must not lose a single day.'

The only possible target now was Japan , which could not possibly have
been developing nuclear weapons (although supporters of the US nuclear
bombing of Japan occasionally claim that there was a Japanese nuclear
weapons programme). The explanation given for the bomb's use therefore
became the need to reduce US losses in the final invasion.

The use of nuclear weapons was now advocated on the grounds of
expediency. For scientists such as Einstein this wasn't valid,
regardless of issues of the war itself. An army at any time can argue
for new weapons to defeat its enemy, but once a fundamentally new weapon
has been achieved, the threat to the whole of humanity is permanently
increased.

The expediency argument could be used today in relation to new
technologies, including biological weapons, robotics and nanotechnology.
The US could argue that to reduce its own casualties when fighting
`terrorist' opponents it should deploy biological weapons (which it
hasn't argued), or develop autonomous killing machines for use in battle
conditions (which it has announced plans for within the next decade).
Each such step makes the world a more dangerous place.

Szilard, who had earlier organised the letter to Roosevelt , now
organised another letter from Einstein to the President, warning of the
threat that the nearly completed bombs would pose. Szilard also
organised a petition of scientists working on the bomb project opposing
its use, which gained 67 signatures before it was banned.

Jungk quotes Szilard, explaining the attitude of the scientists he was
speaking for at this time: `During 1943 and part of 1944 our greatest
worry was the possibility that Germany would perfect an atomic-bomb
before the invasion of Europe ... In 1945, when we ceased worrying about
what the Germans might do to us, we began to worry about what the
Government of the United States might do to other countries.'

The US was in a race against time to drop the bomb before the war ended.
>From mid-July 1945, the US forces were able to read coded Japanese
military information, including expressions of  the  view  that  Japan
was beaten. At  the same time, the US Air Force could bomb just about
any target it wanted. Given these and other descriptions of the state of
Japan 's defences and the attitude of Japan 's rulers, there was no
military reason for the US government to bring into play a devastating
new weapon.

The 1945 nuclear attacks on Japan resulted in the deaths of 250,000
people and ongoing damage generations later. The two cities presented
different technical challenges: a flat coastal area and a rugged
terrain. Two different bomb designs were used; one based on uranium and
the other on plutonium. After a list of possible Japanese cities for
nuclear bombing had been drawn up, these cities were deliberately spared
massive conventional bombing so that the effect of a single atomic blast
could be more accurately assessed.

Einstein gave his view of the development of the first nuclear weapon in
a 10 December 1945 speech titled: `The war is won, but peace is not'.
`We helped in creating this new weapon in order to prevent the enemies
of mankind from achieving it ahead of us, which, given the mentality of
the Nazis, would have meant inconceivable destruction and the
enslavement of the rest of the world. We delivered this weapon into the
hands of the American and the British people as trustees of the whole of
mankind, as fighters for peace and liberty. But so far we fail to see
any guarantee of peace, we do not see any guarantee of the freedoms that
were promised to the nations in the Atlantic Charter. The war is won,
but the peace is not ...

`The world was promised freedom from fear, but in fact fear has
increased tremendously since the termination of the war. The world was
promised freedom from want, but large parts of the world are faced with
starvation while others are living in abundance.'

( Third World Network Features) 
       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 46 [NYTr] Scientists protested Web site nuclear data: report
 
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 08:54:16 -0600 (CST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Reuters - Nov 4, 2006
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-11-04T070105Z_01_N02171090_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-INTERNET-IRAQ.xml

Scientists protested Web site nuclear data: report

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Scientists at a U.S. weapons lab complained more
than two weeks ago that captured Iraqi documents containing sensitive
nuclear information were available on the Web site that the government
shut down on Thursday, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

A senior federal official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the
Times that scientists at California's Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory protested some of the weapons papers on the site to the
National Nuclear Security Administration, an arm of the Department of
Energy, in October. But the objections "never perked up to senior
management," the Times quoted the official as saying. "They stayed at
the mid-levels."

Managers at the security administration passed the warning to their
counterparts at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence,
which oversaw the Web site, the Times said, citing the official. And as
a result, according to a nuclear weapons expert, the government pulled
two nuclear papers from the Web site last month. The dangers of the
documents, which were captured during the war, had been recognized at
Livermore and in the wider community of government arms experts, he
said.

"Those two documents were on everybody's list," the newspaper quoted
him as saying.

The Times said federal officials were conducting a review to better
understand how and when the warnings had originated and how the
bureaucracy had responded.

The Bush administration set up the Web site in March at the urging of
Republicans in Congress who said that public access to such materials
from Iraq could increase the understanding of the danger posed by
Saddam Hussein. It was shut down after the Times inquired about the
disclosure of nuclear information and the experts' complaints. Among
documents posted were roughly a dozen that nuclear weapons experts said
constituted a basic guide to building an atom bomb.

While Democrats have called for an investigation, the scientists'
two-week-old complaints, as outlined by federal officials on Friday,
indicated for the first time that warnings about the site had come from
the government's own arms experts as well as from international weapons
inspectors, the report said.

) Reuters 2006. 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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 47 Guardian Unlimited: Dems Seek Answers About Federal Web Site

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday November 4, 2006 7:31 PM

AP Photo NVLR109 

By JOHN HEILPRIN 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Four Democratic senators demanded on Saturday
that the Bush administration explain its decision to post
documents from Saddam Hussein's covert nuclear program on a
now-shuttered federal Web site. 

The lawmakers told President Bush's director of national
intelligence, John Negroponte, that it was ``shocking that
sensitive documents directly related to the design of a nuclear
weapon were made public by the executive branch.'' 

Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada, Carl Levin of Michigan, Joe Biden of
Delaware and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia also questioned
whether political pressure from congressional Republicans played
a role. 

The letter was released just days before congressional elections
in which Democrats hope to regain control of the Senate. 

Negroponte on Thursday suspended public access to the site
Thursday night, after The New York Times asked officials whether
the site provided too much information on making atomic bombs
for an article it published Friday. Negroponte, who had ordered
the documents released, also began a review of the consequences,
including who accessed the documents. 

Negroponte's spokesman, Chad Kolton, declined to comment on the
letter. He noted that Negroponte already has called for a
review. 

``We disclosed the initiation of a full review of this issue
earlier this week,'' Kolton said by e-mail to The Associated
Press. 

The documents, mostly in Arabic, were posted since March on a
federal Web site called the ``Operation Iraqi Freedom Document
Portal.'' 

Administration officials say the site was a repository for
millions of pages the U.S. government found in Iraq the past 15
years. 

The matter adds to the pre-election debate over the threat Iraq
poses and which political party is best on security and guarding
secrets. 

The senators say the Web site was intended to bolster support
for Bush's claims that Saddam possessed banned weapons and had
ties to al-Qaida. 

The senators said it appeared ``the administration, under
pressure from the chairmen of the congressional intelligence
committees and others, has released documents that could
facilitate the efforts of terrorists and rogue states to acquire
nuclear weapons designs.'' 

They asked Negroponte whether intelligence agencies initially
opposed the Web site, but the administration overrode those
concerns. 

The site represents ``a threat to the security of the American
people,'' according to the letter. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 48 Tri-City Herald: 3 workers treated for radiation exposure 

Published Saturday, November 4th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

Three workers at a Richland plant have been treated for
radioactive contamination, possibly because of radioactive waste
on the outside of a drum. 

Two of them were inside a hazardous materials room with drums of
waste sent to Pacific EcoSolutions from an out-of-state
commercial customer. They were wearing respirators, said Dave
Dalton, president of PEcoS. 

The third worker, who apparently received the most exposure, was
outside the room and not wearing a respirator. Routine
monitoring during work with the drums detected the exposure,
Dalton said. 

The third worker was taken to Battelle's whole body radiation
counter, a sophisticated system that can detect exposure at
lower levels than the PEcoS equipment. 

The worker was found to have americium, a radioactive isotope
produced by the decay of plutonium, in his lungs, said Earl
Fordham, regional director for the Washington State Department
of Health's Office of Radiation Protection. The radiation dose
he received appears to be near the legal limit for annual
exposure, he said. 

The exact radiation dose still is being determined, Dalton said.
The worker is unlikely to see any health effects because the
legal limit is conservative, Fordham said. 

All three workers have been given a chelating agent that binds
to heavy metals to strip them out of the body. Bodily waste
fluids will be collected and checked to determine how successful
the treatment is. If americium stays in the body, it can
continue to expose surrounding tissues to radiation, increasing
the risk of cancer. 

None of the radioactive contamination is believed to have spread
outside the PEcoS building, which is adjacent to the Hanford
nuclear reservation. 

The drums of low-level radioactive waste had been opened so
workers could sort it for appropriate treatment, but the drums
were closed when the contamination incident occurred, Dalton
said. The incident continues to be investigated, but it appears
there may have been contamination on the outside of the drums,
he said. 

"I wish it didn't happen," he said. "That's the downside of the
business. These risks do occur, but we try to minimize them." 

The state has reported the incident to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. 

PEcoS treats both low-level radioactive waste and similar waste
mixed with hazardous chemicals on a 13-acre campus. Although the
company treats some Hanford waste for disposal, Hanford waste
was not involved in the Wednesday incident. 

In October, Perma-Fix Environmental Services signed a letter of
intent to buy PEcoS and its parent company, Nuvotec. 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 49 Spectrum: Nuclear bombshell to hit Utah

St. George UT - www.thespectrum.com - 

 
Assistant Attorney General Laura Lockhart dropped something of a 
nuclear bombshell at the October Radiation Control Board meeting.

Earlier in the meeting staff from the Division of Radiation 
Control - the chief regulatory authority over radioactive matters 
in the state - made presentations about two topics: The 
historical growth of the EnergySolutions (formerly Envirocare) 
nuclear waste dump in Tooele County and a brand new proposal to 
allow the waste dump to grow again by merging two of its existing 
waste cells into a new mega-landfill reaching nearly eight 
stories tall.

If approved, the expansion would further enlarge the largest
commercial radioactive waste dump in the country and mark the
fourth time the Division has allowed EnergySolutions to expand
radioactive waste disposal in Utah. Moreover, it would increase
EnergySolutions' capacity for nuclear waste to over 13 million
cubic yards - more than 5 times its original permitted size of
2.2 million cubic yards. The original size is relevant because a
1990 law says that when a radioactive waste facility wants to
grow by more than 50 percent over its 1990 size, the Legislature
and the governor have to sign off on the move.

That law has not been enforced, with the result that the dump
has grown a whopping 400 percent.

At the board meeting, Assistant Attorney General Laura Lockhart
explained this apparent disregard for the law by saying
something like this: While the Division is legally required to
enforce the 50 percent law, it has never been applied to any
licensing decision.

The 50 percent law provides a sensible built-in control
mechanism where elected officials - not regulators - give the
final go-ahead for a significant nuclear waste dump expansion.

But the Legislature and the governor are not restricted to the
how question; they can ask the far more important question of
should more dumping be allowed and is that something that
benefits the state. By a commonsense reading of the law, that
question should have been applied to every major expansion at
the EnergySolutions facility since 1992, and wasn't. And that's
using the Division's own analysis.

Although it's against federal law to dispose of radioactive
waste on private land, Envirocare was granted a special
exemption by former state radiation chief Larry Anderson, who
later revealed he had accepted more than $600,000 in gold coins,
real estate, and cash payments wired to a Swiss bank account
from former dump owner Khosrow Semnani.

So one must ask the question: Had a bribery/extortion scandal
not laid the foundation, and had regulators not repeatedly
ignored the 50 percent law, would Utah today have the
distinction of being home to the largest commercial radioactive
waste dump in the nation?

And that leads to a final question: What is the remedy to
everyday Utahns across the state?

Well, if you ask the Radiation Control Board, which oversees the
Division and its decisions, the answer seems to be: Nothing.

We think the people of Utah deserve better. Here are three
measures that can help:


+ No more unchecked growth at EnergySolutions. The question
shouldn't be "Is it possible?" but rather "Is it right?" for
Utah to play host to an ever-expanding nuclear waste dump.


+ Free, searchable, online access to nuclear waste dump
applications, amendments, reports, and Board meeting
transcripts. Currently, there is very little information
available to the public through the Division's Web site. And if
the regulators aren't going to enforce the law, then watchdog
groups like HEAL Utah and the general public need every
advantage in overseeing what state regulators do.


+ Stop the revolving door between regulatory agencies and the
industries they oversee. In the past, Khosrow Semnani offered a
$15,000 loan guarantee to a former Radiation Control Board
member. And former regulators have gone on to have careers at
Envirocare. The nuclear bombshell has been dropped, and the
fallout is on its way.

Christopher Thomas is Policy Director at HEAL Utah. HEAL Utah is
a non-profit organization engaging citizens in the effort to
protect public health from nuclear and toxic waste.

Originally published November 5, 2006 Print this article    

 Copyright ©2006 The Spectrum.
*****************************************************************
 50 OpEd News: Stairway to Divine Strake

  November 5, 2006 at 08:43:17
 
On Thursday, a U.S. government lawyer speaking on behalf of a
Pentagon agency sponsoring Divine Strake told a federal judge
that she could not promise 60 days' notice before the test would
be carried out sometime in mid-2007. Divine Strake, a 700-ton
chemical explosives test designed to simulate the blast of a
low-yield nuclear weapon on an underground bunker, was
originally planned for detonation at the Nevada Test Site in
June 2006, however a lawsuit filed by the Western Shoshone and
several downwinders forced a postponement of the test until next
year. Indigenous and environmental groups fear that the test
would eject into the atmosphere radioactive particles that they
suspect were deposited from several 1950s above-ground nuclear
tests at the Nevada Test Site. These long-lived radioisotopes,
including Plutonium-239 and Americium-241, which would
contaminate our air, soil, water and food supplies if they
became airborne, are likely contaminants in the soils at the
Divine Strake ground-zero. 

Since plans for Divine Strake were first announced in March
2006, the U.S. government has made a number of confusing
statements about the location, purpose, environmental impact and
planned date of the test. At one point, the test could have been
conducted in Indiana, New Mexico or Nevada, or elsewhere. As for
test safety, the government agency overseeing the Nevada Test
Site initially issued a green light for the test with their
environmental assessment that they later withdrew. Not deviating
from their steady course of maintaining mass-confusion, the
government lawyer yesterday commented that they were revising
that withdrawn environmental assessment, which they erringly
referred to as a 'study.' The difference between completing an
environmental study and rendering an environmental assessment of
Divine Strake can mean a world of difference to downwinders'
concerns of the air they breath – whether it may or may not
induce cancer in 30 years. A study usually refers to an
Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, which would be the best
(and some would say only) way to ensure the safety of Divine
Strake, which appears to be planned for the Nevada Test Site
(and not New Mexico or Indiana). The EIS would involve actual
sampling of the soil at the ground-zero. However, no evidence
has surfaced to indicate that governmental agencies have done
any sampling of the ground-zero soils, which the Divine Strake
blast is expected to eject into a 10,000-foot high dust cloud
that could reach the East Coast. As one colleague of mine put
it: 'It sounds like they jumped in their car, drove past the
ground-zero at 60 miles per hour holding a Geiger counter out of
the driver's side window and concluded the test was safe.'

So, in spring 2007, the government will announce a date for
Divine Strake, giving less than sixty days for citizens to
educate themselves and discern how the 'new' and revised
environmental assessment compares to the one that was withdrawn
in late May. Perhaps the journalist Robert C. Koehler will have
to revise his famous quote, 'Can a finding withdrawn really have
been a "finding" in the first place?' to 'Can a revision of a
withdrawn finding be any less of no "finding" at all?'

Although any self-respecting scientist can see that there will
never be a 'finding' until an EIS for Divine Strake is
completed, there is no end in sight for the growing Escher-esque
painting that the government is making of Divine Strake. A
stairway to Indiana leads right back to Nevada. A passage to a
'finding' really leads to 'no finding' at all. And worst, a
tunnel that appears to have a light at the end of it in reality
leads to darkness. 

In this day and age, we cannot any longer accept with
complacency being casual patrons of the faux-arts of
governmental disinformation. We must hone and develop our
abilities to be able to tell the real Monet from the fake one
or, in this case, a government lie from the truth that will hurt
ourselves and our children.

Mr. Kishner is a member of the Stop Divine Strake Coalition and

Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2006     
*****************************************************************
 51 NLTB: DOE adds Yucca Mountain info session amid state complaints

North Lake Tahoe Bonanza: 

November 5, 2006                                                                
 					     				 			
[Comment]

The federal Energy Department on Tuesday scheduled another
public meeting on revised plans for a radioactive waste dump in
Nevada, while state officials and anti-nuclear advocates
complained a first meeting was not informative.

"There was not enough detail to offer an intelligent comment,"
Martin Malsch, a Vienna, Va.-based lawyer who represents Nevada,
said of a meeting Monday in Washington, D.C. "Nobody could have
a way to know whether they would be affected or not."

An Energy Department spokesman called the meetings "listening
sessions," to collect comments for environmental studies on
waste-handling at Yucca Mountain and building a railroad to the
site through Lyon, Mineral and Esmeralda counties.

"If someone believes there is not enough information, they
should make that one of the comments," said Allen Benson, Energy
Department and Yucca Mountain project spokesman in Las Vegas.
"We believe we are providing adequate and sufficient information
for people to give the kind of input we need to complete these
environmental assessments."

Meetings were set this week in Amargosa Valley and Las Vegas,
followed by sessions later this month in Caliente, Goldfield,
Hawthorne, Fallon. A Nov. 27 meeting has been added in Reno.

The environmental reports are due out next year, Benson said.

Kevin Kamps, spokesman for the Nuclear Information and Resource
Service, a Washington, D.C.-based watchdog group, complained
that information at the Washington meeting was "scattered."

"We can't talk to each other, we can't hear from each other
about concerns," Kamps told the Las Vegas Review-Journal. "It
think it is by design."

The Energy Department announced earlier this month it was
reconsidering building a rail line through western Nevada to
Yucca site, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The north-south
route dubbed the Mina Corridor had been studied in the 1990s but
shelved after the Walker River Paiute Indians refused access to
their reservation. The tribe reconsidered this year.

The Energy Department had said it favored plans to build a
longer east-west rail line from Caliente, near the Utah border,
across rural Nevada to the nuclear dump site. The cost of the
so-called Caliente Corridor route has been estimated at $2
billion. There currently is no rail line to the Yucca site,
which Congress and the Bush administration picked in 2002 as the
place to entomb 77,000 tons of radioactive waste now being
stored at nuclear reactors in 39 states. The project has been
stalled by funding shortfalls and questions about quality
control during site selection.

All contents © Copyright 2006 tahoebonanza.com
North Lake Tahoe Bonanza - 925 Tahoe Blvd., Suite 206 -
Incline Village, NV 89452 			 		   	 
*****************************************************************
 52 The Age: Uranium export safeguards found wanting 

www.theage.com.au
 
Michelle Grattan

November 5, 2006
 	 	
AUSTRALIA'S proposed safeguards are inadequate to track any
diversion of its uranium exports to China's nuclear weapons
program, a report released today claims. 

The planned big exports to China and potential large
through-puts of spent reactor fuel to extract plutonium increase
the risks Australian nuclear material could be diverted, without
detection, to military programs, it says. 

"The capacity to verify that such diversion has occurred is
lacking," says the report, issued by the Australian Conservation
Foundation and the Medical Association for Prevention of War.
The report has been prepared by a team including academic
experts. 

It says the way in which Australian safeguards in China are to
operate will be subject to secret administrative arrangements,
yet to be negotiated. "Beijing is likely to drive a hard
bargain. The history of Australian diluting of safeguards in
favour of commercial considerations suggests that Canberra is
likely to oblige," it states. 

The report calls for the administrative arrangements to be made
public and Parliament to scrutinise them. The safeguards
agreement is currently before the parliamentary treaties
committee. 

The nature of the strategic and economic relationship between
the two countries shows China has greater leverage over Canberra
than vice versa, the report says. The result is that "claimed
safeguards assurances in the bilateral agreement cannot be
relied upon in practice". 

China's system for accounting for its nuclear material is lax.
It lacks even an adequate physical inventory of fissile
materials. This seriously erodes "the veracity of the
book-keeping exercise of Australian safeguards policy", says the
report. "If Beijing does not have a precise inventory of nuclear
material it becomes difficult to accept the proposition that
Canberra can do better." 

The question of relative influence is important because the
bilateral agreement doesn't lock China into a set system of
safeguards over the 30 years of the agreement, the report says. 

Should the safeguards agreement be revised, as the agreement
allows for, "it is to be expected that the revision will again
continue the trend of weakening Australian safeguards policy in
favour of commercial interests". 

 | Copyright © 2006. The Age Company Ltd.                                                         
*****************************************************************
 53 Caller.com: A hot uranium market revives interest in mines

Saturday, Nov 4

By Dan Kelley/Caller-Times

Brad Moore discovered uranium ore in Goliad County in the 1980s. 

 A short time later, the Soviet Union collapsed. Desperate for
cash, former Soviet states sent uranium originally intended for
weapons to the United States where it was diluted for use in
power plants. 

"The prices have been depressed because of the influx of
weapons-grade uranium that's been blended down," said Lee
Peddicord, vice chancellor for research and federal relations
for Texas A University and a professor of engineering. "For the
past 10 years, the industry really came to a halt." 

That has changed. 

Uranium is hot. 

At its low point in November 2000 uranium brought $7.10 per
pound. 

The price since has shot up to $56 per pound. 

Moore is back in business in the exploration and land tenure
division of Uranium Energy Corp. 

Mines that ceased to be profitable and were taken off-line in
Kleberg County are back in business. About half a dozen uranium
companies have begun exploration across South Texas. 

It isn't known exactly how many new mining projects are on the
drawing board for Texas. The Railroad Commission, which
regulates exploration, has issued eight permits to five
companies. 

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality said there are no
new requests for mining permits. One company has expressed
interest in expanding old mines; another in reopening a closed
mine. In a third instance a company has expressed interest in
applying for a new mining permit. 

Miners tout the economic boons it can bring to an area. An
approved uranium mine, according to the industry, brings about
100 jobs. 

The uranium boom isn't just in Texas. Other uranium-producing
states include New Mexico, Arizona and Wyoming. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects nine applications for
new mines next year. 

Federal policy has played a role in the comeback. President
George W. Bush has backed nuclear energy - by far the largest
market for uranium - and made new power plant construction a key
facet of federal energy policy, citing drastically reduced
greenhouse gas emissions compared with coal-fired plants. 

"Uranium is going to be a key," Kim Jones, a professor at Texas
A University-Kingsville, told a crowd in Goliad in September.
"It's going to be part of our national energy policy for years
to come." 

About 25 new nuclear power plants are in some form of planning
stages. All of them, according to Peddicord, will look to
long-term pricing contracts to determine the economic
feasibility of construction. 

Geologists say uranium was spread across the region by volcanoes
millions of years ago. In most places it traveled with rainwater
deep into the earth and flowed downstream until it hit a
chemical barrier such as oil and gas. 

In Texas, uranium ore deposits are found in a 200-mile swath
that includes Bee, Brooks, Duval, Jim Hogg, Goliad, Kleberg and
Live Oak counties. 

The boom has not come without controversy, and it has renewed
concerns that mining might contaminate groundwater. 

"I'm totally opposed to it," said Luann Duderstadt, of Weser,
north of Goliad. "Apprehensive isn't the word. I don't believe
it is safe." 

Goliad County commissioners oppose uranium exploration. 

Miners say there is little cause for concern but opposition is
understandable. 

"I would be concerned, too, if I didn't know anything about
this," said Harry Anthony IV, CEO of Uranium Energy Corp., and
now Moore's boss. "I'm not going to convince everybody." 

Contact Dan Kelley at 886-4316 or kelleyd@caller.com  
*****************************************************************
 54 Independent: Serco and Bechtel join forces to bid for Sellafield clean-up 

By Tim Webb 

Published: 05 November 2006 

Serco, the UK project services specialist, will tomorrow
announce it has formed a nuclear clean-up consortium with US
engineering giant Bechtel and the US nuclear specialist BWXT. 

The consortium's first priority will be to bid for the five-year
contract to clean up the sprawling Sellafield nuclear site in
Cumbria. This will be worth around £5bn initially but could
include an option to extend the deal. Under plans agreed by the
Government last month, companies will be invited to bid for the
contract next year. The award will be made in 2008. 

The involvement of Bechtel in decommissioning will be
controversial in some quarters of the nuclear industry. Last
year the company helped set up the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority, the body which is running the competitions to parcel
out the estimated £70bn of UK decommissioning work. 

To prevent any conflict of interest, the Government barred
Bechtel from bidding for any of the lucrative clean-up contracts
until 2008. But earlier this year the ban was lifted, despite
protests from rivals, such as Fluor, keen to win a large chunk
of the market . 

Bob McGuiness, chief executive of Serco Science, denied that
Bechtel had any greater advantage, through its work with the
NDA, than other firms already working on nuclear sites in the
UK. 

"I don't think there is a conflict," he said. "It's important
that this whole process is open, honest and transparent." 

As well as Sellafield, the UK's other ageing nuclear sites and
power stations will need to be decommissioned in the coming
years. 

Companies see the clean-up work as a key to winning contracts to
build and operate new reactors, as these will be located next to
the stations that are being decommissioned. 

Serco already has expertise in the nuclear field through its
stake in the AWE joint venture that runs the UK's Trident
nuclear programme. It also inspects the Royal Navy's nuclear
submarine fleet and carries out civil decommissioning work in
Russia. 

Mr McGuiness said Serco's main contribution in the consortium
would be to provide knowledge of doing business in the UK and
contacts in the public sector. 

"All the technology in the world will not work without a good
understanding of the UK workforce, government and unions," he
said. "That's what we do. Serco has transferred more people from
government employment into the private sector by some way." 

© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited 
*****************************************************************
 55 DenverPost.com: Residents cheer clean Shattuck
 
By Christopher N. Osher 

Denver Post Staff Writer

Article Last Updated:11/04/2006 11:18:58 PM MST

Overland neighborhood leaders and public officials gathered
Saturday to celebrate the final cleanup of the Shattuck
Superfund site on South Bannock Street. 

U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette and Richard
Poole, a representative of U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard's office,
joined residents at the nearly 6-acre site in south Denver that
used to contain low-level radioactive waste. 

There was a time when the site was so feared that Tom Anthony
had to use his daughter, Margot, to drive the point home to
political leaders. 

She asked during one of Allard's town-hall meetings whether
Allard, or anyone for that matter, would want to live next to a
low-level radioactive waste site. 

"Nobody could answer that one," Anthony recalled Saturday,
adding that from then on the Republican lawmaker was on the
neighborhood's side. 

That was in 1998. Now Anthony's daughter is 18. On Saturday,
Anthony grinned as he watched his two younger children -
4-year-old Colter, dressed in football gear, and 2-year-old
Arnan - tumble on the green grass at the site. 

"This is what we have been waiting for: 5.9 acres of nothing -
nothing bad, nothing but good," said Jack Unruh, another
resident involved in the fight. 

It wasn't always good. In 1992, residents learned the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency planned to seal waste at the
site with a 14-foot cement cap. 

The waste was the legacy of the Shattuck Chemical Co., whose
plant salvaged uranium from defective fuel rods rejected by
nuclear reactors. 

David Vargas, 47, another resident, remembered when his children
came home to ask him why a security guard had been posted on the
street where they biked. 

He recalled his children joining forces with other children for
one rally. They all gathered up trash for makeshift drums they
pounded to make their presence known. 

The EPA agreed in 1999 to embark on a $50 million cleanup of the
site, removing 250,000 tons of material and shipping it to a
Utah dump. 

"Thank God, they moved all that stuff out of here," Vargas said
Saturday. 

Deb Sanchez, another instrumental resident, lost a husband to a
heart attack during the struggle. She is a minister after
studying at Denver's Iliff School of Theology. 

Now fighting ovarian cancer, she said that it was only when she
and the others living in the neighborhood stressed their
similarities with other public officials that they began to make
progress. 

"In this place, at least, we have beaten our swords into
plowshares," she said, her voice tremulous with emotion, in
reference to Isaiah 2:4. 

Staff writer Christopher N. Osher can be reached at 303-954-1747
or cosher@denverpost.com.

All contents Copyright 2006 The Denver Post or other copyright
*****************************************************************
 56 Caller.com: As uranium mines closed, state altered cleanup goals

George Gongora/Caller-Times

An official with Uranium Resources Inc. near Kingsville says 
amended cleanup permits don’t pose any danger to drinking water 
because groundwater moves too slowly to cause a serious risk. The 
Caller-Times examined 32 permits from closed South Texas mines 
that showed each was allowed to leave behind minerals at higher 
levels than originally agreed upon.

Uranium Resources Inc. uses a water pumping method, known as
in-situ leach mining, to extract uranium, which is mined
primarily for use in nuclear power plants.


Initial targets were unrealistic and unnecessary, companies say

By Dan Kelley/Caller-Times

November 5, 2006

As uranium mines in Texas closed one-by-one during the past two
decades, the mining companies had one thing in common: They
asked the state to relax the groundwater restoration standard
listed in their mining permits. 

State regulators had one response: "OK." 

The Caller-Times examined 32 permits from closed South Texas
mines that had used a water-pumping method to mine. In each
case, companies were permitted to leave behind minerals such as
uranium, molybdenum and selenium at higher levels than were
listed in the original permit. Other permits were reviewed, but
it is unclear if a similar pattern was repeated because the
boundaries of mine areas were changed or merged with other
mines, making it difficult to establish what the stricter,
original cleanup standard should have been. 

Mining companies say the permits require them to clean
groundwater that never was fit for human consumption. They also
say there never has been a documented case of drinking water
contamination from their mining operations. 

The increases that appear in the amended permits aren't uniform.
In some cases, companies were able to meet the restoration
target for one mineral but reported 10- and 20-fold increases in
others. 

Older mines tended to require more drastic permit amendments
than mines started later. 

"It's a kind of a shell game," said George Rice, a groundwater
hydrologist hired by a citizens' group in Kleberg County to help
enforce cleanup standards at a mine known as Kingsville Dome.
"They tell people, 'Here are the standards we're going to meet.'
All along, they know they aren't going to meet those standards
and the state knows they aren't going to meet those standards." 

John Santos, a geologist with the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality, said he performed an informal examination
of all permits and produced similar results. It is unclear if
the study ever appeared in written form. The commission is the
state agency that agreed to the permit amendments. 

Selenium in low doses is necessary for human health, but in high
doses is linked to respiratory inflammation. Molybdenum in high
doses is an irritant of the ears, nose and throat, according to
the Centers for Disease Control. 

Uranium, mined primarily for use in nuclear power plants, is
linked to kidney failure, according to the CDC. 

These minerals occur naturally in the mining areas and across
South Texas. 

The issue of how far a mining company must go to restore a
property's groundwater has cropped up in a handful of court
cases. 

In a federal lawsuit involving two ranches in Webb and Duval
counties, a federal judge recently ruled that the groundwater on
the property was used for drinking water before mining, which
could mean companies are required to clean water to drinking
water standards. 

FIn two affidavits filed in federal court, ranchers claim the
levels of selenium and uranium left behind by Cogema Inc.
impacted potential ranching and hunting uses. The ranchers say
mining company representatives promised that the water would be
restored to pre-mining conditions. 

The owner of one ranch told the court in an affidavit that she
and her husband would not have leased their property to uranium
miners if it wasn't going to be restored to pre-mining
conditions. 

"We all recognize that water is the most valuable resource in
Texas," the rancher stated in court documents, "and to permit
Cogema to not do what it promised the landowners is nothing more
than tolerating abusive behavior and breach of contract." 

A lawyer representing Cogema Inc. disputed the claims that the
water ever was potable. 

"The water in the mining zone wasn't suitable for human
consumption before the mining started," said Carlos M. Zaffirini
Sr. of Laredo. "It is not suitable today. What they are
complaining is that the levels are greater inside the mining
zone. We aren't talking about wells outside of the mining zone.
All of the wells outside the mining zone are at background
levels." 

Zaffirini said that claims the groundwater was used as drinking
water before mining are fact questions to be settled at trial. 

In an instance in Kleberg County, the operator of the Kingsville
Dome mine, Uranium Resources Inc. of Lewisville, entered into a
negotiated agreement that established groundwater standards.
Uranium Resources Inc. also agreed to fund a citizens review
board to independently monitor cleanup progress. 

The result, according to the chairwoman of the citizens review
board, has been mixed. 

"We felt they had not complied with the agreement," Carola
Serrato told a crowd in Goliad in September. "We filed a report
saying URI had not complied with its restoration
responsibilities." 

Officials with the company said it met the terms of the
agreement. 

Industry experts say that testing when the water pumping mining
technique, known as in-situ leach mining, was in its infancy
wasn't accurate, and mistakenly set high standards for
groundwater remediation. 

Craig W. Holmes, a consultant to the industry, said that when
companies began mining South Texas for uranium 30 years ago,
they didn't drill enough monitoring wells and at times did not
hit the ore body with the monitoring well. Because of this, the
restoration standard was based on data that had less contact
with uranium. When it came time to clean up, the companies
realized the calculations were in error. 

"That's what they say," said Santos, the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality geologist. "It's possible." 

Restoration standards are based on the condition of the aquifer
before mining, and companies are required to restore to levels
consistent with pre-mining conditions, according to the statute. 

In each case, the Environmental Protection Agency declared the
mining area an exempt aquifer, which signifies that the
underground water is not used and unsuitable for human
consumption. 

One of those exempt aquifers, in Live Oak County, sits on the
banks of Lake Corpus Christi, which provides drinking water to
Corpus Christi. When the mining operation there closed in March
1999, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality allowed
miners to leave behind underground water with 10 times the
amount of uranium listed in the original permit. 

Ben Knape, who oversees the state agency's underground injection
control program, said provisions in the law allow for the
amendment to permits within certain ranges that pose little risk
as in this case. 

The section of the Texas Administrative Code governing uranium
mine cleanup says the state must take into account potential
uses of groundwater and pre-mining uses of the groundwater.
Other possible reasons for the permit amendments include the
cost of restoration efforts, potential harmful effects and
consumption of energy and water in further cleanup. 

Most of the permits reviewed came from mines that closed in the
1980s and 1990s, when the price of uranium plummeted after the
collapse of the Soviet Union sent a wave of inexpensive nuclear
material across the world. 

A recent spike in prices, combined with forecasts predicting
supply will outstrip demand, has brought a renewed interest in
uranium mining. 

Brad Moore, an exploration and land tenure manager for Uranium
Energy Corp. in Goliad, said the technology has improved. 

"What happened 30 years ago could not happen today," Moore said.
"The industry evolved and regulations evolved." 

Others disagree. 

"I don't agree with some people that this is a mature
technology," said Kim Jones, a professor of environmental
engineering at Texas A University-Kingsville, who is researching
new cleanup technologies. 

The method uranium miners use throughout the world was pioneered
in South Texas about 30 years ago. 

Uranium mining always is done in areas where there is naturally
occurring groundwater. 

During extraction, miners are required to remove slightly more
water than they pump into the ground. This prevents
uranium-contaminated water in the mine from migrating and
contaminating neighboring waters by the creation of a
"low-pressure" zone. 

At the times mines are closed, miners pump more water into the
ground to flush the aquifer. This water, like all water, has
naturally occurring amounts of oxygen in solution. 

Environmentalists argue that this water, and the amount of
oxygen inside, can continue to interact with uranium and allow
it to stay mobile. 

"After you turn off your pumps, there is a possibility that it
will move off site," said Rice, the groundwater hydrologist
hired by Kleberg County residents. "There's a very good reason
for the regulations - if not brought back to pre-mining, I think
long-term monitoring is the answer." 

Assessing the risk to humans and livestock is difficult and
technical. 

"The groundwater moves," Jones said, "sometimes fast, sometimes
slow." 

Miners scoff at this explanation, because they say groundwater
moves too slowly to cause a serious risk - about 30 feet per
year in some cases. 

"The water moves slowly," said Mark Pelizza, vice president for
environmental affairs for Uranium Resources Inc. "The mineral
doesn't." He says geologic chemistry locked uranium in place
before mining and will continue to do so after mining has
ceased. 

Concerns that in-situ leach mining might impact groundwater are
well known, yet it is unclear whether the pattern of amending
permits in Texas is repeated throughout the country. 

Bill von Till of the Uranium Recovery Branch of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, which regulates uranium mining in states
that don't have their own rules, said the commission has
overseen about four restorations. In each case the miners met
the requirements for some minerals, but not for others. 

"What the groundwater community has found over the years is that
trying to achieve cleanup to background is virtually impossible,
and it's moving to a risk-based approach," von Till said. 

The exempt aquifer status granted to the miners removes the
burden of federal Safe Drinking Water Act standards because most
mining regulated by federal agencies occurs in remote areas
where people are unlikely to dig wells or rely on groundwater. 

Von Till said though groundwater inside the mining areas tends
to containincreased levels of some minerals after closure,
"outside the mine area, everything is looked at as a potential
drinking water source." 

Contact Dan Kelley at 886-4316 or kelleyd@ caller.com  

© 2006 Scripps Texas Newspapers, L.P. A newspaper.
*****************************************************************
 57 cbs4denver.com: Shattuck Site Cleared Of Radioactive Waste
                
[clock] Nov 5, 2006 8:44 am US/Mountain 

Arturo Santiago Reporting 

(CBS4) DENVER People in the Overland area of southwest Denver
have reason to celebrate. The cleanup of a radioactive waste
dump is now complete.

The Shattuck Superfund siteis near Santa Fe Drive and Bannock
Street and, after a dark beginning, brighter days are now in
store for area residents.

"It is basically a board that has been erased," Jack Ulruh of
the Overland Neighborhood Association said. "And it's ready for
something wonderful to happen."

It used to be 150,000 tons of "capped" radioactive waste
material but, starting in March of 2003, over 2,200 rail cars
moved over 240,000 tons of material to Idaho for permanent
disposal. The last rail car left in August.

"This project is an example of what can be accomplished when
neighborhoods and government agencies work together for the
betterment of the neighborhood," Robbie Roberts of the
Environmental Protection Agencysaid.

The neighborhood had struggled years ago to get the EPA to move
the waste out, not just cover it over.

Neighbors had to educate themselves and, once they knew as much
as the experts, things started happening.

"Then we weren't just a low income neighborhood," Catherine
Sandy of the Overland Environmental Watch said. "You know, a
bunch of dummies that could be dumped on … literally."

They convinced the EPA to go through with a finished clean-up.

"It's so rare, that it's unique." Ulrah said. "It's the first
time in history that a completed superfund remedy has been
re-thought and re-remedied, and done right." 

Now, children can play on the growing grass and the land has
potential.

"We need more housing in our neighborhood," Sandy said. "So, to
see green lawns with flowers and trees and people, that would be
the ultimate."

The completion means there are now no restrictions on how the
Shattuck site can be used.
 
(© MMVI CBS Television Stations, Inc. All Rights Reserved. This
material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or
redistributed.) 	 	

*****************************************************************
 58 LasVegasNOW.com: Yucca Mountain: 10,000 Year Warning

  Mark Sayre, Investigative Reporter

What will Southern Nevada be like in 10,000? Will the English
language exist? And what about our very civilization, will it
still be around? 

These are questions the Department of Energy is considering as
it works on a long-term warning plan for Yucca Mountain some 100
miles northwest of Las Vegas. 

The federal government wants to turn this barren desert into the
nation's repository for high-level nuclear waste. No matter
where you fall on the politics, the scientific facts don't
change. Spent nuclear fuel will be dangerous for centuries. 

So how do we warn future civilizations? Joshua Abbey, founder of
<FONT color=#0000ff><STRONG>the non-profit <EM>Desert Space
Foundation</EM></STRONG></FONT>, says, "The primary assumption
is that language, as we know it, won't exist." 

Abbey heads the non-profit arts and education group. It
sponsored a competition in 2002 where artists and graphic
designers from around the world were asked to submit their best
concepts for long-term warnings. 

Abbey continues, "So, I think when we look back at how
communication and language has evolved we see that the most
earliest forms of communication were symbols." 

The Department of Energy is formally working on the project.
Scientists say it is critical to convey that Yucca Mountain is
not a "place of honor," no "highly-esteemed deed" is
commemorated here and "nothing of value" is here. 

Dr. Paul Scholmeier of the UNLV Philosophy Department says, "I
doubt that any conventional symbols would last." Scholmeier
believes the key to a successful warning may lie in the physical
form of the humans that are creating it. "Perhaps human biology
won't change in 10,000 years. At least the pace of evolution is
sufficiently slow that that might be a reasonable assumption to
make. So, in that case I would try to pick a symbol that would
somehow cause a very visceral reaction." 

Some key concepts DOE scientists say are critical:  
  + 1. The physical materials used should have 'little value,"
so the markers themselves are not stolen. 
  + 2. It should be "non-linguistic" so it is not rooted in any
particular culture or language. 
  + 3. The markers should convey a sense of "danger, foreboding,
and dread." 

Some of the official concepts include a "spikefield," a
"landscape of thorns," "menacing earthworks" and even
"forbidding blocks." Whether from the minds of scientists or
artists the long-term challenge is daunting. 

Joshua Abbey says, "It's like a graveyard. I mean they are
burying nuclear waste. So these symbols in a way are like
tombstones." 

The winning design in the art competition is called
"<STRONG><FONT color=#0000ff>Blue Yucca Ridge</FONT></STRONG>."
The idea is to genetically engineer a plant that will change
colors with underlying radiation. 

The long-term warning plan is going to be an official part of
the Department of Energy's application to open and operate Yucca
Mountain. Politics aside, it will ultimately be up to the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to give Yucca Mountain the
go-ahead. 

Send your comments to Investigative Reporter Mark Sayre at
msayre@klastv.com

.gif">    All content © Copyright 2000 - 2006 WorldNow and KLAS.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 59 Scotsman.com: Nuclear-free Scotland 'will hurt UK'

Sun 5 Nov 2006    

        EDDIE BARNES AND MARK HOWARTH () 

SCOTLAND's refusal to build a new generation of nuclear power
stations will ruin Britain's bid to cut greenhouse gases. 

A report commissioned for London mayor Ken Livingstone warns
that if Scotland's two nuclear stations are not replaced, the UK
will be forced to build gas-powered stations to compensate. 

As a result, carbon emissions will increase, preventing Britain
from meeting its commitment to cut global warming. 

The warning was seized on by pro-nuclear campaigners last night
as a wake-up call to the Scottish Executive, which is refusing
to countenance new stations until the question of nuclear waste
has been settled. 

Scotland's nuclear energy is a massively important part of
Britain's national grid, feeding about half of Scotland's
electricity needs and supplying energy to England and Northern
Ireland. But Scotland's stations, at Hunterston and Torness, are
coming to their end of their lives and a decision must soon be
made on replacing them. 

Prime Minister Tony Blair has enthusiastically backed nuclear as
a reliable and carbon-free energy source in the current Energy
Review, which will decide the future of Britain's electricity
needs. But First Minister Jack McConnell has refused to follow
suit. 

Ministers claim massive investment in renewable energy will meet
Scotland's needs - with 40% coming from renewable sources by
2020. 

However, the report, written by Large & Associated Consultant
Engineers, concludes that such a hope is in vain. It declares:
"The policy of the Scottish Parliament may well preclude
new-build NPPs [nuclear power plants] in Scotland, or it may
choose only to permit a new generating capacity proportionate to
its electricity consumption demand ... If so, [it] ... could
jeopardise the UK's carbon-free treaty obligations." 

Report author John Large added: "If Scotland said no to another
nuclear power plant, it would effectively be a Scottish veto on
the Energy Review. The UK would not be able to meet its
commitments under the Kyoto treaty." 

He said the consequences could be deeply damaging: "Westminster
might then say that it is in the strategic interests of the UK
to have a nuclear power plant and impose it on Scotland." 

The findings were welcomed by pro-nuclear Scottish Labour MPs
last night. 

Michael Connerty said: "We have gone from 29% of our energy
coming from nuclear and are heading to 7%. There is no
indication that renewables can fill that gap." 

But sources in the nuclear industry warn that such is the lack
of political will, energy firms may decide not to invest in new
stations here. 

A Friends of the Earth Scotland spokesman countered: 

"The Sustainable Development Commission showed we can reduce
carbon emissions and meet energy needs without nuclear." 

©2006 Scotsman.com| contact| terms &amp; conditions
*****************************************************************
 60 AP Wire: Nonradioactive spill at SRS temporarily shuts down highway

11/04/2006 | 

 Associated Press 

NEW ELLENTON, S.C. - A nonradioactive spill at the Savannah
River Site's waste processing facility caused a temporary
shutdown Saturday of a highway that runs through the site,
authorities said. 

An operational emergency was declared at 10:39 a.m. after 1,500
gallons of formic acid spilled at the Defense Waste Processing
Facility, the Washington Savannah River Co. said in a release. 

The facility is where liquid radioactive waste is converted into
solid glass for long-term storage and disposal, according to the
SRS Web site. 

A concrete dike contained the spill. No injuries were reported,
the company said. 

Employees at the site were told to remain inside during the
emergency. Air, rail and river access to SRS was restricted, and
parts of state Highway 125 going through the site was closed
until about 3 p.m. 

Formic acid is a colorless, corrosive liquid that can cause
severe burns and is harmful if inhaled. 

Information from: The Augusta Chronicle, News 
*****************************************************************
 61 SF New Mexican: Lab: Classified files not 'most sensitive'   

By ANDY LENDERMAN | The New Mexican             

November 4, 2006                                                        

Most of the classified material found recently at the home of a 
former Los Alamos National Laboratory contract employee was low 
level and decades old, and none of it was top secret, the lab 
said Friday. However, some of the classified information was of 
"moderate" importance, a lab spokesman said.

 "None of the materials included any of the most sensitive
nuclear weapons information," lab officials said in a statement
responding to news reports about the severity of the data that
left the lab.

 But the head of a watchdog group that investigates federal
government actions said the nature of the classified information
that got outside the nuclear weapons lab's security perimeter
has shaken personnel at Department of Energy headquarters "to
the core."

 "Of course, if you have information about nuclear weapons,
they're going to be 20 or 30 years old, because that's how old
the weapons are," said Danielle Brian, director of the Project
on Government Oversight, a private nonprofit organization.

She noted the lab said that most -- not all -- of the material 
was classified at the lowest level. "I think it's correct that 
it's not top secret -- it was secret, restricted data," Brian 
said. And that information is still very sensitive, she said.

 The FBI is investigating the security breach at the lab, but no
arrests have been made since it got involved in the case Oct.
20. The lab has confirmed classified material was found in the
home of a former contract employee. The agency's investigation
continued Friday, a spokesman said.

 Brian, whose group is based in Washington, said the woman at
the center of the investigation had an extremely high security
clearance and access to extremely sensitive information.

 "What I am hearing is that this incident is shaking them to the
core at (DOE) headquarters," Brian said.

 Santa Fe defense lawyer Steve Aarons has confirmed 22-year-old
Jessica Quintana is being investigated by the FBI. Quintana has
not been charged with a crime, and Aarons has described her as
an overworked archivist trying to meet a deadline to convert
hard copies of documents into electronic form. 

He said about 200 pages of hard copy documents were found at her
home as well as a computer flash drive with roughly the same
number of pages.

 "I'm relieved," Aarons said after reviewing the lab's Friday
statement. "That confirms what we believe to be the case -- but
obviously, they're in the best position to confirm what was
there and, more importantly, what was not."

 Lab spokesman Kevin Roark said taking classified material home
is "strictly prohibited. For any reason." 

He also said it's a crime to mishandle classified information.

 Aarons maintains national security was not compromised.

 Brian said the lab's statement made the situation sound better
than it actually was. "They simply have not taken this matter
seriously enough," she said. "They've had so many warnings over
the years."

 In 1999, former lab scientist Wen Ho Lee pleaded guilty to one
count of "unlawful retention of national defense information" in
a highly publicized case. 

A few years ago, it appeared that two computer disks with
nuclear information were missing, but an inventory discrepancy
that explained the situation was found in 2004.

 "Someone has got to be held accountable at this point ... ,"
Brian said. "When you have such a long history of screw-ups, you
can't just blame the contractor. The government's got to be held
accountable, too."

 A spokesman for Gov. Bill Richardson, a former Department of
Energy secretary, said the lab has a lot of work to do.

 "The governor, when he was secretary of energy, proposed a
security initiative that would have eliminated removable media,
like disks and flash drives, from the lab," spokesman Pahl
Shipley said. 

"But that idea was killed by the (National Nuclear Security
Administration)."

 A spokesman for U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said the
senator is disappointed but believes progress is being made on
the investigation of how the classified information left the
lab. 

"At this point, he hasn't decided whether or when to have
hearings, because he wants to see how far they can get with
their investigation," spokesman Chris Gallegos said.

 Contact Andy Lenderman at 995-3827 or		 	   	 	 	 		
 		   			 		   	 
  I want to read and/or post comments on this story   	

| ©2006, Santa Fe New Mexican
*****************************************************************
 62 Tri-City Herald: Board: Workers deserve equal benefits 

Published Sunday, November 5th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

HOOD RIVER, Ore. -- An estimated 500 Hanford workers who saw
their pension plans frozen a decade ago deserve benefits equal
to others at the nuclear reservation, the Hanford Advisory Board
has decided. 

About 1,750 workers were moved to "enterprise" companies a
decade ago under a new contracting strategy intended to help
build non-Hanford business and stabilize the Tri-City economy.
But little work not tied to Hanford materialized and the
experiment largely was a failure. 

An estimated 500 employees continue to be assigned to enterprise
companies, many doing Hanford work alongside regular Hanford
employees, but they're not allowed to participate in the Hanford
pension plan. 

Having a two-tiered pension plan creates resentment and that
does not lead to a safe work environment, said Keith Smith, a
public representative on the Hanford Advisory Board. The board
met Thursday and Friday in Hood River, Ore. 

The board is recommending the Department of Energy take a look
at enterprise company workers as it prepares to award three new
prime contracts at Hanford, covering the work now done by about
4,600 employees. Draft requests for proposals, which will lay
out parameters of the new contracts, are due soon. 

The requests for proposals should specify that all Hanford
employees, including enterprise employees, be under the Hanford
pension plan, the board said. It also recommended that current
enterprise employees covered by the new contracts be allowed to
recover pension credits. 

Preliminary plans for the new contracts say existing Hanford
workers could continue under the Hanford pension plan, but new
workers would be given a different one. 

Rather than having a plan that pays a set amount each month
during retirement, they and their employer would contribute to a
401(k)-style plan that would require them to manage the money.
The amount they have during retirement would depend on their
skill at managing and building investments during their working
years. 

Enterprise workers have seized on that controversial
announcement to gain attention for their decade-old problem.
They've met with politicians running for election, presented
T-shirts with their names on them to DOE leaders during
Hanford's annual State of the Site meeting, and they've written
letters to the editor to remind the public of the inequity. 

"This is an example of DOE saying do as we say, not as we do,"
said Dick Smith, representing Kennewick on the Hanford Advisory
Board. 

DOE workers are under a separate traditional pension that is not
being targeted. But DOE appears ready to move away from
traditional pension plans not just for workers for Hanford
contractors, but also for DOE contractor employees across the
nation. 

Earlier this year, DOE said it planned to discontinue
traditional pension plans for contractor's new hires. Then,
under pressure from congressional leaders, DOE agreed to delay
consideration of the changes for a year. 

The proposal to change benefits came as some large corporations,
including IBM, Verizon and Motorola, have moved to freeze
traditional pension plans or offer only 401(k) programs to new
hires. 

Good benefits are essential to good work at Hanford, said
members of the Hanford Advisory Board, which approved broader
advice in 2004 calling for traditional pension coverage to be
included in any new contracts. A two-tiered benefit plan "does
increase unrest and lack of loyalty to the programs out here,"
Dick Smith said. 

Hanford has offered an exceptional benefit plan, said Wanda
Munn, representing the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments on
the board. But that's helped the site to retain knowledgeable,
experienced workers. 

"Most workers have thought more than once before leaving the
job," she said. 

The board also is concerned that allowing only current Hanford
employees to continue to build benefits in the Hanford pension
plan will keep employees from transferring to the best project
for their skills. Skilled workers or professionals would be
reluctant to move to projects managed by another contractor who
could use their skills if it would mean being classified as a
new hire who is ineligible to continue in their current pension
plan, the board said. 

The board stopped short of sending the advice to DOE
headquarters in Washington, D.C., over concern that offering
advice outside the direct scope of cleanup would not help the
board's case as it discusses charter responsibilities. The board
and DOE have discussed how much freedom the board should have to
address the topics it believes are most important versus having
DOE assign topics it would like the board to address. 

Board members agreed to send the advice only to Hanford-based
DOE managers, and some members also plan to give copies to
Oregon and Washington members of Congress. 

"Cleanup is nothing without the workers," said Paige Knight,
representing Hanford Watch on the board. 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 63 Star Beacon: Clean up complete for former RMI plant

Ashtabula, Ohio - 

Sun, Nov 05 2006    
      
By SHELLEY TERRY 

Staff Writer sterry@starbeacon.com 

ASHTABULA TOWNSHIP - - Clean up is complete at the former RMI
plant at 1601 E. 21st St., just east of Route 11, officials at
Lata-Sharp Remediation Services and the Ohio Department of
Health said Friday. 

Since 1998, about $139 million was spent to clean up this
seven-acre site. RMI owns 13 of 25 buildings and the Department
of Energy owns the remaining 12. 

The site supported titanium extrusion operations from 1962 to
1988 for the Department of Energy defense programs. 

"There was radioactive contamination left behind," said Clyde
Gaston, spokesman for Lata-Sharp. "We removed soil and
buildings, but there's still a lot of work to finish up,
including paperwork." 

This is the Department of Energy's third cleanup this year in
Ohio, according to James Rispoli, the Department of Energy's
assistant secretary for environmental management. 

"The Ashtabula site will be returned to beneficial commercial
reuse in Ohio," he said. "This is another example of the
department's commitment to safely clean up it's Cold War-era
nuclear waste sites across the country." 

Lata-Sharp was awarded the contract in September 2005 and work
began three months later. The Department of Energy's goal was to
return this site to it's owner, RMI Titanium Company, once all
regulatory requirements were done. 

Throughout the past 10 months, Lata-Sharp excavated more than 1
million cubic feet of low level and mixed low level waste from
the site, removed all contaminated underground utilities, and
demolished more than a dozen contaminated structures, company
officials said. 

Bret Atkins of the Ohio Department of Health on Friday confirmed
that the physical clean-up of the site is complete.     

  © 2006, The Star Beacon P.O. Box 2100, Ashtabula OH 44005-2100 
(440) 998-2323, Send news tips and feedback   
  
Associated Press content © 2006. All rights reserved. AP content
*****************************************************************
 64 UPI: Taken Los Alamos drives held secrets
     
United Press International - NewsTrack - 

11/4/2006 6:53:00 PM -0500

LOS ALAMOS, N.M., Nov. 4 (UPI) -- U.S. government officials said
sensitive and classified documents were among the files on
portable drives taken from Los Alamos National Laboratory. 

Officials said there was no evidence that the information has
been sold or transferred, CBS News reported. 

The documents were found in a Los Alamos, N.M., trailer home
during a drug raid last month, CBS said. The trailer belonged to
a young woman who worked at the facility's classified vault, the
report said. 

Her attorney claimed she had taken the material home to work on
and had forgotten it. 

At least three USB storage drives were recovered, CBS News said.
A federal official said the drives contained 408 classified
documents ranging from intelligence-related Secret National
Security Information to nuclear weapon-related Secret Restricted
Data. 

Federal officials also found 228 printed pages of classified
documents in the home, CBS News said. 

Los Alamos Lab officials determined the majority of the material
was "classified at the lowest levels" and between 20-to-30 years
old, CBS News said. In a statement, lab officials said none of
the documents was classified Top Secret or included sensitive
nuclear weapon information. 

However, one official called the theft "devastating," adding
terrorists could learn "everything they need to do to get a
(nuclear) weapon to fire," CBS News said.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
    
*****************************************************************

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: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************